Russia Collusion Scandal (aka A Leftist fantasy)

[Runnin]

Poor ol' Bill Barr. He's on the hot seat now. I'll bet he wishes he had steered clear of Trump. Will we hear from him today?

 

[Runnin]

Here's your report on Russian election interference.

The Plot to Subvert an Election

Unraveling the Russia Story So Far

For two years, Americans have tried to absorb the details of the 2016 attack — hacked emails, social media fraud, suspected spies — and President Trump’s claims that it’s all a hoax.

But none of the convictions to date involve conspiracy. There remains an alternative explanation to the collusion theory: that the Trump aides, far from certain their candidate would win, were happy to meet the Russians because they thought it might lead to moneymaking deals after the election. “Black Caviar,” read the subject line of an email Mr. Manafort got in July 2016 from his associate in Kiev, Ukraine, hinting at the possibility of new largess from a Russian oligarch with whom they had done business.

Nina L. Khrushcheva, a professor of international affairs at the New School and the great-granddaughter of the Soviet premier Nikita S. Khrushchev, said that what Russia pulled off, through creativity and sheer luck, would have been the envy of Mr. Putin’s predecessors: puncturing the American sense of superiority and insisting on Russia’s power and place in the world.

“This operation was to show the Americans — that you bastards are just as screwed up as the rest of us,” Professor Khrushcheva said. “Putin fulfilled the dream of every Soviet leader — to stick it to the United States. I think this will be studied by the K.G.B.’s successors for a very long time.”

 

[thethe]

I wouldn’t be shocked if there’s at least a little bit of new information that at the very least is a pretty bad look for Trump. I think the likeliest outcome is that some of the speculated/rumored connections between the campaign and Russia are given some additional credibility but that there won’t really be a smoking gun that ties it directly to Trump. Even if the findings are modest or purposely cautious, I still think any official report establishing a greater link between the Campaign and Russia is a problem for Trump and Republicans.

You know how they could get additional credibility? Verifying any of the large claims in the Dossier that started this all.

Now all we have is a Russian meeting at Trump Tower setup by Fusion GPS.

A meeting with Papa D setup by foreign intelligence operations.

And a joking claim made in front of reporters and the world to ask Russia to find e-mails that Hillary illegally deleted.


There was never any real evidence of collusion even in the public eye.

 

[cajunrevenge]

The investigation was into russian election meddling. Collusion became a focus because of Trumps behavior. When he is the only person in the world doubting russian election meddling its legitimate to question whats going on. There is clearly something going on with him and Russia. Innocent people dont act like Trump has. As has been pointed out the only collusion that might be found is Putin bribing or blackmailing Trump for something like sanction relief.

 

[57Brave]

You know how they could get additional credibility? Verifying any of the large claims in the Dossier that started this all.

Now all we have is a Russian meeting at Trump Tower setup by Fusion GPS.

A meeting with Papa D setup by foreign intelligence operations.

And a joking claim made in front of reporters and the world to ask Russia to find e-mails that Hillary illegally deleted.


There was never any real evidence of collusion even in the public eye.

you left off among other things, the hotel and the fact Deutche Bank was the only entity willing to deal with DJT.
yes yes they are German but scratch the surface.
There are plenty of red flags

and why did everyone connected lie at every turn ?
....................

You are naive thinking it was the "dossier" that started this.


As I have said all along it is possible it was only red flags. Consider -
It would have been irresponsible bordering on criminal for Intelligence or FBI to ignore all of those flags. Going back to the 1980's
Next time you speak of ineffective "government" look at you railing against "government" acting effectively and being angry they did so

Speaker Pelosi will have none of the briefing behind closed doors stuff
Will be an interesting week

 

[Runnin]

You know how they could get additional credibility? Verifying any of the large claims in the Dossier that started this all.

Now all we have is a Russian meeting at Trump Tower setup by Fusion GPS.

A meeting with Papa D setup by foreign intelligence operations.

