• 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!

Did Trump collude with the Russians?

Did Trump collude with the Russians? Y’know Russiagate.

  • Total voters
    81
  • Poll closed .
zimmer

zimmer

Educating the Ignorant
Banned
DP Veteran
Joined
Dec 19, 2008
Messages
24,380
Reaction score
7,805
Location
Worldwide
Gender
Undisclosed
Political Leaning
Conservative
Y’know... Russiagate?

Yes.

No.
 




_92861496_flynn.jpg


:coffeepap



2c8e088f3a480289f97d5c9f197e358789198419.jpg
 
Yes, obviously, and they admitted to such. Trump asked on live TV for Russia to involve itself in the election and the next day they did. Multiple people from his administration then began coordinating meetings with Russians to discuss that cooperation, in Trump tower nonetheless.

Don't you remember the goal posts were then moved that collusion isn't a crime and even if it was a crime a sitting president can't be held accountable for it? You don't care if he did or didn't, it wouldn't change your opinion of him, so stop pretending you care about the truth.
 
if it's what you say it is, i love it, especially later in the summer.
 
All evidence points to Hillary colluding with Putin and trying her best. Trump is way too tough on poor Russia, but it's still better than bending over like Obama did or Hillary wanted to. Putin is on record saying he doesn't care who wins, but would prefer Hillary, which makes sense as the Dems never did meet a bad deal they didn't like.

I hope Trump does collude this time tho, get on the phone with those Russian hackers, if they're willing, even give them some incentives, and get to the bottom of all these scandals and treasonous actions by the far left and their supporters.

The biggest mistake Trump made by far is not firing every single Obama holdover when he took office, if he did that none of this treason and the coup attempt would happen. Time to learn from Democrats, Republicans should learn to play the game better. The Dems have this election down even if Repubs have way more support as election fraud and cheating is done to perfection, and Repubs are too high and mighty to even try it, they think bussing people to a poll station is not above board, all the while the Dems have dead people and Canadians, and even non-existent people voting. Ridiculous.
 
zimmer said:
Y’know... Russiagate?

Yes.

No.
Click to expand...

The correct answer is that it is unproven one way or another. We do not know.

We do however know that the Trump campaign was not only willing, but absolutely eager to do so(and only failed due to their incompetence). We also know that Russia did interfere in the election, working to help Trump.
 
From the transcript Schiff and House democrats kept from the public in an effort to maintain their false narrative:

"I never saw any direct empirical evidence that the Trump campaign or someone in it was plotting or conspiring with the Russians to meddle with the election" -James Clapper

"I don't recall intelligence that I would consider evidence." - Susan Rice

"I do not recall that being briefed up to me." - Loretta Lynch

That's just a few of the statements from the transcript proving these people just flat out lied to the public.
 
In my experience, the Democrat leaders project their crimes onto others. Projection is where you blame someone else for the very things you did, as a way to distract everyone from your crimes and indulgences.

The Trump colluded with the Russians narrative, which the Mueller report said did not occur, was designed to cover up the uranium deal that Obama and Hillary made with Putin and the large cash donation given to the Clinton foundation, by Putin, as a quid pro quo. Hillary's erased e-mails had a record of her influence peddling with Putin and others. Trump public appeal, to Putin, to find Hillary's erased emails was an insider joke, that everyone knew but would not say, that got the swamp into projection mode.

Remember how Trump was accused and even impeached for an alleged quid pro quo with Ukraine, when it turned out Biden was the one on tape bragging about leveraging US foreign Aid to get a prosecutor fired who was investigating his son for corruption. Now we have the Governors of top ten death states in the US for violence and Corona, run by Democrats, who project this onto Trump. There is a pattern.

The analogy is two brothers are playing in the house and one brother breaks his mother's favorite vase. When his mother confronts them, he quickly blames his younger brother The younger brother is blinded sided by the lie, and in his unrehearsed attempt to say he is innocent, is made to look guilty by his guilty brother. This projection game will not stop until criminal indictments are handed out, which show evidence the first brother was the one who broke the vase.

