24 minutes ago, JohnSnowsHair said:

Hilarious that you overlook the dozens of examples of Russian collusion by the campaign because of one "altering of documents" for Carter Page. (That altering was basically an omission of the fact that Page had previously worked with the FBI)

And it was stated in the report that nothing at all was found amounting to any sort of "conspiracy" against Trump or his campaign. 

The FBI was "totally exonerated" in a way Trump never has been when it comes to his campaign's many and detailed contacts with Russian agents. 

But yeah, ok, hang your hat on the fact that Clinesmith didn't indicate that Page had worked with the FBI before.

First of all, Clinesmith altered an email so that he could lie to the FISA court about Page's relationship as a CIA asset, not the FBI. 

For those of you always squawking about the Republican's defying the constitution you ought to be outraged by this.  I've said it before and I'll say it again, this is the first of many indictments that are going to come out of this Durham report.  The way these investigations were started and handled were abhorrent.  

 still squawking about russian collusion, classic

4 years later and they cant accept the fact that Trump whipped that arse

 

How many votes did Rushin Caloojun change??? 

You guys should just focus your energy pn preparing yourselves for the next epic DNC collapse, this time featuring Weekend at Bernie Biden

7 minutes ago, The Norseman said:

First of all, Clinesmith altered an email so that he could lie to the FISA court about Page's relationship as a CIA asset, not the FBI. 

For those of you always squawking about the Republican's defying the constitution you ought to be outraged by this.  I've said it before and I'll say it again, this is the first of many indictments that are going to come out of this Durham report.  The way these investigations were started and handled were abhorrent.  

https://www.wsj.com/articles/senate-intelligence-committee-releases-final-report-from-russia-investigation-11597758014

Quote

A substantial portion of the report focuses on the connections of onetime Trump campaign chairman Paul Manafort with Konstantin Kilimnik, who is officially described for the first time as a Russian intelligence officer, and Russia-aligned oligarchs in Ukraine. Mr. Manafort’s high-level campaign access and willingness to share information with Mr. Kilimnik and others "represented a grave counterintelligence threat,” the report concluded.

The report also states that Mr. Manafort might have been connected to the Russian intelligence operation to hack and leak Democratic emails as part of its broader effort to denigrate Hillary Clinton’s candidacy and support Mr. Trump’s campaign.

Quote

Sen. Angus King, a Maine independent who caucuses with Democrats, said the report didn’t determine whether there was collusion between the Trump campaign and Russia, a term he said has become politically charged.

However, Mr. King, an intelligence committee member, said in an interview that there were clear examples of "coordination and cooperation” between the two. One egregious example, he said, was Mr. Manafort’s providing Mr. Kilimnik internal polling data from the Trump campaign. Such data, he said, is a highly sensitive "road map” for any political campaign.

yeah, there was clearly no basis for investigating some of Trump's campaign members. 

I still have that bridge available. You seem like a man who knows bridges, so I'll knock $50 off the price. 

1 hour ago, JohnSnowsHair said:

Let's not overstate it.

It was Trump fawning over Putin. It's unclear whether he reciprocated, or if Trump's love and affection went unrequited.

Yes any letter praising a foreign leader at any time is definitely proof of collusion

Did I say collusion?  I meant delusion, as in youre all f'ing delusional

https://www.lawfareblog.com/republican-senators-misrepresent-their-own-russia-report

So why make up lies then?  Why create phony baloney warrants???

Curious to know why, if this was such a principled and deserving investigation of the POTUS, why make ish up?

Because it was a political hit job.   Take your L and move on, its 2020, youre about to stack another L on top of 2016

the rubio report proved that cheeto & his crooked campaign are a bunch of disgusting commies!  

1 hour ago, Mike31mt said:

 still squawking about russian collusion, classic

4 years later and they cant accept the fact that Trump whipped that arse

 

How many votes did Rushin Caloojun change??? 

You guys should just focus your energy pn preparing yourselves for the next epic DNC collapse, this time featuring Weekend at Bernie Biden

Um it's being talked about because Trump's own party concluded that his campaign colluded with the Russians, and that... You know what, never mind. 

4 minutes ago, Gannan said:

Um it's being talked about because Trump's own party concluded that his campaign colluded with the Russians, and that... You know what, never mind. 

Right. Yet only one Republican voted to impeach him on only one of the two bogus charges that the House came up with.  Obstruction of Congress?  What a joke.  Yea, the proof of collusion was really airtight.  This was a national embarrassment and the Democrats should be ashamed of themselves. 

The only collusion that happened here was under Comey's FBI to falsify evidence in order to knowingly deceive a federal court.  For that, he will very likely serve time.  

3 hours ago, JohnSnowsHair said:

Let's not overstate it.

It was Trump fawning over Putin. It's unclear whether he reciprocated, or if Trump's love and affection went unrequited.

That press conference after the private meeting with Putin a couple years ago was pathetic, Trump looked like a complete beta cuck.  It's a one-way appreciation.

22 minutes ago, The Norseman said:

Right. Yet only one Republican voted to impeach him on only one of the two bogus charges that the House came up with.  Obstruction of Congress?  What a joke.  Yea, the proof of collusion was really airtight.  This was a national embarrassment and the Democrats should be ashamed of themselves. 

