TrumPutinGate

#19,429
#19,429
luthervol said:
No. I believe his crime didn't rise to the level of warranting removal from office.
Click to expand...

So if Trump lies under oath, that doesn't rise to a level of warranting removal either, correct? It would be the exact same crime.
 
#19,430
#19,430
volfanjustin said:
You all have been saying that for 2 years
Click to expand...
No... we have been saying there is evidence of possible collusion since the June 9, 2016 meeting at Trump Tower came to light. There is now evidence that collusion actually happened contained in the e-mails between Jerome Corsi and Roger Stone in August of 2016... and then between Roger Stone and Steve Bannon on October 4, 2016. Members of the Trump campaign had intermediaries between themselves and WikiLeaks and they clearly had advanced knowledge of when their dumps would be made and what they contained. One of these dumps was strategically timed to minimize a bad news event for Trump (the Access Hollywood video).
 
#19,431
#19,431
ClearwaterVol said:
Farce of an investigation? It amazes me how many Trump supporters parrot Trump in this regard while not knowing anything of substance about the investigation. Trump has his supporters dancing like marionettes.
Click to expand...

To be fair, it goes both ways. Outside of Mueller and his team, no one knows anything of substance about this investigation, yet the left continues to gleefully suppose Mueller is closing in. All anyone has is supposition.
 
  • Like
Reactions: 0nelilreb and ClearwaterVol
#19,434
#19,434
hog88 said:
I'm not in the least ok with any of that. I want to see some proof any of this actually happened before I convict someone and after a year and 1/2 I'd think there would be at least 1 person charged with crimes associated with the election if any of it did happen.
Click to expand...

I agree, as of now there is no proof. However, we don't know crap about what the investigation has yielded. It is still wait and see. The Starr Investigation lasted 7 years and Clinton was indicted for lying about an affair with Lewinsky that didn't even take place until several years after the investigation began. The original scope was Whitewater. Don't recall Republicans demanding that the investigation be ended because it was beyond it's original scope.
 
#19,436
#19,436
Weezer said:
To be fair, it goes both ways. Outside of Mueller and his team, no one knows anything of substance about this investigation, yet the left continues to gleefully suppose Mueller is closing in. All anyone has is supposition.
Click to expand...
There are substantive details publicly known which point to collusion between members of the 2016 Trump campaign (Roger Stone and Steve Bannon) and Russian agents who hacked the DNC (and then gave those stolen documents to WikiLeaks).
 
#19,437
#19,437
BowlBrother85 said:
No... we have been saying there is evidence of possible collusion since the June 9, 2016 meeting at Trump Tower came to light. There is now evidence that collusion actually happened contained in the e-mails between Jerome Corsi and Roger Stone in August of 2016... and then between Roger Stone and Steve Bannon on October 4, 2016. Members of the Trump campaign had intermediaries between themselves and WikiLeaks and they clearly had advanced knowledge of when their dumps would be made and what they contained. One of these dumps was strategically timed to minimize a bad news event for Trump (the Access Hollywood video).
Click to expand...
All of those emails were a swing a miss, there was no way people especially your media was going to stop talking about the video over the hill rigging a primary. The Corsi/Stone stuff is garbage, nothing more than crooked Mueller trying to get them to lie and flip. Still nothing more than dreams and conspiracys from you liberal hacks.

If that meeting was 100% for dirt on hill there isn't one thing wrong with that
 
#19,438
#19,438
volfanjustin said:
All of those emails were a swing a miss, there was no way people especially your media was going to stop talking about the video over the hill rigging a primary. The Corsi/Stone stuff is garbage, nothing more than crooked Mueller trying to get them to lie and flip. Still nothing more than dreams and conspiracys from you liberal hacks.

If that meeting was 100% for dirt on hill there isn't one thing wrong with that
Click to expand...

You really do tote Trump's dirty water, don't you?
 
#19,441
#19,441
volfanjustin said:
All of those emails were a swing a miss, there was no way people especially your media was going to stop talking about the video over the hill rigging a primary. The Corsi/Stone stuff is garbage, nothing more than crooked Mueller trying to get them to lie and flip. Still nothing more than dreams and conspiracys from you liberal hacks.