This topic recycle; blame Trump with a Russian narrative, tells me the Democrats are colluding again. There is another fake dossier or election tempering in the works by the criminal Democrats. Trump now understands the projection game snd has September and October surprises in the wings.

One last example is the violent protests by the new Democrat KKK; ANTIFA and BLM. The Democrats are driving the violence, denying it is happening and then blaming Trump due this show of force to stop it. The projection game is not working out as well as the Democrats hoped, even with fake news and social media accomplices helping to drive this latest blame game narrative.
 
Last edited:
zimmer said:
Y’know... Russiagate?

Yes.

No.
Click to expand...

It amazes me how the left still shuffle this ****, even after the Mueller report. And, I really don't understand why, if the left believe the Russians elected Trump in 2016, they believe Biden will win in 2020, especially since the left believes there is still Russian collusion going on in 2020. If you really truly believe this ****, how can Biden win?
 
Let’s keep this going... especially the Leftists... I’d love to see you vote and hear your take.
 
humbolt said:
From the transcript Schiff and House democrats kept from the public in an effort to maintain their false narrative:

"I never saw any direct empirical evidence that the Trump campaign or someone in it was plotting or conspiring with the Russians to meddle with the election" -James Clapper

"I don't recall intelligence that I would consider evidence." - Susan Rice

"I do not recall that being briefed up to me." - Loretta Lynch

That's just a few of the statements from the transcript proving these people just flat out lied to the public.
Click to expand...

Flynn was acting at President-Elect Trump's instructions, and Flynn and Barr are obstructing in an ongoing conspiracy to obstruct, with Trump. Disagree? Why was "go between" KT Macfarland's appointment by Trump, withdrawn? She couldn't truthfully sustain the Senate vetting process.

Trump did not answer the Mueller team's questions for a year, falsely teasing that he would testify in person...

What Mueller asked Trump, what he said in reply - and the questions he simply didn't answer | Daily Mail Online
What Mueller asked Trump, what he said in reply - and the questions he simply didn't answer | Daily Mail Online


What Mueller asked Trump, what he said in reply - and the string of written questions he simply ignored including: did you ask anyone to set up a back channel to Moscow?
......
SPECIAL COUNSEL'S OFFICE:


g. On July 27, 2016, in response to a question about whether you would recognize Crimea as Russian territory and lift sanctions on Russia, you said: 'We'll be looking at that. Yeah, we'll be looking.' Did you intend to communicate by that statement or at any other time during the campaign a willingness to lift sanctions and/or recognize Russia's annexation of Crimea if you were elected?


i. What consideration did you give to lifting sanctions and/or recognizing Russia's annexation of Crimea if you were elected? Describe who you spoke with about this topic, when, the substance of the discussion(s).


TRUMP: No response = (obstruction of Mueller investigation)
Click to expand...

"The Boss is Aware:" Trump Learned about Mike Flynn's Conversations with Sergey Kislyak in Real Time | emptywheel
“THE BOSS IS AWARE:” TRUMP LEARNED ABOUT MIKE FLYNN’S CONVERSATIONS WITH SERGEY KISLYAK IN REAL TIME
May 29, 2020 - Flynn told McFarland about the substance of his calls with Kislyak ... of the call went to Trump second-hand, perhaps through KT McFarland.
Click to expand...

K. T. McFarland - Wikipedia
K. T. McFarland - Wikipedia
....September 19, McFarland's confirmation was approved by the Committee and was sent on to the full Senate,[69] but as of the end of November her nomination was not scheduled for a vote in the full Senate.[54]

On December 1, Robert Mueller's Special Counsel investigation named McFarland as one of the people involved with Michael Flynn, her former supervisor, and Jared Kushner in developments leading up to Flynn's guilty plea to lying to the Federal Bureau of Investigation.[70] In particular, Kushner and McFarland reportedly briefed Flynn on what to say about U S. sanctions against Russia.[71]‹See TfM›[failed verification] The next day, an email McFarland wrote during the transition surfaced; it read: "If there is a tit-for-tat escalation Trump will have difficulty improving relations with Russia, which has just thrown U.S.A. election to him."[72] After talking to Kislyak, Flynn informed McFarland of the contents of the conversation, who in turn passed on the information to one of her colleagues.[73]

.....

