DJT JR Was Set Up by the DNC. Russian Lawyer worked for Fusion GPS, Group behind phony Dossier

originally posted by: Sillyolme
Don't defile Bush by putting him in the same category as trump.
I was never afraid of what Bush would do and now consider him a lovable old fool.

Uh-huh ... you love you some Bush now? That's rich.

originally posted by: Sillyolme
a reply to: ketsuko

It's not a stunt honey it's a legal action taken against trump.

Impeachment is not a legal action. It is a political one.

It will go nowhere... Maybe Democrats should stop blocking testimony in the russia bs.

a reply to: Xcathdra

Stone was supposed to testify today wasn't he?
Why was he delayed?

originally posted by: shooterbrody
a reply to: Xcathdra

Stone was supposed to testify today wasn't he?
Why was he delayed?

Democrats supposedly "need more time"... Democrats have delayed the bulk of witnesses from trumps team. Apparently Democrats know their russia story is bs and the moment testimony starts, it will be confirmed. Democrats cant allow that to happen.

In pother words Democrats are trying to drag this russia bs out into the midterms next year.

originally posted by: ketsuko
Walked in to a meeting that if the same were presented to any person on Hillary's campaign, you better believe they would have been there. In fact, they did hire one foreign national - Steele - to do opposition research for them, and he used Russian intel sources to compile the dossier, and they outright cooperated with another foreign government - Ukraine - to work against the Trump campaign.

So what??
I'm not talking about Hillary and I'm not excusing anything the wimpy Democrats may have attempted. That has nothing to do with this conversation which is the now sitting Presiden't campaign having been compromised by the Russian Federation.

Why is it in one breath you claim the Democrats wont let go of the fact that Hillary lost the election and in another you want to keep bringing her back into any discussion about President Trump? Which is it, is she no longer relevant because she lost and the Democrats should get over it, or is she still relevant and they have been (somewhat) right to keep obsessing over the fact that she won the popular vote?

If simply going to that meeting was treason, then so was what Hillary and her campaign indulged in and all of them better be lined up and shot at dawn.

Who said treason? Not me....in fact I don't even believe a crime was committed...I DO however believe a political ethics line was crossed and as a result the Russian government is now winning the adversarial battle against the US because people keep dismissing these egregious infractions of political standards and thusly is indelibly etched within the people to ensure that US citizens keep friggin fighting each other!

a reply to: alphabetaone

Except nothing was compromised... except for the Democrats lie about Trump and Russia.

originally posted by: Xcathdra
a reply to: alphabetaone

Except nothing was compromised... except for the Democrats lie about Trump and Russia.

Except, you cant make a claim that nothing was compromised about a topic where that compromise may well be impossible to measure.

a reply to: Xcathdra

Well that and Stone has been vocal about the fisa warrant opened up on him....

originally posted by: alphabetaone

originally posted by: Xcathdra
a reply to: alphabetaone

Except nothing was compromised... except for the Democrats lie about Trump and Russia.

Except, you cant make a claim that nothing was compromised about a topic where that compromise may well be impossible to measure.

and if there were evidence democrats would have leaked it already. There was no compromise... Those claiming there is one are the ones who have to support it with evidence and facts. Simply trying to argue that someone must prove a negative doesnt work.

So to sum it up;

Clinton's crimes are valuable.

It's illegal for Trump to try expose those crimes.

originally posted by: shooterbrody
a reply to: Xcathdra

Well that and Stone has been vocal about the fisa warrant opened up on him....

Right now another question is how Manaforts phone was wiretapped by Lynch. At the time this supposedly occurred the DOJ FISA warrant was denied.

a reply to: Xcathdra

this will bring all that bs back to the forefront

originally posted by: shooterbrody
a reply to: Xcathdra

this will bring all that bs back to the forefront

As it should... People should acquaint themselves with the legal concept of "fruit of the poisonous tree". Evidence derived from unlawfully obtained evidence is inadmissible in court.

originally posted by: XcathdraSimply trying to argue that someone must prove a negative doesnt work.

