Social Even Democrats now agree : No Russian Collusion

[JamesRussler]

You're like an uncreative pepe the frog.

Feels good man

 

[MikeMcMann]

First off why are you using "colluded"? You got onto me earlier for saying that, saying I should be saying "leaks and coordination". Then you went on some rambling about how "leaks and coordination" are elements of crimes, but never cited any crime of which they are elements of. You're really in over your head right now, champ.

I don't have proof that he doesn't because I'm not privy to his findings. It's impossible to prove a negative, just like I can't prove he's not a lizard person. However, it doesn't seem like he has anything to prove collusion between Trump and Russia. Every person he has charged are charged with crimes unrelated to direct collusion between the Russian government and the Trump Campaign.

So what's your excuse for your ignorant claim that Manafort sharing polling data with a foreign national is illegal?

Look dude.

If you are going to claim you have insights into the Mueller investigation that you can provide evidence for on this forum, then just put it up and let us see what you got.

You said this

"But he (Mueller) hasn't found any evidence to show that the Trump Campaign and Russia colluded. "

...and you claimed you can substantiate it.


(BTW just so you know, I don;t believe you. but if you do have the proof as you said you do, I am going to auction it off to whichever News Org wants the scoop. I expect i will make millions for that proof. But I expect you to keep ducking.)

 

[KeepItRealist]

I'm hearing increasingly disturbing reports that Trump may have dined at a Russian restaurant in the 1980s. Collusion! According to Bill Kristol at least.

 

[MikeMcMann]

You must have me confused with someone else. I haven't made any assertions about the subject of your conversation.

I'm pointing out that you've made an assertion and your repeatedly refusing to support it.

If that's the case, then that which is asserted without evidence, can be dismissed without evidence.

If you refuse to put in the basic time necessary to support your own position, then there's no reason for anyone else to take your position seriously or give it consideration.

The burden of proof of any claim is on the claimant.

yes, agreed.

Read my post above and the QUOTE and know that I am waiting for him to fulfill his burden of proof.

 

[MikeMcMann]

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

the 'if nothing is found' is key to your sentence there.

As of jan 25 below is what they Mueller Investigation has found which goes to the core of why it was constituted.

So hopefully we agree Mueller should get as much time as he needs as long as more and more of the Swamp is being drained. He is not just fulfilling his own mandate but helping Trump with his election promise campaign.


------

The full list of known indictments and plea deals in Mueller’s probe
1) George Papadopoulos, former Trump campaign foreign policy adviser, was arrested in July 2017 and pleaded guilty in October 2017 to making false statements to the FBI. He got a 14-day sentence.

2) Paul Manafort, Trump’s former campaign chair, was indicted on a total of 25 different counts by Mueller’s team, related mainly to his past work for Ukrainian politicians and his finances. He had two trials scheduled, and the first ended in a conviction on eight counts of financial crimes. To avert the second trial, Manafort struck a plea deal with Mueller in September 2018 (though Mueller’s team said in November that he breached that agreementby lying to them).

3) Rick Gates, a former Trump campaign aide and Manafort’s longtime junior business partner, was indicted on similar charges to Manafort. But in February 2018 he agreed to a plea deal with Mueller’s team, pleading guilty to just one false statements charge and one conspiracy charge.

4) Michael Flynn, Trump’s former national security adviser, pleaded guilty in December 2017 to making false statements to the FBI.

5-20) 13 Russian nationals and three Russian companies were indicted on conspiracy charges, with some also being accused of identity theft. The charges related to a Russian propaganda effort designed to interfere with the 2016 campaign. The companies involved are the Internet Research Agency, often described as a “Russian troll farm,” and two other companies that helped finance it. The Russian nationals indicted include 12 of the agency’s employees and its alleged financier, Yevgeny Prigozhin.

21) Richard Pinedo: This California man pleaded guilty to an identity theft charge in connection with the Russian indictments, and has agreed to cooperate with Mueller. He was sentenced to 6 months in prison and 6 months of home detention in October 2018.

22) Alex van der Zwaan: This London lawyer pleaded guilty to making false statements to the FBI about his contacts with Rick Gates and another unnamed person based in Ukraine. He was sentenced to 30 days in jail and has completed his sentence.