On February 2, 2018, McFarland withdrew her nomination, writing "I have come to this decision reluctantly, because I believe in your mission" in her resignation letter to Trump.[81][82] In response, Trump blamed the Democrats, noting that they "chose to play politics rather than move forward with a qualified nominee for a critically important post" even though Senate Republicans could have approved her nomination unilaterally given their majority, which suggests that some of them may have been hesitant to approve her.[4]

In September 2018 it became known that she had indeed walked back her story to the special prosecutor. The FBI accepted McFarland's contention that she had not misstated factualities intentionally.[83]....
Click to expand...
 
Non-culted readers and posters are weary of the "whaddaboutism" repeated over and over, about Obama or Clinton, supported by nothing close to what is presented about "team Trump" in this two post reply.
Barr submits a clueless, poorly written legal brief to a Trump party contact in the DOJ, and some months later, is putting words in Mueller's mouth and blocking access to the actual Mueller investigation findings.

In May, he took the ridiculously obvious and desperate step of having his "advisor", Acting USA Timothy Shea, submit a demand to Judge Sullivan's court, signalling the DOJ was now acting as admitted-under-oath, guilty Mike Flynn's co-counsel. The prosecutors of that case resigned in protest. Any Trump style pardon of Flynn, bypassing the DOJ pardons review office, would amount to a "hush money" payment to Mike Flynn, on the heels of the pre-election, Presidential blackmail payment to Roger Stone!

Emails Dispute White House Claims That Flynn Acted Independently on Russia - The New York Times
By Michael S. Schmidt, Sharon LaFraniere and Scott Shane
Dec. 2, 2017 .......
...As part of the outreach, Ms. McFarland wrote, Mr. Flynn would be speaking with the Russian ambassador, Mr. Kislyak, hours after Mr. Obama’s sanctions were announced.

“Key will be Russia’s response over the next few days,” Ms. McFarland wrote in an email to another transition official, Thomas P. Bossert, now the president’s homeland security adviser...

...The Trump transition team ignored a pointed request from the Obama administration to avoid sending conflicting signals to foreign officials before the inauguration and to include State Department personnel when contacting them. Besides the Russian ambassador, Mr. Flynn, at the request of the president’s son-in-law, Jared Kushner, contacted several other foreign officials to urge them to delay or block a United Nations resolution condemning Israel over its building of settlements.

Mr. Cobb said the Trump team had never agreed to avoid such interactions. But one former White House official has disputed that, telling Mr. Mueller’s investigators that Trump transition officials had agreed to honor the Obama administration’s request....
...Mr. Obama, she wrote, was trying to “box Trump in diplomatically with Russia,” which could limit his options with other countries, including Iran and Syria. “Russia is key that unlocks door,” she wrote.

She also wrote that the sanctions over Russian election meddling were intended to “lure Trump in trap of saying something” in defense of Russia, and were aimed at “discrediting Trump’s victory by saying it was due to Russian interference.”

“If there is a tit-for-tat escalation Trump will have difficulty improving relations with Russia, which has just thrown U.S.A. election to him,” she wrote.

Mr. Bossert replied by urging all the top advisers to “defend election legitimacy now.”....
Click to expand...
 
Last edited:
zimmer said:
Let’s keep this going... especially the Leftists... I’d love to see you vote and hear your take.
Click to expand...

I'd be careful what I wish for...

Which is more deplorable, the denial and whaddaboutism, if it is sincere, or the "culting" disorder that has made the denial involuntary?

The Most Conspicuous Scandal in American History - The Atlantic
IDEAS
Stone Walks Free in One of the Greatest Scandals in American History
The amazing thing about the saga is how much of it happened in the full light of day.
JULY 11, 2020
David Frum Staff writer at The Atlantic
....
On October 2, a Sunday, he tweeted that the next WikiLeaks dump would come on Wednesday.

