• This is a political forum that is non-biased/non-partisan and treats every person's position on topics equally. This debate forum is not aligned to any political party. In today's politics, many ideas are split between and even within all the political parties. Often we find ourselves agreeing on one platform but some topics break our mold. We are here to discuss them in a civil political debate. If this is your first visit to our political forums, be sure to check out the RULES. Registering for debate politics is necessary before posting. Register today to participate - it's free!

What About Collusion?

GDViking said:
The ones that trump and company are now being sued for.
Click to expand...

The Trump campaign didn't steal emails or hack anyone and they didn't pay anyone to. Did someone tell you they did?
Now, Hillary, yes. We know her campaign bought a whole lot of Russian sourced propaganda dirt.
 
bubbabgone said:
Outsource information? That's so cute.
Tell me, for whom is there more evidence of working with Russians against their opponent during the 2016 election? Trump? or Clinton?
Click to expand...

Trying to argue with you is impossible. Trump's dick is too far down your throat.
 
bubbabgone said:
If spending isn't reported it's not legal.

as for the penalty ...
"... the Commission should determine and impose appropriate sanctions for any and all violations, should enjoin the
respondents from any and all violations in the future, and should impose such additional
remedies as are necessary and appropriate to ensure compliance with the FECA. "
Click to expand...

please put me on the list to be notified as to how this turns out as democracy hangs in the balance. ;):roll:
 
Yeah, yeah, yeah. What is it that he colluded to do?

Oh? No knowledge of the discussion? That surprises no one, yet you shriek "collusion".
 
haymarket said:
please put me on the list to be notified as to how this turns out as democracy hangs in the balance. ;):roll:
Click to expand...
I shall.
And if it turns out that Cohen used campaign funds to shut up Stormy I know we can depend on you to shrug it off.
 
Last edited:
rocket88 said:
Trying to argue with you is impossible. Trump's dick is too far down your throat.
Click to expand...

Now was that nice?
Sounds like the answer to what I asked put you in too awkward a position to answer.
 
ONLY COLLUSION IS BETWEEN THE CLINTON'S and RUSSIA. THE SHE BITCH PAID for the FAKE Dossier. LOCK HER UP, LOCK HER UP.
 
bubbabgone said:
Now was that nice?
Sounds like the answer to what I asked put you in too awkward a position to answer.
Click to expand...

I don't give a ****. There is an important distinction. If I go to the liquor store and buy a bottle of Russian vodka, there's a big difference than if Putin gives me a gift of a bottle of vodka.

You're just on a "Trump good, Democrats evil" trip.
 
rocket88 said:
I don't give a ****. There is an important distinction. If I go to the liquor store and buy a bottle of Russian vodka, there's a big difference than if Putin gives me a gift of a bottle of vodka.

You're just on a "Trump good, Democrats evil" trip.
Click to expand...

No trip here. Just clear-eyed observation.
You must have me confused with someone else.

And your analogy is confusing.
I know Putin is supposed to be Putin but ... who got the free vodka?
Hillary or Trump?

I guess you're suggesting that paying for proscribed vodka is more ennobling than getting unsolicited vodka.
That, my friend, is some bizarre thinking.
 
bubbabgone said:
No trip here. Just clear-eyed observation.
You must have me confused with someone else.

And your analogy is confusing.
I know Putin is supposed to be Putin but ... who got the free vodka?
Hillary or Trump?

I guess you're suggesting that paying for proscribed vodka is more ennobling than getting unsolicited vodka.
That, my friend, is some bizarre thinking.
Click to expand...

What I'm saying is that if I buy it from an American business, it's different than getting it right from the Russian government.

Clinton bought it from a business. Trump tried to get it straight from Putin (or at least Jr and Manafort did).
 
rocket88 said:
What I'm saying is that if I buy it from an American business, it's different than getting it right from the Russian government.

Clinton bought it from a business. Trump tried to get it straight from Putin (or at least Jr and Manafort did).
Click to expand...

And that business got it from what source and how was it paid for?
 
bubbabgone said:
And that business got it from what source and how was it paid for?
Click to expand...

I assume it was paid for with campaign funds. The source is irrelevant as it didn't come directly from the source.

If she bought a Toyota, would that be collusion with Japan?