23) Konstantin Kilimnik: This longtime business associate of Manafort and Gates, who’s currently based in Russia, was charged alongside Manafort with attempting to obstruct justice by tampering with witnesses in Manafort’s pending case last year.

24-35) 12 Russian GRU officers: These officers of Russia’s military intelligence service were charged with crimes related to the hacking and leaking of leading Democrats’ emails in 2016.

36) Michael Cohen: In August 2018, Trump’s former lawyer pleaded guilty to 8 counts — tax and bank charges, related to his finances and taxi business, and campaign finance violations — related to hush money payments to women who alleged affairs with Donald Trump, as part of a separate investigation in New York (that Mueller had handed off). But in November, he made a plea deal with Mueller too, for lying to Congress about efforts to build a Trump Tower in Moscow.

37) Roger Stone: In January 2019, Mueller indicted longtime Trump adviser Roger Stone on 7 counts. He accused Stone of lying to the House Intelligence Committee about his efforts to get in touch with WikiLeaks during the campaign, and tampering with a witness who could have debunked his story.

Finally, there is one other person Mueller initially investigated, but handed over to others in the Justice Department to charge: Sam Patten. This Republican operative and lobbyist pleaded guilty to not registering as a foreign agent with his work for Ukrainian political bigwigs, and agreed to cooperate with the government.

 

[TheBlondBomber]

Look dude.

If you are going to claim you have insights into the Mueller investigation that you can provide evidence for on this forum, then just put it up and let us see what you got.

You said this



...and you claimed you can substantiate it.


(BTW just so you know, I don;t believe you. but if you do have the proof as you said you do, I am going to auction it off to whichever News Org wants the scoop. I expect i will make millions for that proof. But I expect you to keep ducking.)

Okay cool dude. I said that Mueller didn't have anything because its been two years and he hasn't brought charges against anyone regarding direct collusion between Trump and the Russian government. It seems like Senate Democrats agree with me. But whatever. Cool, you got me. I don't have access to Muellers internal files.

Go ahead and address how you erroneously said its illegal for Manafort to share polling data. Only this time, don't spew the usual "b-b-b-b but it IS ILLEGAL!"

Back up that assertion. Cite me a statute, a law review article, an op-ed or something. Anything to back up your claim.

 

[TheBlondBomber]

yes, agreed.

Read my post above and the QUOTE and know that I am waiting for him to fulfill his burden of proof.

You have said that its illegal for Manafort to share polling data wit ha foreign national. Go ahead and fulfill your burden of proof.

So far all you've said was, "Well it is illegal" or "I heard it from a guy on Fox News".

 

[Rematch]

the 'if nothing is found' is key to your sentence there.

As of jan 25 below is what they Mueller Investigation has found which goes to the core of why it was constituted.

So hopefully we agree Mueller should get as much time as he needs as long as more and more of the Swamp is being drained. He is not just fulfilling his own mandate but helping Trump with his election promise campaign.


------

The full list of known indictments and plea deals in Mueller’s probe
1) George Papadopoulos, former Trump campaign foreign policy adviser, was arrested in July 2017 and pleaded guilty in October 2017 to making false statements to the FBI. He got a 14-day sentence.

2) Paul Manafort, Trump’s former campaign chair, was indicted on a total of 25 different counts by Mueller’s team, related mainly to his past work for Ukrainian politicians and his finances. He had two trials scheduled, and the first ended in a conviction on eight counts of financial crimes. To avert the second trial, Manafort struck a plea deal with Mueller in September 2018 (though Mueller’s team said in November that he breached that agreementby lying to them).

3) Rick Gates, a former Trump campaign aide and Manafort’s longtime junior business partner, was indicted on similar charges to Manafort. But in February 2018 he agreed to a plea deal with Mueller’s team, pleading guilty to just one false statements charge and one conspiracy charge.

4) Michael Flynn, Trump’s former national security adviser, pleaded guilty in December 2017 to making false statements to the FBI.

5-20) 13 Russian nationals and three Russian companies were indicted on conspiracy charges, with some also being accused of identity theft. The charges related to a Russian propaganda effort designed to interfere with the 2016 campaign. The companies involved are the Internet Research Agency, often described as a “Russian troll farm,” and two other companies that helped finance it. The Russian nationals indicted include 12 of the agency’s employees and its alleged financier, Yevgeny Prigozhin.

21) Richard Pinedo: This California man pleaded guilty to an identity theft charge in connection with the Russian indictments, and has agreed to cooperate with Mueller. He was sentenced to 6 months in prison and 6 months of home detention in October 2018.

22) Alex van der Zwaan: This London lawyer pleaded guilty to making false statements to the FBI about his contacts with Rick Gates and another unnamed person based in Ukraine. He was sentenced to 30 days in jail and has completed his sentence.

23) Konstantin Kilimnik: This longtime business associate of Manafort and Gates, who’s currently based in Russia, was charged alongside Manafort with attempting to obstruct justice by tampering with witnesses in Manafort’s pending case last year.

24-35) 12 Russian GRU officers: These officers of Russia’s military intelligence service were charged with crimes related to the hacking and leaking of leading Democrats’ emails in 2016.

36) Michael Cohen: In August 2018, Trump’s former lawyer pleaded guilty to 8 counts — tax and bank charges, related to his finances and taxi business, and campaign finance violations — related to hush money payments to women who alleged affairs with Donald Trump, as part of a separate investigation in New York (that Mueller had handed off). But in November, he made a plea deal with Mueller too, for lying to Congress about efforts to build a Trump Tower in Moscow.

37) Roger Stone: In January 2019, Mueller indicted longtime Trump adviser Roger Stone on 7 counts. He accused Stone of lying to the House Intelligence Committee about his efforts to get in touch with WikiLeaks during the campaign, and tampering with a witness who could have debunked his story.

Finally, there is one other person Mueller initially investigated, but handed over to others in the Justice Department to charge: Sam Patten. This Republican operative and lobbyist pleaded guilty to not registering as a foreign agent with his work for Ukrainian political bigwigs, and agreed to cooperate with the government.

And does any of that tie to collusion? It doesn't.

 

[MikeMcMann]

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.

yes it is illegal. Campaigns cannot share internal polling data with outside parties, not even their own SuperPacs. it is also a federal crime to solicit or attempt to receive foreign election aid.

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.

 

[MikeMcMann]

And does any of that tie to collusion? It doesn't.

yes it clearly does.

See my post above on just the Manaforts elements and how they tie to collusion and how those elements of collusion lead to very specific charges and verdicts.

 

[MikeMcMann]

Okay cool dude. I said that Mueller didn't have anything because its been two years and he hasn't brought charges against anyone regarding direct collusion between Trump and the Russian government. It seems like Senate Democrats agree with me. But whatever. Cool, you got me. I don't have access to Muellers internal files.

Go ahead and address how you erroneously said its illegal for Manafort to share polling data. Only this time, don't spew the usual "b-b-b-b but it IS ILLEGAL!"

Back up that assertion. Cite me a statute, a law review article, an op-ed or something. Anything to back up your claim.

So you lied.

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?

 

[mrbaapt]

No Russia collusion, however the US government is in constant collusion with with Israel and Saudi Arabia.

 

[grizzard2bid]

Then seriously, why do you think the media give air times to pundits who attempt to predict the outcome of an investigation that hasn't concluded? Could it be that the story gets good ratings? No, couldn't be that. Must be a secret attempt for the MSM to all get together (through one dude giving his opinion on an NBC morning show) and tip their hand that the investigation will clear trump, all while still laying the ground work for future propaganda?

It's not that you're over thinking it. You're just making shit up as you go along.

Pot kettle, buddy.
You are way too invested. I'm more than happy to never check the news on this subject for two more years because it will in no way impact me in any kind of meaningful way.

 

[Darkballs]

You have said that its illegal for Manafort to share polling data wit ha foreign national.

Then stop mischaracterizing what happened.

Manafort isn't accused of giving of passing internal polling data in a vacuum. The data was passed so that Russia could direct it's assets to targeting certain demographics and areas so that they effect the election. Coordinating with a foreign nation to do such is illegal. So is lying to federal prosecutors about that. Feel free to look up the various statutes on your own.

Now sure, you could argue that Manafort passed this data to a known russian spy, and had no idea what it would be used for. But most people aren't that gullible or partisan.

Mischaracterizing every action that a member of the trump campaign gets indicted for ("All he did was lie! All politicians lie, so whats the big deal?"), and ignoring the context of the indictments (that he lied about passing information to a foreign spy whom's government certainly attempted to influence our election) is just dishonest and stupid.

