RussiaGate

[whichphilosophy]

The solution to collusion is legal prosecution.

- Emails were stolen
- A meeting regarding Russian acquired info against Clinton took place between a Russian Lawyer and Donald Trump Jr
- The emails were leaked

One needs to be pretty partisan to not connect those dots.

And what was to be traded for this info? (Pick one or many... it'll come out sooner or later.)

• Russian money laundering case settled for pennies.
• A huge chuck of Russian oil and gas revenue.
• Secret (non-State Department) channels to continue to launder Russian money
• Lifting of sanctions.
• Weakening of NATO.

Also, I was wrong. I said in a former post that Trump first mentioned a Hillary email dump hours after the Jr.-Lawyer summit concluded. It was minutes, not hours. He knew, and he colluded.

You may be right but this is speculating but I put some comments. I won't call them gold nuggets because you might call them Fool's Gold..

[*]Russian money laundering case settled for pennies. That would be found out quite quickly.

[*]A huge chuck of Russian oil and gas revenue. As above too dangerous but not impossible.

[*]Secret (non-State Department) channels to continue to launder Russian money. This is happening anyway (Russian Mafia)

[*]Lifting of sanctions. This should be done anyway

[*]Weakening of NATO. It depends on its member states and not just the USA.

[/LIST]

I bet more strange things will be coming in the media during the next week but whether they connect persons to acts rather than persons to persons is not certain.

 

[laughing dog]

No, the question, which has been now publicly answered, is that the Trump campaign was willing and did collude with the Russians.

I'm just the postman.

Stop insulting postal workers.

Collusion has not been positively established.

Yes it has.

The declassified intelligence report confirms this. Check the definitions section.

If he was willing to collude with Russians what do you convict Trump Jr of. There is no conspiracy at this point either.

If the 2 parties conspired, what did they conspire about? This question needs to be answered.
If the NY Times found dirt on Trump in Russia would the same principles apply?

It is clear there was collusion, something Trump denied. Whether these activities were a crime or not is not really material to the issue that the Trump campaign colluded with Russia.

No amount of spinning, pedantry or utterly inanity on your part changes that reality.

 

[Nice Squirrel]

• Russian money laundering case settled for pennies.
  That would be found out quite quickly.
  http://www.businessinsider.com/why-was-russian-money-laundering-case-dismissed-house-dems-2017-7
  
  
• A huge chuck of Russian oil and gas revenue.
  As above too dangerous but not impossible.
  http://www.reuters.com/article/us-russia-rosneft-privatisation-insight-idUSKBN1582OH
  
  
• Secret (non-State Department) channels to continue to launder Russian money.
  This is happening anyway (Russian Mafia) - Glad you agree Trump is involved in money laundering.
  https://www.washingtonpost.com/worl...ac8b446820a_story.html?utm_term=.3a6cdd7b35b2
  
  
• Lifting of sanctions.
  This should be done anyway
  It should not. Russia interfered in our elections.
  
  
• Weakening of NATO.
  It depends on its member states and not just the USA.
  Donald Trump can seriously weaken the Alliance.
  

I bet more strange things will be coming in the media during the next week but whether they connect persons to acts rather than persons to persons is not certain.

There is a Russian under every rock.

 

[Deepak]

It's obvious now that we've gone from six months of denials, witch hunts, and accusations of conspiracy to a new denial: that it's not technically illegal.

It's not illegal to deny something

What the what now? Denying contact with a foreign actor for the purposes of getting dirt on one's political opponents when filling out a security clearance form isn't illegal? Who are you, who are so wise in the ways of the US Code?

 

[Elixir]

It's not illegal to deny something

Thank you captain obvious. It's not illegal to whistle dixie in church either. Too bad that's not the extent of Cheato family transgressions.

IT IS ILLEGAL TO OMIT INFORMATION REQUESTED ON FORM SF-86 WHEN APPLYING FOR SECURITY CLEARANCE.
Penalties can be up to 5 years in prison, under title 18, section 1001.

 

[Copernicus]

Generally speaking, it is usually not illegal to tell lies, especially to the public, but there are certainly particular circumstances under which lying could be a criminal act. Falsifying an application for a security clearance clearly is a crime. Amending it later, after one is caught out in a lie, should not be enough to exonerate high public officials, especially when they have to keep amending their application after new information keeps coming out. And conspiracy to commit or conceal a crime is certainly a crime.

 

[whichphilosophy]

No, the question, which has been now publicly answered, is that the Trump campaign was willing and did collude with the Russians.

I'm just the postman.

Stop insulting postal workers.

Collusion has not been positively established.

Yes it has.

The declassified intelligence report confirms this. Check the definitions section.