Don Jr attempted to get information directly from the Russian government. Unless you can prove someone from Clinton's campaign did that, you're just billowing the bull**** fed to you by the administration.
 
rocket88 said:
I assume it was paid for with campaign funds. The source is irrelevant as it didn't come directly from the source.

If she bought a Toyota, would that be collusion with Japan?

Don Jr attempted to get information directly from the Russian government. Unless you can prove someone from Clinton's campaign did that, you're just billowing the bull**** fed to you by the administration.
Click to expand...

Who did Steele use to get the dirt?

Look ... Hillary paying the Russians with laundered campaign money may not have violated campaign laws against foreign involvement in a national election but trying to suggest it didn't involve collusion with Russians is preposterous.

Along those lines ...
(a) actual collusion that produced a work product that was used to influence an election (before and after)
versus
(b) a brief discussion that went nowhere because it's purpose was misrepresented
makes for a crappy equivalence.

However, not declaring that laundered money as a campaign expenditure could very well have violated campaign financing laws.
 
bubbabgone said:
Who did Steele use to get the dirt?

Look ... Hillary paying the Russians with laundered campaign money may not have violated campaign laws against foreign involvement in a national election but trying to suggest it didn't involve collusion with Russians is preposterous.

Along those lines ...
(a) actual collusion that produced a work product that was used to influence an election (before and after)
versus
(b) a brief discussion that went nowhere because it's purpose was misrepresented
makes for a crappy equivalence.

However, not declaring that laundered money as a campaign expenditure could very well have violated campaign financing laws.
Click to expand...

She very wll could have violated the law. I didn't vote for her anyway, so I don't care. As I said, however, that doesn't make the Trump campaign innocent.

If you want to know the source of Steele's funding, you might want to look at your own party. His company was originally hired by Republicans out to derail Trump. These people, who most of us would call sane, have mostly disappeared as you and your ilk denounced them as RINOs.

Clinton's money went to the company Steele worked for. They probably had most of that information before she paid for it. Again, look within. At any rate, her campaign people never met with Russian lawyers in the Clinton Tower to get information from Putin and to receive his blessing. That would be Don Jr and Manafort. Per junior's own admission.
 
rocket88 said:
.....
Click to expand...
She very wll could have violated the law. I didn't vote for her anyway, so I don't care. As I said, however, that doesn't make the Trump campaign innocent.
Click to expand...
If collusion with Russia is the issue then, yes, Trump is innocent ... so far ... and Hillary is guilty ... whether an arms length collusion or otherwise.

If you want to know the source of Steele's funding, you might want to look at your own party. His company was originally hired by Republicans out to derail Trump. These people, who most of us would call sane, have mostly disappeared as you and your ilk denounced them as RINOs.
Click to expand...

The Republican Party had absolutely nothing to do with Steele. They dropped Fusion as a client in May before Hillary hired Fusion in June and Steele came on board to work with Russian intel sources.

Clinton's money went to the company Steele worked for. They probably had most of that information before she paid for it. Again, look within. At any rate, her campaign people never met with Russian lawyers in the Clinton Tower to get information from Putin and to receive his blessing. That would be Don Jr and Manafort. Per junior's own admission
Click to expand...
.

Again ... Steele had the contacts with Russia ... those contacts were made after Rubio dropped Fusion. Conflating the before and after doesn't work.
And Junior was promised dirt on Hillary only to find out she wanted to talk about adoptions. So they both got nothing out of the very brief meeting.

This was all exposed long ago.
 
haymarket said:
For any rational person to pretend that collusion between the Trump campaign and Russia has not been firmly established is akin to claiming that there is no proof man walked on the moon or that Elvis is dead and long gone.

To even begin to argue with somebody holding that willfully delusional belief is like trying to argue with somebody in a mental institution who claims they are Napoleon. It is a waste of time and a fools errand.
Click to expand...

You realize the 'Trump campaign colluding with Russia in the 2016 election' investigation will end someday?

And when it does, you can still enter your thread or post in the CT section of DP. Right alongside no proof of man's landing on the moon, etc.
 
Last edited:
bubbabgone said:
If collusion with Russia is the issue then, yes, Trump is innocent ... so far ... and Hillary is guilty ... whether an arms length collusion or otherwise.



The Republican Party had absolutely nothing to do with Steele. They dropped Fusion as a client in May before Hillary hired Fusion in June and Steele came on board to work with Russian intel sources.

