Evidence of Trump Campaign/Russian Interference and Collusion Mounting

[oreo]

I said the FBI took its comcerns to the Obama administration. Yes, that can include evidence. And clearly they had evidence, because they secured warrants.

Concerns may secure warrants - PROBABLE cause, the belief that there MIGHT be something illegal going on. As I pointed out, though, the wire-taps were STOPPED because a LACK of evidence.

Snowflakes / Seditious Dems are STILL left with NO EVIDENCE of a crime and NO EVIDENCE of any Trump engaging in that NON-EXISTENT crime.

Fail.

Bla--bla--bla. Since you've been on this board you're nothing more than a denier of any article any video--including FOX News that is reporting on this investigation.

Mueller is NOT going to convene two GRAND JURY'S, load up on criminal prosecutors, money laundering experts, and the criminal division of the IRS over a "nothing burger." They would have never done a NO KNOCK SEARCH of Manafort's house, if they didn't already know something. And they have the emails.
With a Picked Lock and a Threatened Indictment, Mueller’s Inquiry Sets a Tone
Manafort offered to give Russian billionaire ‘private briefings’ on 2016 campaign

Today Rod Roseinstein deputy district attorney is testifying on how he knew Trump was going to fire Comey long before his report came out--and that it had nothing to do with his report.




You're nothing but a "lil" Baghdad Bob--"it's not happening"-

Get your crayons & coloring books out, tune into your NO INFORMATION -- right wing diversion talk show hosts, you're in for one hell of a ride.

For those of you that are interested in this Russian investigation, scroll back to page 14, post # 132 on this thread. No one is on this board to babysit you.

 

[jc456]

Bwuhahahaha...

Any day now snowflakes will finally present evidence of collusion...

...as opposed to Obama and Comey colluding with foreign agents to acquire a fake report filled with Rusdian-generated propaganda...

...as opposed to Hillary / Democrats colluding with the Ukrainians

Speaking of any day now....how's those Obama....Comey....Hillary indictments coming along?

And that Special Counsel to investigate Hillary.....what's his name?

1st things 1st, Bo....how is that nearly year-long self-incriminating investigation into 'Trump-Russia Collusion' coming?

To date, as opposed to against Hillary/Comey/Obama, snowflakes have NOTHING - no evidence YET - to offer up.

The average counter intelligence investigation takes 3 years, this one is actually moving quite quickly!!!

it is? what you got that makes you make that statement?

 

[jc456]

I said the FBI took its comcerns to the Obama administration. Yes, that can include evidence. And clearly they had evidence, because they secured warrants.

Concerns may secure warrants - PROBABLE cause, the belief that there MIGHT be something illegal going on. As I pointed out, though, the wire-taps were STOPPED because a LACK of evidence.

Snowflakes / Seditious Dems are STILL left with NO EVIDENCE of a crime and NO EVIDENCE of any Trump engaging in that NON-EXISTENT crime.

Fail.

Bla--bla--bla. Since you've been on this board you're nothing more than a denier of any article any video--including FOX News that is reporting on this investigation.

Mueller is NOT going to convene two GRAND JURY'S, load up on criminal prosecutors, money laundering experts, and the criminal division of the IRS over a "nothing burger." They would have never done a NO KNOCK SEARCH of Manafort's house, if they didn't already know something. And they have the emails.
With a Picked Lock and a Threatened Indictment, Mueller’s Inquiry Sets a Tone
Manafort offered to give Russian billionaire ‘private briefings’ on 2016 campaign

Today Rod Roseinstein deputy district attorney is testifying on how he knew Trump was going to fire Comey long before his report came out--and that it had nothing to do with his report.




You're nothing but a "lil" Baghdad Bob--"it's not happening"-

Get your crayons & coloring books out, tune into your NO INFORMATION -- right wing diversion talk show hosts, you're in for one hell of a ride.

For those of you that are interested in this Russian investigation, scroll back to page 14, post # 132 on this thread. No one is on this board to babysit you.

what about that post that makes you think you made a point exactly? hahahahahaha russia.

oh, what is wrong with any of that information exactly. please let us know.

