According to Devin Nunes, who is supposed to be recused from this entire investigation remember, and is obviously full of shit and desperate to protect Trump (and I suspect himself since he was on the transition committee). Yeah let the trump administration investigate itself essentially, that will definitely yield honest results. :rolleyes:
No it wasn’t, and we already have two separate attempts to setup secret back-channels to Russia during the transition. We also have the email to Trump Jr. from his Russian contacts about their support and their effort to help Trump win the election. Mueller, as far as I know, has not announced the end to his investigation, and we already have 13 Russians indicted for meddling in our election, as well as Manafort, Gates, Papadopolous, Nunberg. Several of whom have flipped and are spilling what they know to Mueller. Nunberg just spent 6 hours in front of a grand jury last Friday. I have noticed that the right has tried to claim every step of the way that there is no evidence when you know very well the investigation is ongoing and that we should not expect to know everything yet, although what we already know is pretty damning. The desperation to try to make this go away since the start is noted though. Smells like flop sweat.
Obvious projection is obvious - cough Fox News cough Breitbart etc…
How much time and money has been spent by your party investigating the Clintons? How much criminal behavior have you actually found? Nothing. She’s a private citizen. Stop letting her live rent free in your in your mind.
There is evidence. We just haven’t seen it- Bob Mueller has. It will come out. There was collusion, there was obstruction of justice, there was money laundering, there was treason. All of this will come out. Your big orange hero will be in prison. No amount of whistling past the graveyard is going to change that.
Bringing up Hillary doesn’t impress anyone who isn’t already in your corner. You might think of other arguments, if you have any.
Are you waiting for someone to come along and allege a crime of collusion? You’ll be waiting forever, since there is no criminal statute that defines “collusion.” It doesn’t exist.
The crime is conspiracy, and I’m confident Mueller has more than a few of those to roll out when the time comes. If you actually examined the facts, you’d know this. Those facts hiding in plain sight, and if you could tear yourself away from Fox “News” for long enough, you might be able to see them.
If you don’t interview Manafort, Flynn, et al., you know the guys actively working with Russia, it’s pretty easy to cry “No collusion!”
Are you talking about all the money donated to the Clinton Foundation? Because I’m pretty sure that went to starving kids in Africa and the like. You could probably look it up, they’re pretty transparent on where the money goes.
Not to mention a failing Trump Taj Mahal that just happened to turn around - while breaking rules against money laundering 106 times - when a bunch of Russian mobsters started patronizing the establishment.
There’s evidence that the Trump campaign expected to receive hacked, incriminating information against Clinton from the Russians. That the Russians didn’t deliver is about as relevant as the guy you’re buying drugs from revealing himself as a DEA agent. It falls afoul of campaign contribution laws.
Between Trump giving speeches which encouraged Russia to hack his opponent and his team removing the Ukrainian sanctions in what can only really be explained as an attempt to flirt with Russia, I think that one could also make a reasonable case, citing Peavy v. WFAA, that the campaign attempted to convince Russia that they should commit an illegal “wiretap” to gain information that is incriminating against his opponent and give that to him or Wikileaks.
An analysis of the overlap of laws being brought up by Mueller’s team also, based on one analysis, leaned on a general principal that it is illegal to interfere in the general functioning of the government and its ability to faithfully execute the laws of the nation. That could imply that Mueller has evidence that members of the Trump campaign took actions to prevent the government from being able to effectively do its job. The multiple (5-6+?) attempts to create backchannels with Russia may be the genesis of that.
That all said, I don’t believe that collusion is or ever should have been the focus of the investigation. More concerning is the question of financial bindings and extortion materials that may be held by Russia. While I hate the idea that someone stole the Presidency, or even attempted to do it - regardless of whether it was necessary or not - I’m far more concerned if the President is not working for my country as his first priority.
I think that the “collusion” angle is much more a keyword for the Right than the Left, because it allows them to avoid looking into a lot of corners where they know that they’re going to find things - and possibly things that aren’t limited to just Trump, like the source of NRA funding.
So Wikileaks was releasing Russian supplied damaging information about Clinton.
Simultaneously on social media Don Jr. was urging people to view that information.
We have since learned that there was secret communication from Wikileaks to Don Jr. suggesting he do just that. This is evidence of secret cooperation. What’s that other term for secret cooperation again?
Of course they do. But it’s a very tenuous connection to Trump.
If someone is discussing the Trump Jr. meeting in which the Russians had suggested that they had damaging info on Clinton, and asserts that they “deliver[ed]” this information a few days later, it implies something more than a public release of information for which the connection to the Russian meeting is highly speculative at best. (Very dubious, in fact, since the Russians were purporting to have damaging info on Clinton’s finances, while the Wikileaks release contained nothing of the sort, which is besides for the fact that if they wanted to deliver on their promises then they could have done so more directly instead of turning off the Trump people.)