You keep regurgitating that same nonsense. No one is attempting to "prove a negative". Unless you have no concept of something being immeasurable versus non-existent. What my supposition is, is no different than saying that you cant measure the universe. The universe still exists and is not a negative.....what you're suggesting is proving that (if you believe this sort of thing) God doesn't exist and that's not what I said.

THIS has been proven, the scope of THIS is what's in question. We cant measure the extent to which the Russian attempt at influencing voters mind actually had a substantial affect.

a reply to: alphabetaone

I have to because others keep regurgitating the same bs.

If there was actual evidence of criminal wrong doing democrats would have leaked it by now and they would be screaming for impeachment. The fact they havent, coupled with democrats stating there is no evidence of collusion, should tell you something.

Nothing has been proven except for the Democrats inability to do their jobs or tell the truth.

originally posted by: Xcathdra
Nothing has been proven except for the Democrats inability to do their jobs or tell the truth.

Yes it has. Multiple times, that the Intelligence Community has said, without hesitation, that Russia attempted to influence this previous election cycle (among oother election cycles).

You seem to be wanting to tout "FAKE NEWS" as your source to imply that nothing has been proven and simply take a non-politician's opinion, and I say opinion because President Trump has a track record of using nothing substantive by which to make his claims (and that is proven too).

If there was actual evidence of criminal wrong doing democrats would have leaked it by now and they would be screaming for impeachment. The fact they havent, coupled with democrats stating there is no evidence of collusion, should tell you something.

I'm gonna call BS on this one as you've said just a few posts up Impeachment is not a legal action. It is a political one. So unless you don't believe in what you've said, I'm going to say that criminal wrongdoing has nothing to do with this issue which is likely why youre hearing nothing from the democrats about something that hasn't occurred.

originally posted by: Sillyolme
a reply to: hopenotfeariswhatweneed

I said several laws have been sited. They are in this thread. Don't be lazy.
Or do you just want to confront me and really don't care?

I just don't believe you, you made the statement, if you can't back it up u will assume my initial reaction was indeed on the money.

originally posted by: alphabetaone
Yes it has. Multiple times, that the Intelligence Community has said, without hesitation, that Russia attempted to influence this previous election cycle (among oother election cycles).

You seem to be wanting to tout "FAKE NEWS" as your source to imply that nothing has been proven and simply take a non-politician's opinion, and I say opinion because President Trump has a track record of using nothing substantive by which to make his claims (and that is proven too).

Thats nice.. wanna try answering again on topic this time? I was responding to your false claim that Trump was compromised.
We went from 17 intelligence agencies claiming Russia hacked the DNC down to 3 and the office of the DNI with "moderate confidence" on the conclusion about Russia. Since the DNC is still refusing to allow a forensic analysis of the server in question it negates the c;aims being pushed by democrats / left wing media.

As for "hacking" into the electoral system it was the databases that keep voter info and not actual machines themselves. Also a lot of the hacks reported came from DHS ip addresses.

originally posted by: alphabetaone
I'm gonna call BS on this one as you've said just a few posts up Impeachment is not a legal action. It is a political one. So unless you don't believe in what you've said, I'm going to say that criminal wrongdoing has nothing to do with this issue which is likely why youre hearing nothing from the democrats about something that hasn't occurred.

Yes and if you are familiar with the Constitution and the law a President has to be impeached and removed from office before they can be criminally prosecuted. Since Congress has no authority to prosecute anyone impeachment is still a political action and not criminal.

But why worry about facts...

a reply to: Xcathdra

yeah
they have to explain that....also dont they put the fisa overviews in the potus daily?

originally posted by: shooterbrody
a reply to: Xcathdra

yeah
they have to explain that....also dont they put the fisa overviews in the potus daily?

I am not sure...