Now It's "Conspiracy To Collude"

[forkup]

Since there is no law against "collusion", with a little digging the Rats have decided to give"conspiracy to collude" a go. Again, they can't snare the President so his son will have to do. The gist of this nothing-burger is that because Junior "thought" he might get some dirt on the Clintons from a Russian, (any Russian will do), that's a conspiracy.

Jeffrey Jacobovitz, a white collar lawyer who represented officials in the Clinton White House and now is with Arnall Golden Gregory LLP. And it could mean Trump Jr. crossed the legal line on collusion with Russia.

But you can go to jail for conspiring with a foreign adversary to influence or undermine an election, and Jacobovitz thinks what the New York Times reported Trump Jr. did could rise to that level.

“You may have crossed the line on conspiracy to commit election fraud or conspiracy to obtain information from a foreign adversary,” he said. “You cannot benefit from a foreign adversary in this kind of scenario.”

Who would know better how to "benefit from a foreign adversary" better than a Clintonite?

Analysis | Donald Trump Jr. may have just crossed the legal line on collusion

the terms conspiracy and collusion are being used interchangeably, dum dum.

conspiracy does not require the completion of the criminal act, only the taking of a step or "overt act" in furtherance of the conspiracy.

now, dum dum.... what do you think meeting with a soviet agent is?

this is why no one should pretend to "debate" you freaks

Russian agent?

This really is the problem that I have with the coverage and constant focus on the Trump-Russia connection. Anyone who is Russian is suddenly a Russian agent colluding even if those meetings (as in the case with sessions) are part of their job. A very serious matter has devolved into pathetic whining.

I agree that objectivity does tend to get lost in this story on both sides. On the other hand. How long did Trump hold up his birther claims even after it was objectively proven to be baloney? How long did Republicans hold up the Benghazi story? 7 separate congressional investigations all coming up empty if I'm not mistaking. Did the Hilary e-mail screaming stop after Comey finished his investigation? Objectively speaking none of these stories hold the same seriousness as this one, yet it dragged for years and is still dragging for most Republicans.

 

[Mr.Blonde]

Since there is no law against "collusion", with a little digging the Rats have decided to give"conspiracy to collude" a go. Again, they can't snare the President so his son will have to do. The gist of this nothing-burger is that because Junior "thought" he might get some dirt on the Clintons from a Russian, (any Russian will do), that's a conspiracy.

Jeffrey Jacobovitz, a white collar lawyer who represented officials in the Clinton White House and now is with Arnall Golden Gregory LLP. And it could mean Trump Jr. crossed the legal line on collusion with Russia.

But you can go to jail for conspiring with a foreign adversary to influence or undermine an election, and Jacobovitz thinks what the New York Times reported Trump Jr. did could rise to that level.

“You may have crossed the line on conspiracy to commit election fraud or conspiracy to obtain information from a foreign adversary,” he said. “You cannot benefit from a foreign adversary in this kind of scenario.”

Who would know better how to "benefit from a foreign adversary" better than a Clintonite?

Analysis | Donald Trump Jr. may have just crossed the legal line on collusion

the terms conspiracy and collusion are being used interchangeably, dum dum.

conspiracy does not require the completion of the criminal act, only the taking of a step or "overt act" in furtherance of the conspiracy.

now, dum dum.... what do you think meeting with a soviet agent is?

this is why no one should pretend to "debate" you freaks

How does the Hillary "intent" standard apply here?

How about the Hillary Ukraine standard:

Ukrainian efforts to sabotage Trump backfire

and where was Hillary working with them, idiota?

nice deflect, though, trollyboy

"they helped Clinton’s allies research damaging information on Trump and his advisers, a Politico investigation found.

A Ukrainian-American operative who was consulting for the Democratic National Committee met with top officials in the Ukrainian Embassy in Washington in an effort to expose ties between Trump, top campaign aide Paul Manafort and Russia, according to people with direct knowledge of the situation."

I am sure Hillary didn't know. Like she doesn't know about Tyson foods or any other scandal that circles her.

