Jump to content

Russian Collusion with Trump Campaign


Recommended Posts

I am fed up with all the kool-aid drinkers on this forum insisting the proposition that Russia was deliberately helping the Trump campaign - with the campaign's support - is a hoax. 

Here's a complete accounting of what the Senate Intelligence Committee found on the subject:

https://www.lawfareblog.com/collusion-reading-diary-what-did-senate-intelligence-committee-find

A Collusion Reading Diary: What Did the Senate Intelligence Committee Find?

 

It's a long document so if you want to jump to the reports conclusions, here they are:

Our own conclusions are notably closer to those of the Democrats than to those of the Republicans. To read these thousand pages and come away with the conclusion that they amount to evidence of “no collusion” really involves a protestation of faith, not a dispassionate assessment of presented evidence. As we said at the outset, debating what constitutes “collusion” is not worth anyone’s time, given that the word has no agreed-upon meaning in this context and that to say that there was none of it doesn’t answer in any event the more important question of what the facts amount to. Here are the conclusions we believe the Intelligence Committee’s evidence supports:

  1. The Trump campaign and Donald Trump himself were certainly aware in real time of Russian efforts to intervene in the 2016 presidential election. The campaign had a heads-up that Russia had stolen Democratic emails. And Russian operatives sought and received a meeting with senior Trump campaign officials promising “dirt” on Trump’s opponent. As the campaign wore on, and the Russian efforts were increasingly made public, Trump personally and publicly encouraged them.
  2. The Trump campaign was run for a time by a man with an ongoing business relationship with a Russian intelligence operative, to whom he gave proprietary internal polling data.
  3. The Trump campaign did not discourage Russian activity on its behalf. In fact, it sought repeatedly to coordinate its messaging around WikiLeaks releases of information. The campaign, and Trump personally, sought to contact WikiLeaks to receive information in advance about releases and may well have succeeded.
  4. The campaign sought to obtain disparaging information about Hillary Clinton from actors who either were Russian operatives or it believed were Russian operatives. It did so through a number of means—some of these efforts were direct. Some were indirect.
  5. The Russian government and affiliated actors clearly regarded the Trump campaign as a prime target for influence and recruitment. Russia targeted a diverse array of people associated with Trump for contact and engagement through an astonishing variety of avenues. Some of these attempts were rebuffed. Many of them were successful. The result was a sustained degree of engagement between the campaign, and later the transition, and Russian officials and cutouts.
  6. Trump’s personal and business history in Russia provided a significant opportunity for kompromat. Such material was very likely collected. There is less evidence that it was ever deployed, though Trump’s mere awareness of his vulnerability gives rise to substantial counterintelligence concerns.
  7. Trump’s active pursuit of business deals in Russia while running for president and denying any such deals created significant counterintelligence risk.
  8. Trump’s campaign, and later transition, were filled with a remarkable number of people who had secret interactions with Russian actors, about which they lied either in real time or in retrospect.
  9. All of this activity, particularly cumulatively, amounts to a grave set of counterintelligence concerns, in which any number of Trump campaign figures—including the candidate himself—exposed themselves to potential coercive pressure from an adversary foreign actor.
  10. Trump to this day will not criticize Russian President Vladimir Putin or acknowledge unambiguously Russian intervention in the 2016 election.

We will leave it to others to debate what words best summarize this picture.

 

 

 

Edited by homersapien
  • Dislike 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites





That’s a rehash of a bunch of horse hockey. But thanks Homer for once again confirming that there is no there there. Well done.

  • Haha 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

6 minutes ago, jj3jordan said:

That’s a rehash of a bunch of horse hockey. But thanks Homer for once again confirming that there is no there there. Well done.

Kinda cult like isn't it...........

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

31 minutes ago, jj3jordan said:

That’s a rehash of a bunch of horse hockey. But thanks Homer for once again confirming that there is no there there. Well done.

 

25 minutes ago, wdefromtx said:

Kinda cult like isn't it...........

You two are saying the findings of the Senate Intelligence Committee are..."horse hockey?"

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

4 minutes ago, Leftfield said:

 

You two are saying the findings of the Senate Intelligence Committee are..."horse hockey?"

Trump got punished for it didn’t he? He’s not allowed to run again right? 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

3 minutes ago, wdefromtx said:

Trump got punished for it didn’t he? He’s not allowed to run again right? 

You're really...gonna go with that....still?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

8 minutes ago, Leftfield said:

You're really...gonna go with that....still?

Seems like if what they had was that airtight as you seem to think there would have been some repercussions. 
 

He has been skating like Hillary. 
 

Why is that? 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

5 minutes ago, wdefromtx said:

Seems like if what they had was that airtight as you seem to think there would have been some repercussions. 
 

