Bipartisan Senate report say 2017 intel assessment about Russian interference and Trump was accurate

[Robertinfremont]

No he did not. He said that he did not have enough evidence to meet the legal threshold to charge anyone with statutory conspiracy while also stating that collusion is not a statutory crime. He also made a statement that a lack of cooperation and obstructive efforts by the President and the people around him contributed to that effort being unsuccessful. He also documented the hundreds of contacts between Russian entities and Trump campaign officials and stated that at the very least there was an unstated understanding that they both stood to benefit from it.

Why not read part one of the report where he cleared Trump and his campaign. Trump was the target if you recall, not Russia. Mueller went after Trump but got Russia. Russia can wish all it wanted to for Trump to win or to lose. It did not matter. No votes were noted to change due to Russia.

 

[Robertinfremont]

Sorry. But if you don't favor Ukraine than you clearly must favor Russia. One is a friend and ally, one isn't. Go ahead and guess which is which.

I still can't get over that rude and wrong statement.

If I don't favor Ukraine hell. I do not favor Ukraine and neither did Obama when he let Russia take over Crimea.

 

[dixon01767]

That's not their job. Their job is it gather information, analyze and present what the nature of the Russian campaign was, it's breadth and objectives, and what the extent of contacts between Russians and Trump campaign officials was. After that it's up to executive and judicial branches to determine if any crimes were committed.

The intel assessment included no claims of Trump campaign involvement. And the Justice Department, House and Senate determined there were no crimes. The whole thing was a witch hunt.

 

[Vern]

I am referring to the longstanding and discredited claim that Trump & Co. conspired with Russia to fix the 2016 election.

I'm sorry athan, like all conservatives you're simply ignoring the non-stop lies from trump and the right. Trump was calling the intel agencies and FBI liars and was pushing the "nuh uh, it wasn't Russia, it was Ukraine" lie. what makes it a lie is he knew it was false. But his delicate ego and obedience to putin forced to him to flail at the truth. Just like you're doing here.

 

[Vern]

Did you see Don Lemon's meltdown over the lockdown protestors?

That was a priceless piece of media right there.

Obo, is a melt down a bad thing? The reason I ask is because even if your post is true (based on your integrity that's a big if) trump is famous for his meltdowns. do his meltdowns send you into a tizzy?

 

[Vern]

Forgot about Hillary's campaign that quickly did you?

I don't really care for a report that retreads the same crap over and over. it's obvious that this is just being moved out as another smear and after three years of one failed smear and scandal after the other. I really don't think anyone outside of the activist sphere really cares either.

Normal people are going to look at this and just roll their eyes. Because they're frankly tired of all the BS and all of the information that the far-left has tried to shove down their throats over the years.

I don't mind that Trump's people did such opposition research, because Hillary's did much of the same. Just like every other presidential campaign has experience for decades now. The only thing that slightly irks me about this is how much of a pass that Hillary got and all it did was make me roll my eyes, because it's more of the same double standard that I've been seeing for years now as well.

wow obo, and I was just questioning your integrity then you go and completely justify my comment. thank you. Anyhoo, Trump's people and relatives were meeting with the Russians and (read this part very slowly) lying about it. Hillary gets a pass because she didn't conspire with a foreign govt. This latest report only proves trump was lying when he had his meltdowns (see what I did there) and called the intel agencies liars and said "nuh uh, it wasn't Russia it was Ukraine". So the "double standard" you're whining about exists only in your head.

 

[CaughtInThe]

i bet seeing this news is like taking a teddy bear away from a Trump Republican.

 

[Athanasius68]

The report makes it exceeding clear that the Russians did interfere and that it was targeted to benefit one candidate over the other

.

The Senate report reviewed the intelligence review of 2016 and agreed with its conclusion that Russia sought to interfere with the election and wished Trump to win.
It answers part of a question which nobody is really asking (Did Russia interfere in the election?) and repeats the claim that Russia wished Trump to win (which can be fairly challenged by the continued revelations regarding the Steele dossier).

And we all know which candidate it was they preferred. If you actually read the through the thread you would know that I, nor anyone else had stated or suggested that Trump had "asked" for the Russian government for help.

Oh-- so all the reports, all the threads, all the campaigning, all the articles and opinion pieces that suggest that Mr. Trump conspired with Russia, was a Russian agent ect ect ect was, (in the modern terminology) a "lie" (or was it a mistake)?

The great scandal is that Russia wanted Trump to win (which as above, can absolutely be challenged)?

But when the Russians began to help, or offered help, in the form of "dirt" on Hillary Clinton. What did Trump Jr. say? He said that he would "love it".