 

[Tom Horn]

I agree that objectivity does tend to get lost in this story on both sides. On the other hand. How long did Trump hold up his birther claims even after it was objectively proven to be baloney? How long did Republicans hold up the Benghazi story? 7 separate congressional investigations all coming up empty if I'm not mistaking. Did the Hilary e-mail screaming stop after Comey finished his investigation? Objectively speaking none of these stories hold the same seriousness as this one, yet it dragged for years and is still dragging for most Republicans.

Going for the GONG SHOW post of the week are ya? Barry admitted he was born in Kenya, got an exchange student loan to Oxnard as a Kenyan, the long form the WH bandied about was an amateurish forgery, and his good pal Neal Abercrombie said he'd find the real one when he became Gov. of Hawaii but never found it. 4 dead Americans at Benghazi because they were denied suitable protection and abandoned when attacked. Hillary committed at least 110 felonies for unsecured secret information, yet Comey decided there was no "intent"...tell a judge you didn't "intend" to be doing 70mph through a school crossing and see what he says. And you're calling this HOAX more serious? You should sue somebody for turning out so easily fooled.

GONG!

 

[jillian]

Since there is no law against "collusion", with a little digging the Rats have decided to give"conspiracy to collude" a go. Again, they can't snare the President so his son will have to do. The gist of this nothing-burger is that because Junior "thought" he might get some dirt on the Clintons from a Russian, (any Russian will do), that's a conspiracy.

Jeffrey Jacobovitz, a white collar lawyer who represented officials in the Clinton White House and now is with Arnall Golden Gregory LLP. And it could mean Trump Jr. crossed the legal line on collusion with Russia.

But you can go to jail for conspiring with a foreign adversary to influence or undermine an election, and Jacobovitz thinks what the New York Times reported Trump Jr. did could rise to that level.

“You may have crossed the line on conspiracy to commit election fraud or conspiracy to obtain information from a foreign adversary,” he said. “You cannot benefit from a foreign adversary in this kind of scenario.”

Who would know better how to "benefit from a foreign adversary" better than a Clintonite?

Analysis | Donald Trump Jr. may have just crossed the legal line on collusion

the terms conspiracy and collusion are being used interchangeably, dum dum.

conspiracy does not require the completion of the criminal act, only the taking of a step or "overt act" in furtherance of the conspiracy.

now, dum dum.... what do you think meeting with a soviet agent is?

this is why no one should pretend to "debate" you freaks

How does the Hillary "intent" standard apply here?

How about the Hillary Ukraine standard:

Ukrainian efforts to sabotage Trump backfire

and where was Hillary working with them, idiota?

nice deflect, though, trollyboy

"they helped Clinton’s allies research damaging information on Trump and his advisers, a Politico investigation found.

A Ukrainian-American operative who was consulting for the Democratic National Committee met with top officials in the Ukrainian Embassy in Washington in an effort to expose ties between Trump, top campaign aide Paul Manafort and Russia, according to people with direct knowledge of the situation."

I am sure Hillary didn't know. Like she doesn't know about Tyson foods or any other scandal that circles her.

they "helped" with Hillary working with them, dum dum?

 

[postman]

This really is the problem that I have with the coverage and constant focus on the Trump-Russia connection. Anyone who is Russian is suddenly a Russian agent colluding even if those meetings (as in the case with sessions) are part of their job. A very serious matter has devolved into pathetic whining.

Good thing Trump jr. didn't have a security clearance, or it would look really bad for him.

 

[forkup]

I agree that objectivity does tend to get lost in this story on both sides. On the other hand. How long did Trump hold up his birther claims even after it was objectively proven to be baloney? How long did Republicans hold up the Benghazi story? 7 separate congressional investigations all coming up empty if I'm not mistaking. Did the Hilary e-mail screaming stop after Comey finished his investigation? Objectively speaking none of these stories hold the same seriousness as this one, yet it dragged for years and is still dragging for most Republicans.

Going for the GONG SHOW post of the week are ya? Barry admitted he was born in Kenya, got an exchange student loan to Oxnard as a Kenyan, the long form the WH bandied about was an amateurish forgery, and his good pal Neal Abercrombie said he'd find the real one when he became Gov. of Hawaii but never found it. 4 dead Americans at Benghazi because they were denied suitable protection and abandoned when attacked. Hillary committed at least 110 felonies for unsecured secret information, yet Comey decided there was no "intent"...tell a judge you didn't "intend" to be doing 70mph through a school crossing and see what he says. And you're calling his HOAX more serious? You should sue somebody for turning out so easily fooled.