If that meeting was 100% for dirt on hill there isn't one thing wrong with that
Click to expand...
Wrong and wrong and wrong again... it's clear cut proof of advanced knowledge of those document dumps and therefore, collusion.... and as far as the June 9, 2016 meeting was concerned, if there was nothing wrong with it... then why lie about it as Donald Trump Jr clearly did? He lied about what was discussed (he said it was adoptions) and then lied repeatedly about who was in attendance. Trump himself, dictated a statement aboard Air Force One defending the meeting despite not having even been there. They were trying to obtain something of value from a foreign adversary in the middle of a campaign and knew it was wrong... that is why they lied to cover it up.
 
  • Like
Reactions: luthervol
#19,445
#19,445
BowlBrother85 said:
Wrong and wrong and wrong again... it's clear cut proof of advanced knowledge of those document dumps and therefore, collusion.... and as far as the June 9, 2016 meeting was concerned, if there was nothing wrong with it... then why lie about it as Donald Trump Jr clearly did? He lied about what was discussed (he said it was adoptions) and then lied repeatedly about who was in attendance. Trump himself, dictated a statement aboard Air Force One defending the meeting despite not having even been there. They were trying to obtain something of value from a foreign adversary in the middle of a campaign and knew it was wrong... that is why they lied to cover it up.
Click to expand...

If these guys said there was gonna be an email dump prior they would’ve been accused of collusion. If they didn’t it’s collusion. It’s all part of the dim double standard and always blame someone else besides themselves.
 
#19,446
#19,446
The fact we have this chess match between Manafort, Corsi, Stone, and now Cohen regarding Trump indicates to me that there hasn't/ wasn't a clear cut case for collusion from the start.

One would think that if Trump was actively communicating with the Russians, there would be phone logs, emails, travel logs, and paper trails that would indicate something shady was going on. IMHO, Mueller is trying to get the aforementioned characters to testify against Trump, or each other, in order to try to catch Trump lying in his written answers.

Also note how the narrative has shifted to business dealings. Is it illegal to have business dealings in Russia? No. Is it illegal to talk to Russian businessmen over such business dealings? No. I would even argue that having business dealings in Russia is not a big deal. All kinds of businesses have dealings with China despite them being a foreign adversary and hacking our military systems. What makes having business deals with Russia any different from China?
 
  • Like
Reactions: volfanjustin
#19,447
#19,447
BowlBrother85 said:
Trump's campaign colluded with a foreign adversary for personal gain. You are calling the people investigating them "anti-American". Mueller volunteered for service in Vietnam while Trump actively avoided it. Your passion for Trump defies sensible reasoning. He is not by any definition a patriot. All evidence points to Trump being completely self-interested.
Click to expand...

I agree that Trump is completely self-interested. He's an ego-maniac. That does not prove collusion. Stating collusion as a fact robs your post of legitimacy. You almost made a valid point, but came up short.
 
  • Like
Reactions: 0nelilreb and Matt2496
#19,448
#19,448
Matt2496 said:
The fact we have this chess match between Manafort, Corsi, Stone, and now Cohen regarding Trump indicates to me that there hasn't/ wasn't a clear cut case for collusion from the start.

One would think that if Trump was actively communicating with the Russians, there would be phone logs, emails, travel logs, and paper trails that would indicate something shady was going on. IMHO, Mueller is trying to get the aforementioned characters to testify against Trump, or each other, in order to try to catch Trump lying in his written answers.

Also note how the narrative has shifted to business dealings. Is it illegal to have business dealings in Russia? No. Is it illegal to talk to Russian businessmen over such business dealings? No. I would even argue that having business dealings in Russia is not a big deal. All kinds of businesses have dealings with China despite them being a foreign adversary and hacking our military systems. What makes having business deals with Russia any different from China?
Click to expand...

Yea but maybe because of these business dealings they made Facebook memes and told Assange to out Hillary. Lol
 
New posts
You must log in or register to reply here.

VN Store



Back
Top