Trump's Russian Collusion

[runrussellrun]

You really holding onto that benghazi teddy bear as the reason Hillary lost?

Oh for f-'s sake. Is there any subject that you don't play dumb about?

No. There's no possible way that partisan hammering of the Dem Candidate for President on national TV the entire time she was campaigning damaged her.

I'm insane. I mean: obviously. You're right. My take? The Benghazi hearings HELPED her. I mean, clearly. When you ask an American voter about Benghazi, they think "rainbows, sunshine, and the awesomeness and honesty of Hillary".

Or, you could understand the real people I described. 5 same sex couple, 10 votes, who wouldn't vote for Hillary if their lives depended on it. Of those 10, 4 are doctors. 1 a tenured professor at Wisconsin. 2 Nurse practicioners. You know, the educated elite. The folks that write code

You aren't giving the folks that stayed home on election day enough credit. Or thought as to why. Hillary has a long, long list of negatives. But, we can just start with the lack of meaningful policies or plans. Vague is being kind. Again, do you really think anyone was swayed by tRumps rants? Wasn't the "lock her up" chants about illegal emails?

Regarding Benghazi, if you wanna go there as the SOLE reason as to why she lost. Guess you forgot that the sad event happened because of a video. Oh, what's that.....Obama and his administration LIED about that? That Nakoula Basseley Nakoula influence in the media peddling field would make a Russian spammer bow down in awe?

[old salt]

Maybe those sealed indictments in DC Court are for Maduro & his drug smuggling Generals.

When BBC asked Elliot Abrams what "all options on the table means", he mentioned Noriega.

[MDlaxfan76]

I'm HOPING that Trump is cleared for us rational Americans.

Trump being "cleared" is NOT ON THE TABLE HERE. That's what "does not exonerate him" means. Barr wrote what any credible person would admit is a highly partisan summary of the Mueller report. Consider that Barr himself decided to add the "does not exonerate" quote. Why would he do that? Because he needs some small thread to hang on to when the report is made public and we see how bad it is -- "look, I said it didn't exonerate him".

I'm not talking about Barr clearing Trump. Or Mueller clearing Trump.

I'm talking about getting the full Mueller report, and for reasonable Americans to clear Trump of conspiring with Russia.

Wishful thinking though it may be.

Wouldn't it be great if we learned that Trump really wasn't trying to do a huge deal in Moscow during the Campaign and was lying about it? That would be terrific to learn.

Or that there really wasn't a Trump Tower meeting with Veselnetskya, Don Jr, Manafort, and Jared. Or that they really didn't express interest in getting dirt on HRC from a Russian operative. You know, that Trump wasn't crafting lies when he dictated the response for Don Jr. That would be a relief, right?

Or hey, how about that Trump and co actually did report all the Russian attempts at kompromat to the FBI, Russian attempts to chat them up. Reported early on, never were lying about it?

Wouldn't that be great if that's what we learned?

Of course, all of that above is not the same as "conspiracy" but in order to be "cleared" that's the sort of thing we'd need to learn.

Just like almost no one bought that Hillary didn't know that her computer and other devices were being scrubbed and that wasn't cool. No indictment, but hey, not 'cleared' either.

[a fan]

Regarding Benghazi, if you wanna go there as the SOLE reason as to why she lost.

Uh huh. And I said that....where?

I said it damaged her. Didn't say anything about "the sole reason". And you know this, but you're playing dumb. Again.

How do you suppose voters figured out what a lying, POS Hillary was? All at once? Or did it take more than a few actions before they concluded that?

How'd they find out about Hillary's private server and all those emails again? Seem to remember that the State Department was investigating "something", and stumbled across the private server.

Something that rhymed with Fugazi? Gee. Can't remember.

[MDlaxfan76]

First of all, what are you talking about? One, two, three criminal indictments for Trump's inner circle. Cohen, Manafort, and Flynn.

Trump never even met those mooks.

[MDlaxfan76]

Maybe those sealed indictments in DC Court are for Maduro & his drug smuggling Generals.

When BBC asked Elliot Abrams what "all options on the table means", he mentioned Noriega.

Interesting theory.
All, some, a few, or none at all... are all possibilities.

[runrussellrun]

Regarding Benghazi, if you wanna go there as the SOLE reason as to why she lost.

Uh huh. And I said that....where?

I said it damaged her. Didn't say anything about "the sole reason". And you know this, but you're playing dumb. Again.