When Wednesday came and went with no dump, Stone tweeted, “Libs thinking Assange will stand down are wishful thinking. Payload coming #Lockthemup.” Stone reaffirmed his prediction on Thursday. The dump came Friday, October 7.

Stone was..in communication....and the candidate Donald Trump. The former Trump deputy campaign chair Rick Gates testified at Stone’s trial in November 2019 that he witnessed Trump take a call from Stone after the first WikiLeaks release in July. Less than a minute after the call ended, Trump told Gates that another release would follow later in the campaign.

Trump declared in writing to the Mueller investigation that he did not recall discussing WikiLeaks with Stone. On page 77 of Volume II of the report, Mueller expressed disbelief in Trump’s sworn evidence: “Witnesses said that Trump was aware that Roger Stone was pursuing information about hacked documents from WikiLeaks at a time when public reports stated that Russian intelligence officials were behind the hacks, and that Trump privately sought information about future WikiLeaks releases.” ...

... At a minimum, the Trump campaign was vulnerable to charges of violating election laws against receiving things of value from non-U.S. persons. Conceivably, the campaign could have found itself at risk as some kind of accessory to the Russian hacks—hacking being a very serious crime indeed. So it was crucial to the Trump campaign that Stone keep silent and not implicate Trump in any way.

Which is what Stone did. Stone was accused of—and convicted of—lying to Congress about his role in the WikiLeaks matter. Since Stone himself would have been in no legal jeopardy had he told the truth, the strong inference is that he lied to protect somebody else. Just today, this very day, Stone told the journalist Howard Fineman why he lied and whom he was protecting. “He knows I was under enormous pressure to turn on him. It would have eased my situation considerably. But I didn’t.” You read that, and you blink. As the prominent Trump critic George Conway tweeted: “I mean, even Tony Soprano would have used only a pay phone or burner phone to say something like this.” Stone said it on the record to one of the best-known reporters in Washington. In so many words, he seemed to imply: I could have hurt the president if I’d rolled over on him. I kept my mouth shut. He owes me.
Click to expand...
 
Last edited:
post said:
I'd be careful what I wish for...

Which is more deplorable, the denial and whaddaboutism, if it is sincere, or the "culting" disorder that has made the denial involuntary?
Click to expand...

ROTFLOL... atta boy.
 
Redress said:
The correct answer is that it is unproven one way or another. We do not know.

We do however know that the Trump campaign was not only willing, but absolutely eager to do so(and only failed due to their incompetence). We also know that Russia did interfere in the election, working to help Trump.
Click to expand...

We know. It didn't happen. However, it has been proven that the DNC / Clinton campaign coordinated with Russia.
 
There is no definitive answer one way or the other.
What is becoming more evident is that top FBI, CIA, DOJ, and DNI officials colluded to push a criminal investigation of the Trump campaign because they wanted to cripple, hamstring, delegitimize, demonize, and denigrate Trump's new Administration.
And they used phony documents (see Steele Dossier) to get a FISA warrant to spy on an innocent American citizen and justify starting a criminal investigation against the Trump campaign.
That is the conclusion that the Republican DOJ will be putting forward just before the election.
 
zimmer said:
Y’know... Russiagate?

Yes.

No.
Click to expand...

Pointless question. The question you should ask yourself is why Putin wanted to see Trump as President and why his people worked to push that result.

Trump's history with Russian oligarchs tells you that they saw a President Trump as an asset. Trump benefited from this and has proven to be that foreign asset they wanted. Just look at how he has placed Russian interests above America's on at least four stand-out occasions...

1) Tabled TTIP for a year, allowing Putin to play pipeline diplomacy across Western Europe, while denigrating European allies
2) Publicly defended Putin against American Intel, after instructing note takers to stay out of the room
3) Handed substantial Middle East influence over to Putin/Turkey after betraying our proven allies, the Kurds
4) Pushed the conspiracy of Ukraine as the true culprit in the 2016 interference in order to distract and even defend Russia's denial of it

One might also want to ask what a clear plutocrat would benefit from such behavior. The man was even impeached for trying to commit treason, proving to be no better than the autocrats and oligarchs he cozies up to. But he is less a traitor as much as he is just a simple amoral plutocrat. As it stands, Trump's nepotism has seen his family operate the Trump Organization from the White House and amount thousands of documented economic conflicts of interests. This is about money and personal power, not so much treason for him. Treason would involve him actually caring about his nation.

