F.B.I. Opened Inquiry Into Whether Trump Was Secretly Working on Behalf of Russia

[Digressions]

Democrats will be powerless to control this oscillating narrative until they too take the debt/deficits seriously

The last Democrat in the White House was crippled by the greatest economical downturn since the Great Depression. His hands were tied for the only two years he had an opportunity to govern. The Democrat before that left with surpluses as far as the eye could see. To say that Democrats don't take it seriously, is not fair, or representative of facts. What is the Republican track record over the last 40 years?

 

[SuperHoosierFan]

https://www.newsweek.com/mueller-in...ied-communications-intercepts-proving-1289142
Wonder if this would convince people? Probably just more excuses...

Meh, the FBI is corrupt and part of the deep state. Next...

 

[CO. Hoosier]

View embedded media

“We’re respected again in the world”

Meh. Trump already publicly said he asked Putin about meddling, Putin denied it, and Trump said he believed Putin.

 

[sglowrider]

Meh. Trump already publicly said he asked Putin about meddling, Putin denied it, and Trump said he believed Putin.

Phew! I was worried for a moment.

Nobody knows Putin better than Trump.

 

[CO. Hoosier]

FBI is corrupt

The IG referred 5 FBI officials for criminal investigation.

 

[DrHoops]

You're the guy who's still trying to give Bernie Madoff your money to manage.

The IG referred 5 FBI officials for criminal investigation.

 

[Cortez88]

Meh. Trump already publicly said he asked Putin about meddling, Putin denied it, and Trump said he believed Putin.

You are the most bad faith poster on this board. Every post is exactly 180 degrees from truthful.

 

[CO. Hoosier]

You beat me to it.

Here’s another article.

https://www.businessinsider.com/trump-reportedly-hid-records-of-his-conversations-with-putin-2019-1

Whether he means to be or not, he’s almost certainly hopelessly compromised by Putin. He’s a blabbering idiot that agrees to anything a “strong” foreign leader says. Plus, he’s flat out parroted obscure Russian talking points that ONLY COME FROM THE KREMLIN. The latest example being that Russia invaded Afghanistan because Russia was attacked by terrorists from there. Which is flatly false, and revionist history from Putin. Literally no other nation in the world views it that way. None.

Even if he’s just an idiot, he’s a DANGEROUS idiot. He’s got to go- soon.

There’s absolutely no good reason for him to not want subordinates in on meetings between he and Putin. Or for him to not disclose the notes, and even hide them from everyone. I knew he’d be bad on the foreign security/relations stuff, but I never dreamed he’d be THIS bad. It’s terrifying.

Even if everything you say is true, you still have several "so what?" question to answer. How has the Trump administration helped Russia?

Arguably, Trump's challenge to NATO members to step up funding is enough of a NATO disruption to benefit the Ruskies. But it is quite another thing to say that Trump asked for funding because Putin requested that. Uncle Sam has funded the bulk of NATO for 70 years. Maybe Trump thinks our generosity has in fact weakened the NATO alliance by allowing members to skate on their anti-Russian readiness obligations--which they have done.

As I pointed out, most of Trump's domestic and foreign agenda has been tougher on Russia than preceding policies. This would specifically include our shipping lethal arms to Ukraine, a policy the previous administration specifically rejected. In those cases where Russia can be seen to benefit from Trump policy, there are other likely US motives that are in play, such as a general improvement of Russian/US relations, and pulling our GI's out of far-flung battlefields that now have little to do with our national defense. Trump has increased some Russian sanctions, and relaxed others. Some of those he has relaxed, such as aluminum trade, puts downward pressure on the price of aluminum which pressures China.

It's not that I don't believe all your dozens of posts and links outlining how Trump is in bed with Russia, rather, this is about what difference does it all make? The fact that there does not appear to be very much of a benefit to Russia would also lead me to believe your litany of circumstances does not necessarily lead to the conclusion that Trump is "hopelessly compromised by Putin".

 

[CO. Hoosier]

You are the most bad faith poster on this board. Every post is exactly 180 degrees from truthful.

Do you deny Trump publicly said this?

