Social Even Democrats now agree : No Russian Collusion

[Darkballs]

Do you know for a fact the reason why the data was passed? Do you know for a fact that the Ukrainian worked for the Russian government? Do you know for a fact that the Russian government used the data for these purposes? If you don't know all these things to be true and you're asserting them as fact, you're mischaracterizing what happened.

Until the Special Council's report is concluded, everyone making a conclusion is engaged in a degree of speculation. Difference being, one side is being honest about the finding so far, while the other attempts to paint the actions of the trump administration in the blandest way possible.

So when roughly 20 people, including damn near every senior member of the trump WH, are indicted about lying to federal investigators about contacts with russians, lying about the purposes of meetings with russians, lying about business deals that were being worked out with the russian state, and ignoring the fact that the russians were certainly working to get trump elected; most people who aren't complete partisan cucks are concerned.

They don't stick their head in the sand and declare it all an innocent mistake, or one that they were tricked into making by answering a prosecutors question; or that it was never illegal to being with because they were just like, talking to someone, and talking to someone isn't illegal.

 

[MikeMcMann]

You keep saying this like it's true, yet you never cite a statute. Manafort wasn't charged with this crime, despite admitting to sharing data. You have repeatedly said this, yet you have done nothing to back it up, despite being challenged multiple times. You've already made yourself look like an idiot multiple times in this thread regarding the law. Not knowing that conspiracy is a crime, not knowing what an element of a crime is, ect. This is your chance to redeem yourself. Cite the statute regarding sharing polling data. You've been asked multiple times.

yes because its true.

When you answer this I will answer your question with data.

You lied because its your M.O to say whatever typically whether you can prove it or not and the only reason you are admitting now is because you really want something from me or you would have clung to that lie (trolled) forever. Is that correct?


(btw you should probably duck answering this as I don't think you want the data. eh you will skip it or ignore it once I prove it to you as trolls do)

 

[Natty Dread]

Well now they can invent something new to impeach him with.

 

[LangfordBarrow]

Are you arguing that all investigations should take as long as those investigations if nothing is found?

You start off with nothing. The investigation should continue as long as there are leads to follow.

 

[JamesRussler]

yes it is illegal. Campaigns cannot share internal polling data with outside parties, not even their own SuperPacs.

I'm going to stop you there, because you have no idea what you're talking about. Campaigns can share their internal polls with whomever they wish—the First Amendment protects that. I don't know where you got this crazy idea.

So we know for FACT the Russians (Putin quote) stated that they wanted Trump to win over Hillary.

we know for FACT the Russians were targeting voting districts thought vulnerable in an attempt to push more votes to Trump and less to Hillary (stated by CIA, NSA, FBI, Homeland Security)

And we know Manafort was giving them priority internal polling data which includes information but is not restricted to which districts they see as 'won', 'lost', 'tight but losing', 'tight but winning', etc.

That IS a crime.

This is you:

The fight's already over. You're just grasping at the air now.
Give it a rest.

 

[LangfordBarrow]

None of that is criminal. A conspiracy, succinctly stated, is an agreement to commit a crime. Notwithstanding that, no I don't believe there was any level of cooperation or "collusion" between Trump and Russia.

Trump himself or anyone in his campaign? I agree nothing has been leaked that implicates Trump directly, the fact that he acts like a guilty person might just be due to his personality, but when you have a guy like Manafort leading the campaign it's like letting a stray dog into the house to sleep on your bed. Yes it would be a good idea to check for fleas. And what has been leaked indicates Manafort is infested with them.

 

[JamesRussler]

Wah wah. I've addressed my opinion on what Mueller has. Now it's time for you to address the illegality of sharing polling data. Cite a fucking statute, troll.

He won't be able to. He's referencing this article, which cites no authority for its assertion. The argument ostensibly is that Trump's campaign conspired to commit a campaign finance violation under 52 U.S.C. § 30121. The alleged violation is itself a dubious proposition, but, as we've just learned, there is no evidence of a conspiracy to do so. This is a hard thing for him to accept.

 

[TheBlondBomber]

He won't be able to. He's referencing this article, which cites no authority for its assertion. The argument ostensibly is that Trump's campaign conspired to commit a campaign finance violation under 52 U.S.C. § 30121. The alleged violation is itself a dubious proposition, but, as we've just learned, there is no evidence of a conspiracy to do so. This is a hard thing for him to accept.

Also, that statute applies to foreign nationals making contributions to American campaigns. In this case, it's Manafort giving polling data to a foreign agent. That statute doesn't apply at all. Comical how they keep repeating that it's illegal yo share polling data but can never come up with an applicable statute.

