• This is a political forum that is non-biased/non-partisan and treats every person's position on topics equally. This debate forum is not aligned to any political party. In today's politics, many ideas are split between and even within all the political parties. Often we find ourselves agreeing on one platform but some topics break our mold. We are here to discuss them in a civil political debate. If this is your first visit to our political forums, be sure to check out the RULES. Registering for debate politics is necessary before posting. Register today to participate - it's free!

The shifting goal posts of Russian Collusion

rjay

Rocket Surgeon
DP Veteran
Joined
Oct 25, 2012
Messages
2,982
Reaction score
2,039
Gender
Undisclosed
Political Leaning
Independent
https://www.axios.com/trump-giuliani-evolving-denials-russian-collusion--d04aeed1-24cc-4609-bcf4-0632a2e193bd.html

Timeline

Nov. 11, 2016: Hope Hicks denies a report that Russian experts were in contact with the Trump campaign: “It never happened. There was no communication between the campaign and any foreign entity during the campaign.”

Dec. 18, 2016: Kellyanne Conway denies that there was any contact between the campaign and Russians: "Those conversations never happened. I hear people saying it like it’s a fact on television. That is just not only inaccurate and false, but it’s dangerous.”

Feb. 16, 2017: Trump says during a press conference, "I have nothing to do with Russia. To the best of my knowledge no person that I deal with does."

March 2017: In an interview with the New York Times, Donald Trump Jr. says, “Did I meet with people that were Russian? I’m sure, I’m sure I did. ... But none that were set up. None that I can think of at the moment.”

July 8, 2017: Trump Jr. responds to a Times report about the now-infamous June Trump Tower meeting with a Kremlin-linked lawyer: “We primarily discussed a program about the adoption of Russian children that was active and popular with American families years ago and was since ended by the Russian government, but it was not a campaign issue at that time and there was no follow-up."

July 9, 2017: Trump Jr. issues a second statement, after it's revealed that he set up the meeting after being promised damaging information on Hillary Clinton. "Her statements were vague, ambiguous and made no sense. No details or supporting information was provided or even offered. It quickly became clear that she had no meaningful information."

Dec. 28, 2017: Trump says in an interview with the Times, “There is no collusion, and even if there was, it’s not a crime.”

July 29, 2018: Giuliani says on Fox News, "When I say the Trump campaign, I mean the upper levels of the Trump campaign. I have no reason to believe anybody else [colluded]. The only ones I checked with obviously are the top four or five people.”

May 16, 2018: Giuliani tells Fox News' Laura Ingraham that looking for political "dirt" is a common practice, but that the important thing is that the campaign didn't use it: “Even if it comes from a Russian, or a German, or an American, it doesn’t matter. And they never used it, is the main thing. They never used it. They rejected it."

July 30, 2018: Giuliani doubles down on collusion not being a crime: "I don't even know if that's a crime, colluding with Russians. Hacking is the crime. The president didn't hack! He didn't pay for the hacking."

Dec. 16, 2018: Giuliani addresses reports that Michael Cohen has given special counsel Robert Mueller "valuable information" about possible ties between the Trump campaign and Russia: "I have no idea what they're talking about. I know that collusion is not a crime. It was over with by the time of the election.”

Jan. 16, 2019: Giuliani says on CNN, "I never said there was no collusion between the campaign, or between people in the campaign…If the collusion happened, it happened a long time ago.”
 

DaveFagan

Iconoclast
DP Veteran
Joined
Mar 20, 2011
Messages
10,090
Reaction score
5,056
Location
wny
Gender
Undisclosed
Political Leaning
Conservative
The timeline is accurate. The only thing I know is about Trump attempting to sell the "naming rights" to a Moscow Hotel. To be a Trump Hotel. So what. If he can sell his tarnished name, more power to him. Is it political? Sounds like business to me, and I am no fan of Trump.
\/
 

rjay

Rocket Surgeon
DP Veteran
Joined
Oct 25, 2012
Messages
2,982
Reaction score
2,039
Gender
Undisclosed
Political Leaning
Independent
The timeline is accurate. The only thing I know is about Trump attempting to sell the "naming rights" to a Moscow Hotel. To be a Trump Hotel. So what. If he can sell his tarnished name, more power to him. Is it political? Sounds like business to me, and I am no fan of Trump.
\/

I could agree with you except..... Why not tell the truth? Why lie until it is found out you lied. Then tell a new lie, until that is proven a lie. Then come up with a new lie?

At some point you have to wonder if maybe the lies are to cover up an unacceptable truth.
 

ataraxia

DP Veteran
Joined
Nov 18, 2016
Messages
36,548
Reaction score
16,292
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Liberal
This whole investigation has gotten so complicated I have lost track of what is what.

That may be part of the Trump strategy. They know it's unlikely anyone is going to indict a sitting president. That's a legal matter and would entail judges and juries who actually have to pay attention to the details. But they know it's really about impeachment, and that's a political matter. So given that fact, the strategy probably is just throw so much smoke and junk out there that the average non-partisan Joe just can't keep up with it all, gets frustrated, and finally just gives up and shrugs it off with a "a pox on both your houses." Trump wins and gets to stay in the whitehouse.

Given the short attention span of the American public (me included), that's a strategy which may very likely work.
 
Last edited:

Cardinal

Respected On All Sides
DP Veteran
Joined
Jun 20, 2008
Messages
96,926
Reaction score
81,183
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Undisclosed
This whole investigation has gotten so complicated I have lost track of what is what.

That may be part of the Trump strategy. They know it's unlikely anyone is going to indict a sitting president. That's a legal matter and would entail judges and juries who actually have to pay attention to the details. But they know it's really about impeachment, and that's a political matter. So given that fact, the strategy probably is just throw so much smoke and junk out there that the average non-partisan Joe just can't keep up with it all, gets frustrated, and finally just gives up and shrugs it off with a "a pox on both your houses." Trump wins and gets to stay in the whitehouse.

Given the short attention span of the American public (me included), that's a strategy which may very likely work.

The relationship between Trump, his campaign officials and Russia happened over the course of many years, was multi-tiered and happened between countless different individuals and for different agendas, and sub-agendas and sub-sub-agendas and agendas that were completely parallel to those other agendas.

Following the investigation while it's happening is like putting together a 5000 piece puzzle, except you're only supplied with a piece or two every couple weeks. Oh, and some of the puzzle pieces belong to different puzzles.

Still, there are enough crucial things that we understand now that are actually sufficient for moving ahead with impeachment. I worry that people are holding out for a fabled "smoking gun" that will tie everything up, not appreciating that what we already know is enough.
 

DaveFagan

Iconoclast
DP Veteran
Joined
Mar 20, 2011
Messages
10,090
Reaction score
5,056
Location
wny
Gender
Undisclosed
Political Leaning
Conservative
I could agree with you except..... Why not tell the truth? Why lie until it is found out you lied. Then tell a new lie, until that is proven a lie. Then come up with a new lie?

At some point you have to wonder if maybe the lies are to cover up an unacceptable truth.

Sounds logical, but Trump seems to be a pathological liar, so anything is a possibility. I just haven't seen any Russian collusion in the matter.
/
 

tres borrachos

HoHoHo
Supporting Member
DP Veteran
Joined
Feb 20, 2012
Messages
101,939
Reaction score
80,440
Location
Biden's 'Murica
Gender
Female
Political Leaning
Moderate
https://www.axios.com/trump-giuliani-evolving-denials-russian-collusion--d04aeed1-24cc-4609-bcf4-0632a2e193bd.html

Timeline

Nov. 11, 2016: Hope Hicks denies a report that Russian experts were in contact with the Trump campaign: “It never happened. There was no communication between the campaign and any foreign entity during the campaign.”

Dec. 18, 2016: Kellyanne Conway denies that there was any contact between the campaign and Russians: "Those conversations never happened. I hear people saying it like it’s a fact on television. That is just not only inaccurate and false, but it’s dangerous.”

Feb. 16, 2017: Trump says during a press conference, "I have nothing to do with Russia. To the best of my knowledge no person that I deal with does."

March 2017: In an interview with the New York Times, Donald Trump Jr. says, “Did I meet with people that were Russian? I’m sure, I’m sure I did. ... But none that were set up. None that I can think of at the moment.”

July 8, 2017: Trump Jr. responds to a Times report about the now-infamous June Trump Tower meeting with a Kremlin-linked lawyer: “We primarily discussed a program about the adoption of Russian children that was active and popular with American families years ago and was since ended by the Russian government, but it was not a campaign issue at that time and there was no follow-up."