The only collusion that happened here was under Comey's FBI to falsify evidence in order to knowingly deceive a federal court.  For that, he will very likely serve time.  

Hey, leave Comey out of this! He's clearly an unbiased public servant...

 

^ Hates women 

6 hours ago, The Norseman said:

Right. Yet only one Republican voted to impeach him on only one of the two bogus charges that the House came up with.  Obstruction of Congress?  What a joke.  Yea, the proof of collusion was really airtight.  This was a national embarrassment and the Democrats should be ashamed of themselves. 

The only collusion that happened here was under Comey's FBI to falsify evidence in order to knowingly deceive a federal court.  For that, he will very likely serve time.  

Don’t get mad at me, get mad at the republicans who said his campaign colluded with the soviets. 

5 hours ago, Kz! said:

Hey, leave Comey out of this! He's clearly an unbiased public servant...

 

So you’re saying only democrats elect women. Interesting. Well if you say so.

15 hours ago, The Norseman said:

Right. Yet only one Republican voted to impeach him on only one of the two bogus charges that the House came up with.  Obstruction of Congress?  What a joke.  Yea, the proof of collusion was really airtight.  This was a national embarrassment and the Democrats should be ashamed of themselves. 

The only collusion that happened here was under Comey's FBI to falsify evidence in order to knowingly deceive a federal court.  For that, he will very likely serve time.  

 

15 hours ago, Kz! said:

Hey, leave Comey out of this! He's clearly an unbiased public servant...

 

Fight the good fight, comrades!

9 hours ago, Gannan said:

Don’t get mad at me, get mad at the republicans who said his campaign colluded with the soviets. 

I'm not mad at anyone.  But I also don't know who those people were or when that happened. 

i have to ask this, if there's so much evidence, where are the charges ? 

 

discuss. 

3 minutes ago, Alpha_TATEr said:

i have to ask this, if there's so much evidence, where are the charges ? 

 

discuss. 

Against Trump for collusion or against the FBI for an unlawful investigation?

17 hours ago, Gannan said:

Um it's being talked about because Trump's own party concluded that his campaign colluded with the Russians, and that... You know what, never mind. 

No, they didn't. 

https://www.npr.org/2018/03/12/593021226/gop-members-of-house-intel-panel-conclude-there-was-no-collusion-with-russia

1 minute ago, The Norseman said:

Against Trump for collusion or against the FBI for an unlawful investigation?

 

just focusing on the trump collusion situation right now. 

1 hour ago, Alpha_TATEr said:

just focusing on the trump collusion situation right now. 

"Collusion" is not a legal term. Nobody can be charged with "collusion". Collusion is also somewhat subjective, which is why politicians on both sides use it rather than proper legal terminology which is more narrow (and more easily disproven).

What was investigated was conspiracy. Legally, what they were looking for was whether the Trump campaign was acting in coordination (which is required for conspiracy - two or more actors agreeing to commit illegal acts in the future) with Russian agents to interfere with the election. 

What was determined was that:

1. members of the Trump campaign were in communication with various Russian agents (including some that are part of the Russian intelligence community, and some close to Putin), and in some cases provided items of value related to the election (Manafort giving campaign data to Kilimnik).

2. Russia was the source of a sophisticated effort to interfere with the elections in favor of Trump.

What could not be clearly established was whether there was the level of coordination necessary to amount to criminal conspiracy to interfere with the election.

The main reason this could not be established was stated in both the Mueller report and at minimum the last volume of the senate report: the White House refused to allow people to cooperate who would have been able to provide evidence one way or the other, and the remaining persons who could have been interviewed are Russian.

In addition, per the last volume of the Senate report, Manafort in particular went to great lengths to ensure there was no paper trail. For example, he and Kilimnik used means of electronic communication that automatically erased itself after being read. Those aren't the actions of an individual who thinks everything they're discussing is on the up-and-up.

3 hours ago, Alpha_TATEr said:

i have to ask this, if there's so much evidence, where are the charges ? 

 

discuss. 

"When the president does it, it's not illegal"

2 minutes ago, Gannan said:

"When the president does it, it's not illegal"

If he asking about charges against Trump, Mueller accepted the premise that a sitting President can't be charged with a crime. He made clear the responsibility and power fell to the Congress through impeachment.

1 minute ago, vikas83 said:

If he asking about charges against Trump, Mueller accepted the premise that a sitting President can't be charged with a crime. He made clear the responsibility and power fell to the Congress through impeachment.

Makes me want to re-watch "Murder at 1600"

Just now, Gannan said:

Makes me want to re-watch "Murder at 1600"

"How did you get in here?"

"I crawled"

Yeah...that was on PPV when I was in college, had an illegal cable box and never went to class.

3 hours ago, Alpha_TATEr said:

i have to ask this, if there's so much evidence, where are the charges ? 

 

discuss. 

Manafort, Stone, Cohen, Flynn, Papadopolous, Butina and all the Russians who fled the country... Then there was a whole impeachment trial at the beginning of the year.