 

[easyt65]

You're nothing but a "lil" Baghdad Bob

Do you even know who 'Baghdad Bob' was? He was a guy who constantly made false accusations / claims without having any evidence to back up what he said. He could be the poster child for today's hate-filled Trump-hating snowflakes.

 

[Camp]

The denial crowd posting on this thread still think a campaign chairman trying to arrange to give private briefings to the Russians is not evidence of conspiracy and collusion. Nor is lying about private meetings. None of those things are evidence that can be used in a conspiracy and collusion case according to the USMB trump cult.

 

[Camp]

You're nothing but a "lil" Baghdad Bob

Do you even know who 'Baghdad Bob' was? He was a guy who constantly made false accusations / claims without having any evidence to back up what he said. He could be the poster child for today's hate-filled Trump-hating snowflakes.

OREO was spot on correct. He projected denial of reality and so do you.

 

[Pumpkin Row]

With news that Trump campaign manager is going to be indicted, revelations of secret meetings between trump officials and Russians, meetings the trump team members consistently lied about, it looks apparent that the evidence of interference and collusion is mounting to form an airtight case being prepared by Special Prosecutor Mueller.

vox.com/2017/9/18/16330978/paul-manafort-wiretap-indictment

Never heard of an airtight case that has no evidence whatsoever, but the whole Russia thing has basically been blind faith the entire time, so the leftists believing it never needed evidence.

 

[Soggy in NOLA]

Trump will drop the hammer on Mewloler as soon as his first indictment has nothing to do with Russian collusion/hacking. He'll have Sessions charge him with prosecutorial misconduct

Who said it had anything to do with colusion

Russians hacked our election
Trump benefitted from the hack

How does one hack an election? That's absurd.

 

[Camp]

With news that Trump campaign manager is going to be indicted, revelations of secret meetings between trump officials and Russians, meetings the trump team members consistently lied about, it looks apparent that the evidence of interference and collusion is mounting to form an airtight case being prepared by Special Prosecutor Mueller.

vox.com/2017/9/18/16330978/paul-manafort-wiretap-indictment

Never heard of an airtight case that has no evidence whatsoever, but the whole Russia thing has basically been blind faith the entire time, so the leftists believing it never needed evidence.

Old partisan misinformed edited propaganda videos are not going to silence or take the place of genuine tangible, provable evidence in a judicial setting. Videos like that are not evidence and can't/won't be shown in grand jury hearings and courtrooms during trials. Their purpose is to influence the gullible into believing a partisan viewpoint.

 

[Pumpkin Row]

With news that Trump campaign manager is going to be indicted, revelations of secret meetings between trump officials and Russians, meetings the trump team members consistently lied about, it looks apparent that the evidence of interference and collusion is mounting to form an airtight case being prepared by Special Prosecutor Mueller.

vox.com/2017/9/18/16330978/paul-manafort-wiretap-indictment

Never heard of an airtight case that has no evidence whatsoever, but the whole Russia thing has basically been blind faith the entire time, so the leftists believing it never needed evidence.

Old partisan misinformed edited propaganda videos are not going to silence or take the place of genuine tangible, provable evidence in a judicial setting. Videos like that are not evidence and can't/won't be shown in grand jury hearings and courtrooms during trials. Their purpose is to influence the gullible into believing a partisan viewpoint.

So, you're admitting that what you think is evidence supporting the Russia myth right now wouldn't hold up in a court setting. That's a good start.

No, but really, there's zero evidence of tampering with those videos, and you can't cite a single inconsistency with them. You're just upset that the people carrying the myth admitted it was just that, a myth. No amount of video tampering would have made those a final product, there would be skips in the video where words needed to be edited out, and in order for something to be taken out of context, he'd have had to omit the beginning of each video. As much as you'd like it to stop being so, in order to fit your false narrative, video evidence is still the strongest form of evidence, and that's what we have right here.