If he was willing to collude with Russians what do you convict Trump Jr of. There is no conspiracy at this point either.

If the 2 parties conspired, what did they conspire about? This question needs to be answered.
If the NY Times found dirt on Trump in Russia would the same principles apply?

It is clear there was collusion, something Trump denied. Whether these activities were a crime or not is not really material to the issue that the Trump campaign colluded with Russia.

No amount of spinning, pedantry or utterly inanity on your part changes that reality.

Can you show the actual conclusion which states collusion did take place between the Trump campaign and the Russians?

 

[Opoponax]

No, the question, which has been now publicly answered, is that the Trump campaign was willing and did collude with the Russians.

I'm just the postman.

Stop insulting postal workers.

Collusion has not been positively established.

Yes it has.

The declassified intelligence report confirms this. Check the definitions section.

If he was willing to collude with Russians what do you convict Trump Jr of. There is no conspiracy at this point either.

If the 2 parties conspired, what did they conspire about? This question needs to be answered.
If the NY Times found dirt on Trump in Russia would the same principles apply?

It is clear there was collusion, something Trump denied. Whether these activities were a crime or not is not really material to the issue that the Trump campaign colluded with Russia.

No amount of spinning, pedantry or utterly inanity on your part changes that reality.

Can you show the actual conclusion which states collusion did take place between the Trump campaign and the Russians?

Can you prove that you can read? I refuse to believe that you can.

 

[whichphilosophy]

It's not illegal to deny something

Thank you captain obvious. It's not illegal to whistle dixie in church either. Too bad that's not the extent of Cheato family transgressions.

IT IS ILLEGAL TO OMIT INFORMATION REQUESTED ON FORM SF-86 WHEN APPLYING FOR SECURITY CLEARANCE.
Penalties can be up to 5 years in prison, under title 18, section 1001.

What are the circumstances to which you refer to because this is not in context with the events mentioned.

- - - Updated - - -

No, the question, which has been now publicly answered, is that the Trump campaign was willing and did collude with the Russians.

I'm just the postman.

Stop insulting postal workers.

Collusion has not been positively established.

Yes it has.

The declassified intelligence report confirms this. Check the definitions section.

If he was willing to collude with Russians what do you convict Trump Jr of. There is no conspiracy at this point either.

If the 2 parties conspired, what did they conspire about? This question needs to be answered.
If the NY Times found dirt on Trump in Russia would the same principles apply?

It is clear there was collusion, something Trump denied. Whether these activities were a crime or not is not really material to the issue that the Trump campaign colluded with Russia.

No amount of spinning, pedantry or utterly inanity on your part changes that reality.

Can you show the actual conclusion which states collusion did take place between the Trump campaign and the Russians?

Can you prove that you can read? I refuse to believe that you can.

I can't read peoples' minds. What collusion took place between the Trump campaign and the 'Russians' Similar to an earlier question.

 

[blastula]

I don't see any Russia apologists, stooges, or shills thanks to the ignore feature.

It's hardly a debate if everyone agrees with each other. It's a bit like opening a debating society in North Korea.

Debating the apologists is like debating flat earthers.

 

[laughing dog]

Can you show the actual conclusion which states collusion did take place between the Trump campaign and the Russians?

Yes I can. Collusion means a secret agreement or cooperation especially for an illegal or deceitful purpose. That describes the behavior of Trump Jr and others in the Trump campaign perfectly. Now, can you show that you have the ability to understand basic english and the intellectual honesty to admit there was collusion?

 

[whichphilosophy]

It's not illegal to deny something

What the what now? Denying contact with a foreign actor for the purposes of getting dirt on one's political opponents when filling out a security clearance form isn't illegal? Who are you, who are so wise in the ways of the US Code?

Are you talking about a call to reevaluate Kushner's security clearance. Again reports are not clear. The Guardian reported

Kushner was required to disclose all meetings with foreign government officials over the past seven years when he applied for security clearance for his White House role. He initially failed to mention the Trump Jr meeting, then included it on a supplemental form.

The question would be when did he include it on a supplemental form? The moves to remove security clearance if necessary can move forward accordingly.

 

[whichphilosophy]

Can you show the actual conclusion which states collusion did take place between the Trump campaign and the Russians?

Yes I can. Collusion means a secret agreement or cooperation especially for an illegal or deceitful purpose. That describes the behavior of Trump Jr and others in the Trump campaign perfectly. Now, can you show that you have the ability to understand basic english and the intellectual honesty to admit there was collusion?

Was there an actual secret agreement? This is not confirmed at all. There is a difference between what Trump says and what the Lawyer says. So collusion cannot be confirmed at this stage. Cadit quaestio -unless something else turns up to show the meeting of minds (intent) of the two parties.

