Welcome home, fellow Gator.

The Gator Nation's oldest and most active insider community
Join today!

Russian trail leads directly to dems

Discussion in 'Too Hot for Swamp Gas' started by g8orbill, Aug 9, 2019.

  1. g8orbill

    g8orbill Old Gator VIP Member

    104,037
    11,283
    3,683
    Apr 3, 2007
    Clermont, Fl
    • Like Like x 2
  2. VAg8r1

    VAg8r1 GC Hall of Fame

    8,486
    823
    533
    Apr 8, 2007
    • Funny Funny x 1
  3. g8orbill

    g8orbill Old Gator VIP Member

    104,037
    11,283
    3,683
    Apr 3, 2007
    Clermont, Fl
    Virginia I guess all the evidence that the russian collusion actually
    Was a dnc/hillary project and what amounts to a coup somehow is just something you can’t seem to grasp- no matter how many times it is proven there was no collusion you have so deeply bought in that you just won’t allow yourself to see the truth- totally pathetic
     
    • Come On Man Come On Man x 4
    • Like Like x 3
    • Winner Winner x 2
    • Agree Agree x 1
  4. citygator

    citygator Premium Member

    3,263
    907
    618
    Apr 3, 2007
    Charlotte
    Wow. It’s been proven that there was NO collusion? I call BS. Post that link.
     
  5. WarDamnGator

    WarDamnGator GC Hall of Fame

    6,087
    490
    538
    Apr 8, 2007
    Hillary really did a great of convincing Jeff Sessions and both the Republican House and Senate to start investigations. She must have had something on them, like pics of them in the basement of Comet Ping Pong, or something.
     
  6. g8orbill

    g8orbill Old Gator VIP Member

    104,037
    11,283
    3,683
    Apr 3, 2007
    Clermont, Fl
    • Winner Winner x 2
  7. citygator

    citygator Premium Member

    3,263
    907
    618
    Apr 3, 2007
    Charlotte
    “The investigation did not establish that members of the Trump campaign conspired with the Russian government in its election interference activities,” Mueller said. But: “We did not address ‘collusion,’ which is not a legal term. Rather, we focused on whether the evidence was sufficient to charge any member of the campaign with taking part in a criminal conspiracy. It was not.”

    Robert Mueller kneecaps President Trump’s no collusion, no obstruction mantra - The Washington Post
     
    • Agree Agree x 1
  8. g8orbill

    g8orbill Old Gator VIP Member

    104,037
    11,283
    3,683
    Apr 3, 2007
    Clermont, Fl
  9. gatorknights

    gatorknights GC Hall of Fame

    25,312
    2,321
    1,093
    Apr 8, 2007
    Gainesville, FL
    Insufficient evidence does not equal NO evidence. BIG difference. Doesn't mean it didn't happen, it just means there wasn't enough evidence to meet the standard to convict. I realize that that there are some humans that cannot (or worse yet refuse to) grasp the concept of "enough". That generally leads to most misunderstandings between us talking monkeys.

    Legal Dictionary - Law.com
     
    • Funny Funny x 1
  10. g8orbill

    g8orbill Old Gator VIP Member

    104,037
    11,283
    3,683
    Apr 3, 2007
    Clermont, Fl
    there is zero proof Trump colluded with anyone

    everyday through FOIA's we DO learn more and more how the dnc and the clinton campaign along with high ranking members of both the DOJ and the FBI conspired to illegally spy on the opposition parties Presidential candidate and on private citizens to try and make it look like the Trump campaign colluded with the rooskies - more and more will continue to come out but I am sure those of you who are so invested in the collusion conspiracy because you still cannot accept that somewhat like Trump beat hillary will continue to believe it
     
    • Like Like x 1
    • Winner Winner x 1
    • Come On Man Come On Man x 1
  11. VAg8r1

    VAg8r1 GC Hall of Fame

    8,486
    823
    533
    Apr 8, 2007
    The Mueller report, explained in only 500 words

    However, “collusion” has no legal definition and isn’t a federal crime. “Conspiracy” is, though, so Mueller looked into whether the Trump campaign purposefully worked with Russia to win the 2016 election. Mueller didn’t find evidence of that. But he did find several troubling interactions that seem collusion-y. Here are just a few examples:


    • Two Trump campaign officials — Paul Manafort and Rick Gates — provided polling information to a Russian oligarch Gates believed was a “spy” for the Kremlin
    • Trump foreign policy adviser George Papadopoulos, with Trump’s approval, tried to arrange meetings between Trump and Russian President Vladimir Putin
    • Russia tried to hack Hillary Clinton’s office five hours after Trump called on Moscow to find her deleted emails
     
  12. VAg8r1

    VAg8r1 GC Hall of Fame

    8,486
    823
    533
    Apr 8, 2007
    Obviously, not sufficient to establish conspiracy ("collusion" is not a legal term) but it's rather clear that Trump was welcoming the assistance of the Russians.
     