He has been skating like Hillary. 
 

Why is that? 

So, you're just going to ignore Mueller's reason for not charging him, and the refusal of the majority of his party to hold him accountable? What am I saying, of course you are.

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

17 minutes ago, Leftfield said:

So, you're just going to ignore Mueller's reason for not charging him, and the refusal of the majority of his party to hold him accountable? What am I saying, of course you are.

Because he was told he cannot indict a sitting president? What is the statue of limitations? Why not indict him after out of office? 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

36 minutes ago, wdefromtx said:

Because he was told he cannot indict a sitting president? What is the statue of limitations? Why not indict him after out of office? 

Call me crazy, but maaayyyybbe it's because there a few significant things that have happened in the interim?

  • Haha 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 hours ago, Leftfield said:

So, you're just going to ignore Mueller's reason for not charging him, and the refusal of the majority of his party to hold him accountable? What am I saying, of course you are.

Mueller would have charged him if he had the goods. He knew he didn’t. So he wrote it to make it sound like he did and excused himself out. He wrote to indict in the public domain but didn’t have anything solid. He wanted people like you to read his report ( which under testimony he had very little intimate knowledge of) and rail about it for years. And that is exactly what you are doing.

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

Just now, jj3jordan said:

Mueller would have charged him if he had the goods. He knew he didn’t. So he wrote it to make it sound like he did and excused himself out. He wrote to indict in the public domain but didn’t have anything solid. He wanted people like you to read his report ( which under testimony he had very little intimate knowledge of) and rail about it for years. And that is exactly what you are doing.

It gets harder and harder to remember that you're a fully developed adult human being. Like, with a brain and everything.

  • Like 1
  • Haha 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 minutes ago, Leftfield said:

It gets harder and harder to remember that you're a fully developed adult human being. Like, with a brain and everything.

Thank you. Most people think I’m just a cultist.

  • Haha 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Well, I'm not sure why this needed a separate thread. Homer was doing a fine job not discussing the only things that were important in the other thread. I'm not sure why he needs to not discuss them here.

Edited by Cardin Drake
  • Haha 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

It's amazing how willing Trump supporters are willing to simply ignore or reject history - reported at the time on an ongoing by every reputable news source - for fantasy that supports their political beliefs.

We are firmly entrenched in a fact-free environment.  What actually happened no longer matters.  The only thing that matters is what you imagined happened.

And Trump is the ringmaster for these folks.  If he says "fake news" or "hoax", they actually believe him.

I fear for our country.

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

7 minutes ago, homersapien said:

It's amazing how willing Trump supporters are willing to simply ignore or reject history - reported at the time on an ongoing by every reputable news source - for fantasy that supports their political beliefs.

We are firmly entrenched in a fact-free environment.  What actually happened no longer matters.  The only thing that matters is what you imagined happened.

And Trump is the ringmaster for these folks.  If he says "fake news" or "hoax", they actually believe him.

I fear for our country.

I do too if you are representative of those who would run it.

  • Haha 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

16 minutes ago, jj3jordan said:

I do too if you are representative of those who would run it.

Yeah, God forbid we have leadership that respects facts and reality. :-\

  • Like 2
  • Facepalm 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Homer, here are the facts.  The investigation into Trump was a setup from the start.  And it has been proven to anyone who is not a blind partisan. You guys just can not let go of it, no matter how thoroughly it has been shown that the idea of russian collusion originated with Hillary and her campaign. All of your accusations against Trump amount to well, he knew a guy who knew some shady russians. Or he was approached by a guy who was associated with the Hillary campaign who wanted to give him dirt on Hillary. It is utter nonsense. Nothing in Tump's past connections to russia are anywhere near the level of Hillary helping Russian interests acquire 20% of the U.S. uranium output. Why didn't the FBI open an investigation into her for russian collusion?

When you examine the actual reason for the investigation (which you don't want to talk about, of course), it gets even worse.  The key figure is Joseph Mifsud. In April of 2017 Mifsud planted the idea that "russia had Hillary's emails" with George Papadopoulos, a very young low level volunteer for Trump's campaign. A week or two later an Austrailian diplomat named Alexander Downey approached Papadopoulos (who didn't know him)  and asked to meet with him.  Downey subsequently told the FBI that Papadopoulos told him that the Trump campaign knew "russia had Hilary's emails"   But Papadopoulos didn't actually tell him that. What happened next? Well, nothing. The FBI didn't interview Papadopoulos to find out how he knew "russia had Hillary's emails". No, instead they used this hearsay information  to open FISA warrants to spy on Trump's entire campaign for the duration of his campaign.  Unbelievable! Only when the campaign was over and much to their surprise Trump won did the initiate Plan B, as Peter Strzok called it.  So it was 9 months later they got around to actually interviewing Papadopoulos about this critical leak of classified information to the Russians. He told them yeah, Mifsud told him about "russia having Hillary's emails"  He also told them he had no memory of telling Downey anything about them in his short one hour meeting.  What did the FBI do with this information? Well they now had the actual source-Mifsud. They could find out who told him that "russia had Hillary's emails" Finally, they could get to the bottom of it all.

