Trump's Russian Collusion

[Trinity]

There isn’t a poster here who wouldn’t do a better job. Maybe Bandito. But that’s it. Hillary could think of 100 questions about the presidency Trump couldn’t answer. He’s a fraud. The whole world knows it.

[youthathletics]

Butina nuzzling up to Clarke....I wonder of this was before or after the "excursion"...

The whole thing with Clark makes zero sense to me.....

It is remarkable. The number of "Trump" surrogates with Russian contacts is stunning...

I would prefer to have acquaintances with Russia and be alive vs the alternative of death and past relationship with the Clintons.

[old salt]

How do I volunteer for Roger Stone jury duty ? Just to read the terabyte of his e-comms.

Michael Isikoff laughs, telling about the Stone => Credico text exchange, in which Stone tells Credico to strap dynamite to himself & blow himself up the next time he has dinner with Isikoff.

Imagine a room full of FBI agents, transcribing Stone's "threats" onto post-it notes, then hanging them all over a whiteboard, building the witness tampering case.

Who gets the publishing rights for Roger Stone's greatest comic texts ?

[old salt]

There isn’t a poster here who wouldn’t do a better job. Maybe Bandito. But that’s it. Hillary could think of 100 questions about the presidency Trump couldn’t answer. He’s a fraud. The whole world knows it.

So let's blame Russia, because we were so stupid (& disgusted with the alternative & that establishment status quo) that we elected Trump.

Stop blaming Russia. We elected Trump. It's not worth another Cold War. Shut off our smart phones & pull our heads out of our arses.

Look at the cast of characters lining up to replace Trump. The (D)'s won't even listen to Shultz ; Bloomberg doesn't have a party.

[Typical Lax Dad]

There isn’t a poster here who wouldn’t do a better job. Maybe Bandito. But that’s it. Hillary could think of 100 questions about the presidency Trump couldn’t answer. He’s a fraud. The whole world knows it.

So let's blame Russia, because we were so stupid (& disgusted with the alternative & that establishment status quo) that we elected Trump.

Stop blaming Russia. We elected Trump. It's not worth another Cold War. Shut off our smart phones & pull our heads out of our arses.

Look at the cast of characters lining up to replace Trump. The (D)'s won't even listen to Shultz ; Bloomberg doesn't have a party.

The blame is on the AMERICANS involved with and around the Trump campaign that worked with Russia to win an election.

[Trinity]

https://www.rawstory.com/2019/02/ann-co ... ry-tirade/

I finally agree with Ann.

[Chips O'Toole]

Let me throw this out: If at this stage in the investigation, Mueller doesn't have very strong evidence of "collusion" by Trump, I think he needs to publicly say so. If it were accurate, would it really be so difficult and controversial for Mueller to issue a statement saying something like, "At this time, our investigation has not uncovered compelling evidence that the POTUS committed any crimes in connection with Russia's interference with the 2016 election." I would sincerely hope, under these incredibly difficult circumstances, that if Mueller could accurately issue that statement, he would do so without hesitation.

No. Horrible idea. Mueller wouldn't do this in a million years.

You are asking Mueller to do something even worse than what Comey (who was in a much tougher situation) did.

Rule #1 -- You don't comment on an ongoing investigation.

Rule #2 -- See rule #1.

You only speak when the investigation is 100.00% over. No exceptions.

"Horrible idea because it's not done that way." Terrific explanation. I'm also impressed that you think it was so clear that what Comey did was so terrible. Must be nice living inside a perfect box. I'll stand by my view of it. What are your thoughts on Mueller's statement about the Buzzfeed article? Was that Rule #1 or Rule #2? I get them confused.

[old salt]

There isn’t a poster here who wouldn’t do a better job. Maybe Bandito. But that’s it. Hillary could think of 100 questions about the presidency Trump couldn’t answer. He’s a fraud. The whole world knows it.

So let's blame Russia, because we were so stupid (& disgusted with the alternative & that establishment status quo) that we elected Trump.

Stop blaming Russia. We elected Trump. It's not worth another Cold War. Shut off our smart phones & pull our heads out of our arses.