GONG!

Like usual with people like you. If facts don't support you just call it fake or in this case a forgery. Tom I'm an adult. This means I try to approach stuff objectively but since I'm an adult I also realise that I can never be completely objective or right. I question myself and try to honestly listen to people who see the world differently than me. I'm polite and try to respect those who choose to debate me I applaud when someone is capable of proving me wrong. YOU ARE NOT THAT PERSON. You are simply incapable of questioning yourself as this last post proves. Talk to me again when you grow up.

 

[Tom Horn]

Like usual with people like you. If facts don't support you just call it fake or in this case a forgery. Tom I'm an adult. This means I try to approach stuff objectively but since I'm an adult I also realise that I can never be completely objective or right. I question myself and try to honestly listen to people who see the world differently than me. I'm polite and try to respect those who choose to debate me I applaud when someone is capable of proving me wrong. YOU ARE NOT THAT PERSON. You are simply incapable of questioning yourself as this last post proof. Talk to me again when you grow up.

I'm full-grown and if you're an adult you should know when to concede an argument you're getting your tail kicked in. I haven't called you any names or said something about your mother have I? I took each of your examples and tried to show you you're woefully misinformed. But you're here and being to exposed to the truth...all we can ask is that you eventually wake up.

 

[forkup]

Like usual with people like you. If facts don't support you just call it fake or in this case a forgery. Tom I'm an adult. This means I try to approach stuff objectively but since I'm an adult I also realise that I can never be completely objective or right. I question myself and try to honestly listen to people who see the world differently than me. I'm polite and try to respect those who choose to debate me I applaud when someone is capable of proving me wrong. YOU ARE NOT THAT PERSON. You are simply incapable of questioning yourself as this last post proof. Talk to me again when you grow up.

I'm full-grown and if you're an adult you should know when to concede an argument you're getting your tail kicked in. I haven't called you any names or said something about your mother have I? I took each of your examples and tried to show you you're woefully misinformed. But you're here and being to exposed to the truth...all we can ask is that you eventually wake up.

You should sue somebody for turning out so easily fooled.

Here you go

 

[Tom Horn]

Here you go

If you're that easily offended you're on the wrong board.....read some of my posts where I really light into somebody.....if you're a snowflake you're find little mercy around here.

 

[forkup]

Like usual with people like you. If facts don't support you just call it fake or in this case a forgery. Tom I'm an adult. This means I try to approach stuff objectively but since I'm an adult I also realise that I can never be completely objective or right. I question myself and try to honestly listen to people who see the world differently than me. I'm polite and try to respect those who choose to debate me I applaud when someone is capable of proving me wrong. YOU ARE NOT THAT PERSON. You are simply incapable of questioning yourself as this last post proof. Talk to me again when you grow up.

I'm full-grown and if you're an adult you should know when to concede an argument you're getting your tail kicked in. I haven't called you any names or said something about your mother have I? I took each of your examples and tried to show you you're woefully misinformed. But you're here and being to exposed to the truth...all we can ask is that you eventually wake up.

Oh and btw. Saying the birth certificate is fake is an opinion not a fact. Stating the events in Benghazi, doesn't implicate Clinton. In fact the simple fact that congress couldn't pin her even after trying 7 times means they couldn't implicate her. And the felonies nature of Hillary's e-mail scandal again is an unsupported opinion. If you want to show me how I'm misinformed back it up by PROVABLE facts, not opinions.

 

[forkup]

Here you go

If you're that easily offended you're on the wrong board.....read some of my posts where I really light into somebody.....if you're a snowflake you're find little mercy around here.

I'm not offended. I pointed out you did call me names. You called me fool. Don't get me wrong it is a possibility. But I replied to that by making the statement that you are unwilling to question yourself and that makes you immature.

 

[Tom Horn]

Oh and btw. Saying the birth certificate is fake is an opinion not a fact. Stating the events in Benghazi, doesn't implicate Clinton. In fact the simple fact that congress couldn't pin her even after trying 7 times means they couldn't implicate her. And the felonies nature of Hillary's e-mail scandal again is an unsupported opinion. If you want to show me how I'm misinformed back it up by PROVABLE facts, not opinions.