Well, the FBI interviewed Mifsud and didn't think to ask him where he got his information.  As they put it, they were unable to question him effectively because of Papadopoulos's irrelevant lie (actually misrembering when Mifsud told him russia had hillary's emails. This is transparently laughable.  They would have you believe they are so grossly incompetent they were unable to ask him where he got his information.  They let him go, and he left the country and went into hiding. He is still in hiding or dead.  So 40 million dollars and 18 prosecutors were unable to get to the bottom of the origin of the crossfire hurricane investigation. Because when the FBI had the source they were too stupid to ask him the relevant questions and too incompetent to hold the key to the origin of russian collusion.  Yeah, I don't believe it either.

The FBI never even tried to get to the bottom of russian collusion. Likely because they knew all along that Hillary was the source. They just used the setup to spy on his campaign for 9 months, then lied on other FISA warrents to continue spying on him well into his Presidency.  Those are the real facts.

 

  • Like 1
  • Haha 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

3 hours ago, Cardin Drake said:

The FBI never even tried to get to the bottom of russian collusion. Likely because they knew all along that Hillary was the source. They just used the setup to spy on his campaign for 9 months, then lied on other FISA warrents to continue spying on him well into his Presidency.  Those are the real facts.

 

Dude, I admire you for trying but the partisan crowd you are talking to are "all in" on Orange Man Bad because he was not nice and fought back after being spied on and lied about every day.  Now they actually believe that the worst President in US History is not performing that badly.  More outrageous BS couldn't be made up although Homer's "reputable news sources" try everyday!!

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

22 minutes ago, auburn41 said:

Dude, I admire you for trying but the partisan crowd you are talking to are "all in" on Orange Man Bad because he was not nice and fought back after being spied on and lied about every day.  Now they actually believe that the worst President in US History is not performing that badly.  More outrageous BS couldn't be made up although Homer's "reputable news sources" try everyday!!

It was cathartic. 😁

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

3 hours ago, Cardin Drake said:

Homer, here are the facts.  The investigation into Trump was a setup from the start.  And it has been proven to anyone who is not a blind partisan. You guys just can not let go of it, no matter how thoroughly it has been shown that the idea of russian collusion originated with Hillary and her campaign. All of your accusations against Trump amount to well, he knew a guy who knew some shady russians. Or he was approached by a guy who was associated with the Hillary campaign who wanted to give him dirt on Hillary. It is utter nonsense. Nothing in Tump's past connections to russia are anywhere near the level of Hillary helping Russian interests acquire 20% of the U.S. uranium output. Why didn't the FBI open an investigation into her for russian collusion?

When you examine the actual reason for the investigation (which you don't want to talk about, of course), it gets even worse.  The key figure is Joseph Mifsud. In April of 2017 Mifsud planted the idea that "russia had Hillary's emails" with George Papadopoulos, a very young low level volunteer for Trump's campaign. A week or two later an Austrailian diplomat named Alexander Downey approached Papadopoulos (who didn't know him)  and asked to meet with him.  Downey subsequently told the FBI that Papadopoulos told him that the Trump campaign knew "russia had Hilary's emails"   But Papadopoulos didn't actually tell him that. What happened next? Well, nothing. The FBI didn't interview Papadopoulos to find out how he knew "russia had Hillary's emails". No, instead they used this hearsay information  to open FISA warrants to spy on Trump's entire campaign for the duration of his campaign.  Unbelievable! Only when the campaign was over and much to their surprise Trump won did the initiate Plan B, as Peter Strzok called it.  So it was 9 months later they got around to actually interviewing Papadopoulos about this critical leak of classified information to the Russians. He told them yeah, Mifsud told him about "russia having Hillary's emails"  He also told them he had no memory of telling Downey anything about them in his short one hour meeting.  What did the FBI do with this information? Well they now had the actual source-Mifsud. They could find out who told him that "russia had Hillary's emails" Finally, they could get to the bottom of it all.

Well, the FBI interviewed Mifsud and didn't think to ask him where he got his information.  As they put it, they were unable to question him effectively because of Papadopoulos's irrelevant lie (actually misrembering when Mifsud told him russia had hillary's emails. This is transparently laughable.  They would have you believe they are so grossly incompetent they were unable to ask him where he got his information.  They let him go, and he left the country and went into hiding. He is still in hiding or dead.  So 40 million dollars and 18 prosecutors were unable to get to the bottom of the origin of the crossfire hurricane investigation. Because when the FBI had the source they were too stupid to ask him the relevant questions and too incompetent to hold the key to the origin of russian collusion.  Yeah, I don't believe it either.