Look at the cast of characters lining up to replace Trump. The (D)'s won't even listen to Shultz ; Bloomberg doesn't have a party.

The blame is on the AMERICANS involved with and around the Trump campaign that worked with Russia to win an election.

While the AMERICANS who purchased Russian disinformation (via Christopher Steele) were just playing politics as usual. Okie Dokie.

At least Trump's idiot family & friends didn't spend any campaign funds to do it.

[Typical Lax Dad]

Refer them to law enforcement.

[foreverlax]

Let me throw this out: If at this stage in the investigation, Mueller doesn't have very strong evidence of "collusion" by Trump, I think he needs to publicly say so. If it were accurate, would it really be so difficult and controversial for Mueller to issue a statement saying something like, "At this time, our investigation has not uncovered compelling evidence that the POTUS committed any crimes in connection with Russia's interference with the 2016 election." I would sincerely hope, under these incredibly difficult circumstances, that if Mueller could accurately issue that statement, he would do so without hesitation.

No. Horrible idea. Mueller wouldn't do this in a million years.

You are asking Mueller to do something even worse than what Comey (who was in a much tougher situation) did.

Rule #1 -- You don't comment on an ongoing investigation.

Rule #2 -- See rule #1.

You only speak when the investigation is 100.00% over. No exceptions.

"Horrible idea because it's not done that way." Terrific explanation. I'm also impressed that you think it was so clear that what Comey did was so terrible. Must be nice living inside a perfect box. I'll stand by my view of it. What are your thoughts on Mueller's statement about the Buzzfeed article? Was that Rule #1 or Rule #2? I get them confused.

Or the sweaty temp AG who said it's almost over??? What the heck is that??

[old salt]

This is what I suspect likely happened :

https://www.washingtonpost.com/opinions ... 220de73f8d

There’s evidence of collusion everywhere, and it has everything to do with the president. But what we still don’t know is whether the collusion rose to the level of a criminal conspiracy.

...we still don’t know the criminal implications, if any, for those in the campaign who were involved. Even if Trump himself did direct a senior campaign official to tell Stone to learn more about WikiLeaks’s plans, that alone is not criminal. Suppose I get wind that a group of people is planning to rob a bank and ask an intermediary to try to learn more about the group’s plans. If I get the information, it doesn’t make me guilty of a conspiracy to rob the bank, because I have not joined the agreement to commit the crime.

The indictment does not allege any kind of agreement or coordination between Stone or the campaign and WikiLeaks. It portrays the campaign as primarily seeking information about actions that WikiLeaks was already planning. If that’s all it was, learning that information and failing to disclose it is deplorable but likely not criminal.

If Mueller had a legal theory and evidence that made Stone’s contacts with WikiLeaks on behalf of the campaign a crime, it’s not clear why he wouldn’t charge it at this point. It’s possible he has some tactical reason for holding back. But the allegations are certainly no longer a secret, and it seems unlikely that Mueller is relying on someone with Stone’s credibility issues to cooperate and break the case wide open.

There have always been at least two possible end games for the Mueller investigation. He could uncover evidence of a widespread criminal conspiracy between the Trump campaign and Russians to influence the election. Or he could conclude that the campaign’s numerous documented interactions with Russians seeking to help Trump win were not criminal, but people close to Trump lied to cover up those interactions because revealing them would have been politically devastating.

Stone’s indictment falls into the coverup category. Mueller may have evidence of the broader conspiracy, and more charges may well be coming. But every case like Stone’s, or those against former campaign manager Paul Manafort, that is filed without charging a conspiracy with the Russians makes it seem more likely that criminal charges brought by the special counsel will end up being primarily about the coverups.

That doesn’t mean the campaign’s behavior wasn’t reprehensible. The best case scenario concerning WikiLeaks is that the Trump campaign, having learned that emails stolen from its opponent by a hostile foreign power were about to be released, did not alert the authorities or disavow that act but eagerly and secretly accepted the help. Even if that ends up not amounting to a criminal conspiracy, it should already be an enormous political scandal.

The 3 stooges theory.