Why stop there? All those people charged in absentia in russia for directing a troll farm? Well they were just playing on their computers. Are you telling me it's a crime to use a computer now? Show me the statue or law review article that says typing on a computer is a crime. Checkmate dems.

 

[MikeMcMann]

Then stop mischaracterizing what happened.

Manafort isn't accused of giving of passing internal polling data in a vacuum. The data was passed so that Russia could direct it's assets to targeting certain demographics and areas so that they effect the election. Coordinating with a foreign nation to do such is illegal. So is lying to federal prosecutors about that. Feel free to look up the various statutes on your own.

Now sure, you could argue that Manafort passed this data to a known russian spy, and had no idea what it would be used for. But most people aren't that gullible or partisan.

Mischaracterizing every action that a member of the trump campaign gets indicted for ("All he did was lie! All politicians lie, so whats the big deal?"), and ignoring the context of the indictments (that he lied about passing information to a foreign spy whom's government certainly attempted to influence our election) is just dishonest and stupid.

Why stop there? All those people charged in absentia in russia for directing a troll farm? Well they were just playing on their computers. Are you telling me it's a crime to use a computer now? Show me the statue or law review article that says typing on a computer is a crime. Checkmate dems.

While everything you say is true it is also true that simply passing on a Campaigns Internal Polling Data is a crime.

far less so then the conspiratorial aspects and thus why its not a focus but its a crime none-the-less.

 

[TheBlondBomber]

Then stop mischaracterizing what happened.

Manafort isn't accused of giving of passing internal polling data in a vacuum. The data was passed so that Russia could direct it's assets to targeting certain demographics and areas so that they effect the election. Coordinating with a foreign nation to do such is illegal. So is lying to federal prosecutors about that. Feel free to look up the various statutes on your own.

Now sure, you could argue that Manafort passed this data to a known russian spy, and had no idea what it would be used for. But most people aren't that gullible or partisan.

Mischaracterizing every action that a member of the trump campaign gets indicted for ("All he did was lie! All politicians lie, so whats the big deal?"), and ignoring the context of the indictments (that he lied about passing information to a foreign spy whom's government certainly attempted to influence our election) is just dishonest and stupid.

Why stop there? All those people charged in absentia in russia for directing a troll farm? Well they were just playing on their computers. Are you telling me it's a crime to use a computer now? Show me the statue or law review article that says typing on a computer is a crime. Checkmate dems.

Mueller isn't accused of anything regarding the sharing of poll data. He admitted to it. It's not illegal.

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.

I'm stating what happened. He passed polling information to a Ukrainian national. We don't know why. We don't know what the Ukranian did with it. We don't know for sure if the Ukrainian works for the Russian government. All we know is that Manafort shared the polling data with a foreign national. That is not illegal. It may look bad, but it's not illegal. That has always been my position.

 

[TheBlondBomber]

So you lied.

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?

Haha. I say that Mueller doesn't have anything regarding collusion because he hasn't charged anyone with a crime related to direct collusion between Trump and the Russian government and you act like that's an unfair statement. I think Mueller doesn't have anything regarding collusion, and multiple Senate Democrats agree. Get over it.

For the 90th time, cite a statute that says its illegal to share polling data with a foreign national. You've said it multiple times, now back it up, punchy.

 

[MikeMcMann]

Haha. I say that Mueller doesn't have anything regarding collusion because he hasn't charged anyone with a crime related to direct collusion between Trump and the Russian government and you act like that's an unfair statement. I think Mueller doesn't have anything regarding collusion, and multiple Senate Democrats agree. Get over it.

For the 90th time, cite a statute that says its illegal to share polling data with a foreign national. You've said it multiple times, now back it up, punchy.

Nothing you say there is a fact.

You stated that you could back up factually what Mueller had. Either do it or admit you lied because its your M.O to say whatever you want 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?

 

[TheBlondBomber]

While everything you say is true it is also true that simply passing on a Campaigns Internal Polling Data is a crime.

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.

 

[TheBlondBomber]

Nothing you say there is a fact.

You stated that you could back up factually what Mueller had. Either do it or admit you lied because its your M.O to say whatever you want 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?

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.