 

[CO. Hoosier]

Phew! I was worried for a moment.

Nobody knows Putin better than Trump.

LOL. You need to keep up. This point is about the super-secret translator statement that turns out to be very old news.

 

[SuperHoosierFan]

The IG referred 5 FBI officials for criminal investigation.

Meh

 

[iuwclurker]

The last Democrat in the White House was crippled by the greatest economical downturn since the Great Depression. His hands were tied for the only two years he had an opportunity to govern. The Democrat before that left with surpluses as far as the eye could see. To say that Democrats don't take it seriously, is not fair, or representative of facts. What is the Republican track record over the last 40 years?

I responded to you as one of the posters here more interested in what works than ideology. Clinton's the exception to the rule. He represents one fact and the truth is he did that in conjunction with a very powerful Republican congress that demanded that. You know that of course. And yes, Republicans since Reagan have had a tendency to explode the debt, while arguing the contrary.

Frame it as you wish, politically or policy-wise, but it's clear that Democrats tend to not run on lowering the debt or deficit and I think you'd be hard-pressed to name legislation that sunsets expenditures or are otherwise designed with debt-lowering in mind. Just not the typical Democrat mindset. So Republicans tend to own that narrative and it has a powerful effect on the electorate. Their most recent tax cut again exploded the debt and deficit and yet Republicans are in glee about it, most of whom gain relatively little from it.

Blaming it on the Rs doesn't change anything and doesn't help the nation move forward. The question is, can the Ds take control of that narrative and if so how?

 

[TerhuneHoosierfan]

KC's definitely going to the Super Bowl.
Just saying the Rams dominated the line of scrimmage and they rammed the ball down the Boys' throats. This game was never as close as the score looks.

Yeah, I was both surprised and impressed with the way LA dominated the line of scrimmage. The Chiefs did as well and they're going to be a load to handle at Arrowhead for today's survivor.

 

[TerhuneHoosierfan]

Please... don't curse the Chiefs when we are this close. There have been many false dawns at Arrowhead over the decades.

One of my last memories of living in KC was the humiliation of watching the Chiefs, albeit a fantastic ticket (at the 50yard line) -- with a garbage bag around my legs and a blanket wrapped around my body watching them lose to the Steelers while the wind, rain & snow were chucking it down.

I said: No Mas.

I left before the 4th Q and some idiots were yelling 'fair weather fan' at me. I guess it was better than death from hypothermia or worse, frostbitten ass.

I've got a good friend (Pfizer retiree) who accepted a job transfer to there back in '74. He and his wife live in Lees Summit. They love it out there! I expect a call from him later today regarding yesterday's game which they were in attendance.

I've been a Packer fan since '60 and attending a game at Lambeau is on my buckets list, although, at my age, the thought of a 8 hour drive to endure those frigid conditions is not too appealing, especially, as I'm staring out the window at 5 inches of snow. If I'm ever going to make that dream a reality (early in the season ), I better make it before Rodgers retires and they return to those horrid '70's and '80's with the likes of Lynn Dickey and David Whitehurst behind center. Those were some truly "lean" years in Packers history.

 

[Cortez88]

Meh

It’s almost like CoH has no idea how many Trump campaign and administration officials have either pleaded to or been found guilty of federal felonies. It’s almost like he posts entirely in bad faith.

 

[Digressions]

I responded to you as one of the posters here more interested in what works than ideology. Clinton's the exception to the rule. He represents one fact and the truth is he did that in conjunction with a very powerful Republican congress that demanded that. You know that of course. And yes, Republicans since Reagan have had a tendency to explode the debt, while arguing the contrary.

Frame it as you wish, politically or policy-wise, but it's clear that Democrats tend to not run on lowering the debt or deficit and I think you'd be hard-pressed to name legislation that sunsets expenditures or are otherwise designed with debt-lowering in mind. Just not the typical Democrat mindset. So Republicans tend to own that narrative and it has a powerful effect on the electorate. Their most recent tax cut again exploded the debt and deficit and yet Republicans are in glee about it, most of whom gain relatively little from it.

