Starker on 19/10/2017 at 05:24
I don't understand why you think it doesn't rise to the level of collusion. Setting up a meeting with people who say they represent the Russian government is not active enough? Do you need written confessions or something?
As for circumstantial evidence, in addition to all the meetings and business connections and banking connections and attempts to obstruct justice, there are also all these active efforts to aid Russia. For example, Lord Dampnut fought against Russia sanctions, only signing the bill when it became clear that the Congress would veto him and even now he refuses to enact these sanctions on Russia, with the deadline already three weeks past. The way he goes out of his way to defend Russia is damn suspicious just by itself.
Renzatic on 19/10/2017 at 06:06
Because taken at face value, Trump Jr.'s meeting with the Russians was a one-off affair. They claimed to have dirt on Clinton, and were willing to give it to him, and he said "hey, why not?"
For a collusion charge to stick, it has to involve the Trump campaign at a far deeper level, has to be active and ongoing. They would have to have had first hand knowledge of the Russians hacking the DNC with the intent that any info garnered from said hacking should be funneled directly to their campaign either for use against Clinton, or to harm the DNC's reputation. There had to be an agreement made, consent from one party given to the other to engage in illegal activities.
Trump Jr.'s meeting fails to meet that standard. Nothing we've seen shows that he knew what the info was, or where the Russians got it. He just knew they had it, and went to see what it was. As part of a large picture, it's good evidence. By itself, it's not collusion.
Now as Trump him going to bat for the Russians more often and with more vigor than he should, well yeah, it does look suspicious. Just about everything Trump does looks bad at a casual glance. But that doesn't necessarily mean it is bad. Trump likes the Russians, and as we've seen with Manafort, Arpaio, and a number of other people, Trump will reward people he likes and respects regardless of what they've done, regardless of the optics.
...without more to go on, Trump being guilty is just as likely as Trump simply being a dumbfuck.
Goldmoon Dawn on 19/10/2017 at 06:28
But that doesnt fit into MY view
Renzatic on 19/10/2017 at 06:35
Gold, you're at least as guilty of dismissing things that don't fit into your worldview as anyone else here.
icemann on 19/10/2017 at 14:09
The only bit that annoys me is that when it was alleged that Trump had dealings with Russia everyone (not here but media wise) was screaming bloody murder and calling for the pitchforks. But as soon as it was revealed about the Clinton's, the response has been like "meh it's fine don't worry about it then". It should be the same response regardless of who is found to be at fault. Trump for all his crazy ravings was right about the media. Quite corrupt and one sided on many topics.
This also gives points to those that had that feelings of distrust towards Hilary during the campaign. Her track record speaks for itself really, and this further adds to that. Did the US deserve Trump though as the lesser of 2 evils? Hmm. I dunno. There needed to be a better 3rd option. Better than Sanders and the others that were running.
At the time I'd have voted for Trump (if I lived in the US), but he's just digging himself a bigger hole as time goes on. By the time the next election comes around he'll lose in a landslide. Just have to reach that point first.
Goldmoon Dawn on 19/10/2017 at 14:55
Quote Posted by icemann
This also gives points to those that had that feelings of distrust towards Hilary during the campaign. Her track record speaks for itself really, and this further adds to that. Did the US deserve Trump though as the lesser of 2 evils? Hmm. I dunno. There needed to be a better 3rd option. Better than Sanders and the others that were running.
Now that Trump opened the door, hopefully people like Jesse Ventura will finally get out and run! Dont tell me Ventura would be worse than Trump...
Quote Posted by Renzatic
Gold, you're at least as guilty of dismissing things that don't fit into your worldview as anyone else here.
:p
Starker should put in an application at CNN, would be perfect for the job!
jkcerda on 19/10/2017 at 15:06
depends on who runs against him, put hillary there again & watch :D
Starker on 19/10/2017 at 16:34
The way I see it, in the end, it matters very little whether Lord Dampnut does things out of malice or stupidity or both. Conspiring with a foreign power to influence US elections is collusion in my mind, no matter whether it's an established relationship or simple opportunism.
As for Hillary, I couldn't care less. She's not the president of the US. Also, her scandals tend to be largely manufactured or vastly overblown or outright conspiracy theories. Cough*benghazi*cough*pizzagate*cough*she's on the verge of dying*cough.
henke on 19/10/2017 at 16:34
Yeeeeeah, maybe Ventura will finally run. Maybe.
[video=youtube;sOlqoKHFNRI]https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=sOlqoKHFNRI[/video]
Bucky Seifert on 19/10/2017 at 18:03
This doesn't clear up Trump, but if this is true and Obama and Hillary (Which is hardly unlikely) was taking bribes from Russia this long, it does illustrate a bigger problem of Russia manipulating US politics.