Trump & Flynn's original hope for outreach & cooperation with Russia was (initially) a legit foreign policy option which aligned with Trump's previous statements & business experiences. Flynn knew enough about Russia to understand both the threat & the potential benefits of a realpolitik working relationship (a la Reset button & tell Vlad I'll have more flexibilty after the election).

Once the Russian hacking became public & the Manchurian Candidate meme started, the possibility of co-operation with Russia became politically toxic. But Trump was too stubborn & politically obtuse to shut up about Russia. He typically counter punched & doubled down.
After that, it would have been political suicide not to publicly deny (aka lie), which came naturally to this bunch, since lying & misleading was their m.o. By interfering against HRC, Putin made it impossible to work with Trump in the aftermath. But he never expected Trump to win -- he just hoped to discredit our system & damage HRC. He succeeded -- we are still gridlocked in chaos.

It'll give the House (D)'s enough to impeach, but they won't do it unless they think they'll get enough (R) Senate votes to convict.
They'll use it to hammer Trump for 2020 elections. 2-3 more years of gridlock & escalating Cold War with Russia.

[jhu72]

https://www.rawstory.com/2019/02/ann-co ... ry-tirade/

I finally agree with Ann.

She is just trying to cover her tracks. I don't think she really believes 10% of what she writes or says. It is the old outrage for bucks scam. She is the Franklin Mint of far right thinking.

Do you ever wonder why outfits like the Franklin Mint only advertise on Fox, not CNN, not MSNBC?

[a fan]

The 3 stooges theory.

Trump & Flynn's original hope for outreach & cooperation with Russia was (initially) a legit foreign policy option which aligned with Trump's previous statements & business experiences. Flynn knew enough about Russia to understand both the threat & the potential benefits of a realpolitik working relationship (a la Reset button & tell Vlad I'll have more flexibilty after the election).

Once the Russian hacking became public & the Manchurian Candidate meme started, the possibility of co-operation with Russia became politically toxic. But Trump was too stubborn & politically obtuse to shut up about Russia. He typically counter punched & doubled down.
After that, it would have been political suicide not to publicly deny (aka lie), which came naturally to this bunch, since lying & misleading was their m.o. By interfering against HRC, Putin made it impossible to work with Trump in the aftermath. But he never expected Trump to win -- he just hoped to discredit our system & damage HRC. He succeeded -- we are still gridlocked in chaos.

I think what you're saying here is the MOST likely scenario. All save the last sentence. Remember that we were locked in gridlock from 2010-2018, and barely spoke with Russia, and simply let sanctions do the talking...just as Trump is doing. Putin has nothing to do with the gridlock and chaos, as you put it, imho.

[old salt]

Remember that we were locked in gridlock from 2010-2018, and barely spoke with Russia, and simply let sanctions do the talking...just as Trump is doing. Putin has nothing to do with the gridlock and chaos, as you put it, imho.

...& what do we have to show for 6+ yrs of sanctions on Russia, other that making you feel good & giving politicians an opportunity to make it look like they're doing something.
https://www.csis.org/analysis/us-sancti ... -need-know

[a fan]

Your Cyrus Newlin from CSIS needs to take five minutes and take a finance class. A BA from Swarthmore? Odd are the many hasn't had to work a day in his life, and this sophomoric effort to judge the US sanctions betrays that fact.

What am I talking about?

How about this: What was the main purpose behind the Iran sanctions, and why did the right freak out when the sanctions were lifted?

That's right: money. Removing the sanctions gave Iran access to money. Why is money important? Apparently I have to tell Cyrus. Money is used to buy goods and services, and you can't buy goods and services without it. In this case, we're talking about buying military stuff.

That's odd, Cyrus makes zero mention of how much money Putin has lost, or how much damage has been done to the Russian economy. Whoops. Sorry Cyrus, you just failed your Grad School Seminar. Speaking of which, maybe you should take some grad school courses before you work for the CSIS, Cy.

More to my point: how much did you freak out over the sequester and what it did to "hollow out" our military, old salt? So what you and Cyrus are saying is, the US military needs money, but the Russian one doesn't, and these sanctions don't hurt Putin's military posturings. I disagree completely.