I've given you enough to investigate if you were ambitious enough to stop making a fool of yourself. I have no incentive to continue arguing with a lost-cause....see ya at the barricades, motherfucker.

 

[idb]

“You may have crossed the line on conspiracy to commit election fraud or conspiracy to obtain information from a foreign adversary,” he said. “You cannot benefit from a foreign adversary in this kind of scenario.”

This actually proves their was no collusion. If there was collusion then he wouldn't have gotten fooled.

Russian lawyer who met with Donald Trump Jr linked to investigation group behind salacious Steele Dossier

On the Collusion was with Barak Obama and Hillary Clinton sending their favorite Russian Pets to call or meet with The Trump Team while Obama Bin Spying IIlegally Wire Tapped Everyone.

The newest talking point is that the stupid Kenyan fooled the the brilliant Trumps?

 

[Ted Frazier]

Since there is no law against "collusion", with a little digging the Rats have decided to give"conspiracy to collude" a go. Again, they can't snare the President so his son will have to do. The gist of this nothing-burger is that because Junior "thought" he might get some dirt on the Clintons from a Russian, (any Russian will do), that's a conspiracy.

Jeffrey Jacobovitz, a white collar lawyer who represented officials in the Clinton White House and now is with Arnall Golden Gregory LLP. And it could mean Trump Jr. crossed the legal line on collusion with Russia.

But you can go to jail for conspiring with a foreign adversary to influence or undermine an election, and Jacobovitz thinks what the New York Times reported Trump Jr. did could rise to that level.

“You may have crossed the line on conspiracy to commit election fraud or conspiracy to obtain information from a foreign adversary,” he said. “You cannot benefit from a foreign adversary in this kind of scenario.”

Who would know better how to "benefit from a foreign adversary" better than a Clintonite?

Analysis | Donald Trump Jr. may have just crossed the legal line on collusion

If you conspired, you colluded, dummy.

 

[TheDude]

Since there is no law against "collusion", with a little digging the Rats have decided to give"conspiracy to collude" a go. Again, they can't snare the President so his son will have to do. The gist of this nothing-burger is that because Junior "thought" he might get some dirt on the Clintons from a Russian, (any Russian will do), that's a conspiracy.

Jeffrey Jacobovitz, a white collar lawyer who represented officials in the Clinton White House and now is with Arnall Golden Gregory LLP. And it could mean Trump Jr. crossed the legal line on collusion with Russia.

But you can go to jail for conspiring with a foreign adversary to influence or undermine an election, and Jacobovitz thinks what the New York Times reported Trump Jr. did could rise to that level.

“You may have crossed the line on conspiracy to commit election fraud or conspiracy to obtain information from a foreign adversary,” he said. “You cannot benefit from a foreign adversary in this kind of scenario.”

Who would know better how to "benefit from a foreign adversary" better than a Clintonite?

Analysis | Donald Trump Jr. may have just crossed the legal line on collusion

LOL...........YEP...............Conspiracy to collude involving opponent collusion. You can't make this up. We're a dumbed down public. There's no other explanation. Add over-populated and the greatest level of propaganda in history........... yeah, we're pretty fucked up.

 

[CrusaderFrank]

Watched CNN during Physical Therapy at Equinox. Poor Wolf, he's in worse shape than Starkey. He mentioned something about Trump Jr and a gun pointed at him.

 

[Mr.Blonde]

the terms conspiracy and collusion are being used interchangeably, dum dum.

conspiracy does not require the completion of the criminal act, only the taking of a step or "overt act" in furtherance of the conspiracy.

now, dum dum.... what do you think meeting with a soviet agent is?

this is why no one should pretend to "debate" you freaks

How does the Hillary "intent" standard apply here?

How about the Hillary Ukraine standard:

Ukrainian efforts to sabotage Trump backfire

and where was Hillary working with them, idiota?

nice deflect, though, trollyboy

"they helped Clinton’s allies research damaging information on Trump and his advisers, a Politico investigation found.

A Ukrainian-American operative who was consulting for the Democratic National Committee met with top officials in the Ukrainian Embassy in Washington in an effort to expose ties between Trump, top campaign aide Paul Manafort and Russia, according to people with direct knowledge of the situation."