 

[Camp]

With news that Trump campaign manager is going to be indicted, revelations of secret meetings between trump officials and Russians, meetings the trump team members consistently lied about, it looks apparent that the evidence of interference and collusion is mounting to form an airtight case being prepared by Special Prosecutor Mueller.

vox.com/2017/9/18/16330978/paul-manafort-wiretap-indictment

Never heard of an airtight case that has no evidence whatsoever, but the whole Russia thing has basically been blind faith the entire time, so the leftists believing it never needed evidence.

Old partisan misinformed edited propaganda videos are not going to silence or take the place of genuine tangible, provable evidence in a judicial setting. Videos like that are not evidence and can't/won't be shown in grand jury hearings and courtrooms during trials. Their purpose is to influence the gullible into believing a partisan viewpoint.

So, you're admitting that what you think is evidence supporting the Russia myth right now wouldn't hold up in a court setting. That's a good start.

No, but really, there's zero evidence of tampering with those videos, and you can't cite a single inconsistency with them. You're just upset that the people carrying the myth admitted it was just that, a myth. No amount of video tampering would have made those a final product, there would be skips in the video where words needed to be edited out, and in order for something to be taken out of context, he'd have had to omit the beginning of each video. As much as you'd like it to stop being so, in order to fit your false narrative, video evidence is still the strongest form of evidence, and that's what we have right here.

You are distorting my comments and talking pure trash and misinformation to defend your propaganda videos.

Evidence to prove wrongdoing in the Trump Campaign/Russian investigation is mounting and building. Much effort is now being focused on New York state charges that are out of the reach of trump pardons.

 

[jc456]

The denial crowd posting on this thread still think a campaign chairman trying to arrange to give private briefings to the Russians is not evidence of conspiracy and collusion. Nor is lying about private meetings. None of those things are evidence that can be used in a conspiracy and collusion case according to the USMB trump cult.

it's not evidence of a crime. come on man.

 

[Soggy in NOLA]

Any day now.. any day now...

 

[jc456]

With news that Trump campaign manager is going to be indicted, revelations of secret meetings between trump officials and Russians, meetings the trump team members consistently lied about, it looks apparent that the evidence of interference and collusion is mounting to form an airtight case being prepared by Special Prosecutor Mueller.

vox.com/2017/9/18/16330978/paul-manafort-wiretap-indictment

Never heard of an airtight case that has no evidence whatsoever, but the whole Russia thing has basically been blind faith the entire time, so the leftists believing it never needed evidence.

Old partisan misinformed edited propaganda videos are not going to silence or take the place of genuine tangible, provable evidence in a judicial setting. Videos like that are not evidence and can't/won't be shown in grand jury hearings and courtrooms during trials. Their purpose is to influence the gullible into believing a partisan viewpoint.

So, you're admitting that what you think is evidence supporting the Russia myth right now wouldn't hold up in a court setting. That's a good start.

No, but really, there's zero evidence of tampering with those videos, and you can't cite a single inconsistency with them. You're just upset that the people carrying the myth admitted it was just that, a myth. No amount of video tampering would have made those a final product, there would be skips in the video where words needed to be edited out, and in order for something to be taken out of context, he'd have had to omit the beginning of each video. As much as you'd like it to stop being so, in order to fit your false narrative, video evidence is still the strongest form of evidence, and that's what we have right here.

You are distorting my comments and talking pure trash and misinformation to defend your propaganda videos.

Evidence to prove wrongdoing in the Trump Campaign/Russian investigation is mounting and building. Much effort is now being focused on New York state charges that are out of the reach of trump pardons.

no it isn't, you got jack shit. mold growing perhaps, but that's all.

 

[Crixus]

With news that Trump campaign manager is going to be indicted, revelations of secret meetings between trump officials and Russians, meetings the trump team members consistently lied about, it looks apparent that the evidence of interference and collusion is mounting to form an airtight case being prepared by Special Prosecutor Mueller.

vox.com/2017/9/18/16330978/paul-manafort-wiretap-indictment

You huff to much scotch guard this afternoon?

