I couldn't care less about Russia one way or another. The tears they're making liberals cry has been great, but their interference they've produced in blocking Trump's agenda has not been helpful.

However, if you want an analysis of why Hillary wanted war with Russia, here you go: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=hyaFsPKjZdo

I don't think anyone is accusing Trump of actually helping with hacking. Again, your understanding of the news would be much better if you stuck to things that were actually being alleged.

That's kind of the point!

Oh my god the trifecta.

Citing Snopes saying there was no evidence something happened in an argument it did happen

Citing a dissent(a 7-1 dissent) as argument about the state of the law

and now, the ****ing cherry on top,

A youtube. Not just any youtube, a Youtube by Sargon of Akkad

Helping is a little far - but the point of collusion still stands.

The only question is "Did Trump work with or coordinate with the Russians in the DNC hacking?" If not, then there's nothing to see here.

Looking forward to Trump dismissing Mueller. The Democrats will whine regardless, so the political fallout is a non-starter.

LOL called it. These people are nothing if not predictable.

You 'predicted' what's been going on in the Twitterverse since Comey testified on June 8th? Huh? The Right pretty much agreed that Mueller should go once Comey said his peace.

How is that in any way relevant to whether trump was receiving benefits for pledging to make those changes?

How is that in any way relevant to anything that anyone is talking about in this thread?

Why does Trump have to pledge anything? Russia already knows they're getting a better deal if Trump gets elected - Trump doesn't have to pledge anything. Do you deny that the United States has influenced elections? Do you deny that others try to influence ours?

Obama and his deep state cronies are the reason why Comey even testified in the first place.

I dont disagree that the US has tried to influence other elections but Russia isn't on trial in the context of this thread. Maybe we've been too hard on russia and even a little bit hypocritical in imposing those sanctions. It's fair game for a president to bring it up.

But the fact that trump might be preferred by russia says nothing about how he'd deal with the specifics of the situation. To put it in terms you might be willing to listen to - hillary might be preferred to bernie by company/industry x, but that doesn't mean it's not possible for her to take money to support specific policies.

If the only piece of evidence we had was the fact that russians interfered there wouldn't be much of a case. Lying about financial ties, refusing to disclose tax returns and having senior cabinet members repeatedly fail to disclose meetings with russian officials - this starts to add up. And when you consider that the guy has a rich history of unethical business dealings, went bankrupt in the 90s, and kept afloat largely on the back of loans from russian lenders... if you can't admit that there's grounds for an investigation you're just another fraud trying to protect the king.

I'm not saying he did it. I'd say there's a good chance he didn't do anything treasonous. But he's certainly aware of what it will look like, and it seems almost certain that he dismissed comey (and has considered firing mueller) because he wants to protect himself. And the more evidence that mueller uncovers the more unreasonable it would be for anyone to claim to have doubts of that.

I'm not really familiar with the happenings in the derposphere, I just predicted that people like you, and Sushy, don't actually want Republican presidents to be accountable to any kind of justice or oversight. You don't want a government with checks and balances, you want Trump to have absolute and unquestionable power. Sentiments like "fire Robert Mueller!" just prove that; it's amazing that you're dumb enough to basically brag in an internet forum about the level of disrespect you have for America's democracy.

Incorrect.

You're not very good at predictions are you goofy.

I find it funny how you try to build this circumstantial case against Trump, but would surely shout "conspiracy theory" should your own side be accused of far worse shenanigans. These transgressions you mention were fully on the table for the American people and they legitimately determined they did not matter. If his taxes mattered, Trump wouldn't have been elected. If his financial dealings with Russia had mattered, he wouldn't have been elected. With that in place, anything else is trying to undermine the legitimate election of the United States President and borders on treason. As much as Liberals like legislating from the bench, attempting to overturn a legitimate election by fiat would go very badly for the Democrats.

Conspiracy theories is all they have got.

What's funny is that you think my criticism of lifelong democrat donald trump shows that I'm a democrat/liberal when i'm canadian, have only ever voted for the conservative party and would probably have voted for just about any of the other republican candidates over clinton. I'm even open to the idea that trump would be better than clinton. And I'd be as gleeful at the prospect of her being impeached had she won.

That he narrowly beat out a trainwreck like clinton about 6 months ago says nothing about what americans think about it today in light of all that's happened since. And if he fires mueller you better believe those already record low approval ratings are going to drop like a rock.

Still zero evidence of Russia being involved whatsoever in the 2016 election but they will drag that narrative forever.

The Clinton bodycount is not a conspiracy theory.

The nothingburger is getting bigger by the day.

You keep saying this. Given that this is your judgement, I think it is fair to ask what standards you are using to make this judgement. In particular, do you think the President has a sworn duty to be honest or not lie to the American people?

Literally today it was reported that Russia hacked into 39 separate state election departments

He was consistently publicly supportive of sanction relief for Russia. That implies his trading on sanction relief would be dumb, even for Trump. This is what I said about this in the Trump thread:

I suppose this sort of easy analysis, whereby the viability of taking a public stand on an issue and then using trading on that issue is thought through, is just beyond most people. Or do you have an answer?