I am sure Hillary didn't know. Like she doesn't know about Tyson foods or any other scandal that circles her.

they "helped" with Hillary working with them, dum dum?

I forgot the Clintons are innocent:
Thomas Alfred Taylor guilty
Tyson foods guilty
Jim and Susan McDougal guilty
Johnny Chung guilty
Tony Rodham guilty

Guilty people sure love the Clintons. Those poor Clintons

 

[whitehall]

What desperate democrats are hoping for is something like " indictments pending in the cover-up of the conspiracy to collude with the Russians" but if there is no law that covers collusion there is no conspiracy. Forlorn democrats are still under the delusion that somehow the Washington Post can create a "deep throat" informant that will enthrall Americans with unverified anonymous salacious junk just like Woodie and Bernie did to Nixon. The problem is that democrats aren't in charge anymore and they have lost most of the important elections in the last eight years but they are still playing by the old failed political playbook that pretends democrats are in charge.They don't even realize that most Americans in the age of information are as informed and generally smarter than the geeks and dorks who write the fake news in the MSM

 

[FA_Q2]

Since there is no law against "collusion", with a little digging the Rats have decided to give"conspiracy to collude" a go. Again, they can't snare the President so his son will have to do. The gist of this nothing-burger is that because Junior "thought" he might get some dirt on the Clintons from a Russian, (any Russian will do), that's a conspiracy.

Jeffrey Jacobovitz, a white collar lawyer who represented officials in the Clinton White House and now is with Arnall Golden Gregory LLP. And it could mean Trump Jr. crossed the legal line on collusion with Russia.

But you can go to jail for conspiring with a foreign adversary to influence or undermine an election, and Jacobovitz thinks what the New York Times reported Trump Jr. did could rise to that level.

“You may have crossed the line on conspiracy to commit election fraud or conspiracy to obtain information from a foreign adversary,” he said. “You cannot benefit from a foreign adversary in this kind of scenario.”

Who would know better how to "benefit from a foreign adversary" better than a Clintonite?

Analysis | Donald Trump Jr. may have just crossed the legal line on collusion

the terms conspiracy and collusion are being used interchangeably, dum dum.

conspiracy does not require the completion of the criminal act, only the taking of a step or "overt act" in furtherance of the conspiracy.

now, dum dum.... what do you think meeting with a soviet agent is?

this is why no one should pretend to "debate" you freaks

Russian agent?

This really is the problem that I have with the coverage and constant focus on the Trump-Russia connection. Anyone who is Russian is suddenly a Russian agent colluding even if those meetings (as in the case with sessions) are part of their job. A very serious matter has devolved into pathetic whining.

I agree that objectivity does tend to get lost in this story on both sides. On the other hand. How long did Trump hold up his birther claims even after it was objectively proven to be baloney? How long did Republicans hold up the Benghazi story? 7 separate congressional investigations all coming up empty if I'm not mistaking. Did the Hilary e-mail screaming stop after Comey finished his investigation? Objectively speaking none of these stories hold the same seriousness as this one, yet it dragged for years and is still dragging for most Republicans.

And none of those have anything to do with this story or my comment on it. Having any commonality with birthers does not really help in advocating for this asinine trend.

 

[westwall]

Since there is no law against "collusion", with a little digging the Rats have decided to give"conspiracy to collude" a go. Again, they can't snare the President so his son will have to do. The gist of this nothing-burger is that because Junior "thought" he might get some dirt on the Clintons from a Russian, (any Russian will do), that's a conspiracy.

Jeffrey Jacobovitz, a white collar lawyer who represented officials in the Clinton White House and now is with Arnall Golden Gregory LLP. And it could mean Trump Jr. crossed the legal line on collusion with Russia.

But you can go to jail for conspiring with a foreign adversary to influence or undermine an election, and Jacobovitz thinks what the New York Times reported Trump Jr. did could rise to that level.

“You may have crossed the line on conspiracy to commit election fraud or conspiracy to obtain information from a foreign adversary,” he said. “You cannot benefit from a foreign adversary in this kind of scenario.”

Who would know better how to "benefit from a foreign adversary" better than a Clintonite?

Analysis | Donald Trump Jr. may have just crossed the legal line on collusion

It can't be a conspiracy if it ain't illegal. The progs seem to have missed that in Law school.