Don't Noonan
Footballguy
Top of Page 2 says "the investigation did not establish that members of the Trump campaign conspired (colluded ) or coordinated with the Russian government in its election interference activities."
"No evidence of conspiracy with Russia is clearly stated"Top of Page 2 says "the investigation did not establish that members of the Trump campaign conspired (colluded ) or coordinated with the Russian government in its election interference activities."
Exactly- no proof of collusion"No evidence of conspiracy with Russia is clearly stated"
"A statement that the investigation did not establish particular facts does not mean there was no evidence of those facts."
Oh, I see we're back to not understanding "proof" vs. "evidence". You said the report concluded there was no evidence. It did not conclude that and clearly states as much in the summary you point to as your source.Exactly- no proof of collusion
As usual you are defining the other side's various positions in a narrow way that suits your argument. Most reasonable people never alleged the vast international conspiracy you are straw-manning. Most simply claim that Trump welcomed and lied about Russia's support of him, and in doing so compromised his own position, and that there may also have been some collaboration on a smaller scale, say for example meeting in secret to discuss their mutual interest in defeating Clinton, sharing polling data, etc..I'd probably say stuff like this too if I staked my entire career on TrumpRussia alarmism.
A finding of no collusion is everywhere to be seen in real life. It's in Trump's posture toward Russia, which has "been much tougher on Russia than any in the post-Cold War era".
It's in his DOJ's prosecution of Julian Assange, who could totally out him for his supposed role in the conspiracy if it was a real thing that happened (it didn't).
It's in the fact that characters like Rob Goldstone (a British music publicist) and Felix Sater (an FBI informant that couldn't figure out contacting important Russians to get a Trump Tower deal from a hole in the ground) have been revealed to be sideshow hucksters, not participants to an international conspiracy theory.
It's in Deripaska's lawsuit against the US govt for sanctions that have cost him billions of dollars (sanctions which the EU opposed).
It's in Trump badgering Merkel to pull Germany out of the Nordstream 2 pipeline with Russia.
It's in Trump's bombing of Russian client state Syria, Trump's suffocating sanctions and regime change attempts against Russian ally Venezuela.
It's in Trump giving lethal weaponry to hostile anti-Russian forces in Ukraine.
It's in Trump's threatened withdrawal from the INF treaty (which NATO supports).
It's in Trump packing his administration with antiRussian neocon hawks.
It's in the fact that despite all of this, despite this conspiracy theory taking all the air out of the room and newsrooms allocating an obscene amount of investigative resources to it for years, despite a 22-month special prosecutor investigation with all the resources and subpoena power in the world, despite relations with Russia being so fraught that the Bulletin of Atomic Scientists cited how "the US-Russia nuclear rivalry re-emerged" in keeping the Doomsday Clock at 2 minutes to midnight, that despite all of that, Russia has still not outed their "puppet".
At every turn, the things happening in the real world and not in total fantasyland reveal collusion to be a literal joke. It reveals Adam Schiff to be a complete fraud, and the whole thing to have been predicated on a ####### conspiracy theory.
IOW, after throwing two years and the unlimited resources of the Federal government at looking, they did not find any collusion or conspiracyA statement that the investigation did not establish particular facts does not mean there was no evidence of those facts.
We applied the term coordination in that sense when stating in the report that the investigation did not establish that the Trump Campaign coordinated with the Russian government in its election interference activities.
That page, 1-2?
By taking the meeting, you’ve made yourself beholden to Putin.
- eta - Actually Powell is a proponent of the Deep State theory."I'm honored to be representing General Flynn, who i've long considered an American hero. The General and his family want to thank everyone across the country for their cards and contributions to his legal defense fund. He is going to continue to cooperate with the government, pursuant to his plea agreement," Powell told Hill.TV in a phone call.
That makes no logical sense whatsoever
Oh the irony. Can’t tell you how many times I’ve felt this way here.That makes no logical sense whatsoever
It's almost as if McCarthy talks differently on Fox.That makes no logical sense whatsoever
This is why letting Trump define the story in terms of "collusion!" was such a bad move for politicians and the media. IMO it really doesn't matter whether and to what degree they conspired with the Russians to commit illegal acts. As soon as the campaign welcomed Russian assistance and then lied about it (not to mention pushing forward with business interests in Russia and then lying about that too) they were compromised. A president who can be exposed and embarrassed by a foreign adversary at any time if he crosses them is a far bigger deal than whether any of their actions violate federal criminal law.
McGraw-Hill U.S. History (2028 edition)“That makes no logical sense whatsoever “
This is an awfully bold bar to set given your position. Let's see how it turns outThat makes no logical sense whatsoever
This statement is correct. With regard to the IRA's social media exploits, Mueller found that certain members of the Trump campaign did cooperate in some ways, but didn't realize that the people they were cooperating with were Russian. They were fooled. That is a legal exoneration (since criminal coordination must be done knowingly). But with regard to the GRU's release of hacked materials, while Mueller was not able to prove coordination, he also was not able to establish that coordination didn't happen. The Stone stuff is redacted, so we don't know exactly what he found there. The Manafort stuff, though, likely amounted to coordination ... but evidence sufficient to establish coordination couldn't be obtained because Manafort, Kilimnick, Putin and various other persons who may have been able to provide such evidence all refused to cooperate with the investigation. That's not an exoneration. It's just a legal dead end.Schiff opening statement: "For those who have not yet read the Mueller report, and most have not, they might be astonished to learn that a finding of no collusion, much less a finding of no obstruction, is nowhere to be seen on any page, or in any passage, of the Mueller report."
You obviously don't get your books from Texas...McGraw-Hill U.S. History (2028 edition)
Chapter 19: 2015-2021
Nope. Barr said there wasn't. And he is the top lawyer in the land! So he must be right.This statement is correct. With regard to the IRA's social media exploits, Mueller found that certain members of the Trump campaign did cooperate in some ways, but didn't realize that the people they were cooperating with were Russian. They were fooled. That is a legal exoneration (since criminal coordination must be done knowingly). But with regard to the GRU's release of hacked materials, while Mueller was not able to prove coordination, he also was not able to establish that coordination didn't happen. The Stone stuff is redacted, so we don't know exactly what he found there. The Manafort stuff, though, likely amounted to coordination ... but evidence sufficient to establish coordination couldn't be obtained because Manafort, Kilimnick, Putin and various other persons who may have been able to provide such evidence all refused to cooperate with the investigation. That's not an exoneration. It's just a legal dead end.
It's not correct to say that there was no evidence of coordination. There was evidence -- just not sufficient evidence to constitute proof beyond a reasonable doubt.
And there was obstruction up the wazoo.
You have this set up as a macro right? You hit F10 and it spits this sentence out?IOW, after throwing two years and the unlimited resources of the Federal government at looking, they did not find any collusion or conspiracy
McGraw-Hill U.S. History (2028 edition)
Chapter 19: 2015-2021
From Texas... Chapter 20: The Advanced ConservatismYou obviously don't get your books from Texas...
Chapter 19: 2015-2021- Fake News Era
Which lies by the MSM and democrats? Be specific.You guys do know that you're setting yourselves up for yet another disappointment...right?
How many is that now?
Seriously...what will it take for you to believe that you have been lied to by the Democrats and the MSM?
Is it possible at all? Will you ever believe it? I don't think so.
You placed all your chips on Mueller and he crapped out so you just keep trying to roll again after everyone has left the table.
We all know that the plan is to keep this up through the 2020 election.
Will it stop when President Trump is a lame duck after the 2020 election?
Not likely.
Better yet...show me the evidence that you've seen....not heard about.Which lies by the MSM and democrats? Be specific.
No...you made a claim and have been asked to support it.Better yet...show me the evidence that you've seen....not heard about.
That should narrow it down.
https://nypost.com/2019/04/19/top-10-things-the-media-got-wrong-about-collusion-and-obstruction/Which lies by the MSM and democrats? Be specific.
I am sure that they'll have to be lies by the MSM reported by the MSM as being lies in order to be accepted here.https://nypost.com/2019/04/19/top-10-things-the-media-got-wrong-about-collusion-and-obstruction/
https://theintercept.com/2019/01/20/beyond-buzzfeed-the-10-worst-most-embarrassing-u-s-media-failures-on-the-trumprussia-story/
https://www.realclearpolitics.com/video/2019/03/25/montage_mainstream_media_hype_about_russia_collusion.html
https://www.breitbart.com/the-media/2019/05/02/nolte-rachel-maddows-17-most-audacious-and-paranoid-russia-hoax-lies/
https://www.courier-journal.com/story/opinion/2019/05/01/scott-jennings-democrats-lie-and-media-lets-them/3637723002/
How about lies I have accepted at all? Or anyone here. Start with those. Just a link or two.I am sure that they'll have to be lies by the MSM reported by the MSM as being lies in order to be accepted here.
Here...I'll do it again.https://nypost.com/2019/04/19/top-10-things-the-media-got-wrong-about-collusion-and-obstruction/
https://theintercept.com/2019/01/20/beyond-buzzfeed-the-10-worst-most-embarrassing-u-s-media-failures-on-the-trumprussia-story/
https://www.realclearpolitics.com/video/2019/03/25/montage_mainstream_media_hype_about_russia_collusion.html
https://www.breitbart.com/the-media/2019/05/02/nolte-rachel-maddows-17-most-audacious-and-paranoid-russia-hoax-lies/
https://www.courier-journal.com/story/opinion/2019/05/01/scott-jennings-democrats-lie-and-media-lets-them/3637723002/
https://nypost.com/2019/04/27/battling-the-democrats-big-lie-about-donald-trump/
https://www.nationalreview.com/2019/04/trump-collusion-charges-fade-democratic-lies-emerge/
You know what the response will be....attack the source.Here...I'll do it again.
There are more after you finish with these.
Those didn’t answer my question actually. And nypost and BreitbartHere...I'll do it again.
There are more after you finish with these.
Called itThose didn’t answer my question actually. And nypost and Breitbart
Like people ask of you. All the time. No one here should ever answer your questionsSo basically you are going to make claims and fail to back any of them up when you are asked about them.
Just as I suspected.
Board Cop Sho. Ignores facts that don't fit his shtick and then attacks the source. So typical.Like people ask of you. All the time. No one here should ever answer your questions
Called it
Slam dunk.I am sure that they'll have to be lies by the MSM, reported by the MSM as being lies, in order to be accepted here.
Everyone is a liar except Trump.Which lies by the MSM and democrats? Be specific.
You made a claim that people here believed the lies. That is what was asked of you. You have provided nothing. In addition lies made by the MSM and democrats was the first claim. You’ve shown nothing.Slam dunk.
Predictable, if anything.
I've never claimed that. Sho thinks there have been no lies from the media and Democrats about Russia.Everyone is a liar except Trump.
Did the pigeon learn to play chess from Trump?I'll play chess....but not with a pigeon.
All they do is knock over the pieces, take a crap in the middle of the board, and then strut around like they won.
...and struts around like he won.You made a claim that people here believed the lies. That is what was asked of you. You have provided nothing. In addition lies made by the MSM and democrats was the first claim. You’ve shown nothing.
Your slam dunk was rejected by the rim. And yeah seeing my shadows in here is quite predictable as is your inability to back up bogus claims you have made.
I never claimed you did yet here you are.I've never claimed that. Sho thinks there have been no lies from the media and Democrats about Russia.
NY Post: Skews/Hyper-Partisan Right; Nonsense damaging to public discourseHere...I'll do it again.https://nypost.com/2019/04/19/top-10-things-the-media-got-wrong-about-collusion-and-obstruction/
https://theintercept.com/2019/01/20/beyond-buzzfeed-the-10-worst-most-embarrassing-u-s-media-failures-on-the-trumprussia-story/
https://www.realclearpolitics.com/video/2019/03/25/montage_mainstream_media_hype_about_russia_collusion.html
https://www.breitbart.com/the-media/2019/05/02/nolte-rachel-maddows-17-most-audacious-and-paranoid-russia-hoax-lies/
https://www.courier-journal.com/story/opinion/2019/05/01/scott-jennings-democrats-lie-and-media-lets-them/3637723002/
https://nypost.com/2019/04/27/battling-the-democrats-big-lie-about-donald-trump/
https://www.nationalreview.com/2019/04/trump-collusion-charges-fade-democratic-lies-emerge/
There are more after you finish with these.
no strutting needed...it took absolutely zero energy to ask you to back up your claims and watch you continue to refuse to do so....and struts around like he won.
Also...I never claimed what he said...and just how many of his posts in there have been about me?I never claimed you did yet here you are.
That does not mean what they wrote isn't true.NY Post: Skews/Hyper-Partisan Right; Nonsense damaging to public discourse
Breitbart: Most Extreme Right; Nonsense damaging to public discourse
National Review: Hyper-Partisan Right
Media Bias Chart
It's all about you buddy. Nailed it.Also...I never claimed what he said...and just how many of his posts in there have been about me?