 

[MikeMcMann]

I'm going to stop you there, because you have no idea what you're talking about. Campaigns can share their internal polls with whomever they wish—the First Amendment protects that. I don't know where you got this crazy idea.



This is you:
...

The fight's already over. You're just grasping at the air now.
Give it a rest.

I got it from the law and the facts. You know those things you care little about.

No there are tons of rules and laws around what campaigns can do. And it is law and fact that they cannot share internal polling data.

Your FIrst amendment grasp is laughable.

 

[MikeMcMann]

He won't be able to. He's referencing this article, which cites no authority for its assertion. The argument ostensibly is that Trump's campaign conspired to commit a campaign finance violation under 52 U.S.C. § 30121. The alleged violation is itself a dubious proposition, but, as we've just learned, there is no evidence of a conspiracy to do so. This is a hard thing for him to accept.

Well you know the rules here.

Prove now with facts that is the article I have and am referencing if you want me to play along.

Substantiate your statement of fact that you have made, now please.

 

[MikeMcMann]

Also, that statute applies to foreign nationals making contributions to American campaigns. In this case, it's Manafort giving polling data to a foreign agent. That statute doesn't apply at all. Comical how they keep repeating that it's illegal yo share polling data but can never come up with an applicable statute.

Because it is illegal,

 

[JamesRussler]

I got it from the law and the facts. You know those things you care little about.

No there are tons of rules and laws around what campaigns can do. And it is law and fact that they cannot share internal polling data.

Your FIrst amendment grasp is laughable.

Well you know the rules here.

Prove now with facts that is the article I have and am referencing if you want me to play along.

Substantiate your statement of fact that you have made, now please.

Did you see the statute I referenced? I cited the authority in support of your argument (since you neglected to do so) and explained why your argument was bunk. @TheBlondBomber , true to his name, further dropped the bomb on your argument. You simply have no clue what you're talking about.

 

[TheBlondBomber]

I got it from the law and the facts. You know those things you care little about.

No there are tons of rules and laws around what campaigns can do. And it is law and fact that they cannot share internal polling data.

Your FIrst amendment grasp is laughable.

You've been asked dozens of times to share the statute that prohibits the sharing of data and have yet to. Hack.

 

[JamesRussler]

Trump himself or anyone in his campaign? I agree nothing has been leaked that implicates Trump directly, the fact that he acts like a guilty person might just be due to his personality, but when you have a guy like Manafort leading the campaign it's like letting a stray dog into the house to sleep on your bed. Yes it would be a good idea to check for fleas. And what has been leaked indicates Manafort is infested with them.

I don't think Trump "acts like a guilty person" (as if that were the standard)—he acts like a prick, because he's a prick. Always has been. As for the rest of his campaign, no I don't believe a mere connection to Russia constitutes "collusion," let alone conspiracy. Manafort may have had some dirty tax dealings (maybe, I wasn't privy to all the evidence), but it appears he fell victim to that old Communist credo of "show me the man, I'll show you the crime." Mueller wants to ruin everyone associated with Trump, and that's the reason he went after Manafort.

 

[MikeMcMann]

Did you see the statute I referenced? I cited the authority in support of your argument (since you neglected to do so) and explained why your argument was bunk. @TheBlondBomber , true to his name, further dropped the bomb on your argument. You simply have no clue what you're talking about.

Prove right now that is the statute I am references.

Show me what evidence you have that is what I am looking at and stop simply saying it.

Show your proof of what i got.

 

[MikeMcMann]

You've been asked dozens of times to share the statute that prohibits the sharing of data and have yet to. Hack.

I've told you I don't play games with trolls if they don't won't provide the info requested. You provided part. Provide the rest (which I have asked you dozens of times for) and get JamesRussler to provide his proof and we can move forward.

Or don't because you know you don't want the proof.

 

[SBJJ]

Jesus Christ Mike. You are officially suspended 180 days because of the multiple KOs you have suffered in this thread

 

[TheBlondBomber]

I've told you I don't play games with trolls if they don't won't provide the info requested. You provided part. Provide the rest (which I have asked you dozens of times for) and get JamesRussler to provide his proof and we can move forward.

Or don't because you know you don't want the proof.

I have already addressed my comments in regards to Mueller. It's your turn, Palooka.

 

[vengeful]

Jesus Christ Mike. You are officially suspended 180 days because of the multiple KOs you have suffered in this thread

Lol this made me laugh.

 

[MikeMcMann]

I have already addressed my comments in regards to Mueller. It's your turn, Palooka.

Point me to the number of the post or requote it where you answered this.


You lied because its your M.O to say whatever typically whether you can prove it or not and the only reason you are admitting now is because you really want something from me or you would have clung to that lie (trolled) forever. Is that correct?