Latest from Trump-Russia Investigation

So what? Who cares? Call it collusion, call it conspiracy.....does it really matter? I mean the media calls it collusion but they will be charged with conspiracy so what difference does it make? Are you really down to arguing the semantics over what it's called?

 

I then asked you define it. Now you’ve backed off.

I’m not arguing with the media. Just you and you keep chaging words.

How does this relate to collusion with Russia to win the election?

The charge is based on being an unregistered foreign agent for his consulting in Ukraine.

Care to explain?

 

You are missing the point completely and at this point I have to assume that you are doing so selectively. I called it collusion when I began this thread and @Winston1 correctly stated, as you were begging for a definition, that the correct term is conspiracy. I believed his term to be the correct one. It is also the legal term that applies here. So, you can play this little game of see-sawing over definitions and whether I used collusion or conspiracy all you want, but the reality is that while you are doing this and pretending that the real issue is whether Hillary Clinton was prosecuted or not, Robert Mueller is conducting a very real investigation. Your obfuscation nor the Presidents will matter when that reported is submitted.

If he was giving them polling data that was used to determine who and where to target with their disinformation campaigns that's conspiracy.

It's one of them.

 

https://www.chicagotribune.com/news...trump-executive-privilege-20190109-story.html
https://www.washingtonpost.com/podc...lawyers/?noredirect=on&utm_term=.906252c8c2d2
https://www.motherjones.com/kevin-d...-lawyers-to-help-hide-obstruction-of-justice/

Trump has now hired 17 additional attorneys to help him assert executive privilege when Mueller's report is released in an attempt to silence it. But he has nothing to hide, right?

 

The questions remains, how does this related to colluding with Russia to win the 2016 election????

So "ifs" now?

What is the other charges then. List them. You started this thread asking a question. You realize this dont you?

I then asked YOU for clarity on it and as always, you start going off the deep end.

You also brought up the Trump tower meeting yet ignore the fact that she met with the Fusion GPS people before and after as if it doesn't matter, yet seem to think that being a consultant for Ukraine matters.

You are being highly inconsistent in your rational.

 

Who has claimed Trump has nothing to hide?

You and @Winston1 seem to have a hard time grasping basic concepts around here.

Its like me throwing it back at you with Holder pleading the 5th on Fast and Furious. What did he and Obama have to hide?

This is our point here.

You guys wanna jump up and down and act like this is "new".

Trump is some sort of dumb-ass, yet had this elaborate plan to "steal" the election.Yet, no-body can point to any factual evidence of Trump and Russia coordinating. What did they coordinate on?

Oh thats right, your fall back is "Mueller will tell us".

Here is what is going to happen. Mueller is going to release his report and it will state: "Trumps was unwittingly sought after by Russian intelligence to influence the election".

Its clear that Russia poked and prodded both the DNC and GOP. Trumps campaign was filled with amateurs. To say the DNC wasn't is amateurish would also be false as their their entire system was hacked.

However, what Russia did is exactly what the DNC did to Bernnie. So I will leave it at that....

 

I have no idea. I'm not supposed to know. None of us are privy to all the information that Mueller has so we have no idea how the dots connect. That said, Trump just hired 17 additional attorneys just so he can figure out how to subvert the report Mueller will release. There is also a report out there that Rudy Guiliani has been quoted as saying that the report will be horrific for the President.
https://www.inquisitr.com/5241485/g...ders-suggest-trump-may-strike-deal-to-resign/

Semantics much?

I believe it's rationale, not rational. Big difference and since we are playing semantics police I thought you'd find the humor in it.
But no, I being perfectly rationale. Things are very bad for Trump right now, like him or not.

 

Its the most logical outcome given the lack of evidence. If the evidence was very clear, it would be known by now. That is why 90% of the charges are tax or lying related.

Earlier, NC said Russia was "savvy"; you think they left a paper trail in their pen-pal letters to Trump coordinating collusion???

You are going to have to have VERY concrete evidence.

 

Trump

I'd say Winston and I are two of the more enlightened ones around here. We disagree because we have different philosophies of governance but Winston is a smart guy and you are lying when you say otherwise.

Yeah, I remember when they were investigated and......oh, that's right they weren't. But I guess that was the Deep State at work, right?

Hallelujah! You're finally going to make it?

Aside from Nixon, it is new. Any other Presidents been in this much trouble?

You're learning grasshopper.....keep listening and you'll catch up

It might and as I've stated for the sake of the country I hope you are right.

no they didn't. stop lying.

Nope. Just another false equivalency.....