I don't recall Trump actually lying about his ties to Russia. I'm not saying it didn't happen, but I would need a citation there please.

As for Trump's people being in contact with Russia- oligarchs gonna oligarch. Their false, exculpatory statements are troubling. And no doubt whatever they were cooking would predictably be bad for most people and personally enriching for them. However, no one has produced anything tying Trump or his team to "hacking the election". There is a wide universe of corruption available to politicians. To get worked up over one highly improbable instance, which makes no sense and for which there is no evidence, is pure hysteria.

It's sad that you can't see why you are being led to believe a complete fabrication. This is about attribution. The democrats want people to attribute the loss to cheating by Russia and Trump. They don't want you to simply look at the obvious truth staring everyone in the face: Hillary Clinton is a venal monster and a terrible candidate who lost because she sucks. That truth also happens to be an indictment of the democratic party. How could they, eyes wide open, advance such a candidate who would lose to Trump? Come on. If something equivalent happened in medieval times DNC heads would be stuck atop pikes. But now we have thought control. So they tell people like you unsubstantiated nonsense in a way which fools the weak minded. And you will believe it.

I think I know more or less what is out there about the story. I know that there is no evidence presented supporting the particular allegations against Trump or that it was Russia who hacked the emails. I know that Wikileaks says it wasn't Russia. I believe them because they have always told the truth. The supposed evidence that it was the Russians has not been shared. As far as I am concerned it doesn't exist.

It seems like what you "know" about this story are things you are making up or allowing others to make up for you. That's not knowledge, which is true belief. You just have belief by itself. That's more like religion.

I thought the truther insult applied when someone dared to disagree with something the government says. So far I have seen any charges or arrest warrants. The government hasn't yet spoken. Does truther really mean someone who disagree with you or your clan??

So innocent people don't mind being investigated? You're really going to go with that as your thought process here? lolol. I disagree. I think anyone resists being investigating, either for things they did or things they didn't.

Trump probably fired Comey over the investigation. While that might be obstruction of justice, it is not evidence supporting "election hacking". It seems pretty clear that the scope of the investigation was unnaturally stretched into nonsense conspiracy theories. The poor judgement enabling that is a sound reason to fire Comey.

Comey characterized Trumps stated opinions as "lies" before congress. There some chance Comey is just an idiotic jackass.

This cant be mis-attributed to Hilary Bad Clinton except by weak thinkers or trained bull****ters. Of course quantifying an influence of propaganda is a whole other ballgame. Smaller thinkers wont even go near that kind estimating. The cutting edge can be sharp. But, still what really goes on inside a voting machine in Georgia?


http://www.esquire.com/news-politics...voting-totals/

bump for an answer

I'm not sure they even have that. Their conspiratorial narrative is just too vague to even qualify as a theory. Saying the mob killed Kennedy by doing X Y Z and presenting some sort of supporting observations is a conspiracy theory. This is like them saying the Russians might have hacked Hillary's email, and some Trump guys met with some Russians, so...yadayadayada...they 'hacked the election'.

The other day I saw a vid of HRC speaking. She said that the fake news coming from Russia (or some Eastern Euro somewhere) could not have been so effective without American help, which she intimated came from team Trump. Never mind having no clue of the impact of the fake news stories, which might have helped Hillary for all anyone knows. Never mind no evidence showing any connection of the Trump campaign to those efforts. Plus it doesn't make sense. If I am some Russian agent trying to find editors for my fake news content, am I going to tap the Trump campaign out of all the possible sources (if I even needed help, which itself is doubtful)?

What would that conversation even be like? "Hey. This is Russia. We wanted to run some fake news stories against HRC. Even though my country has a whole division dedicated to gorilla propaganda, I just love that one ad you guys did with the serious music and the voice over. Would you like to risk your future presidency and give us a valuable blackmail chip by helping us do something which will probably have no impact and which we could do better without you anyway?

Yep. Even before that, it has been proven time and again that Russia hacked and meddled in our election. It is a fact. Somehow the deplorables in this thread don't want to hear that, but it doesn't matter. It is a FACT. Proven. Believed by everyone from congress to the Intelligence community. The only question is whether or not Trump and/or his campaign goons were complicit. They all act like the guiltiest people on earth. Every last one of them. Everything they do just screams "I ****ing did it."

For anyone to believe otherwise is just moronic. Then again, look at some of the people in this thread that we are talking about.

Well, of course. But the left are still in denial over the election result. They are desperately searching for anything that would explain it. They find it incomprehensible that Trump won and therefore believe that there must have been foul play.

But as every day goes by they are just looking more and more delusional. Eventually they will have to accept the fact that they ran a terrible campaign with a deeply flawed candidate and have no-one to blame but themselves.

Edit: reply to Deuces post.