The part I did chuckle over was this quote from our buddy Cyrus "Cooperation with the European Union is critical to making sanctions bite since Russia is much more dependent on the European than the American market. "

So in answer to your assertion that NATO is stronger than ever, and I told you that it's painfully obvious this isn't the case: if NATO is as strong as it's ever been, how come NATO isn't on the same page with sanctions with Putin? Russia is the reason NATO still exists, no?

That's right----it's as weak as it's ever been. The UK is pulling away from the economic compact it has with most of the NATO members, and no one wants to so much as talk to Trump, never mind follow his lead when it comes to Putin, or frankly any other subject.

[old salt]

NATO is a military alliance, not a trade & customs union. The US & Canada were never EU members. We receive no special consideration from the EUroburghers for the security were provide for their access to global markets.
The US, UK, Canada, & the new former Warsaw Pact nations are far more assertive & reliable NATO allies than EU big boys Germany & France.
The stronger & more assertive the EUrocracy has become, the less united & effective NATO has become.
At NATO's zenith, our European allies just had the Common Market.

The Russian military is the last thing hurt by sanctions, ...along with their national hockey team.
Neither is subject to sequester budget caps.

You keep telling us how the sanctions keep Russia from being a threat. Meanwhile, they deploy their newest hypersonic & undersea weapons, against which we are defenseless.

Putin, & his power structure, are the remnants of the Soviet system & the Cold War. They will eventually pass from the scene. Do we really want to institutionalize a Cold War, with increasingly capable nuclear weapons + Russian paranoia & grievance, as the permanent state of our future relations with the Russian people. The only thing worse than Putin's Russia is what we'll have to deal with if we force him from power.

The EUros get it. That's why they don't join us in our all encompassing sanctions to damage Russia's economy.. They more narrowly target specific Russian bad actors. They're not still stuck in a Cold War legacy ideological Red scare. They want to coexist (& trade) with the Bear next door.
They don't freak out over political cyber pranks or when former Russian spies (too stupid to go underground) are poisoned on their soil.

One size fits all logic : sanctions worked against Iran, therefore they'll work against Russia, ...while our German, French & Dutch allies insist on building Nordstream 2.

[Trinity]

Putin skipped Poland and went straight to Wisconsin— Garry Kasparov

https://www.wsj.com/articles/deutsche-b ... 1549147289

Follow the money.

[dislaxxic]

More Jerome Corsi Fantasy

This is EXACTLY the kind of guy Donnie would spend lots of phone time with during his extensive "Executive Time"...

Wheeler spends a ton of time on Trump, Stone and Corsi because THIS is where the collusion (conspiracy) was really happening, it seems. Members of the crime family were most likely read into these plots...

..

[MDlaxfan76]

This is what I suspect likely happened :

https://www.washingtonpost.com/opinions ... 220de73f8d

There’s evidence of collusion everywhere, and it has everything to do with the president. But what we still don’t know is whether the collusion rose to the level of a criminal conspiracy.

...we still don’t know the criminal implications, if any, for those in the campaign who were involved. Even if Trump himself did direct a senior campaign official to tell Stone to learn more about WikiLeaks’s plans, that alone is not criminal. Suppose I get wind that a group of people is planning to rob a bank and ask an intermediary to try to learn more about the group’s plans. If I get the information, it doesn’t make me guilty of a conspiracy to rob the bank, because I have not joined the agreement to commit the crime.

The indictment does not allege any kind of agreement or coordination between Stone or the campaign and WikiLeaks. It portrays the campaign as primarily seeking information about actions that WikiLeaks was already planning. If that’s all it was, learning that information and failing to disclose it is deplorable but likely not criminal.

If Mueller had a legal theory and evidence that made Stone’s contacts with WikiLeaks on behalf of the campaign a crime, it’s not clear why he wouldn’t charge it at this point. It’s possible he has some tactical reason for holding back. But the allegations are certainly no longer a secret, and it seems unlikely that Mueller is relying on someone with Stone’s credibility issues to cooperate and break the case wide open.

There have always been at least two possible end games for the Mueller investigation. He could uncover evidence of a widespread criminal conspiracy between the Trump campaign and Russians to influence the election. Or he could conclude that the campaign’s numerous documented interactions with Russians seeking to help Trump win were not criminal, but people close to Trump lied to cover up those interactions because revealing them would have been politically devastating.