 

[Nice Squirrel]

Yes I can. Collusion means a secret agreement or cooperation especially for an illegal or deceitful purpose. That describes the behavior of Trump Jr and others in the Trump campaign perfectly. Now, can you show that you have the ability to understand basic english and the intellectual honesty to admit there was collusion?

Was there an actual secret agreement? This is not confirmed at all. There is a difference between what Trump says and what the Lawyer says. So collusion cannot be confirmed at this stage. Cadit quaestio -unless something else turns up to show the meeting of minds (intent) of the two parties.

The lawyer is lying because she is smart and has nothing to lose if she does and everything to lose if she tells the truth. Trump has pretty much admitted he knew and that collusion was okay. Donald Jr. told a lie and then the truth and he is dumb. All this is confirmed.

 

[Elixir]

Was there an actual secret agreement?

You still don't get it. Doesn't matter if a deal was consummated. There is already an admission that such a deal was intended and a meeting held. That's collusion.

 

[laughing dog]

Yes I can. Collusion means a secret agreement or cooperation especially for an illegal or deceitful purpose. That describes the behavior of Trump Jr and others in the Trump campaign perfectly. Now, can you show that you have the ability to understand basic english and the intellectual honesty to admit there was collusion?

Was there an actual secret agreement? This is not confirmed at all. There is a difference between what Trump says and what the Lawyer says. So collusion cannot be confirmed at this stage. Cadit quaestio -unless something else turns up to show the meeting of minds (intent) of the two parties.

You ignored the "or cooperation", so you failed to show you have the ability to understand basic english and the intellectual honesty to admit there was collusion.

 

[Deepak]

What the what now? Denying contact with a foreign actor for the purposes of getting dirt on one's political opponents when filling out a security clearance form isn't illegal? Who are you, who are so wise in the ways of the US Code?

Are you talking about a call to reevaluate Kushner's security clearance. Again reports are not clear. The Guardian reported

Kushner was required to disclose all meetings with foreign government officials over the past seven years when he applied for security clearance for his White House role. He initially failed to mention the Trump Jr meeting, then included it on a supplemental form.

The question would be when did he include it on a supplemental form? The moves to remove security clearance if necessary can move forward accordingly.

No detailed supplement was supplied between Jan 18th and the Apr 6th NYT report. The supplement mentioned multiple contacts with foreign nationals, but didn't list dates, names, or details of the purpose of the meetings as required on the form - no mention of Gorkov, Kislyak, or Veselnitskaya. And let's not forget that it's been determined Flynn knowingly omitted meetings with the first two.

Moreover, both the Trump Jr. email chain and Veselnitskaya's own statements indicated he was eager to solicit information about Clinton from Veselnitskaya (that is to say, something of value under federal election rules).

https://www.nytimes.com/2017/04/06/us/politics/jared-kushner-russians-security-clearance.html?_r=0
http://billmoyers.com/story/the-jared-kushner-timeline/
http://www.npr.org/2017/07/10/536478972/lawyer-who-met-with-trump-jr-has-ties-to-russian-government

 

[Don2 (Don1 Revised)]

Sweet home in the slammer
Where the skies are not blue
Sweet home in the slammer
Lord, I'm coming home to you

In Nizhny Novgorod they love the Pres'dent, boo-hoo-hoo
Now we all did what we could do
Now Russiagate does not bother me
Does your conscience bother you, tell the truth

-- Rooskie Trollsky

 

[Rhea]

Was there an actual secret agreement? This is not confirmed at all. There is a difference between what Trump says and what the Lawyer says. So collusion cannot be confirmed at this stage. Cadit quaestio -unless something else turns up to show the meeting of minds (intent) of the two parties.

You're hilariously sycophantic. I will say it's kind of hard to understand you, sometimes, what with your mouth full of Trump's balls. Maybe if you take them out for a bit, you'll be able to express yourself more clearly?

 

[Copernicus]

Was there an actual secret agreement?

You still don't get it. Doesn't matter if a deal was consummated. There is already an admission that such a deal was intended and a meeting held. That's collusion.

Exactly right. All three Trump campaign representatives went to that meeting in response to an email from a Russian citizen who was described as having secret information from the Russian government that could be used to influence a political campaign. Trump Jr explicitly wrote back that he was enthusiastic about that information coming out, especially later in the summer. His intent could not be clearer.

As Jon Oliver recently put it, someone who agrees to buy cocaine but ends up buying a bag of sugar is still guilty of committing the crime. Not being able to consummate the drug purchase does not absolve that person of the crime.