Mueller investigation conludes that Trump is guilty!

[Mountain Man]

EXCEPT for this graphic showing all the Trump associates who talked with Russian agents during the 2016 presidential campaign. This is the big-picture summary of what we know about the Trump campaign’s contacts with Russian agents — and it does not look good for the president.

https://www.rawstory.com/2018/12/tha..._notifications

Nothing suspicious here is there.

Like I said, you're falling for the bait-and-switch, where liberals are trying to make multiple normal and innocent connections appear sinister as a whole.

[Mountain Man]

When you deny putin wanted trump to win and i post a link to putin saying he wanted trump to win.

When you deny our intelligence said putin tried to influence the election for trump and i post a link documenting a cia report saying exactly that.

That is ignoring direct evidence.

The Senate Intelligence Committee was aware of the intelligence community's preliminary assessment when they said there is no evidence of collusion and no evidence that Russia preferred one candidate over the other. And trust me, those guys hate Trump and looked very hard to find the evidence. I've ignored nothing.

[oxmixmudd]

The Senate Intelligence Committee was aware of the intelligence community's preliminary assessment when they said there is no evidence of collusion and no evidence that Russia preferred one candidate over the other. And trust me, those guys hate Trump and looked very hard to find the evidence. I've ignored nothing.

You've ignore everything that matters MM.

(1) I said putin wanted Trump elected. You said I had no evidence of that. Then I posted a video of Putin saying he wanted Trump elected. You ignored it.

(2) I said our intelligence community had concluded Russia hacked our elections for the purpose of getting Trump elected. You posted a quite saying there was no evidence of collusion. I posted a WP article about a CIA report that concluded Russia was playing to get Trump elected. You ignored it.


(2) is the only place you have even one square inch of potential footing in that you effectively are claiming that the intelligence community 'changed its mind' and are thus justified ignoring my link.
a) that doesn't change the fact our intelligence community indeed had concluded Russia was playing to help get Trump elected (This is all that is needed for my statement to be correct)
b) your assertion is blatantly contradicted by other statements:

https://www.chicagotribune.com/news/...516-story.html

https://www.nytimes.com/2018/05/22/u...mp-russia.html

https://www.newyorker.com/magazine/2...tion-for-trump

You are ignoring the fact that the raw intelligence and putin's own words point directly to the fact Russia wanted trump elected. You are Cherry picking opinions that favor your hopeful position and ignoring the weight of the evidence.

Jim

[seer]

With regard to the campaign finance violations paying off Stormy Daniels etc... it's worth bearing in mind that the final election results were really close and a small percentage vote swing in some states would have given the election to Clinton. There's a pretty high probability that had the story that Trump had an affair with a porn star coming out right before the election would have swung enough voters to change the election outcome. So Trump's campaign finance violations to suppress her story probably changed the election outcome: i.e. Trump is only president because he broke the law in order to win the election. Put like that, the case for removing him from office as a result of this campaign finance conviction looks pretty compelling.

That is nonsense, he did not use campaign funds. And I doubt if it would have mattered much, most people already knew he was womanizer. That was not a secret given his history. But again no campaign funds were used, that is usually where campaign finance violations come in.

[oxmixmudd]

With regard to the campaign finance violations paying off Stormy Daniels etc... it's worth bearing in mind that the final election results were really close and a small percentage vote swing in some states would have given the election to Clinton. There's a pretty high probability that had the story that Trump had an affair with a porn star coming out right before the election would have swung enough voters to change the election outcome. So Trump's campaign finance violations to suppress her story probably changed the election outcome: i.e. Trump is only president because he broke the law in order to win the election. Put like that, the case for removing him from office as a result of this campaign finance conviction looks pretty compelling.

Absolutely. To push back against the potential of gaining the Presidency through fraud is one of the key reasons impeachment exists. The election was far too close for anyone to reasonably conclude Trump could be guaranteed to have taken the election had the Stormy Daniels story been published. The payoff was critical to his success, and by hiding that story from the public, Trumps presidency win is in all likelihood, on this element alone, the result of fraud. Add to it the shady actions of so many of his campaign personnel and staff with the Russians and add in their interference and push to bias towards Trump and there is almost no doubt Trump's presidency is the product of Fraud.

What I want to know it what does Trump (or Putin?) have on the house GOP members that is causing them to defend Trump here. It may be nothing more than their own lack of conscience as regards their lust for power and the clear loss of power that will follow a Trump impeachment/conviction. But at the same time, it would be easy to imagine a lot of them with a woman in the woodpile that they don't want publicly aired and that is serving as leverage to keep them in line.


Jim

[oxmixmudd]

That is nonsense, he did not use campaign funds. And I doubt if it would have mattered much, most people already knew he was womanizer. That was not a secret given his history. But again no campaign funds were used, that is usually where campaign finance violations come in.

I'm not sure that argument can fly here. Campaign finance reform's goal is to prevent alternate sources of money from flying free of their regulations. The whole point is that moneys associated with a campaign must be used lawfully. These moneys were used to affect the campaign unlawfully. We will see how it actually turns out.


Jim

[seer]

I'm not sure that argument can fly here. Campaign finance reform's goal is to prevent alternate sources of money from flying free of their regulations. The whole point is that moneys associated with a campaign must be used lawfully. These moneys were used to affect the campaign unlawfully. We will see how it actually turns out.


Jim

Really Jim? I would like to see what actual law was violated. It was a private payment. Besides Jim are you really suggesting that we already didn't know that he was a womanizer?

[Mountain Man]

...that doesn't change the fact our intelligence community indeed had concluded Russia was playing to help get Trump elected...

That was their preliminary conclusion based more on conjecture than on verifiable evidence. Subsequent investigations, however, have failed to support those initial conclusions. The Senate Intelligence Committee said in no uncertain terms that there is no evidence that the Trump campaign coordinated with Russia to swing the election, or that Russia preferred Trump over Hillary, saying that Russia's only aim was to sow discord; the House Intelligence Committee reached a similar conclusion after conducting a thorough investigation. Furthermore, Dirty Cop Mueller has yet to indict a single person for criminal conspiracy or even attempted conspiracy, instead having to settle for mere process crimes and other crimes that have nothing to do with Trump or the election.

So...

[Mountain Man]

Really Jim? I would like to see what actual law was violated. It was a private payment. Besides Jim are you really suggesting that we already didn't know that he was a womanizer?

Bingo. I have yet to see which law was actually broken. Even in the case of John Edwards where there is a straight line from Edwards' friends through his campaign and to his mistress, the prosecution had to admit that even the FEC said no laws had been broken; in Trump's case, his campaign was entirely out of the loop, so the case against him is even weaker to the point of being nonexistent.

[oxmixmudd]

Really Jim? I would like to see what actual law was violated. It was a private payment. Besides Jim are you really suggesting that we already didn't know that he was a womanizer?

More knowledgable people than you or i believe trump may well face the prospect of jail time over thiui s. Timb e will tell.


Jim

[oxmixmudd]

That was their preliminary conclusion based more on conjecture than on verifiable evidence. Subsequent investigations, however, have failed to support those initial conclusions. The Senate Intelligence Committee said in no uncertain terms that there is no evidence that the Trump campaign coordinated with Russia to swing the election, or that Russia preferred Trump over Hillary, saying that Russia's only aim was to sow discord; the House Intelligence Committee reached a similar conclusion after conducting a thorough investigation. Furthermore, Dirty Cop Mueller has yet to indict a single person for criminal conspiracy or even attempted conspiracy, instead having to settle for mere process crimes and other crimes that have nothing to do with Trump or the election.

So...

You just continue to ignore the meat of my posts and grab some snippit you think you can produce a plausible reply to, don't you.

That says it all in terms of how weak your arguments are!



Jim

[Mountain Man]

More knowledgable people than you or i believe trump may well face the prospect of jail time over thiui s. Timb e will tell.

Then there are the knowledgeable people who have relevant expertise* and who therefore can speak with greater authority who have said that no laws were broken.



* Specifically "Many election law experts, including former commissioners on the Federal Election Commission (FEC)..."

[seer]

More knowledgable people than you or i believe trump may well face the prospect of jail time over thiui s. Timb e will tell.


Jim

Really Jim, and some very knowledgeable people, including Alan Dershowitz, say there was no law broken. But of course, on the face of it, there was no campaign finance law broken. And no one on your side has explicitly referenced the law or statue in question. If they have I would like to see it.

[oxmixmudd]

Really Jim, and some very knowledgeable people, including Alan Dershowitz, say there was no law broken. But of course, on the face of it, there was no campaign finance law broken. And no one on your side has explicitly referenced the law or statue in question. If they have I would like to see it.

Really seer. There is NO objective voice out there on this. It will be what it will be, and most of it will be politics with maybe a smidgen of what is legal mixed in. No-one from your side of the fence could care less what is actually good or legal in this. Just look at all the GOP voices claiming 'it doesn't matter - Trump is doing good things for us' now that Mueller has put out information that implies actual crimes were likely to have been committed. The Republicans and the "Moral Mojority" are in fact now officially divorced. Morality and GOP are now like oil and water - they just don't mix.

Jim

[seer]

Really seer. There is NO objective voice out there on this. It will be what it will be, and most of it will be politics with maybe a smidgen of what is legal mixed in. No-one from your side of the fence could care less what is actually good or legal in this. Just look at all the GOP voices claiming 'it doesn't matter - Trump is doing good things for us' now that Mueller has put out information that implies actual crimes were likely to have been committed. The Republicans and the "Moral Mojority" are in fact now officially divorced. Morality and GOP are now like oil and water - they just don't mix.

Jim

Oh stop Jim, you are just virtue signaling again through your hatred of Trump, but it doesn't work. It is the Democrats who are making a mountain out of a molehill on this issue and they are the most wicked party possible. As far as I'm concerned when one throws their lot in with them they have made a pack with the Devil...