None of this was going to come out of the shallow and restricted Mueller investigation. This is something for historians to put together, as soon as Russia begins releasing documents and Trump's mountain of non-disclosure agreements begin to crumble. Whether or not Trump "colluded" is not the issue. He benefited in 2016 from his history with foreigners and then moved to protect and continue that history after elected.

The sad thing (because it is no longer harmless and funny) is that you still choose to pretend (with no evidence or behavior backing it up) that Obama is the "most corrupt president in United States history." Historians disagree. So does anybody with a measure of common sense and just a small awareness of American presidential history. Ever heard of Grant? How about Harding? There are plenty of actually corrupt Administrations. But this irrational attitude is why a non-conservative man like Trump came to represent so-called conservatives in 2016.
 
Tahuyaman said:
We know. It didn't happen. However, it has been proven that the DNC / Clinton campaign coordinated with Russia.
Click to expand...

Which is why the GRU unit was identified right down to their serial numbers. Not to mention the internal videos of the IRC. The russian interference was very real.

If trump didn't know about it, he's an idiot considering he was so pally with all kinds of Russian operatives and mafia types. But ignore all that.

He is as pure as the driven snow after its been pissed on by vladdie.
 
MSgt said:
Pointless question. The question you should ask yourself is why Putin wanted to see Trump as President and why his people worked to push that result.

Trump's history with Russian oligarchs tells you that they saw a President Trump as an asset. Trump benefited from this and has proven to be that foreign asset they wanted. Just look at how he has placed Russian interests above America's on at least four stand-out occasions...

1) Tabled TTIP for a year, allowing Putin to play pipeline diplomacy across Western Europe, while denigrating European allies
2) Publicly defended Putin against American Intel, after instructing note takers to stay out of the room
3) Handed substantial Middle East influence over to Putin/Turkey after betraying our proven allies, the Kurds
4) Pushed the conspiracy of Ukraine as the true culprit in the 2016 interference in order to distract and even defend Russia's denial of it

One might also want to ask what a clear plutocrat would benefit from such behavior. The man was even impeached for trying to commit treason, proving to be no better than the autocrats and oligarchs he cozies up to. But he is less a traitor as much as he is just a simple amoral plutocrat. As it stands, Trump's nepotism has seen his family operate the Trump Organization from the White House and amount thousands of documented economic conflicts of interests. This is about money and personal power, not so much treason for him. Treason would involve him actually caring about his nation.

None of this was going to come out of the shallow and restricted Mueller investigation. This is something for historians to put together, as soon as Russia begins releasing documents and Trump's mountain of non-disclosure agreements begin to crumble. Whether or not Trump "colluded" is not the issue. He benefited in 2016 from his history with foreigners and then moved to protect and continue that history after elected.

The sad thing (because it is no longer harmless and funny) is that you still choose to pretend (with no evidence or behavior backing it up) that Obama is the "most corrupt president in United States history." Historians disagree. So does anybody with a measure of common sense and just a small awareness of American presidential history. Ever heard of Grant? How about Harding? There are plenty of actually corrupt Administrations. But this irrational attitude is why a non-conservative man like Trump came to represent so-called conservatives in 2016.
Click to expand...

hear hear
 
zimmer said:
Y’know... Russiagate?

Yes.

No.
Click to expand...


No for at least the 100th time!


Mueller Report, Volume I, page 66, second paragraph:
[In particular,] the investigation examined whether these contacts involved or resulted in coordination or a conspiracy with the
Trump Campaign and Russia, including with respect to Russia providing assistance to the Campaign in exchange for any sort of favorable treatment in the future. Based on the available information, the investigation did not establish such coordination.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom