It's up to everyone to ask "Why did Putin want Trump to win?"

[Manc Skipper]

There's no need to ask why. Just look around you at the hate and division he and his minions are creating.

 

[hanger4]

You asserted that intelligence agencies thought Trump conspired with Russia. Now you say “must have been some”. Which line are you gonna stick with, because you can’t it both ways.


Only to someone who doesn’t know what they’re talking about. Putin had nothing to do with the Steele dossier. Not a thing.

You don't know that. Knowing that the Ruskies main intent was to sow discord, what better way than to feed false information to Steele.

 

[hanger4]

No, you didn’t say anything at all about giving “them the benefit of the doubt”. You specifically said that intelligence agencies thought Trump conspired with Putin.

And the Steele dossier was compiled by Steele.

The more you try to dig your way out of stupid comments, the deeper in you go. Stop now before making it worse.

*And the Steele dossier was compiled by Steele.*

Via anonymous Russian sources.

 

[hanger4]

No. Trump, himself, was not investigated for possible conspiracy. His campaign was. Huge difference.

Wow, so Trump's not part of the Teump Campaign ?? Who knew.

 

[Lesh]

To weaken the United States

To weaken the EU

to weaken NATO

To reduce sanctions

Probably a lot more

 

[RaleBulgarian]

You don't know that. Knowing that the Ruskies main intent was to sow discord, what better way than to feed false information to Steele.

You don’t know otherwise.

*And the Steele dossier was compiled by Steele.*
Via anonymous Russian sources.

Steele built his report from anonymous Russian sources. That’s your assertion? :lamo

Wow, so Trump's not part of the Teump Campaign ?? Who knew.

Apparently you’re not able to comprehend simple differences.

 

[Athanasius68]

Steele built his report from anonymous Russian sources. That’s your assertion? :lamo

It's Steele's assertion as well.

 

[Athanasius68]

Apparently you’re not able to comprehend simple differences.

Well, Comey did say Trump HIMSELF was not under investigation.
If true, we have knocked out just about all those obstruction claims.

 

[hanger4]

You don’t know otherwise.


Steele built his report from anonymous Russian sources. That’s your assertion? :lamo


Apparently you’re not able to comprehend simple differences.

1) You made a declarative statement, "Putin had nothing to do with the Steele dossier", you don't know that.

2) *And so, as Steele threw himself into his new mission, he could count on an army of sources whose loyalty and information he had bought and paid for over the years. There was no safe way he could return to Russia to do the actual digging; the vengeful F.S.B. would be watching him closely.*

* How good were these sources? Consider what Steele would write in the memos he filed with Simpson: Source A—to use the careful nomenclature of his dossier—was “a senior Russian Foreign Ministry figure.” Source B was “a former top level intelligence officer still active in the Kremlin.”*

How Ex-Spy Christopher Steele Compiled His Explosive Trump-Russia Doss | Vanity Fair

*Here’s the problem: Steele is not the source of the information. For purposes of the warrant application, he is the purveyor of information from other sources. The actual sources of the information are Steele’s informants — anonymous Russians providing accounts based on hearsay three- and four-times removed from people said to have observed the events alleged.*

McCarthy: Steele's reputation is irrelevant, it's his anonymous sources that needed vetting - Washington Times

3) Trump is very much a part of the Trump Campaign that Mueller said did not conspire or coordinate with the Ruskies.

 

[RaleBulgarian]

It's Steele's assertion as well.

Steele used other sources/resources as well. As for his Russian sources, there’s no evidence that they aided Steele on behalf of the Russian government.

Well, Comey did say Trump HIMSELF was not under investigation.
If true, we have knocked out just about all those obstruction claims.

Not hardly. A silly diversion attempt on your part.

1) You made a declarative statement, "Putin had nothing to do with the Steele dossier", you don't know that.

2) *And so, as Steele threw himself into his new mission, he could count on an army of sources whose loyalty and information he had bought and paid for over the years. There was no safe way he could return to Russia to do the actual digging; the vengeful F.S.B. would be watching him closely.*

* How good were these sources? Consider what Steele would write in the memos he filed with Simpson: Source A—to use the careful nomenclature of his dossier—was “a senior Russian Foreign Ministry figure.” Source B was “a former top level intelligence officer still active in the Kremlin.”*

How Ex-Spy Christopher Steele Compiled His Explosive Trump-Russia Doss | Vanity Fair

*Here’s the problem: Steele is not the source of the information. For purposes of the warrant application, he is the purveyor of information from other sources. The actual sources of the information are Steele’s informants — anonymous Russians providing accounts based on hearsay three- and four-times removed from people said to have observed the events alleged.*

McCarthy: Steele's reputation is irrelevant, it's his anonymous sources that needed vetting - Washington Times

3) Trump is very much a part of the Trump Campaign that Mueller said did not conspire or coordinate with the Ruskies.

You don’t know otherwise.

2. Russian sources does not mean the Russian government. Your own reference make clear that Steele was concerned about returning to Russia. If the Russian government were involved, Steele wouldn’t have had reason to be concerned. Steele bought information from trusted sources (read; individuals profiting from their insider knowledge) within/associated the Russian government. Do you understand the distinction?

3. Wrong. Mueller’s exact words; “that there was insufficient evidence to charge a broader conspiracy.”

 

[hanger4]

You don’t know otherwise.

2. Russian sources does not mean the Russian government. Your own reference make clear that Steele was concerned about returning to Russia. If the Russian government were involved, Steele wouldn’t have had reason to be concerned. Steele bought information from trusted sources (read; individuals profiting from their insider knowledge) within/associated the Russian government. Do you understand the distinction?

3. Wrong. Mueller’s exact words; “that there was insufficient evidence to charge a broader conspiracy.”

1) Nor do you. Your declarative statement is incorrect.

2) All I said was anonymous Russian sources, whether or not these sources worked for or were being fed info by the Ruskie gov is an unknown.

3) Mueller's exact words;

“[T]he investigation did not establish that members of the Trump Campaign conspired or coordinated with the Russian government in its election interference activities.”

There was no evidence of conspiracy or coordination.

 

[calamity]

The special counsel's final report was clear, Russia interfered in our elections and wanted Trump to win. Just two days ago, on Thursday morning, Trump finally admitted, after 2 1/2 years of denying it, that Russia helped him win. The only thing Mueller's report didn't find out is why Putin wanted Trump to win.

"Russia, Russia, Russia! That's all you heard at the beginning of this Witch Hunt Hoax...And now Russia has disappeared because I had nothing to do with Russia helping me to get elected. It was a crime that didn't exist."

Later Thursday, he stopped to take questions from reporters. Not surprisingly, he was asked about his admission that Russian had helped him win the election.

"Russia did not help me get elected. You know who got me elected? You know who got me elected? I got me elected. Russia did not help me at all."


So that's just one day of craziness back and forth from the president.

Putting aside what Trump has said, the 2 year investigation by the special counsel proved beyond a shadow of a doubt that Russia interfered in our election and specifically aided Trump to win over Hillary Clinton. Here's what everyone needs to ask themselves. Why? Putin had to know the risks involved if it was discovered that his government had hacked emails, stolen information and had interfered with the elections in the United States. So he was willing to pay a very high price to ensure that the next president of the United States was Donald J. Trump.

Here's my answer to my own question.

Since Ronald Reagan and the end of the Soviet Union, Republican presidential candidates like George H.W. Bush, Bob Dole, George W. Bush, John McCain and Mitt Romney have spoken of the need for a strong America as the best hope for the world to live in peace – and that Russia continued to be a threat to lasting peace. In fact, Romney, in one of the 2012 presidential debates against President Barack Obama, stated that Russia was "without question, our number one geopolitical foe."

So when did the Russians decide that the Republican candidate winning the presidency was in their best interest? And why?

First there was Putin's hatred for Hillary Clinton. In 2011, Putin strongly condemned comments by Clinton, who was Secretary of State, calling Russia's parliamentary elections "unfair". As was proved in the last election held in Russia, their elections were unfair to the max. There was blatant vote rigging and ballot stuffing that was even caught on camera. Did Putin and the Russian government interfere in American elections on behalf of the Republican candidate simply to take revenge on Clinton and her hard-line approach to the Putin administration?

Personally, I believe the entire objective of Vladimir Putin was to sow division and create chaos in the US. Donald Trump has been referred to as the 'chaos president'. For the party that led the effort to dismantle the Soviet Union, tear down the Berlin Wall and just five years ago believed that Russia was our number one geopolitical foe, perhaps the most important question there could be today is 'why'.

The Kremlin pulled off one of the greatest acts of political sabotage in modern history, turning American democracy against itself.

Trump is and always has been Putin's bitch. Everyone knows it, even the Trumpers. They are just too dishonest to own it.

 

[Eriech]

Trump is and always has been Putin's bitch. Everyone knows it, even the Trumpers. They are just too dishonest to own it.

Do you think that if you say it often it often enough it will presto bamo come true? Obama was Putin's bitch and the Democrat party is his useful idiots.

Sent from my SM-G892A using Tapatalk

 

[JustHanging]

Do you think that if you say it often it often enough it will presto bamo come true? Obama was Putin's bitch and the Democrat party is his useful idiots.

Sent from my SM-G892A using Tapatalk

The thing is, you're just making **** up because you got nothing.

Trump proved it.He stood on stage in Helsinki, and told the world that they should put their trust in Putin, and not in America. Trump was literally being Putin's bitch:

Helsinki summit: Trump sides with Putin over US intelligence



Show me when Obama did that. Sorry, the only "useful idiots" are Trump, and his merry band of supporters. Hell, Trump even states that he considers them to be idiots:

Donald Trump loves the 'poorly educated' — and they love him

Trump has said that's what he thinks of you. How does that feel?

 

[HumblePi]

Trump is and always has been Putin's bitch. Everyone knows it, even the Trumpers. They are just too dishonest to own it.

 

[Athanasius68]

Steele used other sources/resources as well. As for his Russian sources, there’s no evidence that they aided Steele on behalf of the Russian government.


Not hardly. A silly diversion attempt on your part.



You don’t know otherwise.

2. Russian sources does not mean the Russian government. Your own reference make clear that Steele was concerned about returning to Russia. If the Russian government were involved, Steele wouldn’t have had reason to be concerned. Steele bought information from trusted sources (read; individuals profiting from their insider knowledge) within/associated the Russian government. Do you understand the distinction?

3. Wrong. Mueller’s exact words; “that there was insufficient evidence to charge a broader conspiracy.”

1. We just spent the last two years saying how evil and rotten Putin is. Now we are going to give him the benefit of the doubt?

2. Not a diversion at all. A president has a right to think about firing, and firing, subordinate officials in the Executive branch. As the man himself was not under investigation, he is doing nothing more than exercising his authority.

 

[Eriech]

The thing is, you're just making **** up because you got nothing.

Trump proved it.He stood on stage in Helsinki, and told the world that they should put their trust in Putin, and not in America. Trump was literally being Putin's bitch:

Helsinki summit: Trump sides with Putin over US intelligence



Show me when Obama did that. Sorry, the only "useful idiots" are Trump, and his merry band of supporters. Hell, Trump even states that he considers them to be idiots:

Donald Trump loves the 'poorly educated' — and they love him

Trump has said that's what he thinks of you. How does that feel?

Did he whisper sweet nothings in Putin's ear....." I'll have greater flexibility after my reelection"

Look up useful idiots. Democrats have disrupted more than Putin could have ever dreamed.

Trump should as his want tag Democrats with the Useful idiot moniker.

Sent from my SM-G892A using Tapatalk

 

[JustHanging]

Did he whisper sweet nothings in Putin's ear....." I'll have greater flexibility after my reelection"

Haha! I absolutely love that quote. It tells us so much about the person who uses it.

So you know what they were talking about do you? You know what Obama was referring to do you? Part of the uppermost levels of government are you? Privy to all of Obama's conversations?

The best thing about that quote is, as I clearly demonstrated, it exposes the person who uses it for what they are.

Look up useful idiots. Democrats have disrupted more than Putin could have ever dreamed.

Obviously in your fevered dreams. But in reality? I would need to see proof. You don't really expect me to take the word of someone who believes whatever they're told, do you?

Trump should as his want tag Democrats with the Useful idiot moniker.

Yeah, Trump does do a lot of projecting. Remember "Lock her up!" :lamo

 

[RaleBulgarian]

1) Nor do you. Your declarative statement is incorrect.

2) All I said was anonymous Russian sources, whether or not these sources worked for or were being fed info by the Ruskie gov is an unknown.

3) Mueller's exact words;

“[T]he investigation did not establish that members of the Trump Campaign conspired or coordinated with the Russian government in its election interference activities.”

There was no evidence of conspiracy or coordination.

1. You acknowledged that you don’t know and then immediately claimed that I’m wrong? How does that make sense?

2. And all you meant was that Steele didn’t get info from the Russian government?

3. Uh-huh. That appears to contradict Mueller’s report. Where’d you get that statement from? Have you quoted Mueller fully in context? Link, please.

 

[RaleBulgarian]

1. We just spent the last two years saying how evil and rotten Putin is. Now we are going to give him the benefit of the doubt?

2. Not a diversion at all. A president has a right to think about firing, and firing, subordinate officials in the Executive branch. As the man himself was not under investigation, he is doing nothing more than exercising his authority.

1. Give Putin benefit of the doubt? Absolutely not. Use critical thinking skills, analyzing information available? Absolutely.

2. Not sure what you’re referring to.

 

[Athanasius68]

1. Give Putin benefit of the doubt? Absolutely not. Use critical thinking skills, analyzing information available? Absolutely.

2. Not sure what you’re referring to.

1. Ok-- well then at a time that Russia was attempting to screw with the election, why are we not interpreting anti- Trump propaganda from anonymous Russian sources sent to his political opponent as part of the plot? Particularly when Russia was also sending anti-Clinton propaganda to her opponent?

 

[RaleBulgarian]

1. Ok-- well then at a time that Russia was attempting to screw with the election, why are we not interpreting anti- Trump propaganda from anonymous Russian sources sent to his political opponent as part of the plot? Particularly when Russia was also sending anti-Clinton propaganda to her opponent?

Russia did interfere with the ‘16 election cycle even before it started, and they did target both sides however, once Trump and Clinton were nominated by their respective parties, only Clinton’s campaign was attacked.

 

[hanger4]

1. You acknowledged that you don’t know and then immediately claimed that I’m wrong? How does that make sense?

2. And all you meant was that Steele didn’t get info from the Russian government?

3. Uh-huh. That appears to contradict Mueller’s report. Where’d you get that statement from? Have you quoted Mueller fully in context? Link, please.

1) You made a declarative statement, it was incorrect, Steele did gather info from anonymous Russian sources.

2) Steele may have gotten some or all his info from Russian gov agents. Anonymous sources are just that, anonymous, unknown.

3) The quote is form Mueller's report, it is an independent clause, no amount of context can change it. Team Mueller "did not establish" a conspiracy or coordination. I suggest you ask Mueller why you believe he contradicted himself.

 

[RaleBulgarian]

1) You made a declarative statement, it was incorrect, Steele did gather info from anonymous Russian sources.

2) Steele may have gotten some or all his info from Russian gov agents. Anonymous sources are just that, anonymous, unknown.

3) The quote is form Mueller's report, it is an independent clause, no amount of context can change it. Team Mueller "did not establish" a conspiracy or coordination. I suggest you ask Mueller why you believe he contradicted himself.

1. I didn’t say Steele didn’t obtain information from anonymous Russian sources. I disputed that Steele’s report was comprised of information gathered from anonymous Russian sources. He collected information from other sources as well.

2. Already acknowledged.

3. Reference where exactly in his report that Mueller said there was “no evidence of conspiracy”.

 

[hanger4]

1. I didn’t say Steele didn’t obtain information from anonymous Russian sources. I disputed that Steele’s report was comprised of information gathered from anonymous Russian sources. He collected information from other sources as well.

2. Already acknowledged.

3. Reference where exactly in his report that Mueller said there was “no evidence of conspiracy”.

1) You said "Putin had nothing to do with the Steele dossier." I said "you don't know that".

3) It's in his conclusion phase 1 of his report;

“[T]he investigation did not establish that members of the Trump Campaign conspired or coordinated with the Russian government in its election interference activities.”

It was also quoted by Barr in his first public report concerning the completed Mueller investigation.