Blaming it on the Rs doesn't change anything and doesn't help the nation move forward. The question is, can the Ds take control of that narrative and if so how?

They slowly are. The EITC and letting the Bush tax cuts expire were pro growth policies, but not by conventional wisdom or rhetoric. If the BHO year's are any indication, it would help to have both houses and the oval.

BTW, you give Newt's HoR too much credit. They didn't like the EITC. They just couldn't defend, not giving the lower middle class a tax cut. Sorry for the double negative, but IOW, they just got outflanked.

 

[SuperHoosierFan]

It’s almost like CoH has no idea how many Trump campaign and administration officials have either pleaded to or been found guilty of federal felonies. It’s almost like he posts entirely in bad faith.

If I, or anyone else, pointed out that five FBI officials were investigated, CO would say “Meh, the FBI has 35k employees, so five lone wolves hardly point to a problem. You have to understand the context/nuance of the investigations.”

 

[MonroeCity]

The FBI under Andrew McCabe and James Comey's inner circle decided to, on their own initiative, launch both a criminal and counterintelligence investigation of the president of the United States. There is no evidence presented that Department of Justice was consulted about this much less approving it.

 

[UncleMark]

The FBI under Andrew McCabe and James Comey's inner circle decided to, on their own initiative, launch both a criminal and counterintelligence investigation of the president of the United States. There is no evidence presented that Department of Justice was consulted about this much less approving it.

My money is on Rosenstein signing off on it.

 

[sglowrider]

It’s almost like CoH has no idea how many Trump campaign and administration officials have either pleaded to or been found guilty of federal felonies. It’s almost like he posts entirely in bad faith.

CoH is sui generis. It's a gift.

 

[sglowrider]

I've got a good friend (Pfizer retiree) who accepted a job transfer to there back in '74. He and his wife live in Lees Summit. They love it out there! I expect a call from him later today regarding yesterday's game which they were in attendance.

I've been a Packer fan since '60 and attending a game at Lambeau is on my buckets list, although, at my age, the thought of a 8 hour drive to endure those frigid conditions is not too appealing, especially, as I'm staring out the window at 5 inches of snow. If I'm ever going to make that dream a reality (early in the season ), I better make it before Rodgers retires and they return to those horrid '70's and '80's with the likes of Lynn Dickey and David Whitehurst behind center. Those were some truly "lean" years in Packers history.

Lee's Summit wasnt far from where I lived. I was in Overland Park.

The only problem with KC was the weather -- the winters can be brutal and the summers definitely are. Makes Singapore feel balmy at times. The food was great especially the ribs.

 

[TerhuneHoosierfan]

Lee's Summit wasnt far from where I lived. I was in Overland Park.

The only problem with KC was the weather -- the winters can be brutal and the summers definitely are. Makes Singapore feel balmy at times. The food was great especially the ribs.

Only stopped in KC a couple of times traveling through it. Thumbs up on the ribs! Great barbecue!

 

[sglowrider]

Only stopped in KC a couple of times traveling through it. Thumbs up on the ribs! Great barbecue!

The Plaza in the winter is pretty too. Westport in the old days was good for after work drinks.

My fav memory was going out to some Italian 'restaurant'/dive by the Missouri River -- it used to be one of those places that was used to off-load alcohol during the bad ol' days. But great food and cheap.

South of Overland Park, there is a steak place where they literally chop the cows in the back room and so the steaks were as fresh as you get.

Its also party why I just dont eat steaks anymore!!

 

[wiede]

Even if everything you say is true, you still have several "so what?" question to answer. How has the Trump administration helped Russia?

Arguably, Trump's challenge to NATO members to step up funding is enough of a NATO disruption to benefit the Ruskies. But it is quite another thing to say that Trump asked for funding because Putin requested that. Uncle Sam has funded the bulk of NATO for 70 years. Maybe Trump thinks our generosity has in fact weakened the NATO alliance by allowing members to skate on their anti-Russian readiness obligations--which they have done.

