Jump to content

Trump campaign’s Russian link


TexasTiger

Recommended Posts

Folks will still whine about the hoax of the “Russian Hoax,” but the key question is how this information didn’t previously see the light of day?
 

https://www.justsecurity.org/75766/us-treasury-provides-missing-link-manaforts-partner-gave-campaign-polling-data-to-kremlin-in-2016/

  • Like 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites





Still couldn’t tell what he did with the info. Was this Trump internal polling that showed him ahead? Or other public polling that showed him losing badly?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 hours ago, jj3jordan said:

Still couldn’t tell what he did with the info. Was this Trump internal polling that showed him ahead? Or other public polling that showed him losing badly?

I suspect it’s polling on what to exploit. But why share any polling with Russian intelligence? 

  • Like 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 hours ago, TexasTiger said:

I suspect it’s polling on what to exploit. But why share any polling with Russian intelligence? 

You think this information steered the Russians into what particular Facebook ads to purchase?

Edited by jj3jordan
Link to comment
Share on other sites

53 minutes ago, jj3jordan said:

You think this information steered the Russians into what particular Facebook ads to purchase?

Wouldn’t shock me.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

22 minutes ago, TexasTiger said:

Wouldn’t shock me.

 

22 minutes ago, TexasTiger said:

Wouldn’t shock me.

It would shock me if anyone out there is dumb enough to make a voting decision from Facebook information.

  • Like 1
  • Thanks 3
  • Haha 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

13 hours ago, jj3jordan said:

 

It would shock me if anyone out there is dumb enough to make a voting decision from Facebook information.

Got news for you. Folks believe a lot of crazy stuff they see on social media, such as DT won the election. Beyond that, however, is this establishes the link Trump denied and Mueller was denied access to. Cover up?

  • Like 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

This is not the smack forum. This thread is about new information not previously disclosed. It’s not apparent anyone responding even read the article. If you don’t want to reasonably discuss this topic, there are numerous smack threads on which you can regurgitate the same old tired partisan lines.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

51 minutes ago, TexasTiger said:

This is not the smack forum. This thread is about new information not previously disclosed. It’s not apparent anyone responding even read the article. If you don’t want to reasonably discuss this topic, there are numerous smack threads on which you can regurgitate the same old tired partisan lines.

Read the article twice and curious as to how TD can make a definitive while the others danced all around it.  

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, SaltyTiger said:

Read the article twice and curious as to how TD can make a definitive while the others danced all around it.  

I don’t think others dance around it as much as everything pointed in that direction but they weren’t provided confirmation from intelligence. The assumption was that Mueller was conducting two investigations— one a counterintelligence investigation that was still ongoing even after his report. Later turned out Rosenstein quashed that. 
 

The choices appear to be that the intelligence was there, but not provided before or the current TD is just making it up.
 

Why would the Russian operative not share the info with Russian intelligence? How likely is that?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, TexasTiger said:

I don’t think others dance around it as much as everything pointed in that direction but they weren’t provided confirmation from intelligence. The assumption was that Mueller was conducting two investigations— one a counterintelligence investigation that was still ongoing even after his report. Later turned out Rosenstein quashed that. 
 

The choices appear to be that the intelligence was there, but not provided before or the current TD is just making it up.
 

Why would the Russian operative not share the info with Russian intelligence? How likely is that?

Stand to reason that he may share info but hard to imagine it being anything of real value. 

  • Like 1
  • Haha 1
  • Facepalm 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

42 minutes ago, SaltyTiger said:

Stand to reason that he may share info but hard to imagine it being anything of real value. 

10 years ago if you’d been told the nominee of either party was sharing polling data with Russian intelligence would you have been as likely to dismiss it as unimportant?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 hours ago, TexasTiger said:

10 years ago if you’d been told the nominee of either party was sharing polling data with Russian intelligence would you have been as likely to dismiss it as unimportant?

I would bet it happened 10 years ago. Just that no one felt it multiple investigation worthy. Further, if you told me we would elect Donald Trump 10 years ago I would have called you a nutcase.

  • Like 1
  • Dislike 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

That $1.3M that compensated for being our spent by $500M....
Must have been the singular most shrewd ad buy in history.

 

  • Facepalm 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 hours ago, SaltyTiger said:

I would bet it happened 10 years ago. Just that no one felt it multiple investigation worthy. Further, if you told me we would elect Donald Trump 10 years ago I would have called you a nutcase.

So which nominee are you guessing engaged Russian intelligence 10 years ago? 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

56 minutes ago, DKW 86 said:

That $1.3M that compensated for being our spent by $500M....
Must have been the singular most shrewd ad buy in history.

 

David continues to bend over backwards to defend Trump by glossing over the fact of his working with Russians after previously claiming it didn’t happen. 

  • Thanks 1
  • Facepalm 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

16 hours ago, TexasTiger said:

Got news for you. Folks believe a lot of crazy stuff they see on social media, such as DT won the election. Beyond that, however, is this establishes the link Trump denied and Mueller was denied access to. Cover up?

Which election that DT won are you referencing? 2016? Did social media crazily proclaim that DT won? Because next to NOBODY on the left/dem establishment believed it true and accepted it as a win.  

  • Facepalm 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 minutes ago, jj3jordan said:

Which election that DT won are you referencing? 2016? Did social media crazily proclaim that DT won? Because next to NOBODY on the left/dem establishment believed it true and accepted it as a win.  

That’s an absolute crock. HRC conceded right away. Obama recognized it right away and graciously welcomed Trump to the WH. How many Dems voted not to certify the results? There’s no comparison and any one claiming it as such has been brainwashed by some medium.

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Just now, TexasTiger said:

That’s an absolute crock. HRC conceded right away. Obama recognized it right away and graciously welcomed Trump to the WH. How many Dems voted not to certify the results? There’s no comparison and any one claiming it as such has been brainwashed by some medium.

Did you miss the Russia Russia Russia collusion investigation? I'm pretty sure there were numerous dems who objected to the certification. Obama was no fan of Hillary. Hillary was forced to concede but it's doubtful she would have without urging. Then she spent the next four years claiming the russians (the ones she hired) helped DT win so it was not legit. Acceptance that is not. That whole thing was designed to get DT out  BEFORE inauguration so Hillary could be declared the winner. Didn't happen so they went to impeachment and yada yada yada. If you think ANYTHING done by the dems was acceptance of DT victory you are delusional.

  • Like 3
Link to comment
Share on other sites

33 minutes ago, TexasTiger said:

So which nominee are you guessing engaged Russian intelligence 10 years ago? 

Nominee? The 2016 nominee never engaged Russian intelligence. 

  • Facepalm 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 hours ago, jj3jordan said:

Did you miss the Russia Russia Russia collusion investigation? I'm pretty sure there were numerous dems who objected to the certification. Obama was no fan of Hillary. Hillary was forced to concede but it's doubtful she would have without urging. Then she spent the next four years claiming the russians (the ones she hired) helped DT win so it was not legit. Acceptance that is not. That whole thing was designed to get DT out  BEFORE inauguration so Hillary could be declared the winner. Didn't happen so they went to impeachment and yada yada yada. If you think ANYTHING done by the dems was acceptance of DT victory you are delusional.

Obama certainly wanted Hillary over Trump. 
 

Hillary conceded the next morning so it didn’t take much urging:

https://www.google.com/amp/s/time.com/4564480/read-hillary-clintons-concession-speech-full-transcript/%3famp=true

Trump hasn’t conceded yet. McConnell waited until the electoral college voted.

Obama urged acceptance the next day:

 But you @SaltyTigerand @bigbird and others keep believing your hyper partisan fantasy. Facts don’t penetrate.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

7 hours ago, TexasTiger said:

This guy’s as conservative as they come. 

F1626FFA-85A6-4D0D-8BF0-117A79F68F00.jpeg

https://www.usatoday.com/story/news/politics/2019/08/25/joe-walsh-apologizes-racist-comments-run-against-trump/2115011001/

If that is your conservative standard bearer you need to pick another one.  Again, for real, how did the Kremlin help Trump win?   By saying that Hillary is an arrogant mean unlikeable vengeful drunk leftist?  Still no legit sane believable explanation. FB? Sorry that’s just pathetic.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

33 minutes ago, jj3jordan said:

https://www.usatoday.com/story/news/politics/2019/08/25/joe-walsh-apologizes-racist-comments-run-against-trump/2115011001/

If that is your conservative standard bearer you need to pick another one.  Again, for real, how did the Kremlin help Trump win?   By saying that Hillary is an arrogant mean unlikeable vengeful drunk leftist?  Still no legit sane believable explanation. FB? Sorry that’s just pathetic.

Can’t stand a guy who apologizes for racist comments? He can’t be a real conservative? Thanks for finally clarifying how you and your buddies have redefined conservatism.
 

So you endorse campaigns working with Russian intelligence. How about China? Iran? Any limits? 

  • Facepalm 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now
×
×
  • Create New...