And what did Mrs. Clinton say re: the Steele dossier? What did the Obama Admin actually do when they actually received info?
Yet again, the Trump campaign actually received nothing from Russia, whereas the Clinton campaign (and don't forget, they actually sought it out)

When a Russian cutout enticed Papadopoulos with the possibility of having access to to stolen DNC emails. Did Papadopoulos immediately turn him away. No he didn't. The Trump people may not solicited Russian assistance.

PapaD said he was thinking in terms of the Clinton emails.
Mifsud said he never told PapsD the information was emails
Downer assumed the DNC emails is what PapaD was talking about.
In other words, and politely, a massive miscommunication. Impolitely, a clusterf*ck.
BTW-- we now know PapaD told Halpert that the Trump campaign was not interested as this would be illegal.

But the hundreds of documented contacts between Russian nationals and cutouts and Trump campaign officials such as Roger Stone and Paul Manafort clearly suggests that they were happy to have it

.

Manafort worked for Ukraine, not Russia.
The Stone indictment by Mueller lays out the absurdity of thinking there was any conspiracy between the Trump campaign and Russia.

This report highlights several points.

1. The Russians did run an interference campaign. Trump still denies this.

Yes.

2. The Russian interference campaign was designed to help Trump and harm Clinton

.

The nature of the Steele dossier calls that conclusion into question, but ok.

3. The counterintelligence investigations into the Russian campaign and the contacts between them and Trump campaign officials was properly predicated and free of political bias and/or political influence.

The Senate report was clear that they draw no conclusion as to whether the Trump campaign conspired with Russia, or whether it was justified in thinking that they had.

 

[Athanasius68]

Hillary gets a pass because she didn't conspire with a foreign govt.

Says who? Why accept the 'legitimacy' of the Steele dossier? The FBI was apparently of the opinion that it was Russian disinformation.

 

[Athanasius68]

No he did not. He said that he did not have enough evidence to meet the legal threshold to charge anyone with statutory conspiracy while also stating that collusion is not a statutory crime. He also made a statement that a lack of cooperation and obstructive efforts by the President and the people around him contributed to that effort being unsuccessful. He also documented the hundreds of contacts between Russian entities and Trump campaign officials and stated that at the very least there was an unstated understanding that they both stood to benefit from it.

Mueller is referring to details in the above, not substance.
Mueller's indictment of Stone lays out the improbability of there being any coordination between Russia and the campaign.

 

[Athanasius68]

I'm sorry athan, like all conservatives you're simply ignoring the non-stop lies from trump and the right. Trump was calling the intel agencies and FBI liars and was pushing the "nuh uh, it wasn't Russia, it was Ukraine" lie. what makes it a lie is he knew it was false. But his delicate ego and obedience to putin forced to him to flail at the truth. Just like you're doing here.

Well, were intel agencies and the FBI 'liars" when they thought that Mr. Trump was complicit with Russian interference in the 2016 election?
Or were they simply wrong?
Trump was falsely accused of a heinous crime and one can perhaps understand his agitation behind it.

 

[Vern]

Says who? Why accept the 'legitimacy' of the Steele dossier? The FBI was apparently of the opinion that it was Russian disinformation.

er uh Athan, shouldn't you be trying to understand the point of the latest report that proves trump is a liar instead of flailing about all the other conservative narratives your masters spoon feed you? Try to focus.

I'm sorry athan, like all conservatives you're simply ignoring the non-stop lies from trump and the right. Trump was calling the intel agencies and FBI liars and was pushing the "nuh uh, it wasn't Russia, it was Ukraine" lie. what makes it a lie is he knew it was false. But his delicate ego and obedience to putin forced to him to flail at the truth. Just like you're doing here.

 

[Vern]

Well, were intel agencies and the FBI 'liars" when they thought that Mr. Trump was complicit with Russian interference in the 2016 election?
Or were they simply wrong?
Trump was falsely accused of a heinous crime and one can perhaps understand his agitation behind it.

Look! Questions. Athan, conservatives like yourself have to resort to asking questions because you cant make a clear straightforward statement and back it up. Its all "nuh uh" and "they're mean" from you guys. The FBI opened a legitimate investigation of trump and his staff's actions based on their actions. Hey I know,explain why he ignored the now re-re-reaffirmed fact that Russia meddled on his behalf and Ukraine did not. That proves he's a liar to anybody who can think for themselves. "nuh uh" and "they're mean" doesn't change that.

 

[Athanasius68]

er uh Athan, shouldn't you be trying to understand the point of the latest report that proves trump is a liar instead of flailing about all the other conservative narratives your masters spoon feed you? Try to focus.

The point of the most recent report was to review the assessment that intelligence agencies made in 2016 that Russia had interfered in the election and that they did so so as to benefit Mr. Trump.
They concurred with that assessment.
Which is nice, because the major issue over the past three years wasn't that Russia targeted the election. It was that Trump and/or his campaign was complicit in that targeting. On that issue, the Senate was silent.

 

[Athanasius68]

Look! Questions. Athan, conservatives like yourself have to resort to asking questions because you cant make a clear straightforward statement and back it up. Its all "nuh uh" and "they're mean" from you guys. The FBI opened a legitimate investigation of trump and his staff's actions based on their actions. Hey I know,explain why he ignored the now re-re-reaffirmed fact that Russia meddled on his behalf and Ukraine did not. That proves he's a liar to anybody who can think for themselves. "nuh uh" and "they're mean" doesn't change that.

Statements are made and they are backed up.
Russia targeted the election. The issue was whether Mr. Trump and/or his campaign was complicit with this.
Thats all that really matters.

With regards to Ukraine, Mr. Trump had a theory that it was Ukraine which hacked the DNC which whose origins I have no idea.
There was a theory kicking around that that Ukraine targeted the Trump campaign when embarrasing information about Mr. Manafort was released. However, it seems that was more of the work of individual Ukrainian legislators as opposed to the government in general.

 

[Atomic Kid]

Forgot about Hillary's campaign that quickly did you?

I don't really care for a report that retreads the same crap over and over. it's obvious that this is just being moved out as another smear and after three years of one failed smear and scandal after the other. I really don't think anyone outside of the activist sphere really cares either.

Normal people are going to look at this and just roll their eyes. Because they're frankly tired of all the BS and all of the information that the far-left has tried to shove down their throats over the years.

I don't mind that Trump's people did such opposition research, because Hillary's did much of the same. Just like every other presidential campaign has experience for decades now. The only thing that slightly irks me about this is how much of a pass that Hillary got and all it did was make me roll my eyes, because it's more of the same double standard that I've been seeing for years now as well.

Opposition research my ass. The Trump campaign wasn't conducting 'opposition research'. They were taking "gifts". Ever heard of the old axiom "beware of Greeks bearing gifts". Well, there is an axiom in place since the end of WWII in US Presidential politics that says; "beware of Russians bearing 'gifts'. Because they are always going to try. And every presidential campaign adhered to that axiom except this one. While that may not be statutorily illegal. It's grossly unpatriotic and amoral.

 

[Atomic Kid]

Ukraine gladly holds open its hands for more and more money. Russia takes nothing from our country.

An no, I do not favor Russia. And Trump does not. Obama did though when he let Russia capture Crimea.

Of course you favor Russia. You just said that Ukraine takes from us but Russia doesn't. Don't you even look at the crap you're posting?

 

[Atomic Kid]

Why not read part one of the report where he cleared Trump and his campaign. Trump was the target if you recall, not Russia. Mueller went after Trump but got Russia. Russia can wish all it wanted to for Trump to win or to lose. It did not matter. No votes were noted to change due to Russia.

Can't read that part because it doesn't exist. Mueller even held out that Congress may want to act and prosecutors may want to pursue charges of obstruction once Trump is no longer President.

 

[Atomic Kid]

I still can't get over that rude and wrong statement.

If I don't favor Ukraine hell. I do not favor Ukraine and neither did Obama when he let Russia take over Crimea.

Sorry if the truth hurts. Russia's incursion into Crimea would be akin to us taking Cuba or Venezuela. Surely they would loudly object to it but in reality there wouldn't be anything much they could do to stop it since those places are thousands of miles away from Russia and right next door to us. We should favor Ukraine over Russia because their willingness to oppose Russian aggression and adventurism serves to keep us from having to directly confront that Russian aggression over there. Where anything can happen once two large powers directly confront one another.

 

[Oborosen]

Obo, is a melt down a bad thing? The reason I ask is because even if your post is true (based on your integrity that's a big if) trump is famous for his meltdowns. do his meltdowns send you into a tizzy?

And given your integrity, you're not intent on rationally discussing anything. But I will at least give my reasoning to just humor this instance.

Don Lemon's response was considered a meltdown, because he acted just like how they portray Trump to act. He stopped being a journalist and more, or less turned into a caricature of himself for almost five minutes.

While on the topic of Trump having a meltdown. He could simply say that he likes puppies and you'd still try to claim that he had a meltdown.

 

[FreeSpeechRooom]

It wasn't bipartisan Burr is a never-Trump scrum bag, the judge already through out Muellers case against the Macedonian meme farmers who he never thought would actually show up for their day in court.