July 9, 2017: Trump Jr. issues a second statement, after it's revealed that he set up the meeting after being promised damaging information on Hillary Clinton. "Her statements were vague, ambiguous and made no sense. No details or supporting information was provided or even offered. It quickly became clear that she had no meaningful information."

Dec. 28, 2017: Trump says in an interview with the Times, “There is no collusion, and even if there was, it’s not a crime.”

July 29, 2018: Giuliani says on Fox News, "When I say the Trump campaign, I mean the upper levels of the Trump campaign. I have no reason to believe anybody else [colluded]. The only ones I checked with obviously are the top four or five people.”

May 16, 2018: Giuliani tells Fox News' Laura Ingraham that looking for political "dirt" is a common practice, but that the important thing is that the campaign didn't use it: “Even if it comes from a Russian, or a German, or an American, it doesn’t matter. And they never used it, is the main thing. They never used it. They rejected it."

July 30, 2018: Giuliani doubles down on collusion not being a crime: "I don't even know if that's a crime, colluding with Russians. Hacking is the crime. The president didn't hack! He didn't pay for the hacking."

Dec. 16, 2018: Giuliani addresses reports that Michael Cohen has given special counsel Robert Mueller "valuable information" about possible ties between the Trump campaign and Russia: "I have no idea what they're talking about. I know that collusion is not a crime. It was over with by the time of the election.”

Jan. 16, 2019: Giuliani says on CNN, "I never said there was no collusion between the campaign, or between people in the campaign…If the collusion happened, it happened a long time ago.”

Oh the irony of Kellyanne Conway talking about dangerous.....
 

Objective Voice

DP Veteran
Joined
Apr 14, 2008
Messages
12,201
Reaction score
4,726
Location
Huntsville, AL (USA)
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Moderate
The relationship between Trump, his campaign officials and Russia happened over the course of many years, was multi-tiered and happened between countless different individuals and for different agendas, and sub-agendas and sub-sub-agendas and agendas that were completely parallel to those other agendas.

Following the investigation while it's happening is like putting together a 5000 piece puzzle, except you're only supplied with a piece or two every couple weeks. Oh, and some of the puzzle pieces belong to different puzzles.

Still, there are enough crucial things that we understand now that are actually sufficient for moving ahead with impeachment. I worry that people are holding out for a fabled "smoking gun" that will tie everything up, not appreciating that what we already know is enough.

I seriously doubt you'd find any notes, memos or emails, audio or video recordings that would directly implicate anyone in the Trump campaign of any wrong-doing. The Mueller team is left with piecing together a story of what really happened and why. From the start, Donald Trump, Sr. has tried to convince the public "he had no business dealings" with Russia. That's significant because from everything we currently know about his efforts to build a Trump International Tower in Moscow, that would be true. But he's also tried to claim he didn't know Putin, had never met him and that no one in his campaign had any contact with Russians for any reason during the campaign. We now know this isn't true.

So, now the question people looking at this investigation as clear-eyed as possible have to ask themselves is: "What kind of relationship did Donald Trump, Sr. and all of his campaign/Administration associates or just plain associates (i.e., Michael Cohen and Roger Stone) have with the Russians? If it were all business, you'd think that not only himself but everyone else who had legitimate business dealings with Russia would just come right out and say so from the very start. But Team Trump has been acting as if they've got something to hide because their story keeps changing moment-by-moment, day-to-day.

I think it's very legit to ask why 10 people from Trump's campaign/inner-circle were in close contact/had close associations with Russians particularly in the run-up to and during the 2016 presidential campaign:

* Paul Manafort
* Michael Flynn
* Jeff Sessions
* Rex Tillerson
* Donald Trump, Jr.
* Jared Kushner
* George Papadopolis
* Carter Page
* Michael Cohen
* Roger Stone

Twelve if you include Donald Trump, Sr. himself.