The FBI never even tried to get to the bottom of russian collusion. Likely because they knew all along that Hillary was the source. They just used the setup to spy on his campaign for 9 months, then lied on other FISA warrents to continue spying on him well into his Presidency.  Those are the real facts.

 

These are not the facts.

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

20 hours ago, jj3jordan said:

Thank you. Most people think I’m just a cultist.

i am pretty sure you drank the trump kool aid............admit it. you can do it big shooter!

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

36 minutes ago, aubiefifty said:

i am pretty sure you drank the trump kool aid............admit it. you can do it big shooter!

I was not offered any kool aid. My favs would be cherry or grape. I was offered a choice between a bombastic businessman with a large ego but who had espoused positions which agreed with me, and a pathetic angry entitled candidate who I believed to be a criminal (server) and a traitor (Benghazi) who was physically a wreck.

I chose wisely with no coercion. They country was better off despite 24/7 attacks never before seen by party, media, and government agencies. Trump upset the apple cart which he said he would do. You can’t blame him for what was on the cart.

  • Like 2
  • Thanks 1
  • Haha 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

5 hours ago, Cardin Drake said:

Homer, here are the facts.  The investigation into Trump was a setup from the start.  And it has been proven to anyone who is not a blind partisan. You guys just can not let go of it, no matter how thoroughly it has been shown that the idea of russian collusion originated with Hillary and her campaign. All of your accusations against Trump amount to well, he knew a guy who knew some shady russians. Or he was approached by a guy who was associated with the Hillary campaign who wanted to give him dirt on Hillary. It is utter nonsense. Nothing in Tump's past connections to russia are anywhere near the level of Hillary helping Russian interests acquire 20% of the U.S. uranium output. Why didn't the FBI open an investigation into her for russian collusion?

When you examine the actual reason for the investigation (which you don't want to talk about, of course), it gets even worse.  The key figure is Joseph Mifsud. In April of 2017 Mifsud planted the idea that "russia had Hillary's emails" with George Papadopoulos, a very young low level volunteer for Trump's campaign. A week or two later an Austrailian diplomat named Alexander Downey approached Papadopoulos (who didn't know him)  and asked to meet with him.  Downey subsequently told the FBI that Papadopoulos told him that the Trump campaign knew "russia had Hilary's emails"   But Papadopoulos didn't actually tell him that. What happened next? Well, nothing. The FBI didn't interview Papadopoulos to find out how he knew "russia had Hillary's emails". No, instead they used this hearsay information  to open FISA warrants to spy on Trump's entire campaign for the duration of his campaign.  Unbelievable! Only when the campaign was over and much to their surprise Trump won did the initiate Plan B, as Peter Strzok called it.  So it was 9 months later they got around to actually interviewing Papadopoulos about this critical leak of classified information to the Russians. He told them yeah, Mifsud told him about "russia having Hillary's emails"  He also told them he had no memory of telling Downey anything about them in his short one hour meeting.  What did the FBI do with this information? Well they now had the actual source-Mifsud. They could find out who told him that "russia had Hillary's emails" Finally, they could get to the bottom of it all.

Well, the FBI interviewed Mifsud and didn't think to ask him where he got his information.  As they put it, they were unable to question him effectively because of Papadopoulos's irrelevant lie (actually misrembering when Mifsud told him russia had hillary's emails. This is transparently laughable.  They would have you believe they are so grossly incompetent they were unable to ask him where he got his information.  They let him go, and he left the country and went into hiding. He is still in hiding or dead.  So 40 million dollars and 18 prosecutors were unable to get to the bottom of the origin of the crossfire hurricane investigation. Because when the FBI had the source they were too stupid to ask him the relevant questions and too incompetent to hold the key to the origin of russian collusion.  Yeah, I don't believe it either.

The FBI never even tried to get to the bottom of russian collusion. Likely because they knew all along that Hillary was the source. They just used the setup to spy on his campaign for 9 months, then lied on other FISA warrents to continue spying on him well into his Presidency.  Those are the real facts.

 

Pure fantasy.  The Horowitz review says as much.  Although, it is critical of the FISA warrants.

But hey, maybe Durham will find something new! 

 

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

On 8/15/2022 at 3:44 PM, homersapien said:

As the campaign wore on, and the Russian efforts were increasingly made public, Trump personally and publicly encouraged them.

Is this when he cracked the joke while on the campaign rally trail?

  • Like 2
  • Haha 2
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
 Share

×
×
  • Create New...