And a joking claim made in front of reporters and the world to ask Russia to find e-mails that Hillary illegally deleted.


There was never any real evidence of collusion even in the public eye.

What do you expect "evidence" of collusion to look like - a video of Trump and Putin saying "Let's collude."?

You forgot Manafort's secret meeting.

 

[sturg33]

Glad to see the leftists goal post moving isn't unique to this board

[tw]1109792048608088066[/tw]

 

[57Brave]

who "made it about" ?
Mueller's mandate has been clear since day 1 for anyone with 5th grade reading skills and the interest to know


I wish there was a way to calculate who has used the term "collusion" the most --- my guess would be on htis particular forum ---- you know who

 

[thethe]

So predictable

 

[Runnin]

who "made it about" ?
Mueller's mandate has been clear since day 1 for anyone with 5th grade reading skills and the interest to know


I wish there was a way to calculate who has used the term "collusion" the most --- my guess would be on htis particular forum ---- you know who

I'm interested to know how many times the word appears in the report. Either a lot or very little.

 

[57Brave]

The Rude Pundit
‏ @rudepundit
34m34 minutes ago

1. Let's not be naive here. No matter what comes out of the Mueller report about Trump's involvement, there was Russian interference in the 2016 election. But if Democrats made it all about him, Trump absolutely did so, too.

2. If Trump had been a different person, one without an easily wounded ego, he could have just said, "I'm worried about the sanctity of our elections and want any issues fully investigated." As we know, he didn't.

3. Instead, he saw it as an assault on his "greatest victory in the history of America" and attacked it, which, whether he's guilty or not, sure as hell made it seem like he's guilty of something.

4. Every action he took, from firing James Comey to pressuring Jeff Sessions, and every statement he made, from the 400-lb guy in a room to his "no collusion" mantra to "witch hunt," added to that sense of complicity.

5. Meanwhile, all these people around Trump lied to the FBI, lied to Congress, and perjured themselves, which means they were hiding something. Whether that is just that Trump is a baby who can't stand being challenged or that they worked with Russia, we will see soon.

6. But let's remember: This investigation of a Republican was started by a once-Republican (James Comey) and led by a Republican (Robert Mueller) under the watch of Republicans (Rosenstein, Whitaker, and Barr). For most of the investigation, Democrats had no say at all.

7. So if you're saying Democrats went crazy over "Russiagate," well, Trump bears a whole lot of blame here for how the whole thing was perceived. And if he truly had no part in anything, if there was "no collusion," then it was just pathetic for him to lash out.

8. Of course, the reality is going to be far more complicated. But if you're gonna curse Democrats for calling Trump a traitor, then you better curse Trump for never once acting like he cared about finding out about interference in the 2016 election.

 

[57Brave]

Rantt Media
‏ @RanttMedia
17h17 hours ago

22 months

34 individuals or entities indicted

25 of which were Russian individuals or entities who interfered in the 2016 election

6 were Trump associates (5 pleaded guilty)

Mueller's probe was cheaper and more efficient than past probes of its nature

 

[sturg33]

This is so much fun.

Nscapi, can you please post your list again?

I worry for the mental health of many people if turns out that Trump isn't an actual foreign spy

 

[sturg33]

who "made it about" ?
Mueller's mandate has been clear since day 1 for anyone with 5th grade reading skills and the interest to know


I wish there was a way to calculate who has used the term "collusion" the most --- my guess would be on htis particular forum ---- you know who

You were quite fond of it

yes, every country tries to influence other country's elections. That is a fact

The catch being accepting that influence ( or even being aware of it and not reporting it ? ) is against the law.
Cooperating with that foreign entity is text book collusion / conspiracy to commit ...

Please stop with the inane argument of everybody does it.

Nancy Pelosi: Mueller Doesn’t Have to Indict Trump for Congress to Impeach Him

But the congresswoman says she isn’t planning to go down that road—yet.
Edward-Isaac Dovere- 11/11/18





Nancy Pelosi really does not want to impeach Donald Trump—and she’s prepared to take all the heat from her party and from the new House Democratic majority she’s hoping to lead, unless she sees something wildly different emerge.