Stone’s indictment falls into the coverup category. Mueller may have evidence of the broader conspiracy, and more charges may well be coming. But every case like Stone’s, or those against former campaign manager Paul Manafort, that is filed without charging a conspiracy with the Russians makes it seem more likely that criminal charges brought by the special counsel will end up being primarily about the coverups.

That doesn’t mean the campaign’s behavior wasn’t reprehensible. The best case scenario concerning WikiLeaks is that the Trump campaign, having learned that emails stolen from its opponent by a hostile foreign power were about to be released, did not alert the authorities or disavow that act but eagerly and secretly accepted the help. Even if that ends up not amounting to a criminal conspiracy, it should already be an enormous political scandal.

The 3 stooges theory.

Trump & Flynn's original hope for outreach & cooperation with Russia was (initially) a legit foreign policy option which aligned with Trump's previous statements & business experiences. Flynn knew enough about Russia to understand both the threat & the potential benefits of a realpolitik working relationship (a la Reset button & tell Vlad I'll have more flexibilty after the election).

Once the Russian hacking became public & the Manchurian Candidate meme started, the possibility of co-operation with Russia became politically toxic. But Trump was too stubborn & politically obtuse to shut up about Russia. He typically counter punched & doubled down.
After that, it would have been political suicide not to publicly deny (aka lie), which came naturally to this bunch, since lying & misleading was their m.o. By interfering against HRC, Putin made it impossible to work with Trump in the aftermath. But he never expected Trump to win -- he just hoped to discredit our system & damage HRC. He succeeded -- we are still gridlocked in chaos.

It'll give the House (D)'s enough to impeach, but they won't do it unless they think they'll get enough (R) Senate votes to convict.
They'll use it to hammer Trump for 2020 elections. 2-3 more years of gridlock & escalating Cold War with Russia.

I think this is plausible re Flynn specifically, but the lying about contacts and relationships with Russia began far earlier and were in every part of the campaign hierarchy and Trump cronies. All sorts of lying pre Flynn.

Sure, maybe all the lies along the way and thereafter were simply to cover-up politically embarrassing connections, but all of that was kompromat, and from all indications, the Trump folks, and most importantly Trump the candidate and Trump as POTUS, didn't care (at a minimum) or worse were enthusiastically welcoming the help.

[MDlaxfan76]

There isn’t a poster here who wouldn’t do a better job. Maybe Bandito. But that’s it. Hillary could think of 100 questions about the presidency Trump couldn’t answer. He’s a fraud. The whole world knows it.

So let's blame Russia, because we were so stupid (& disgusted with the alternative & that establishment status quo) that we elected Trump.

Stop blaming Russia. We elected Trump. It's not worth another Cold War. Shut off our smart phones & pull our heads out of our arses.

Look at the cast of characters lining up to replace Trump. The (D)'s won't even listen to Shultz ; Bloomberg doesn't have a party.

The blame is on the AMERICANS involved with and around the Trump campaign that worked with Russia to win an election.

While the AMERICANS who purchased Russian disinformation (via Christopher Steele) were just playing politics as usual. Okie Dokie.

At least Trump's idiot family & friends didn't spend any campaign funds to do it.

That's such a weak crack, Salty, or perhaps you were merely being sarcastic?

Did the HRC folks know they were purchasing Russian disinformation? If so, TLD is right, refer them for criminal prosecution.
But that just doesn't appear to be factual, so...

In contrast, the Trump crew seemed to know what they were doing was wrong, that it was the Russians, and they lied and covered it up.

Different order of offense.

On the stop blaming Russia, your defense seems to me to be pretty lame, to the point that one would think you perhaps had/have some contracts yourself dependent upon lifting of sanctions. sarcasm emoji.

But from day one of learning about the Russian efforts you've minimized their impact, as if what we read and hear on social media doesn't have an enormous impact on the electorate's perceptions of reality. Sure, we (AMERICANS) need to take responsibility...you betcha. But that doesn't mean we say to advertisers, "go ahead and make false claims, no one will believe them, and if they do shame on us".