As I pointed out, most of Trump's domestic and foreign agenda has been tougher on Russia than preceding policies. This would specifically include our shipping lethal arms to Ukraine, a policy the previous administration specifically rejected. In those cases where Russia can be seen to benefit from Trump policy, there are other likely US motives that are in play, such as a general improvement of Russian/US relations, and pulling our GI's out of far-flung battlefields that now have little to do with our national defense. Trump has increased some Russian sanctions, and relaxed others. Some of those he has relaxed, such as aluminum trade, puts downward pressure on the price of aluminum which pressures China.

It's not that I don't believe all your dozens of posts and links outlining how Trump is in bed with Russia, rather, this is about what difference does it all make? The fact that there does not appear to be very much of a benefit to Russia would also lead me to believe your litany of circumstances does not necessarily lead to the conclusion that Trump is "hopelessly compromised by Putin".

So now it’s Ok to TRY to conspire with a hostile foreign power? So long as you’re not successful, right?

That’s what I read when I read this post from you.

I’ll play along.

Here are some things that Trump and his campaign did to help Russia.

- changed the republican platform to offer less assistance to Ukraine
- just recently, relaxed sanctions on business related to Oleg Derapaska- a guy VERY close to Putin, and one of the most powerful Russian oligarchs. Without explanation.
- spoke with Putin about “adoption”, on the sidelines of the G5 without any other American presence. This is code for the Magnisky act, which Russia absolutely hates.
- delayed the implementation of additional sanctions that congress passed.
- Trump parrots Russian views, which are unique to Russia. Like the terrorists in Afghanistan
- his campaign, and likely he knew, tried to secretly meet with Russians offering dirt on Hillary. There was a blocked phone call from Jr, that the republican intel committee in the house refused to follow up on. And Trump was literally in the building when this happened.
- Trump decided to pull out of Syria abruptly, despite the advice of everyone around him. And his defense secretary resigned because of it.
- Trump has repeatedly said that he believes Putin when he says Russia didn’t meddle in our election. Despite every intelligence agency stating other wise. Which makes us even more vulnerable to future interference.

Possibly unintentionally, he had attacked our allies, which makes Putin VERY happy.

There are many more examples. It’s not about effectiveness. It’s about intent.

I doubt Russia/Putin thought that Trump would ever be as effective in supporting Russia’s goals. However, I think he thought that Trump had more power to lift sanctions than he does. Thank god for our system of checks and balances. I’d bet Russia thought that the changing of the pub party plank re: Ukraine was a bigger deal than it was.

I don’t see how you don’t see a problem with all of this. He’s done so much in plain sight, it’s easy to lose track of just how out of bounds all of this is.

I should’ve expected this from you now, but it still amazes me that you can take this view. We’ve got a group in the White House that’s conspired to help Russia, at a time when they helped to swing an election for the same group. That’s about as bad as it gets.

 

[CO. Hoosier]

So now it’s Ok to TRY to conspire with a hostile foreign power? So long as you’re not successful, right?

That’s what I read when I read this post from you.

I’ll play along.

Here are some things that Trump and his campaign did to help Russia.

- changed the republican platform to offer less assistance to Ukraine
- just recently, relaxed sanctions on business related to Oleg Derapaska- a guy VERY close to Putin, and one of the most powerful Russian oligarchs. Without explanation.
- spoke with Putin about “adoption”, on the sidelines of the G5 without any other American presence. This is code for the Magnisky act, which Russia absolutely hates.
- delayed the implementation of additional sanctions that congress passed.
- Trump parrots Russian views, which are unique to Russia. Like the terrorists in Afghanistan
- his campaign, and likely he knew, tried to secretly meet with Russians offering dirt on Hillary. There was a blocked phone call from Jr, that the republican intel committee in the house refused to follow up on. And Trump was literally in the building when this happened.
- Trump decided to pull out of Syria abruptly, despite the advice of everyone around him. And his defense secretary resigned because of it.
- Trump has repeatedly said that he believes Putin when he says Russia didn’t meddle in our election. Despite every intelligence agency stating other wise. Which makes us even more vulnerable to future interference.

Possibly unintentionally, he had attacked our allies, which makes Putin VERY happy.

