whoknew

The Russia Investigation: Cohen Admits to Violating Campaign Finance Law at "Direction of the Candidate"

89,998 posts in this topic

1 minute ago, Maurile Tremblay said:

Dershowitz continues his descent into weirdness.

https://mobile.twitter.com/FoxNews/status/926822382882324481

Pretty much what the average FNC viewers position is nowadays. Even if Trump colluded with Russia to win an election, is it even against any laws? Really sad...

Edited by Bucky86
1 person likes this

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

There are obvious laws that could have been broken. Lying to investigators. Private citizens (before inauguration) negotiating policy with a foreign government. Agreement to reduce sanctions in return for the release of hacked emails. Yadda, yadda. We don’t know yet what the evidence is, but it’s silly to rule out the possibility of criminal acts before the investigation is completed. (And we already know there were criminal acts, violations of real live criminal statutes, based on the Papadopoulos plea.) Dershowitz is being weird.

5 people like this

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
4 minutes ago, Maurile Tremblay said:

Dershowitz is being weird.

Not really. There's going to be a few dollars in defending one of these guys. If that doesn't happen for AD, all of cable news is designed around Side A debating Side B. No matter how dumb Side B is. So there are a few dollars in a smart guy who is recognizable defending Side B on TV. 

This isn't really the first time he's injected himself into the legally wrong side of some case to make money. I can't say I wouldn't do the same. 

2 people like this

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, Rirruto said:

Not really. There's going to be a few dollars in defending one of these guys. If that doesn't happen for AD, all of cable news is designed around Side A debating Side B. No matter how dumb Side B is. So there are a few dollars in a smart guy who is recognizable defending Side B on TV. 

This isn't really the first time he's injected himself into the legally wrong side of some case to make money. I can't say I wouldn't do the same. 

He's not trying to make money.  Rumor has it he's part of the Jeffrey Epstein / Donald Trump / Bill Clinton underage girl fanclub.

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
7 hours ago, Bucky86 said:

Pretty much what the average FNC viewers position is nowadays. Even if Trump colluded with Russia to win an election, is it even against any laws? Really sad...

Watch your wording....Clinton colluded with russia to acquire the dossier. 

Im sure Trump did collude with Russia in some way. But how?  And will it be bad enough for it to stick and get him impeached?  We shall see

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
16 minutes ago, shader said:

Watch your wording....Clinton colluded with russia to acquire the dossier. 

Im sure Trump did collude with Russia in some way. But how?  And will it be bad enough for it to stick and get him impeached?  We shall see

How did Clinton collude with Russia to acquire the dossier?

6 people like this

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, shader said:

Watch your wording....Clinton colluded with russia to acquire the dossier. 

Im sure Trump did collude with Russia in some way. But how?  And will it be bad enough for it to stick and get him impeached?  We shall see

Oh do tell? Clinton colluded with the Russians for the dossier?

 

Maybe watch your tone...I was just quoting Derkowitz...those were his words

Edited by Bucky86

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
6 minutes ago, Bucky86 said:

Oh do tell? Clinton colluded with the Russians for the dossier?

 

Maybe watch your tone...I was just quoting Derkowitz...those were his words

It's astounding what people who follow the right wing news will take as fact.  Sites like Breitbart and Infowars have zero journalistic standards yet they throw garbage out there and many conservatives eat it up.  Meanwhile the Times and Post are actual news organizations that have meet and maintained standards for freaking decades.  It's crazy. 

9 people like this

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, shader said:

Watch your wording....Clinton colluded with russia to acquire the dossier.

Clinton colluded with Russia by having a campaign that hired a law firm that hired an American company that hired a British citizen to gather information in part by interviewing Russian citizens? If that’s what you mean, I genuinely love the fact that it was preceded by telling someone else to watch his wording.

18 people like this

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
7 minutes ago, Maurile Tremblay said:

Clinton colluded with Russia by having a campaign that hired a law firm that hired an American company that hired a British citizen to gather information in part by interviewing Russian citizens? If that’s what you mean, I genuinely love the fact that it was preceded by telling someone else to watch his wording.

This thread is 1100 pages long with accusations of Trump “associates” and their wrongdoings...

Clinton directly paid for Russian info on Trump, some of which is probably false.  Yes she didn’t travel to Moscow and meet with the Russians directly, but she colluded with russia to get a dossier.

To be fair, I don’t think there’s necessarily anything wrong with what she did.  It’s “opposition research”.  Now if it turns out that she made promises in exchange for the info that would change things, but there’s no evidence of that. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 minute ago, shader said:

This thread is 1100 pages long with accusations of Trump “associates” and their wrongdoings...

