Surprisingly, I agree with trump's spokesman.

[berg80]

russian collusion!!

What about it?

Putting an end to an ubiquitous meme from Trump loyalists

It has been asserted hundreds of times by occupants of Trumpworld........the collusion hoax. It comes up in all manner of contexts. Most recently as a way to dismiss the 1/6 committee's work. Let's see what the facts say. Manafort conspired with Kilimnik to give the Kremlin internal polling...

www.usmessageboard.com

 

[berg80]

at this point what difference does it matter ?

We had a disagreement about a factual matter and I proved you wrong. Other than that I'm not sure about the point you are trying to make by injecting an out of context quote from Hillary.

 

[berg80]

Fumblespeech from the "Educated Party"

"Make us citizens aware of." This is not only the Low-IQ grammar typical of college graduates, it is also a pathetic attempt to "sound educated." This is most commonly expressed by these fraudulent job-thieves when they use "and I" when it is not the subject of the sentence, because they've been told that using "and I" instead of "and me" in all cases makes people believe is a sign of higher education.

If you have nothing of substance to add to the conversation why don't you take a nap.

 

[berg80]

Again, you’re taking the word of another corrupted leftist. Talk about predictable….

Why do you find it necessary to accuse Repubs in good standing of being corrupted just because they chose to expose trump's lack of fitness for the office of POTUS?

That is why many Trump appointees have vowed to do what we can to preserve our democratic institutions while thwarting Mr. Trump’s more misguided impulses until he is out of office.

The root of the problem is the president’s amorality. Anyone who works with him knows he is not moored to any discernible first principles that guide his decision making.

 

[jknowgood]

What facts are those?

But Trump sang a different tune in July 2016, when during a news conference the presidential hopeful directly appealed to Russia to hack Clinton’s emails. “Russia, if you’re listening, I hope you’re able to find the 30,000 emails that are missing,” he said, referring to emails she’d deleted from a private account she had used when she was secretary of State. “I think you will probably be rewarded mightily by our press.”
That same day, Russians made their first attempt to break into the servers used by Clinton’s personal office. From there, the hacked emails were released by WikiLeaks in dribs and drabs. And by October, Trump was complaining that the leaks were not getting enough coverage from reporters. “Very little pick-up by the dishonest media of incredible information provided by WikiLeaks,” he posted on Twitter.

Lol, he was joking, what are you a 5 year old?

 

[berg80]

Lol, he was joking, what are you a 5 year old?

I realize you need to believe that because the alternative is so abhorrent. It's why you folks just shrug at so many things he has said over the years. If you accepted the fact he means the things he says it would make it even more difficult to support him. And for some reason, beyond understanding, you are compelled to support him.

 

[pknopp]

We had a disagreement about a factual matter and I proved you wrong.

LOL, if you say so. The government charged some people (who they knew they would never actually have to prosecute) for posting some meme's.

No one was influenced by that and again, Wiki said they did not get the info from the Russians. I believe Wiki far more than the government.

Other than that I'm not sure about the point you are trying to make by injecting an out of context quote from Hillary.

Glad you caught that. It was a big reason among many that people didn't support her.

 

[berg80]

LOL, if you say so. The government charged some people (who they knew they would never actually have to prosecute) for posting some meme's.

No one was influenced by that and again, Wiki said they did not get the info from the Russians. I believe Wiki far more than the government.




Glad you caught that. It was a big reason among many that people didn't support her.

Although the broad outlines of the hacking and influence campaign have been widely reported, the indictment describes for the first time the identities, techniques and tactics of the operation to disrupt American democracy.

It includes details on how the Russians, using an encrypted file with instructions, delivered their trove of hacked emails to WikiLeaks, the online anti-secrecy organization led by Julian Assange that became the main platform for the Russians to display their trove of hacked emails.

https://www.washingtonpost.com/world/national-security/how-the-russians-hacked-the-dnc-and-passed-its-emails-to-wikileaks/2018/07/13/af19a828-86c3-11e8-8553-a3ce89036c78_story.html

There pretty much always comes a time in these discussions when the facts overwhelm the position of folks like you. At that point your only recourse is to claim things like Wikileaks being more credible than our intel agencies. Or something is "fake news." Or a dozen other ways to deny the truth. Even though Russia hacked the material so only Russia could have given it to Wikileaks.

You keep saying voters weren't influenced by what Russia did despite having absolutely no evidence to base that assertion on. It appears because you need to believe, for whatever reason, all the blame must fall on Hillary. She definitely deserves blame for her poor decision making and strategic mistakes. But can it be said with certainty that Russian interference, or the Comey letter, or all the disinformation about her server played no role? Nope.

 

[Billiejeens]

Even if that is true, which you have no way of knowing, it does not excuse trump's conduct once it was understood Russia was supporting his campaign.

Russia never supported his campaign, you ignorant fuck

 

[berg80]

Here is an example of what should have happened when Donnie J was approached about obtaining dirt on Hillary from the Russian government.

Stevens pointed to an incident during the 2000 campaign, when he was part of George W. Bush’s media team, as the appropriate response by a campaign. The Bush campaign had a tightly held briefing book to prep Bush for his debates with then-Vice President Al Gore, the Democratic nominee. There were only seven or eight debate books, each with a specific typo on the opening page so a leak could be traced, he said. Someone associated with the campaign anonymously shipped a copy of the 120-page book, along with a 60-minute videotape of mock debate sessions, to Tom Downey, then a congressman from Long Island who was assisting Gore with the debates and playing the role of Bush in mock debates.

Downey said he quickly realized what the materials were and contacted a lawyer, who called the FBI so it could take possession of the materials. Downey then recused himself from any further debate prep – a move that Stevens and Downey said probably hurt the Gore campaign because Downey, as one of Gore’s closest friends, was so central to the preparation. A woman who worked for media consultant Mark McKinnon, a colleague of Stevens, was eventually charged and sentenced to a year in jail.

https://www.washingtonpost.com/politics/2018/08/21/rudy-giulianis-pinocchio-laden-interview-nbcs-meet-press/

The reason Mueller declined to charge Donnie J with breaking the law he broke was the latter's ignorance of it.

 

[pknopp]

Although the broad outlines of the hacking and influence campaign have been widely reported, the indictment describes for the first time the identities, techniques and tactics of the operation to disrupt American democracy.

It includes details on how the Russians, using an encrypted file with instructions, delivered their trove of hacked emails to WikiLeaks, the online anti-secrecy organization led by Julian Assange that became the main platform for the Russians to display their trove of hacked emails.

https://www.washingtonpost.com/world/national-security/how-the-russians-hacked-the-dnc-and-passed-its-emails-to-wikileaks/2018/07/13/af19a828-86c3-11e8-8553-a3ce89036c78_story.html

There pretty much always comes a time in these discussions when the facts overwhelm the position of folks like you. At that point your only recourse is to claim things like Wikileaks being more credible than our intel agencies. Or something is "fake news." Or a dozen other ways to deny the truth. Even though Russia hacked the material so only Russia could have given it to Wikileaks.

You keep saying voters weren't influenced by what Russia did despite having absolutely no evidence to base that assertion on. It appears because you need to believe, for whatever reason, all the blame must fall on Hillary. She definitely deserves blame for her poor decision making and strategic mistakes. But can it be said with certainty that Russian interference, or the Comey letter, or all the disinformation about her server played no role? Nope.

I believe Assange far more than I believe the government.