TrumpPutingate III: the beginning of the end

#4,027
#4,027
luthervol said:
Honest answer. Yes. Of course I already believe that he is guilty so it would not change the way I view him and his presidency in the least.
Click to expand...


adam-schiff-trump-russia-009-01-800x416.jpg
 
#4,028
#4,028
hog88 said:
What evidence have you seen to make you believe he's guilty?
Click to expand...

The people with whom he chooses to surround himself is enough to implicate. His moral character (or complete lack thereof) coupled with how he prioritizes values pushes him to the edge. The continued uncovering of financial dealings with Russian ties when he has so frequently denied any such dealings tightens the noose. And finally, the mere fact that he won drops the trap door. (I still do not accept that Americans would do that on their own.)
 
#4,029
#4,029
Sandman 423 said:
No, I just can't wrap my head around someone hoping that someone else did something that would hurt our country.
Click to expand...


I don't "hope" it. I don't like him substantively and won't even if he is cleared. So either way, I think he is unfit to be President.

But you are asking the wrong question of the wrong person. Its not do I hope he colluded.

Its why others on here seem so willing to just ignore all of the facts and evidence that he (or his campaign) did.
 
  • Like
Reactions: 2 people
#4,031
#4,031
lawgator1 said:
Its not a subjective issue.

I think the evidence is sufficient to go to a jury on whether the Trump campaign attempted to collude. The June '16 meeting and Trump Jr's email concerning the subject matter are sufficient in my view to establish an intent to do so.

Trump himself? Right now, the evidence of that is 1) his comment that he was about to have info on her right after that meeting; 2) his constant calls at his stump speeches for the Russians and wikileaks to intervene to hurt HRC; and 3) his repeated efforts to assist the Russians in American foreign policy, such as a) changing the GOP platform on the Ukraine and b) failing to impose sanctions, as instructed by the Congress.

But why? I don't think its as transparent as just a quid pro quo as in, help me win, I'll be nice to you. Its going to be financial in nature.

Waiting to see what Mueller has on that. The fact that it is the focus on Manafort and Gates, and those guys were brought in to the campaign makes it very easy to believe that this angle was being worked on them, and on Trump too.

Time will tell.

(PS, in my view he is absolutely already guilty of obstruction. But that was not your question)
Click to expand...

Attempting to collude is not a crime - why would you take that to a Grand Jury?

As for the obstruction there is no underlying crime to obstruct an investigation on.

Bunch a people trying to change election outcomes by finding process crimes. It was wrong with Clinton and it's wrong now.

BTW - the DNC and HC actually did collude with Russia to influence the election; they just used 2 middlemen (Fusion and Steele) to do so. If the DJR meeting was a crime then the dossier activity was most definitely a crime.
 
  • Like
Reactions: 3 people
#4,035
#4,035
lawgator1 said:
Its not a subjective issue.

I think the evidence is sufficient to go to a jury on whether the Trump campaign attempted to collude. The June '16 meeting and Trump Jr's email concerning the subject matter are sufficient in my view to establish an intent to do so.

Trump himself? Right now, the evidence of that is 1) his comment that he was about to have info on her right after that meeting; 2) his constant calls at his stump speeches for the Russians and wikileaks to intervene to hurt HRC; and 3) his repeated efforts to assist the Russians in American foreign policy, such as a) changing the GOP platform on the Ukraine and b) failing to impose sanctions, as instructed by the Congress.

But why? I don't think its as transparent as just a quid pro quo as in, help me win, I'll be nice to you. Its going to be financial in nature.

Waiting to see what Mueller has on that. The fact that it is the focus on Manafort and Gates, and those guys were brought in to the campaign makes it very easy to believe that this angle was being worked on them, and on Trump too.

Time will tell.

(PS, in my view he is absolutely already guilty of obstruction. But that was not your question)
Click to expand...

You know damn well you wouldn't take this to court.
 
#4,036
#4,036
luthervol said:
The people with whom he chooses to surround himself is enough to implicate. His moral character (or complete lack thereof) coupled with how he prioritizes values pushes him to the edge. The continued uncovering of financial dealings with Russian ties when he has so frequently denied any such dealings tightens the noose. And finally, the mere fact that he won drops the trap door. (I still do not accept that Americans would do that on their own.)
Click to expand...

It must suck to lead such a deluded, conspiracy-filled life.
 
  • Like
Reactions: 1 person
#4,037
#4,037
luthervol said:
The people with whom he chooses to surround himself is enough to implicate. His moral character (or complete lack thereof) coupled with how he prioritizes values pushes him to the edge. The continued uncovering of financial dealings with Russian ties when he has so frequently denied any such dealings tightens the noose. And finally, the mere fact that he won drops the trap door. (I still do not accept that Americans would do that on their own.)
Click to expand...

So nothing?
 
  • Like
Reactions: 1 person
#4,041
#4,041
luthervol said:
9 months is a fraction of the length of time of the Starr investigation.
Click to expand...

No, the Whitewater investigation already had taken down a Governor in 9 months and Starr was closing up shop in just a little over a year.

We've been over the time line Luther. The Lewinsky investigation was a separate investigation.
 
  • Like
Reactions: 1 person
#4,043
#4,043
luthervol said:
I'm all good. It's some of you guys that I worry about.
Click to expand...

You just said you don’t accept that America elected Trump.

Spoiler alert... they DID.

Hillary got her ass kicked in states she took for granted. By all means, blame a foreign power rather than a horrible candidate who ran on, well, nothing.
 
  • Like
Reactions: 1 person
#4,044
#4,044
luthervol said:
9 months is a fraction of the length of time of the Starr investigation.
Click to expand...

Since July 2016, the FBI has been investigating the Russian government’s attempt to influence the 2016 presidential election, including whether President Donald Trump’s campaign associates were involved in those efforts....so 18 months = not an centila of evidence.
 
#4,045
#4,045
volinbham said:
Attempting to collude is not a crime - why would you take that to a Grand Jury?

As for the obstruction there is no underlying crime to obstruct an investigation on.

Bunch a people trying to change election outcomes by finding process crimes. It was wrong with Clinton and it's wrong now.

BTW - the DNC and HC actually did collude with Russia to influence the election; they just used 2 middlemen (Fusion and Steele) to do so. If the DJR meeting was a crime then the dossier activity was most definitely a crime.
Click to expand...

Welcome back, don't be a stranger.
 
#4,046
#4,046
Vol0725 said:
Since July 2016, the FBI has been investigating the Russian government’s attempt to influence the 2016 presidential election, including whether President Donald Trump’s campaign associates were involved in those efforts....so 18 months = not an centila of evidence.
Click to expand...

What was it they talked about in Trump Tower. Adoptions or Dirt on Clinton "I love it".


Trump Tower Meeting did happen.
 
  • Like
Reactions: 1 person
New posts
You must log in or register to reply here.
Advertisement





Back
Top