Clinton directly paid for Russian info on Trump, some of which is probably false.  Yes she didn’t travel to Moscow and meet with the Russians directly, but she colluded with russia to get a dossier.

To be fair, I don’t think there’s necessarily anything wrong with what she did.  It’s “opposition research”.  Now if it turns out that she made promises in exchange for the info that would change things, but there’s no evidence of that. 

Wat

5 people like this

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
15 minutes ago, Maurile Tremblay said:

Clinton colluded with Russia by having a campaign that hired a law firm that hired an American company that hired a British citizen to gather information in part by interviewing Russian citizens? If that’s what you mean, I genuinely love the fact that it was preceded by telling someone else to watch his wording.

 

2 minutes ago, shader said:

This thread is 1100 pages long with accusations of Trump “associates” and their wrongdoings...

Clinton directly paid for Russian info on Trump, some of which is probably false.  Yes she didn’t travel to Moscow and meet with the Russians directly, but she colluded with russia to get a dossier.

To be fair, I don’t think there’s necessarily anything wrong with what she did.  It’s “opposition research”.  Now if it turns out that she made promises in exchange for the info that would change things, but there’s no evidence of that. 

What we've got here, is....

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
5 minutes ago, shader said:

So?

Do you have a picture of your dear leader in every room of your house yet? He’s watching you. You better get those pictures up. Do you call him Don Jong Un, cause Your God worship of the criminal is mind boggling. 

2 people like this

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, shader said:

Watch your wording....Clinton colluded with russia to acquire the dossier. 

Im sure Trump did collude with Russia in some way. But how?  And will it be bad enough for it to stick and get him impeached?  We shall see

Collided with Russia?  No...no she didn’t.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
21 minutes ago, James Daulton said:

It's astounding what people who follow the right wing news will take as fact.  Sites like Breitbart and Infowars have zero journalistic standards yet they throw garbage out there and many conservatives eat it up.  Meanwhile the Times and Post are actual news organizations that have meet and maintained standards for freaking decades.  It's crazy. 

It’s astounding what people who have strong political leanings will take as facts.

Clinton paid for research that came directly Russia.  Much of that research may have been completely false and unsubstantiated.  How can anyone be sure that Steele didn’t acquire info by making promises?  It should be investigated I’d imagine.

Yet the very mention of “Clinton colluded with Russia” is immediately laughed at by you guys, because your media doesn’t connect the dots.

I said many weeks ago that Russia has compromised both sides, which should scare all of you.  But it doesn’t.  The right thinks the left is compromised and vice versa. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
12 minutes ago, shader said:

This thread is 1100 pages long with accusations of Trump “associates” and their wrongdoings...

Clinton directly paid for Russian info on Trump, some of which is probably false.  Yes she didn’t travel to Moscow and meet with the Russians directly, but she colluded with russia to get a dossier.

To be fair, I don’t think there’s necessarily anything wrong with what she did.  It’s “opposition research”.  Now if it turns out that she made promises in exchange for the info that would change things, but there’s no evidence of that. 

Sorry...your claim on Clinton is utterly ridiculous.

1 person likes this

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
4 minutes ago, Mario Kart said:

Do you have a picture of your dear leader in every room of your house yet? He’s watching you. You better get those pictures up. Do you call him Don Jong Un, cause Your God worship of the criminal is mind boggling. 

What in the heck are you talking about?  God worship?  Some of you have absolutely lost it.  

1 person likes this

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Just now, sho nuff said:

Sorry...your claim on Clinton is utterly ridiculous.

Which part?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 minute ago, shader said:

It’s astounding what people who have strong political leanings will take as facts.

Clinton paid for research that came directly Russia.  Much of that research may have been completely false and unsubstantiated.  How can anyone be sure that Steele didn’t acquire info by making promises?  It should be investigated I’d imagine.

Yet the very mention of “Clinton colluded with Russia” is immediately laughed at by you guys, because your media doesn’t connect the dots.

I said many weeks ago that Russia has compromised both sides, which should scare all of you.  But it doesn’t.  The right thinks the left is compromised and vice versa. 

It’s laughed at because it’s not a true statement.

And you were incorrect weeks ago when you said that...as people pointed out them.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Just now, shader said:

Which part?

That she collided with Russia...and pretty much your portrayal of the whole situation...especially in comparison of what Trump is accused of.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

:fishing: Spit the hook, folks

4 people like this

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Just now, Bucky86 said:

:fishing: Spit the hook, folks

Unfortunately...this one isn’t fishing.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 minute ago, sho nuff said:

That she collided with Russia...and pretty much your portrayal of the whole situation...especially in comparison of what Trump is accused of.

Trump probably colluded too.  That isn’t what we are talking about.  I know some people on here think that criticizing Clinton equals Trump god worship :lmao: but learn to separate the two.

Clinton funds directly went to Steele who acquired a VAST amount of info in that dossier. This isn’t Breitbart, this is mainstream info.

How did he get the Russians to pony up?  Money? Promises?  Aren’t these things that should be investigated?  

Think outside the box.  If Trump has acquired a long and detailed dossier on Clinton from Russia, what questions would you want to know?

Why is this even a remotely controversial opinion?

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
16 minutes ago, Mario Kart said:

Do you have a picture of your dear leader in every room of your house yet? He’s watching you. You better get those pictures up. Do you call him Don Jong Un, cause Your God worship of the criminal is mind boggling. 

I'm sure this sounded witty in your head. 

2 people like this

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
11 minutes ago, shader said:

 

Why is this even a remotely controversial opinion?

Because if I pay somebody to do cancer research, I’m not colluding with cancer.

16 people like this

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
32 minutes ago, shader said:

Yes she didn’t travel to Moscow and meet with the Russians directly, but she colluded with russia to get a dossier.

To collude with Russia means to have an agreement with Russia. This is being plausibly alleged of the Trump campaign — that Trump agreed to enact policies favorable to Russia in return for Russia’s help winning the election. (Not help from private Russian citizens, but from Russia.)

As far as I know, nobody, not even Alex Jones, is alleging that Clinton had an ageeement with Russia.

5 people like this

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Why do we need spies anyways? Apparently all you have to do is pay for it and promise things!

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
27 minutes ago, shader said:

What in the heck are you talking about?  God worship?  Some of you have absolutely lost it.  

:goodposting:

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Just now, Maurile Tremblay said:

To collude with Russia means to have an agreement with Russia. This is being plausibly alleged of the Trump campaign — that Trump agreed to enact policies favorable to Russia in return for Russia’s help winning the election. (Not help from private Russian citizens, but from Russia.)

As far as I know, nobody, not even Alex Jones, is alleging that Clinton had an ageeement with Russia.

The president of the US and his press secretary have alleged that the Russian dossier is clear eveidence of Clinton colluding with Russia.  So this isn’t some outlandish conspiracy theory that goes beyond Alex Jones.

Let’s keep the Trump allegations out of this.  I’m not comparing the two and/or saying one is worse or better than the other.

But she clearly paid for Steele to go to russia and collect info.  How did he get this info?  

Maybe I've seen too many movies, but I’m imagining Steele in Russia digging for info and the Russians wanting to know “what’s in it for them?  Do they just volunteer all this salacious stuff out of the goodness of their hearts?

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
20 minutes ago, shader said:

Why is this even a remotely controversial opinion?

A lot of objectively false opinions are controversial.

”Clinton colluded with Russia,” as a characterization of Clinton paying Steele to compile information that came from Russians, is objectively false. It’s not what the word “collude” means.

12 people like this

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
3 minutes ago, shader said:

The president of the US and his press secretary have alleged that the Russian dossier is clear eveidence of Clinton colluding with Russia.

The President and his Press Secretary have said plenty of objectively false things. That's not controversial.

13 people like this

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2 minutes ago, Maurile Tremblay said:

A lot of objectively false opinions are controversial.

”Clinton colluded with Russia,” as a characterization of Clinton paying Steele to compile information that came from Russians, is objectively false. It’s not what the word “collude” means.

Clinton and Russians, through an intermediary, came to a secret agreement to get dirt on Donald Trump in exchange for money. 

Agree?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Just now, Maurile Tremblay said:

The President and his Press Secretary have said plenty of objectively false things. That's not controversial.

No doubt. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
17 minutes ago, shader said:

Clinton and Russians, through an intermediary, came to a secret agreement to get dirt on Donald Trump in exchange for money. 

Agree?

No, but even that isn't collusion with Russia. "Russians" are not Russia. Also, that kind of agreement isn't collusion just like buying groceries isn't collusion.

6 people like this

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
5 minutes ago, shader said:

Clinton and Russians, through an intermediary, came to a secret agreement to get dirt on Donald Trump in exchange for money. 

Agree?

So you think the Free Beacon also colluded with Russia?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
7 minutes ago, shader said:

Clinton and Russians, through an intermediary, came to a secret agreement to get dirt on Donald Trump in exchange for money. 

Agree?

NO! What the hell are you talking about?

10 people like this

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!


Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.


Sign In Now