.

Again ... Steele had the contacts with Russia ... those contacts were made after Rubio dropped Fusion. Conflating the before and after doesn't work.
And Junior was promised dirt on Hillary only to find out she wanted to talk about adoptions. So they both got nothing out of the very brief meeting.

This was all exposed long ago.
Click to expand...

Junior got nothing, but we all know why he went. Someone got scared at that meeting and the agenda changed. Nobody wanted to talk about adoption, though as the adoptive father of 2 Russian kids I iwsh they would.

Good to see that the right's obsession with Clinton continues. Maybe nobody got the memo that she won't be running in 2 years and you all would do better to focus more on the next election rather than the last.

I also see that your myopia continues. Steele didn't suddenly arrive in a vacuum. He benefited greatly from the work Fusion had already done for the Republicans.
 
Last edited:
bubbabgone said:
Please show the details of what Steele delivered for the Republicans.
Click to expand...

He didn't deliver for them because they weren't paying for the finished project. Unlike you, I'm not stupid enough to think Fusion threw away the file.
 
rocket88 said:
He didn't deliver for them because they weren't paying for the finished project. Unlike you, I'm not stupid enough to think Fusion threw away the file.
Click to expand...

Fusion in 2015 began investigating Trump under a contract with the Washington Free Beacon, a conservative website financially supported by GOP megadonor Paul Singer. That assignment ended once Trump was on track to win the nomination. But in April 2016, Fusion was hired by the Hillary Clinton campaign and the Democratic National Committee to keep funding the research. (Marc E. Elias, a lawyer representing the Clinton campaign and the DNC, retained the firm.)

In early June, Fusion hired Steele, a former British intelligence officer with ties to the FBI and the U.S. intelligence community, to examine Trump’s ties in Russia. The dossier is actually several memos, based on conversations with Russian sources, that were written between June and December of 2016.

https://www.washingtonpost.com/news...dossier/?noredirect=on&utm_term=.1d2013a093f2

In short, Steele wasn't hired until the Clinton camp took over
 
rocket88 said:
Junior got nothing, but we all know why he went. Someone got scared at that meeting and the agenda changed. Nobody wanted to talk about adoption, though as the adoptive father of 2 Russian kids I iwsh they would.

Good to see that the right's obsession with Clinton continues. Maybe nobody got the memo that she won't be running in 2 years and you all would do better to focus more on the next election rather than the last.

I also see that your myopia continues. Steele didn't suddenly arrive in a vacuum. He benefited greatly from the work Fusion had already done for the Republicans.
Click to expand...

You've got to stop this for your own good. Or at least do some research.

Fusion in 2015 began investigating Trump under a contract with the Washington Free Beacon, a conservative website financially supported by GOP megadonor Paul Singer. That assignment ended once Trump was on track to win the nomination. But in April 2016, Fusion was hired by the Hillary Clinton campaign and the Democratic National Committee to keep funding the research. (Marc E. Elias, a lawyer representing the Clinton campaign and the DNC, retained the firm.)
In early June, Fusion hired Steele, a former British intelligence officer with ties to the FBI and the U.S. intelligence community, to examine Trump’s ties in Russia. The dossier is actually several memos, based on conversations with Russian sources, that were written between June and December of 2016.
Click to expand...

https://www.washingtonpost.com/news...dossier/?noredirect=on&utm_term=.229d03be0857
 
Fletch said:
Fusion in 2015 began investigating Trump under a contract with the Washington Free Beacon, a conservative website financially supported by GOP megadonor Paul Singer. That assignment ended once Trump was on track to win the nomination. But in April 2016, Fusion was hired by the Hillary Clinton campaign and the Democratic National Committee to keep funding the research. (Marc E. Elias, a lawyer representing the Clinton campaign and the DNC, retained the firm.)

In early June, Fusion hired Steele, a former British intelligence officer with ties to the FBI and the U.S. intelligence community, to examine Trump’s ties in Russia. The dossier is actually several memos, based on conversations with Russian sources, that were written between June and December of 2016.
https://www.washingtonpost.com/news...dossier/?noredirect=on&utm_term=.1d2013a093f2
Click to expand...

heh heh ... way to go ... incredible timing.
wanna bet it won't register at all?
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom