• 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!

Mueller Russian Collusion Investigation turns from Trump to Clinton: Is that good?

Mueller Russia Collusion Investigation turns from Trump to Clinton: Is that good?

  • YES - in fairness any possible Russian collusion should be investigated

    Votes: 18 78.3%

  • NO - it's just a political witch hunt to get Hillary

    Votes: 1 4.3%

  • NO - only investigations into Trump collusion are valid

    Votes: 4 17.4%
  • Total voters
    23
American said:
Sure, but the political outrage over something that happens all the time, is out of place given they never investigated it in earlier times. And why not a balance investigation like including the part where Hillary's campaign paid for the dossier? All angle should then be investigated. But that's not happening, so clearly we have a biased special counsel, because he's not limited by Comey letting her off the hook.
Click to expand...

The outrage is over the potential that a candidate for president or members of his campaign conspired with a foreign country illegally in an effort to win an election. I would hope people are outraged over crime.
 
simply a last ditch typical republican attempt to redirect the attention of their base on the hated Clinton's.
 
Redress said:
The outrage is over the potential that a candidate for president or members of his campaign conspired with a foreign country illegally in an effort to win an election. I would hope people are outraged over crime.
Click to expand...

Let's balance this out...

The outrage is over the potential that a candidate for president or members of HER campaign conspired with a foreign country illegally in an effort to win an election. I would hope people are outraged over crime.


If you can accept that type of parity, then we are good... :peace
 
MrMike said:
The reason I ask and poll this question, is because of the article I read a little bit ago.
Click to expand...

Ummm... you're relying on investors.com for your breaking news huh? Sorry pal, but this site is nothing more than a right wing WordPress blog dressed up to look like a legitimate site for investor information. You're going to have to do better than that. There is zero evidence to conclude that the Clinton campaign colluded with Russia. What they actually did was hire a company, who hired a British agent, to provide information that alleged collusion between the Trump administration and Russia. That information was not illegally obtained nor was it used to influence the election, nor was it used as the sole basis for the Russia investigation although much of the information provided has been confirmed accurate by the investigation.
 
This thread is nonsense. It's laughable -- but expected, that the right-wing would try to distract from Trump's conspiracy by pointing at Clinton and yelling HOW ABOUT HILLARY!
 
MrWonka said:
Ummm... you're relying on investors.com for your breaking news huh? Sorry pal, but this site is nothing more than a right wing WordPress blog dressed up to look like a legitimate site for investor information. You're going to have to do better than that. There is zero evidence to conclude that the Clinton campaign colluded with Russia. What they actually did was hire a company, who hired a British agent, to provide information that alleged collusion between the Trump administration and Russia. That information was not illegally obtained nor was it used to influence the election, nor was it used as the sole basis for the Russia investigation although much of the information provided has been confirmed accurate by the investigation.
Click to expand...

So you've reached a conclusion without an actual investigation. That type of partisan bias thing is sort of how we ended up here in the first place.

Thanks, your opinion is appreciated and noted.
 
MrMike said:
I already know the righties will be 100% behind that type of shift in the investigation because that's the nature of partisan hypocrisy in politics (see I'm being honest here). So, will the Left support the expansion of the Mueller Russian Collusion investigation to include Hillary and her campaign or will they declare it to just be a witch-hunt (unintended pun)?

The reason I ask and poll this question, is because of the article I read a little bit ago.

Excerpt:

"As we said, the only real collusion appears to be on the part of the Clinton campaign — aided by the Obama administration, CIA chief John Brennan and a handful of high-level officials at the Department of Justice and FBI.

What's next? It's possible the collusion investigation soon will turn from Trump to Clinton. If so, it could lead to more resignations and possibly jail time for those involved. That includes perhaps even Hillary Clinton, who sits at the political epicenter of all this illegality."


https://www.investors.com/politics/editorials/russian-collusion-hillary-clinton/
Click to expand...

If they find a reason to investigate her and want to go after it, that's fine with me. But as of right now there's absolutely no evidence that Hillary or the DNC had any part in the russian collusion investigation with the small exception of having paid for oppo research that ended up uncovering troublesome details about their opponent. But in general, this entire notion that Hillary or the FBI or the "deep state" or the Obama admin somehow created this russian story out of thin air in order to hurt trump is an idea that belongs next to the faked moon landing or chem trails. It would require literally hundreds if not a thousand people all conspiring at the highest levels of multiple governmental agencies to fabricate an elaborate falsehood and to plant evidence, to distribute and leak tens (or hundreds?) of thousands of their own emails before an election, and to set up fake meetings just so that those persons would lie about it later etc. It's tragic, like chernobyl tragic, that anyone is stupid enough to think this is possible, much less that it's likely the explanation.

I would love, absolutely love, for someone to give me a realistic scenario in which the entire russian collusion story is entirely explained away with the theory that it was a setup or somehow arranged/planned/fabricated by the obama admin/deepstate/Hillary/DNC. It's just not possible.
 
roughdraft274 said:
If they find a reason to investigate her and want to go after it, that's fine with me. But as of right now there's absolutely no evidence that Hillary or the DNC had any part in the russian collusion investigation with the small exception of having paid for oppo research that ended up uncovering troublesome details about their opponent. But in general, this entire notion that Hillary or the FBI or the "deep state" or the Obama admin somehow created this russian story out of thin air in order to hurt trump is an idea that belongs next to the faked moon landing or chem trails. It would require literally hundreds if not a thousand people all conspiring at the highest levels of multiple governmental agencies to fabricate an elaborate falsehood and to plant evidence, to distribute and leak tens (or hundreds?) of thousands of their own emails before an election, and to set up fake meetings just so that those persons would lie about it later etc. It's tragic, like chernobyl tragic, that anyone is stupid enough to think this is possible, much less that it's likely the explanation.

I would love, absolutely love, for someone to give me a realistic scenario in which the entire russian collusion story is entirely explained away with the theory that it was a setup or somehow arranged/planned/fabricated by the obama admin/deepstate/Hillary/DNC. It's just not possible.
Click to expand...

Cool beans. So you are good to let them include the Clinton camp, investigate and prove there are no issues then?
 
MrMike said:
I already know the righties will be 100% behind that type of shift in the investigation because that's the nature of partisan hypocrisy in politics (see I'm being honest here). So, will the Left support the expansion of the Mueller Russian Collusion investigation to include Hillary and her campaign or will they declare it to just be a witch-hunt (unintended pun)?

The reason I ask and poll this question, is because of the article I read a little bit ago.

Excerpt:

"As we said, the only real collusion appears to be on the part of the Clinton campaign — aided by the Obama administration, CIA chief John Brennan and a handful of high-level officials at the Department of Justice and FBI.

What's next? It's possible the collusion investigation soon will turn from Trump to Clinton. If so, it could lead to more resignations and possibly jail time for those involved. That includes perhaps even Hillary Clinton, who sits at the political epicenter of all this illegality."


https://www.investors.com/politics/editorials/russian-collusion-hillary-clinton/
Click to expand...

Over the last many years our political system has devolved into ever increasing extremely expensive witch hunt investigations, stopping our elected officials from running the country. The only thing they do anymore is anything they can to stop the other party. So, I choose option "D" - stop all investigations that are politically motivated and get the hell back to bipartisans running the country.
 
Moderate Right said:
Over the last many years our political system has devolved into ever increasing extremely expensive witch hunt investigations, stopping our elected officials from running the country. The only thing they do anymore is anything they can to stop the other party. So, I choose option "D" - stop all investigations that are politically motivated and get the hell back to bipartisans running the country.
Click to expand...

Best answer yet!

thank you
 
American said:
Nice dodge, keep dancing.
Click to expand...


I'll dance when the time comes.

You're not on my card btw.

Trump needs to be checked because he's out of balance. Which brings us to USA elections and Putin-Trump-Fanboyz. In other words people are beginning to choose up sides. We see the desperation of it in the thread and topic.
 
MrMike said:
Cool beans. So you are good to let them include the Clinton camp, investigate and prove there are no issues then?
Click to expand...


Nope. Your entire argument seems to be "well we are investigating one of them, therefor it's only right and fair to investigate both of them!" That's a stupid argument. As soon as their is any evidence that the clinton campaign worked with Russia to affect the election, or that they lied about material details such as meetings or communications, or it's discovered that a suspected russian agent was in the campaign or any of the other insane things that we know for a fact about the trump campaign, I would fully support investigating. But I don't support this dumb idea of "lets investigate it just to investigate it".

Would you support Ken Starr going around investigating every single member of congress to see if they ever had an affair simply because he investigated Clinton? It's a stupid argument. Investigations are opened because of facts and evidence that require an investigation.
 
MrMike said:
I already know the righties will be 100% behind that type of shift in the investigation because that's the nature of partisan hypocrisy in politics (see I'm being honest here). So, will the Left support the expansion of the Mueller Russian Collusion investigation to include Hillary and her campaign or will they declare it to just be a witch-hunt (unintended pun)?

The reason I ask and poll this question, is because of the article I read a little bit ago.

Excerpt:

"As we said, the only real collusion appears to be on the part of the Clinton campaign — aided by the Obama administration, CIA chief John Brennan and a handful of high-level officials at the Department of Justice and FBI.

What's next? It's possible the collusion investigation soon will turn from Trump to Clinton. If so, it could lead to more resignations and possibly jail time for those involved. That includes perhaps even Hillary Clinton, who sits at the political epicenter of all this illegality."


https://www.investors.com/politics/editorials/russian-collusion-hillary-clinton/
Click to expand...


I'm all for it. I'm in favor of knowing things. If it's actually common for this sort of collusion to occur by all or most actors, then I want to know. If the president, or any other politicians are guilty of something illegal, then I want to hold them accountable for it. We wouldn't even be talking about Russia right now if it weren't for Wikileaks exposing emails from Democratic insiders . . . emails that were true, and revealed something that the public needed to hear.

As much as it's tempting to allow my response to stand as an example of objectivity on the left, for the sake of honesty, I'll have to clarify that I'm a Berniecrat with absolutely no love for the Clintons, so I have no right to claim a lack of bias just because I'm willing to investigate Democratic politicians or even failed presidential candidates.
 
roughdraft274 said:
Nope. Your entire argument seems to be "well we are investigating one of them, therefor it's only right and fair to investigate both of them!" That's a stupid argument. As soon as their is any evidence that the clinton campaign worked with Russia to affect the election, or that they lied about material details such as meetings or communications, or it's discovered that a suspected russian agent was in the campaign or any of the other insane things that we know for a fact about the trump campaign, I would fully support investigating. But I don't support this dumb idea of "lets investigate it just to investigate it".

Would you support Ken Starr going around investigating every single member of congress to see if they ever had an affair simply because he investigated Clinton? It's a stupid argument. Investigations are opened because of facts and evidence that require an investigation.
Click to expand...


On Trump, the evidence now seems to focus on a meeting setup for his campaign staff with a Russian lawyer and that seemed to be enough to go for an investigation. So in fairness, there is open evidence the Clinton's accepted millions in cash from Russians. There's also evidence the Clinton campaign conspired and paid foreign agents in collusion with Russia to create a dossier on an opposition candidate.

So... let's investigate and let the chips fall where they may. Why would anyone not want to see the whole picture?
 
DH Kirkwood said:
I'm all for it. I'm in favor of knowing things. If it's actually common for this sort of collusion to occur by all or most actors, then I want to know. If the president, or any other politicians are guilty of something illegal, then I want to hold them accountable for it. We wouldn't even be talking about Russia right now if it weren't for Wikileaks exposing emails from Democratic insiders . . . emails that were true, and revealed something that the public needed to hear.

As much as it's tempting to allow my response to stand as an example of objectivity on the left, for the sake of honesty, I'll have to clarify that I'm a Berniecrat with absolutely no love for the Clintons, so I have no right to claim a lack of bias just because I'm willing to investigate Democratic politicians or even failed presidential candidates.
Click to expand...

That's a fair and honest answer. Heck, I'm happy even with the answers here (some above) I don't even agree with. At least there is a majority that want to see openness in examining all of it (the bigger picture) because the shenanigans that have gone on, cross into both parties and even they (our political parties) have at times colluded together to fool all of us.

I'm really reaching the point of being happy if we could have a real alternative to either of the current parties.
 
MrMike said:
So you've reached a conclusion without an actual investigation.
Click to expand...
Evidence by itself isn't a conclusion, but in order to justify an investigation, you should at least have some first. You have none. By your logic, we must investigate every single solitary crackpot crime that is alleged by any partisan extremist. I realize for the right that's really all you can do. You don't actually have anything so you just want to throw a bunch of **** at the wall and see what sticks. But for those of us on the left, we prefer to have at least some rational basis for our investigation before we start.
 
MrWonka said:
Evidence by itself isn't a conclusion, but in order to justify an investigation, you should at least have some first. You have none. By your logic, we must investigate every single solitary crackpot crime that is alleged by any partisan extremist. I realize for the right that's really all you can do. You don't actually have anything so you just want to throw a bunch of **** at the wall and see what sticks. But for those of us on the left, we prefer to have at least some rational basis for our investigation before we start.
Click to expand...

You are subjectively saying there is no evidence when in fact there is even though it is easier to look the other way out of partisanship driven need. I understand that and accept that is just how things are and will be for either side.
 
MrMike said:
On Trump, the evidence now seems to focus on a meeting setup for his campaign staff with a Russian lawyer and that seemed to be enough to go for an investigation.
Click to expand...
Well, I'm not sure if you're outright lying or just wrong. They lied about numerous meetings and communications (last I heard the number was nearing 100), in public and in private and to the FBI, there was a suspected Russian agent in the campaign, there was a surrogate in the campaign that knew of the illegally hacked emails before being publicly known etc. etc.

MrMike said:
So in fairness, there is open evidence the Clinton's accepted millions in cash from Russians. There's also evidence the Clinton campaign conspired and paid foreign agents in collusion with Russia to create a dossier on an opposition candidate.

So... let's investigate and let the chips fall where they may. Why would anyone not want to see the whole picture?
Click to expand...

1. Accepting cash from Russia doesn't show collusion or any illegal activity at all with regards to this. But please show the millions they accepted. If trump had simply done business in Russia in the past and had made money but there were no lies and no hidden meetings and no suspected foreign agents, I wouldn't approve of an investigation. The simple assertion "they got money from russia at some point in time" is not evidence of anything.

2. They paid an oppo research firm to dig up oppo research. They paid for the research in the same manner that all political campaigns do. There's also no evidence to back up the "foreign agents in collusion with Russia" aspect of this. He got info from russian people that he knew. There's no evidence that any information was from the russian government at large or that any of the information was illegally obtained as it was in Trumps case.

You are making silly claims to try to compare all of these things. They aren't comparable.

And as I've said, I want the whole picture, but you are saying "why not expand in to areas where we have no evidence at all of any wrong doing". That's stupid. Period. When there is any evidence of wrong doing by the Hillary campaign or the DNC, investigate. Until then lets focus on all of the evidence we currently have, which is pointing directly at Russia and the trump campaign.
 
MrMike said:
That's a fair and honest answer. Heck, I'm happy even with the answers here (some above) I don't even agree with. At least there is a majority that want to see openness in examining all of it (the bigger picture) because the shenanigans that have gone on, cross into both parties and even they (our political parties) have at times colluded together to fool all of us.

I'm really reaching the point of being happy if we could have a real alternative to either of the current parties.
Click to expand...

I'm afraid that, at the very least, will have to see state-level laws regarding ballots and elections change. On the far-left side of things, my ilk is split between taking over the Democratic Party, and throwing more support into third parties. I think that the last election proved that the latter, unfortunately, is not currently viable. Candidates like Gary Johnson and Jill Stein had a much greater advantage than previous third-party candidates. Lots of anti-establishment sentiment on both sides, and Trump and Clinton were both ridiculously unpopular.

I'm a kitchen-sink kinda guy, meaning that I want to throw everything at unseating corporate Dems, but I don't think we can open the door for third-parties until we start getting candidates sympathetic to that cause to infiltrate the big two. It would take multiple elections, but we could do this by taking a few seats here, a few seats there. It's for that reason that I won't be supporting third-party presidential candidates first and foremost. I would definitely like to see more than two parties dominating the political landscape, though. I would like to see the broader spectrum of American thought and ideals to be more accurately represented.

Giving the Republicans and the Democrats any sort of real competition would be nice. More options would make it harder for 'I'm not the other guy' tactics to actually work, and people might actually start voting for candidates that are speaking to them, rather than simply voting against the opposition.
 
Last edited:
MTAtech said:
This thread is nonsense. It's laughable -- but expected, that the right-wing would try to distract from Trump's conspiracy by pointing at Clinton and yelling HOW ABOUT HILLARY!
Click to expand...

What isn’t laughable is how the GOP has Stolen the Federal Court System since the 2000 election.

McConnell invented the Nuclear Option in 2005.

UNPRECEDENTED GOP Obstruction of Obama Federal Court Appointments, and Clinton the Last Two of his Years.

The GOP has Intentionally Broken this Nation for and By Sheer Fascist Tactics to gain the Federal Judiciary, as we saw with Garland. A true Constitutional Crisis is what we have.

Aided by Purity Prog and Lib Disastrous Election Malfeasance since the 2000 election and REDMAP 2010, both Remap Years for the GOP of ‘Legalized by the THESE Federal Courts’ Racial Gerrymandering.

I don’t Watch or Listen to the Lies LIVE from SHS until they’re recapped later.
 
roughdraft274 said:
Well, I'm not sure if you're outright lying or just wrong. They lied about numerous meetings and communications (last I heard the number was nearing 100), in public and in private and to the FBI, there was a suspected Russian agent in the campaign, there was a surrogate in the campaign that knew of the illegally hacked emails before being publicly known etc. etc.



1. Accepting cash from Russia doesn't show collusion or any illegal activity at all with regards to this. But please show the millions they accepted. If trump had simply done business in Russia in the past and had made money but there were no lies and no hidden meetings and no suspected foreign agents, I wouldn't approve of an investigation. The simple assertion "they got money from russia at some point in time" is not evidence of anything.

2. They paid an oppo research firm to dig up oppo research. They paid for the research in the same manner that all political campaigns do. There's also no evidence to back up the "foreign agents in collusion with Russia" aspect of this. He got info from russian people that he knew. There's no evidence that any information was from the russian government at large or that any of the information was illegally obtained as it was in Trumps case.

You are making silly claims to try to compare all of these things. They aren't comparable.

And as I've said, I want the whole picture, but you are saying "why not expand in to areas where we have no evidence at all of any wrong doing". That's stupid. Period. When there is any evidence of wrong doing by the Hillary campaign or the DNC, investigate. Until then lets focus on all of the evidence we currently have, which is pointing directly at Russia and the trump campaign.
Click to expand...

Going off of "what you've heard" doesn't quite fly as substantial reasoning. Yet you deny reality of actual Russian cash being paid to someone else.

For instance, let's dig into the "cash" situation and you can explain why a brief meeting with a Russian lawyer is worse than taking millions in Russian cash?

From the Right Wing NY Times: https://www.nytimes.com/2015/04/24/u...m-company.html

From the Right Wing Washington Post: https://www.washingtonpost.com/opini...=.c33a20303bd8

But that is of no concern? Jeez...

Now I agree with you that until there is an investigation, this is all conjecture. I'm counting on the hope that the Justice Department self-corrects its past partisan behavior and looks equally across the election and influence peddling domain regardless of political party affiliation.

I'd prefer to see the entire mess cleaned up...
 
There has been a lot of speculation about the Trump Tower meeting being a setup for months.

The bombshell released last Friday of text messages between Ohr and Christopher Steele really laid it out how deep the upper echelon of the FBI and DOJ were working with FUSiON GPS, Glenn Simpson and Christopher Steele employed by the DNC and the Clinton campaign for opposition research using Russian sources with ties to the Kremlin. They were very damning.

Ohr is suppose to be before the House Judiciary committee near the end of this month behind closed doors. I have my doubts he shows but rather likely pleads the 5th just like McCabe. Lynch and Comey have also refused to appear.

We shall see.
 
MrMike said:
You are subjectively saying there is no evidence when in fact there is
Click to expand...
No, there isn't. You haven't offered one single solitary shred of it. You've offered a random blog that claims aspects of the Russian investigation are looking into things done by the Clinton Campaign. Nothing here suggests Collusion with Russia. No evidence here is put forward. Nothing.
 
MrMike said:
Let's balance this out...

The outrage is over the potential that a candidate for president or members of HER campaign conspired with a foreign country illegally in an effort to win an election. I would hope people are outraged over crime.


If you can accept that type of parity, then we are good... :peace
Click to expand...

There is no evidence to support that though. It is like being outraged that Obama may have been from Kenya, or Bush may have plotted 9/11. Neither is impossible, but there is a total of zero evidence to support those.
 
Redress said:
There is no evidence to support that though. It is like being outraged that Obama may have been from Kenya, or Bush may have plotted 9/11. Neither is impossible, but there is a total of zero evidence to support those.
Click to expand...

What led you to believe there is no evidence?

You do realize her campaign has been outed paying foreign agents and Russian sources for information right? It's reported and not just me saying that.

Bonus honesty test: If the Russians gave Trump $500k in fees for a 30 minute speech, then donated $millions to his private slush fundation would you be at all concerned?
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom