QuoteThey were paid by the Clibton campaignWho started the initial funding of Fushion GPS?The Washington Free Beacon. They funded it from 2015 up until May 2016. Who is the WFB? A conservative website with a hedge fund billionaire Paul Singer. Paul Singer is a republican. So when you suggest that Fushion GPS was a tool used by the Democrats you're leaving out a major part of the story. Why would you do that? For obvious reasons. "Fushion GPS was funded by the KILLARY!" Well, who started the funding for the opposition research??? Hmmmmmmmm
They were paid by the Clibton campaign
QuoteThat doesn't change the fact that Clinton campaign funding was used to cojure up this reportHow can Clinton campaign funding conjure up a report that was already under way via the funding of Republicans? Seriously though. The report was already in existence before the HRC campaign found out about it. Once Trump secured the Republican nomination the Republicans stopped their funding of the Dossier and thats when the Clinton Campaign stepped in. The source of the funding does not matter in this instance. But nice try.Secondly, the Dossier was not, I repeat was NOT, the source the FBI used to get their warrant for surveillance of Trump and his surrogates. The FBI was already underway in its investigation of Carter Page and his connections to Russian Spies. One of those Russian spies being convicted and serving time. Once Trump brought in Carter Page he sealed his fate, man. The Dossier only corroborated what the FBI had already found out through their intelligence gathering via a FISA warrant on Carter Page. Classic Republican misdirection tactics...spreading false narratives about the Christopher Steele Dossier. Its like watching Sean Hannity when I read your posts (because i do watch him). You can fact check me on whether or not the dossier was the PRIMARY source for the FISA warrant on initial surveillance of Carter Page. I'll wait
That doesn't change the fact that Clinton campaign funding was used to cojure up this report
Moscow helped in the election of Trump through Wikileak dumps of stolen material from the DNC and social media bots. If the Trump campaign helped (which i'm pretty damn sure they did) in this effort then we have an American campaign being helped by a foreign advisory hell bent on seeing the destruction of Democracy.
AND! If the Trump campaign knowingly worked with Russians in this effort for, say, a change in policy on how it treats the Ukrainian Government (which they changed the Republican parties stance on this issue at the RNC for no reason and have yet to acknowledge who's decision it was to change their position), or an easing of sanctions (which literally JUST HAPPENED last week) then the obvious conclusion is the Trump White House is influenced by a foreign advisory.
The Trump White House is doing favors for a President (Putin) who locks up political opponents. Are you really this blind by party loyalty that you don't see that?
P.S. real big bombshell with the Nunes memo. Page 6, Line 3. The Papadoupolus information triggered the opening of the FBI counterintelligence investigation in late July, 2016. I thought the Dossier did that? Oh yeah thats right Nunes and the Trump WH are full of shi!
Never thought I'd see a republican president publicly attack and accuse two republicans, (Rosenstein/Wray) that he personally chose for those positions mind you, for aiding in a Democrat conspiracy to take down the WH. You do see the craziness of all of this, right?
It all boils down to this.Mr. D,Will you accept the findings of Robert Mueller as truthful?
Quote from: parkerynp on February 05, 2018, 04:05:53 pmIt all boils down to this.Mr. D,Will you accept the findings of Robert Mueller as truthful?Will you?Because so far the final measure has been this- "No evidence of collusion".Now if Mueller goes for obstruction of justice, I think it depends. He could leave it somewhat open-ended, i.e. "Enough to move forward, but ultimately a jury/Congress will determine" or something along the lines of Comey's "Extremely reckless" (which we know how the wording was changed by partisans in the FBI, any comment?), regardless there are many possible outcomes. And there's also the question of to what degree Trump may or may not have obstructed justice. If for example that he obstructed through action but not intent (or some other situation where there's a combination of factors, some of them mitigating), then that would certainly be grounds for censure, but might fall short of impeachment.
"So far the final"--now there's a nice illogical phrase.
Quote from: gogators! on February 05, 2018, 07:01:51 pm"So far the final"--now there's a nice illogical phrase. Touche'!Anyways, as of now, NO EVIDENCE OF COLLUSION. You can try and claim otherwise, but that's where it stands now.
NO EVIDENCE OF COLLUSION
So you are aware of the evidence that Meuller has or are you just parroting Trump and his flunkey's talking points?
I think Mueller is going for “Obstruction of Justice”.Probably, a case for money laundering if he needs some leverage on guilty pleas.
Trump can still obstruct justice in the Russia probe even if there is zero evidence regarding collusion. As i mentioned before...Flynn and Papadopolous plead guilty (Flynn especially) to very insignificant charges considering what they were up against so one has to question the information they turned over.
If you have free time today I suggest listening to this podcast on who Robert Mueller is.