But she said she won’t let Robert Mueller define the decision.

“Recognize one point,” Pelosi told me during an interview in the conference room of her minority-leader suite in the Capitol late Friday: “What Mueller might not think is indictable could be impeachable.”

Pelosi said people should pray for the country as long as Trump is in charge. She’s not sure of his mental condition. She thinks he’s degraded the Constitution and American values. She says the intelligence assessments are indisputable in showing that Russia interfered in the 2016 election. She thinks the firing of Jeff Sessions and the appointment of Matthew Whitaker as acting attorney general in a clear move against the Mueller probe “is perilously close to a constitutional crisis.”

That’s not enough, she said.

“You have to have evidence, evidence of the connection. Everything’s about the connection,” Pelosi explained.

In other words, it comes down to a topic the president has notably refrained from tweeting about for weeks: collusion.

what collusion ?

Mueller already has him for collusion -- have you not been watching this week ?
sheesh

The charge of the Special Prosecutor is to investigate Russian Involvement in the 2016 election.
As you know, as an officer f the court Mueller is bound by law to report any and all other crimes he comes across.
thus Michael Cohen

The word "collusion" is not in his charge.
The name Trump is not of his charge

A synonym for collusion or a form of collusion would be conspiracy --- yes ?

by no stretch am I a legal scholar but Cohen being instructed to meet with Russians, whether he did or not, qualifies as "conspiracy"

the Russian lawyer from the Trump Tower meeting, despite claims that she was a private citizen, was working directly with the Russian government to cover up a conspiracy to commit tax fraud, identity theft, and money laundering through real estate. That’s exactly the same kind of money laundering and tax fraud behind the charges against former Trump campaign chair Paul Manafort, and exactly the kind of money laundering that powered Trump back from bankruptcy. Trump’s surrogates, including Rudy Giuliani, will be quick to dismiss the charges against Veselnitskaya as unrelated to Trump and unrelated to “collusion.” But federal prosecutors are charging one of those present at the Trump Tower meeting with working directly with the Russian government in a scheme to obstruct justice in the United States. That’s a big deal, and it is collusion


https://www.dailykos.com/stories/20...Tower-meeting-indicted-by-federal-prosecutors

I find it hard to believe there is still anyone arguing whether there was collusion/conspiracy.
What a waste of time they are. Rumsfeld called them "dead enders"

is immaterial at this point.

...................

Whether Trump himself gets impeached or goes to prison - His campaign (not HRC's or The former Gov of NM) the Trump Campaign colluded to conspire with Russia to tilt the 2016 election
Which is/was against the law.

A High Crime .


I personally don't think the House will impeach and I don't see Trump getting re elected
We'll see

Despite ample public evidence of secret collaboration between President Donald Trump’s campaign and Russia during the 2016 election and since, Senate Intelligence Committee Chairman Richard Burr (R-NC) is repeatedly insisting that he’s seen no clear evidence of “collusion” in the chamber’s investigation.

“I’m not sure how to put it any clearer than I said it before,” Burr told reporters Wednesday. “We have no factual evidence of collusion between the Trump campaign and Russia.”

In an NBC News report on Burr’s remarks, reporter Ken Dilanian characterized his conclusion as a claim that the committee has “uncovered no direct evidence of a conspiracy between the Trump campaign and Russia.” But Rep. Eric Swalwell (D-CA), who sits on the House Intelligence Committee, argued that this was a misunderstanding of both the kind of evidence that is available and what kind of evidence is acceptable.

“Let’s talk about direct vs circumstantial evidence,” said Swalwell in a thread of tweets. “The law treats them the same. @SenatorBurr says there’s no “direct evidence of collusion” b/w Trump & Russians. Put aside the fact that @MarkWarner doesn’t agree w/ this. What matters is if there’s evidence of collusion.”