There are many more examples. It’s not about effectiveness. It’s about intent.

I doubt Russia/Putin thought that Trump would ever be as effective in supporting Russia’s goals. However, I think he thought that Trump had more power to lift sanctions than he does. Thank god for our system of checks and balances. I’d bet Russia thought that the changing of the pub party plank re: Ukraine was a bigger deal than it was.

I don’t see how you don’t see a problem with all of this. He’s done so much in plain sight, it’s easy to lose track of just how out of bounds all of this is.

I should’ve expected this from you now, but it still amazes me that you can take this view. We’ve got a group in the White House that’s conspired to help Russia, at a time when they helped to swing an election for the same group. That’s about as bad as it gets.

You read my post wrong. I have no clue why you talk about "effectiveness." Effectiveness of what? Yes, Trump's intent is important. His intent, as shown by his unmistakable actions are not blatantly pro-Russia. If you look, you can find actions of any administration that are in a sense "pro-Russian". Just cuz something is seen as a benefit to Russia doesn't mean we don't also receive a same or greater benefit. Using Russia to ferry people and equipment to and from the ISS is a perfect example. Us using Russian-built heavy-lift rocket engines to launch satellites we use to spy on Russia is another example. Pulling out of Syria, in my view, is in our long term best interest. Not to mention that adventure is not authorized by congress in the first place. It wasn't that long ago the Democrats were bitching about Trump bombing Syria without congressional authorization. Oh, that GOP platform change about Ukraine is a red herring given Trump's policy in sending lethal arms there.

And do you find fault with Trump's desire to improve overall relations with Russia?

 

[wiede]

You read my post wrong. I have no clue why you talk about "effectiveness." Effectiveness of what? Yes, Trump's intent is important. His intent, as shown by his unmistakable actions are not blatantly pro-Russia. If you look, you can find actions of any administration that are in a sense "pro-Russian". Just cuz something is seen as a benefit to Russia doesn't mean we don't also receive a same or greater benefit. Using Russia to ferry people and equipment to and from the ISS is a perfect example. Us using Russian-built heavy-lift rocket engines to launch satellites we use to spy on Russia is another example. Pulling out of Syria, in my view, is in our long term best interest. Not to mention that adventure is not authorized by congress in the first place. It wasn't that long ago the Democrats were bitching about Trump bombing Syria without congressional authorization. Oh, that GOP platform change about Ukraine is a red herring given Trump's policy in sending lethal arms there.

And do you find fault with Trump's desire to improve overall relations with Russia?

Normally, no. Better relations with every foreign country is what we should strive for in our foreign policy.

EXCEPT... The hostile foreign powers that greatly interfered with our elections, in a very effective way. Like Russia, for example. And they did it explicitly to help Trump.

If Trump was all lovey dovey with say, Italy or France, who cares?

You’re ignoring the obvious. It’s right in front of all of us.

I’d feel a lot better about it had Trump put everything in a true blind trust, and we knew a least a little something about his finances. But, like his conversations with Putin, he’s completely hidden those also.

In most other situations, not involving the presidency, you can give someone the benefit of the doubt. When it involves our elections and national security, you cannot be as lenient.

 

[TheOriginalHappyGoat]

you cannot be as lenient.

You spelled "naive" wrong.

 

[sglowrider]

You spelled "naive" wrong.

 

[sglowrider]

.. Jeff Bozo!!

The more pressure he's under, the more desperate, embarrassing and undignified his tweets get. I have to check every single one nowadays to see if it's him or Denald.

 

[CO. Hoosier]

The hostile foreign powers that greatly interfered with our elections, in a very effective way.

Ah . . . .

I see. The nasty Russians were very effective? Really? I see why you are desperate to believe that, but I think there were probably a 1,000 factors that were more important in 2016 than Russia’s faked stories on the internet.

I’m thinking tin foil hats here.

 

[CO. Hoosier]

View embedded media

.. Jeff Bozo!!

The more pressure he's under, the more desperate, embarrassing and undignified his tweets get. I have to check every single one nowadays to see if it's him or Denald.

Now that tweet is a good example of schadenfreude.