How do you suppose voters figured out what a lying, POS Hillary was? All at once? Or did it take more than a few actions before they concluded that?

How'd they find out about Hillary's private server and all those emails again? Seem to remember that the State Department was investigating "something", and stumbled across the private server.

Something that rhymed with Fugazi? Gee. Can't remember.

Once again, you are ignoring real people. Real stories. Decades long pattern. The gay mafia is real. And, they hold a grudge. Hillary was against it before she was for it. (same sex marriage stuff)

Like I said, a long, long long list of negatives for Hillary. Now who's playing dumb?

[tech37]

First of all, what are you talking about? One, two, three criminal indictments for Trump's inner circle. Cohen, Manafort, and Flynn.

Trump never even met those mooks.

context mdlax, context...you're out of the loop

[a fan]

Like I said, a long, long long list of negatives for Hillary. Now who's playing dumb?

You. Still. All I said was the Benghazi thing damaged her.

I'm not discounting a word you're saying. Tons of reasons not to vote for her.....or, like so many, not to vote at all and just skip election day.

[runrussellrun]

Like I said, a long, long long list of negatives for Hillary. Now who's playing dumb?

You. Still. All I said was the Benghazi thing damaged her.

I'm not discounting a word you're saying. Tons of reasons not to vote for her.....or, like so many, not to vote at all and just skip election day.

You are the one that keeps on bringing benghazi up. Of course Benghazi damaged her....but, it's like asking your consumers, can they taste the water in your products. Tons of reasons to drink your booze. Water probably isnt one of them.

[holmes435]

Maybe because investigations into Benghazi went on for 4 years, vs. Mueller's 2 year investigation, and kept getting dragged on and on and on? It was as much or more of an obsession by the right despite finding absolutely nothing, including an 8 hour grilling of Hil-dog. We certainly heard about Benghazi a ton on LP and here vs. Mueller because this is a more right-leaning forum.

Trump wouldn't last 5 minutes without perjuring himself, hence the stonewalling on that front.

It's a double standard, and the right and alt-right is excellent at controlling the conversation, hence the Democrat's inability to capitalize on any of the scandals Trump has been through. Just one or two would derail most candidates. Democrats are pusillanimous in pursuing these kinds of things - they think it's going to hurt them in elections. They try too hard to appease too many people. Republicans have no such compunction.

[cradleandshoot]

Maybe because investigations into Benghazi went on for 4 years, vs. Mueller's 2 year investigation, and kept getting dragged on and on and on? It was as much or more of an obsession by the right despite finding absolutely nothing, including an 8 hour grilling of Hil-dog.

Trump wouldn't last 5 minutes without perjuring himself, hence the stonewalling on that front.

It's a double standard, and the right and alt-right is excellent at controlling the conversation, hence the Democrat's inability to capitalize on any of the scandals Trump has been through. Just one or two would derail most candidates. Democrats are pusillanimous in pursuing these kinds of things - they think it's going to hurt them in elections. They try too hard to appease too many people. Republicans have no such compunction.

4 Americans died in Benghazi working at the behest of their government that turned their backs on repeated requests for additional security. To the best of my knowledge no Americans died during the Trump collusion fiasco because the leadership of the government took no action. To the best of my knowledge the US government left no stone unturned. The US government did everything it could to find collusion from the Trump administration. Too bad the gubmint wonks didn't work with the same determination to save our people in Benghazi. We are comparing grapes to watermelons here.

[a fan]

So then we'd see a 4 year long Congressional investigation if, say, our own Navy was so messed up and overtasked from the sequesters and Congressional neglect....neglecting repeated warnings of the multitude of problems...... they couldn't make it to port without colliding into other ships?

Collisions that killed, oh, let's say, 17 Americans......far more then the number that died in Benghazi? 17 sailors that were working on the behest of their government that turned their backs on repeated requests for help to fix the problems?

Is that Congressional investigation still going, and I missed the memo?

[holmes435]

4 Americans died in Benghazi working at the behest of their government that turned their backs on repeated requests for additional security. To the best of my knowledge no Americans died during the Trump collusion fiasco because the leadership of the government took no action. To the best of my knowledge the US government left no stone unturned. The US government did everything it could to find collusion from the Trump administration. Too bad the gubmint wonks didn't work with the same determination to save our people in Benghazi. We are comparing grapes to watermelons here.

Thank you for proving me correct. I'd rather be less divided than being correct though.