He continued: “What is circumstantial evidence? Suppose I’m trying to prove that my son Nelson ate some freshly baked brownies that we made together. When I turned away, all of the brownies were out. When I turned back, one was gone… I didn’t see Nelson eat a brownie — that would be direct evidence. But when I returned, he had crumbs on his shirt, and chocolate on his lips and fingers. That would be considered circumstantial evidence that Nelson ate a brownie.”

But as Swalwell explained, that’s still strong and credible evidence.

“It’s not direct, but that doesn’t matter. The law says it’s treated exactly the same way. So, @SenatorBurr, have you seen any circumstantial evidence of collusion?” he concluded.

On Twitter, reporter Natasha Bertrand cited an additional compelling instance of circumstantial evidence: “Chuck Rosenberg gave me another example: you wake up with snow on your front lawn. Do you have direct evidence that it snowed? No. But the circumstantial evidence is strong, and far more likely than someone driving up to your house and throwing snow on your lawn.”

things you find along the way of looking for other things.
lets take this slow



Wasn't Manafort involved in the June 6, 2016 meeting ?
With a Russian as the meeting heading - something/something dirt on HRC ?
And isn't accepting campaign contributions form foreign nationals against the law?
And isn't discussing that meeting a conspiracy ?
Isn't conspiracy a synonym for collusion ?

If Trump and his team did nothing wrong, they’d “have little to fear” from Mueller because, as the former solicitor general noted, prosecuting collusion and obstruction is “enormously difficult” and a report clearing the president of wrongdoing would be the end of it.

https://www.rawstory.com/2019/02/mu...te-ex-solicitor-general/#.XHKRTTthN7o.twitter

Rantt Media
‏ @RanttMedia
18m18 minutes ago

Manafort lied about contacts w/ Kilimnik

Flynn lied about contacts w/ Kislyak

Stone lied about contacts w/ Wikileaks link

Cohen lied about Moscow Project

Papadopoulos lied about Russia dirt

Excuse us for not believing Trump when he says "no collusion"

This took me about 10 seconds to find. But I did have a good laugh at this line where you say you've personally never used the term "collusion"

You, Fox,Trump and the rest insist on using the term "collusion" as in "there is no collusion"

What to your mind would constitute collusion.
I personally dont think I have ever used that term to specify a crime because that particular word does not specify a particular crime

And this one just for fun

I can't wait to one day go back into the old pages of this thread and screenshot the comments from thethe and sturg about the dossier being phony and "I WAS PROMISED COLLUSION" from the last year and have them be actual memes in the meme and quote thread.

Looking forward to it

 

[thethe]

Well we know two things

The dossier was fake

Collusion/conspiracy didnt happen

 

[57Brave]

Rantt Media
‏ @RanttMedia
34m34 minutes ago

Mueller's indictments have told a story.

We know Russia interfered in the 2016 election with espionage and propaganda campaigns.

We know Russians reached out to and met with the Trump Campaign.

We hope Mueller's report will fill in the blanks.

 

[thethe]

Rantt Media
‏ @RanttMedia
34m34 minutes ago

Mueller's indictments have told a story.

We know Russia interfered in the 2016 election with espionage and propaganda campaigns.

We know Russians reached out to and met with the Trump Campaign.

We hope Mueller's report will fill in the blanks.

We know fusion gps met with the russian lawyer before and after the setup.

We know papa d was setup by foreign intelligence.

We know fusion gps used russian sources go create a fake dossier.

 

[thethe]

[Tw]1109813678239555584[/tw]

 

[AerchAngel]

I find Twitter not something you trust on both sides.

That includes Right leaning and Left leaning.

The Left needs them and it is their bread and butter, but you cannot rely on their "truth"

You Righties, get on them using it. It brings out the falsehood of their deplorable hypocrite party.

 

[thethe]

[tw]1109902477850279941[/tw]


LOLOLOLOLOL

The tables are going to turn on Mueller real fast now.