 

[zeke4ahs]

Ah . . . .

I see. The nasty Russians were very effective? Really? I see why you are desperate to believe that, but I think there were probably a 1,000 factors that were more important in 2016 than Russia’s faked stories on the internet.

I’m thinking tin foil hats here.

Every single day you fall deeper down the rabbit hole. Whenever the latest horrible news comes out, I wonder how people can still justify it. But all I have to do is come here and read the latest pretzel you’ve twisted yourself into to ignore the absolute most obvious things. The fact that you call people that can see what has been blatant for two years tin foil hats. The irony is so thick.

 

[wiede]

Ah . . . .

I see. The nasty Russians were very effective? Really? I see why you are desperate to believe that, but I think there were probably a 1,000 factors that were more important in 2016 than Russia’s faked stories on the internet.

I’m thinking tin foil hats here.

So, it’s OK to let them continue to do what they did, and are still doing. Though, they’ll be even more effective next time- because we’re not doing much about it. And they know if they’re held accountable by us, it’ll only be because of Congress. And the administration will either delay the punishment or ignore their will.

So, this is not a big deal. Because you claim it didn’t have an effect. How exactly do you know that’s true? There was a study posted on here a while back that demonstrated that it could’ve very likely tipped the scales in Trump’s favor. Even if it can’t be 100% proven, it’s ok? I guess it’s open season on our elections now.

Is that really what you really think?

You’re not being rational if you don’t think it had an impact. It clearly did.

Not just in rallying some folks to vote that may have sat it out, but encouraging others to sit it out. We’re taking 70K votes among 3 states. We’ll never truly know, but it seems very likely what they did had a very real impact.

And we just learned that Manafort shared internal, proprietary campaign data with the Russians, via pro Russian Ukrainian proxies. When he was still connected to the campaign. That’s not a big deal either, right?

Let’s not take the focus off a foreign hostile power throwing their resources into disrupting our presidential election. And then our nut job president insults everyone, except Russia. Seems like he’ll do almost anything to be Vlad’s friend. Would it be because of a quid pro quo? Perhaps? Just another coincidence, right?

You’re grasping at everything you can to justify your increasingly untenable position.

Occam’s razor almost certainly applies here. Particularly because Trump and his clan aren’t the smartest folks- it’s VERY easy to read them, and their intentions via their actions and words. Subtle as sledgehammers. Not very nuanced, in CO parlance.

It’s as if you just ignore the mounting evidence of obvious connections, because you’re dug in to what you already believe.

I’ve read several former FBI/intel agency employees state that for the FBI to open an investigation into whether Trump was actively working for Russia, there would almost certainly be plenty of SIGNET (phone intercepts and “chatter” picked up via surveillance) as well. Are they all wrong? Or are every single one of them just biased?

It’s as if no matter what comes out, you’ll find some way to say it’s “no big deal”.

I don’t know why I’m wasting my time here. I guess we’ll all know more in time, when the report is finished, and we eventually get to see it and the impeachment hearings. That’s almost certain to happen at this point.

 

[CO. Hoosier]

Every single day you fall deeper down the rabbit hole. Whenever the latest horrible news comes out, I wonder how people can still justify it. But all I have to do is come here and read the latest pretzel you’ve twisted yourself into to ignore the absolute most obvious things. The fact that you call people that can see what has been blatant for two years tin foil hats. The irony is so thick.

What’s obvious is that Trump is POTUS and you can’t stand it. Of all the forces that drove the 2016 election Russia is way down the list. Moving Russia to a position of determining the outcome is tin foil hat territory.

As I said from day one. Anybody who broke the law should be prosecuted. I haven’t changed in that view.

 

[wiede]

Every single day you fall deeper down the rabbit hole. Whenever the latest horrible news comes out, I wonder how people can still justify it. But all I have to do is come here and read the latest pretzel you’ve twisted yourself into to ignore the absolute most obvious things. The fact that you call people that can see what has been blatant for two years tin foil hats. The irony is so thick.

Tin foil is not realizing what’s going on. I’m one of the last people to believe in conspiracies.