  13. DeBigLeezard

    DeBigLeezard GC Hall of Fame

    1,314
    252
    313
    Feb 25, 2010
    • Russia tried to hack Hillary Clinton’s office five hours after Trump called on Moscow to find her deleted emails [/QUOTE] It will be shown, in time...that the 33,000 emails that Hillary deleted and destroyed... were never lost. In fact, we have ALWAYS had them...for years now. The simple hard fact is...the Trump Administration, (along with a high-level U.S. Military Intelligence team) have always secured them. ALL emails, all cellphone texts, etc have all been secured and archived by the U.S. Military. And not just Hillary's...but ALL of the emails & texts from Hillary's Campaign boss, Podesta, ALL from Peter Strock & Lisa Page, Valerie Jarrett, Clapper, Brennen, etc. The list goes on and on and on...and on.
     
    Last edited: Aug 10, 2019
    • Like Like x 1
    • Informative Informative x 1
  14. wrpgator

    wrpgator GC Hall of Fame

    2,655
    4,850
    508
    Dec 12, 2013
    Ooooh! There's that authoritative legal precept known as "interactions that seem collusion-y".
    You see, spreading innuendo was supposed to be all it took to knock out a candidate late in the campaign. It didn't work out as planned, and a necessary after-election phase II backing-and-filling was needed to provide cover and prop up that which was already out there. It's like shooting the suspect, then arranging the scene to make it appear justifiable. Setting the scene means sending people to jail for crimes unrelated to the Mueller (Weissmann) 'Investigation', and indicting Russian hackers who will never see the inside of a U.S. courtroom.

    Your collusion-y examples are lame (and in some cases false) in comparison to Steele's / Clinton campaign efforts which were picked up and helped along by a partisan upper-level intel cabal which 1. attempted to derail a campaign, and 2. attempted to overturn the results of an election.

    You'll find out soon enough--it's high-time the other side of this sordid period was investigated. One day this will be remembered as the biggest scandal and threat to our republic of all time.
     
    • Funny Funny x 2
  15. mdgator05

    mdgator05 Premium Member

    8,050
    697
    508
    Dec 9, 2010
    When exactly is soon enough? I've been promised I would find out soon enough for over 2 years now. How many people have been arrested as part of this "soon enough" outcome in the last 2 years?

    It was going to be Gowdy. Or Nunes. Or the judge in the Flynn case. Or the 302s. Or the redacted FISA warrants. Or the unredacted FISA warrants. Or the IG report. Or the other IG report. Or the other IG report. Or the US Attorney investigating it. Or the other US Attorney investigating it.

    Looking more and more like cognitive dissonance run amok.
     
    Last edited: Aug 10, 2019
    • Winner Winner x 4
  16. wrpgator

    wrpgator GC Hall of Fame

    2,655
    4,850
    508
    Dec 12, 2013
    You'll see.
     
    • Agree Agree x 1
    • Funny Funny x 1
  17. mdgator05

    mdgator05 Premium Member

    8,050
    697
    508
    Dec 9, 2010
    The official answer of hope and cognitive dissonance dressed up as analysis.

    See also Benghazi, Hillary's emails, or any of the other dead ends of the last 5 years. Good luck on this one. I'm sure it'll be different this time.
     
    • Agree Agree x 2
  18. wrpgator

    wrpgator GC Hall of Fame

    2,655
    4,850
    508
    Dec 12, 2013
    You seem to be well-acquainted with 'Hope' and cognitive dissonance. Thanks for the advice--and your sincere good luck wishes.
    upload_2019-8-10_16-21-11.png
     
    Last edited: Aug 10, 2019
    • Winner Winner x 1
  19. mdgator05

    mdgator05 Premium Member

    8,050
    697
    508
    Dec 9, 2010
    Years of watching you guys tilt at windmills and never be able to get even to the point of charging a person. Mueller indicted Trump's campaign manager, his deputy campaign manager, his first NSA, a foreign policy advisor, and one of his longest running unofficial political advisors as well as a variety of people and groups from the Russian side of the equation.

    The Hillary Clinton email and Benghazi investigations indicted...well, nobody. But I am sure this one will be different. Got to find out how we started that investigation that locked all those Trump folks up after being convicted of crimes.
     
    • Winner Winner x 1
    • Best Post Ever Best Post Ever x 1
  20. Claygator

    Claygator GC Hall of Fame

    3,310
    271
    358
    Apr 11, 2007
    Nice parsing of words. It was your ilk, the radical left, that threw the word "collusion" around ad nauseum, even though it wasn't a crime. Now, since this exhaustive, time consuming and incredibly divisive Mueller investigation clears him of the CRIMES they were investigating, you yap about not clearing him of "collusion". Guess what? They also didn't clear him of scratching his balls when they itch.
     
    • Funny Funny x 2