[youthathletics]

Speaking of Hillary - could we please start another investigation of her?

LOCK HER UP, LOCK HER UP.

Happy to see you appear to be getting better and your sense of humor is returning.

[jhu72]

Speaking of Hillary - could we please start another investigation of her?

LOCK HER UP, LOCK HER UP.

Happy to see you appear to be getting better and your sense of humor is returning.

Never lose my sense of humor. But in this case I am serious. I really believe the DOJ should investigate her again.

[6ftstick]

Speaking of Hillary - could we please start another investigation of her?

LOCK HER UP, LOCK HER UP.

Happy to see you appear to be getting better and your sense of humor is returning.

Never lose my sense of humor. But in this case I am serious. I really believe the DOJ should investigate her again.

No need to investigate her again. Just prosecute the crimes we already know about.

[foreverlax]

Maybe because investigations into Benghazi went on for 4 years, vs. Mueller's 2 year investigation, and kept getting dragged on and on and on? It was as much or more of an obsession by the right despite finding absolutely nothing, including an 8 hour grilling of Hil-dog. We certainly heard about Benghazi a ton on LP and here vs. Mueller because this is a more right-leaning forum.

Trump wouldn't last 5 minutes without perjuring himself, hence the stonewalling on that front.

It's a double standard, and the right and alt-right is excellent at controlling the conversation, hence the Democrat's inability to capitalize on any of the scandals Trump has been through. Just one or two would derail most candidates. Democrats are pusillanimous in pursuing these kinds of things - they think it's going to hurt them in elections. They try too hard to appease too many people. Republicans have no such compunction.

Correct...all we heard for years was Benghazi was worse then Watergate...now the Ds collusion with Russia and the Deep State is worse then Watergate.

[foreverlax]

Maybe because investigations into Benghazi went on for 4 years, vs. Mueller's 2 year investigation, and kept getting dragged on and on and on? It was as much or more of an obsession by the right despite finding absolutely nothing, including an 8 hour grilling of Hil-dog.

Trump wouldn't last 5 minutes without perjuring himself, hence the stonewalling on that front.

It's a double standard, and the right and alt-right is excellent at controlling the conversation, hence the Democrat's inability to capitalize on any of the scandals Trump has been through. Just one or two would derail most candidates. Democrats are pusillanimous in pursuing these kinds of things - they think it's going to hurt them in elections. They try too hard to appease too many people. Republicans have no such compunction.

4 Americans died in Benghazi working at the behest of their government that turned their backs on repeated requests for additional security. To the best of my knowledge no Americans died during the Trump collusion fiasco because the leadership of the government took no action. To the best of my knowledge the US government left no stone unturned. The US government did everything it could to find collusion from the Trump administration. Too bad the gubmint wonks didn't work with the same determination to save our people in Benghazi. We are comparing grapes to watermelons here.

....and yet HRC was cleared from all accusations of wrong doing, correct?

No need to investigate her again. Just prosecute the crimes we already know about.

Go for it....still willing to bet a Trump gets indicted before a Clinton.

[OCanada]

Step further back and find:

Muller suppoenaed about what 12 Russians or maybe 24? Whatever the number Trump refused to have the brought here and Putin didn’t want them brought here. That itself is problematic.

The number of time there appears to be a quid pro quo with Russia is staggering and I expect I expect is in in the report.

The number of times Trump took actions that furthered Russian foreign policy goals also staggering and reversed 7 decades of continuity in policy.

Clinton’s report was released in its entirety.

To be clear Trump lost the popular vote by about 3 million votes. A pretty comfortable margin. She lost the electoral vote. Certainly the fact she was investigate at least seven times by Congress as part of a coordinated plan to hurt her didn’t help but she still won by 3 million.

So what hurt her. In five states, as I recall, the vote margin can be explained by a drop in turn out after the Obama surge. If that vote remained steady Clinton wins.

If Jill Stein hurt Clinton in the Electoral College. So did the refusal of some Bernie people to support her.

Studies on trump voters don’t uphold the theory of education being a big decider. It does support that people who focus on fact to make decisions voted for Clinton.

The biggest factors are authoritarianism and bigotry.

In the event the proclivity to becauthoritarian or to be nurturing goes back to s very early age. It sets a trajectory. A minority of voters actually objectively analyze their voting. They vote their inclination and later rationalize it.

How many died in Niger in 2017? By the way Clinton’s responses in real time have been analyzed within context as opposed to hindsight. It is a different narrative