Conspiracies all share the same trait- they all lack evidence. There’s PLENTY of evidence in this situation. More and more every day, in fact.

 

[wiede]

What’s obvious is that Trump is POTUS and you can’t stand it. Of all the forces that drove the 2016 election Russia is way down the list. Moving Russia to a position of determining the outcome is tin foil hat territory.

As I said from day one. Anybody who broke the law should be prosecuted. I haven’t changed in that view.

Impeachment ain’t about criminal behavior CO. You know that. You’re shifting the goal posts here.

If we have a president that actively welcomed and encouraged assistance from a hostile foreign government, should that president be impeached?

Curious as to your answer.

 

[wiede]

This is your second “so it’s okay” post in this thread. If you don’t respond to what I said, that’s fine. But don’t rewrite my point with your “so it’s okay” stuff because you don’t get it right.

What exactly is your point CO? You keep moving the goal posts, and going in different directions.

Is it just that we don’t know yet?

If that’s it, what will it actually take for you to change your mind?

 

[CO. Hoosier]

So, it’s OK to let them continue to do what they did, and are still doing. Though, they’ll be even more effective next time- because we’re not doing much about it. And they know if they’re held accountable by us, it’ll only be because of Congress. And the administration will either delay the punishment or ignore their will.

So, this is not a big deal. Because you claim it didn’t have an effect. How exactly do you know that’s true? There was a study posted on here a while back that demonstrated that it could’ve very likely tipped the scales in Trump’s favor. Even if it can’t be 100% proven, it’s ok? I guess it’s open season on our elections now.

Is that really what you really think?

You’re not being rational if you don’t think it had an impact. It clearly did.

Not just in rallying some folks to vote that may have sat it out, but encouraging others to sit it out. We’re taking 70K votes among 3 states. We’ll never truly know, but it seems very likely what they did had a very real impact.

And we just learned that Manafort shared internal, proprietary campaign data with the Russians, via pro Russian Ukrainian proxies. When he was still connected to the campaign. That’s not a big deal either, right?

Let’s not take the focus off a foreign hostile power throwing their resources into disrupting our presidential election. And then our nut job president insults everyone, except Russia. Seems like he’ll do almost anything to be Vlad’s friend. Would it be because of a quid pro quo? Perhaps? Just another coincidence, right?

You’re grasping at everything you can to justify your increasingly untenable position.

Occam’s razor almost certainly applies here. Particularly because Trump and his clan aren’t the smartest folks- it’s VERY easy to read them, and their intentions via their actions and words. Subtle as sledgehammers. Not very nuanced, in CO parlance.

It’s as if you just ignore the mounting evidence of obvious connections, because you’re dug in to what you already believe.

I’ve read several former FBI/intel agency employees state that for the FBI to open an investigation into whether Trump was actively working for Russia, there would almost certainly be plenty of SIGNET (phone intercepts and “chatter” picked up via surveillance) as well. Are they all wrong? Or are every single one of them just biased?

It’s as if no matter what comes out, you’ll find some way to say it’s “no big deal”.

I don’t know why I’m wasting my time here. I guess we’ll all know more in time, when the report is finished, and we eventually get to see it and the impeachment hearings. That’s almost certain to happen at this point.

This is your second “so it’s okay” post in this thread. If you don’t respond to what I said, that’s fine. But don’t rewrite my point with your “so it’s okay” stuff because you don’t get it right.

 

[CO. Hoosier]

What exactly is your point CO? You keep moving the goal posts, and going in different directions.

Is it just that we don’t know yet?

If that’s it, what will it actually take for you to change your mind?

Change my mind about what? I’ve said dozens if times those who broke the law should be prosecuted.

 

[CO. Hoosier]

Tin foil is not realizing what’s going on. I’m one of the last people to believe in conspiracies.

Conspiracies all share the same trait- they all lack evidence. There’s PLENTY of evidence in this situation. More and more every day, in fact.

Conspiracy theorists usually have evidence. The pattern is usually to form a conclusion, then marshall circumstantial evidence to support said theory and also exclude inconsistent circumstantial evidence.