 

[Pumpkin Row]

With news that Trump campaign manager is going to be indicted, revelations of secret meetings between trump officials and Russians, meetings the trump team members consistently lied about, it looks apparent that the evidence of interference and collusion is mounting to form an airtight case being prepared by Special Prosecutor Mueller.

vox.com/2017/9/18/16330978/paul-manafort-wiretap-indictment

Never heard of an airtight case that has no evidence whatsoever, but the whole Russia thing has basically been blind faith the entire time, so the leftists believing it never needed evidence.

Old partisan misinformed edited propaganda videos are not going to silence or take the place of genuine tangible, provable evidence in a judicial setting. Videos like that are not evidence and can't/won't be shown in grand jury hearings and courtrooms during trials. Their purpose is to influence the gullible into believing a partisan viewpoint.

So, you're admitting that what you think is evidence supporting the Russia myth right now wouldn't hold up in a court setting. That's a good start.

No, but really, there's zero evidence of tampering with those videos, and you can't cite a single inconsistency with them. You're just upset that the people carrying the myth admitted it was just that, a myth. No amount of video tampering would have made those a final product, there would be skips in the video where words needed to be edited out, and in order for something to be taken out of context, he'd have had to omit the beginning of each video. As much as you'd like it to stop being so, in order to fit your false narrative, video evidence is still the strongest form of evidence, and that's what we have right here.

You are distorting my comments and talking pure trash and misinformation to defend your propaganda videos.

Evidence to prove wrongdoing in the Trump Campaign/Russian investigation is mounting and building. Much effort is now being focused on New York state charges that are out of the reach of trump pardons.

The reason I followed the first line up with "No, but really" was to show that was a joke. Though, the joke was to show you the irony of your post. Naturally, it went right over your head.

If there was evidence, any single one of you would be able to SHOW US. Something you've failed to do since the start of the 'investigation' months ago. As the people in the videos above stated, the whole thing is for ratings.

 

[Spare_change]

Mueller now requesting documents and information on Trump's actions. Testing the waters. Will the WH freak out or play ball?

Neither. Its a fabricated witchhunt to distract from illegal wiretapping of Trump associates.

So, the defense will change from "there is no evidence" to "it's unfair how they got that evidence".

Boy, that sounds like the liberal "PP selling body parts videos" defense ..... "we don't deny the charge, we only detest the way the evidence was collected."

 

[Spare_change]

Trump will drop the hammer on Mewloler as soon as his first indictment has nothing to do with Russian collusion/hacking. He'll have Sessions charge him with prosecutorial misconduct

Who said it had anything to do with colusion

Russians hacked our election
Trump benefitted from the hack

No --- they did NOT hack our election.

Quit perpetuating a myth.

Yes they did

They provided Trump with emails, fake news and attempted to corrupt electronic voting

None of that is true .... but you just keep saying it.

Maybe, if you say it often enough and loud enough, somebody will believe it. Then, there'll be two idiots out there.

The Russians did NOT hack our election. No matter how many times you say it, it just isn't true.

Actually, you've proven my point ---- you've already backed off to "attempted" ... keep going. In a month or two, you'll get to the truth.

I agree...there was no "hack". But, they did work against Hillary.

Thank you. Honesty, at last ....

 

[jc456]

With news that Trump campaign manager is going to be indicted, revelations of secret meetings between trump officials and Russians, meetings the trump team members consistently lied about, it looks apparent that the evidence of interference and collusion is mounting to form an airtight case being prepared by Special Prosecutor Mueller.

vox.com/2017/9/18/16330978/paul-manafort-wiretap-indictment

You huff to much scotch guard this afternoon?

 

[Camp]

Trump's base will refuse to acknowledge evidence, no matter what. Like he said, he could shoot someone in Times Square and it would not make a difference to his base. His base will not be on the grand jury or the trial juries of his associates. Rational people will probably be on those juries. Rational people will recognize evidence when they see it.