 

[FreeSpeechRooom]

Sorry if the truth hurts. Russia's incursion into Crimea would be akin to us taking Cuba or Venezuela. Surely they would loudly object to it but in reality there wouldn't be anything much they could do to stop it since those places are thousands of miles away from Russia and right next door to us. We should favor Ukraine over Russia because their willingness to oppose Russian aggression and adventurism serves to keep us from having to directly confront that Russian aggression over there. Where anything can happen once two large powers directly confront one another.

Trump gave them lethal aid Obama gave blankets.

 

[FreeSpeechRooom]

Can't read that part because it doesn't exist. Mueller even held out that Congress may want to act and prosecutors may want to pursue charges of obstruction once Trump is no longer President.

Sorry sport the report clearly said that no one in the Trump campaign conspired with Russia and that collusion and conspiracy are legally synonymous. Moreover, thinking about maybe firing the coup plotter Mueller and then not firing him is not obstruction. Trump granted the Mueller team every single interview and document they requested and did not claim Executive privilege once, or was the most transparent investigation in the history of the republic.

 

[Vern]

And given your integrity, you're not intent on rationally discussing anything. But I will at least give my reasoning to just humor this instance.

Don Lemon's response was considered a meltdown, because he acted just like how they portray Trump to act. He stopped being a journalist and more, or less turned into a caricature of himself for almost five minutes.

While on the topic of Trump having a meltdown. He could simply say that he likes puppies and you'd still try to claim that he had a meltdown.

In in the first line of your double spaced random blurts, you seem to focus on my integrity. Its literally the equivalent of "nuh uh, you are". Obo, I can document your dishonesty. As far as the second line goes, I didn't see the "meltdown" that has so upset you. You originally said it was the lockdown protesters. I can see someone getting upset about people so selfish and stupid. their ignorance will only lead to more deaths. Trump's meltdowns (yes meltdowns, plural) are whenever someone hurts his little feelings. But your third line is the best. Out comes the made up narrative to deflect from trumps meltdowns. Obo, the reason you try to deflect is because you know he has meltdowns (and often). so tell us how the president's meltdowns upset you.

Now lets get back to your first line. In addition to posting "nuh uh, you are" you've said you "humor me". Obo, this is a debate forum. I think what you're looking for is a preteen conservative chatroom where everybody praises your obedience. anyhoo, here's me proving your lack of integrity

Seeing as I'm a moderate liberal,

That's all I need to post. Do you want more examples? sure you do. In this thread, you made false statements about the SPLC. Of course you obediently hate the SPLC because your conservative masters told you to hate them

Yeah if this has anything to do with the SPLC, then I'm out.

This is the same group that considers over half of the church assemblies in the country to be hate groups. So no, I'm not even going to begin to trust them on this one.

Now what proves you have no integrity is you were asked to back up that claim. When you attempted to back it up your own links that proved it was false. yes, your own links proved your obedient falsehoods were false. But you wouldn't admit it. The rest of the thread is just a whirlwind you deflecting, whining and of course more lying in your desperate attempt to make it all go away. Hilarious stuff. Both threads are good read for fans of Obo I should add.

 

[Oborosen]

In in the first line of your double spaced random blurts, you seem to focus on my integrity. Its literally the equivalent of "nuh uh, you are". Obo, I can document your dishonesty. As far as the second line goes, I didn't see the "meltdown" that has so upset you. You originally said it was the lockdown protesters. I can see someone getting upset about people so selfish and stupid. their ignorance will only lead to more deaths. Trump's meltdowns (yes meltdowns, plural) are whenever someone hurts his little feelings. But your third line is the best. Out comes the made up narrative to deflect from trumps meltdowns. Obo, the reason you try to deflect is because you know he has meltdowns (and often). so tell us how the president's meltdowns upset you.

Now lets get back to your first line. In addition to posting "nuh uh, you are" you've said you "humor me". Obo, this is a debate forum. I think what you're looking for is a preteen conservative chatroom where everybody praises your obedience. anyhoo, here's me proving your lack of integrity



That's all I need to post. Do you want more examples? sure you do. In this thread, you made false statements about the SPLC. Of course you obediently hate the SPLC because your conservative masters told you to hate them



Now what proves you have no integrity is you were asked to back up that claim. When you attempted to back it up your own links that proved it was false. yes, your own links proved your obedient falsehoods were false. But you wouldn't admit it. The rest of the thread is just a whirlwind you deflecting, whining and of course more lying in your desperate attempt to make it all go away. Hilarious stuff. Both threads are good read for fans of Obo I should add.

Strange, still crying over all of that being thrown back in your face.

I know at least one poster on here that you'd get along with just fine.