Keep this in mind as well: No other presidential campaign has had so many individuals so closely linked to a geopolitical foe to the U.S. since FDR - and he only had one that we're aware of and look at all the flack he got way back then. That's an 11:1 ratio compared to all of Pres. Trump's campaign associates. I really don't understand how people can't look at this and not think something's not right about it.
 

rjay

Rocket Surgeon
DP Veteran
Joined
Oct 25, 2012
Messages
2,982
Reaction score
2,039
Gender
Undisclosed
Political Leaning
Independent
I seriously doubt you'd find any notes, memos or emails, audio or video recordings that would directly implicate anyone in the Trump campaign of any wrong-doing. The Mueller team is left with piecing together a story of what really happened and why. From the start, Donald Trump, Sr. has tried to convince the public "he had no business dealings" with Russia. That's significant because from everything we currently know about his efforts to build a Trump International Tower in Moscow, that would be true. But he's also tried to claim he didn't know Putin, had never met him and that no one in his campaign had any contact with Russians for any reason during the campaign. We now know this isn't true.

So, now the question people looking at this investigation as clear-eyed as possible have to ask themselves is: "What kind of relationship did Donald Trump, Sr. and all of his campaign/Administration associates or just plain associates (i.e., Michael Cohen and Roger Stone) have with the Russians? If it were all business, you'd think that not only himself but everyone else who had legitimate business dealings with Russia would just come right out and say so from the very start. But Team Trump has been acting as if they've got something to hide because their story keeps changing moment-by-moment, day-to-day.

I think it's very legit to ask why 10 people from Trump's campaign/inner-circle were in close contact/had close associations with Russians particularly in the run-up to and during the 2016 presidential campaign:

* Paul Manafort
* Michael Flynn
* Jeff Sessions
* Rex Tillerson
* Donald Trump, Jr.
* Jared Kushner
* George Papadopolis
* Carter Page
* Michael Cohen
* Roger Stone

Twelve if you include Donald Trump, Sr. himself.

Keep this in mind as well: No other presidential campaign has had so many individuals so closely linked to a geopolitical foe to the U.S. since FDR - and he only had one that we're aware of and look at all the flack he got way back then. That's an 11:1 ratio compared to all of Pres. Trump's campaign associates. I really don't understand how people can't look at this and not think something's not right about it.

If it were all business you have to wonder what Russia would want with internal polling data. This is the type of data you might be interested in if you were going to try to target specific areas of the Country with a disinformation campaign.
 

Mr Person

A Little Bitter
Supporting Member
DP Veteran
Monthly Donator
Joined
Oct 14, 2015
Messages
59,290
Reaction score
49,672
Location
Massachusetts
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Other
https://www.axios.com/trump-giulian...on--d04aeed1-24cc-4609-bcf4-0632a2e193bd.html

Timeline

Nov. 11, 2016: Hope Hicks denies a report that Russian experts were in contact with the Trump campaign: “It never happened. There was no communication between the campaign and any foreign entity during the campaign.”

Dec. 18, 2016: Kellyanne Conway denies that there was any contact between the campaign and Russians: "Those conversations never happened. I hear people saying it like it’s a fact on television. That is just not only inaccurate and false, but it’s dangerous.”

Feb. 16, 2017: Trump says during a press conference, "I have nothing to do with Russia. To the best of my knowledge no person that I deal with does."

March 2017: In an interview with the New York Times, Donald Trump Jr. says, “Did I meet with people that were Russian? I’m sure, I’m sure I did. ... But none that were set up. None that I can think of at the moment.”

July 8, 2017: Trump Jr. responds to a Times report about the now-infamous June Trump Tower meeting with a Kremlin-linked lawyer: “We primarily discussed a program about the adoption of Russian children that was active and popular with American families years ago and was since ended by the Russian government, but it was not a campaign issue at that time and there was no follow-up."

July 9, 2017: Trump Jr. issues a second statement, after it's revealed that he set up the meeting after being promised damaging information on Hillary Clinton. "Her statements were vague, ambiguous and made no sense. No details or supporting information was provided or even offered. It quickly became clear that she had no meaningful information."

Dec. 28, 2017: Trump says in an interview with the Times, “There is no collusion, and even if there was, it’s not a crime.”

July 29, 2018: Giuliani says on Fox News, "When I say the Trump campaign, I mean the upper levels of the Trump campaign. I have no reason to believe anybody else [colluded]. The only ones I checked with obviously are the top four or five people.”

May 16, 2018: Giuliani tells Fox News' Laura Ingraham that looking for political "dirt" is a common practice, but that the important thing is that the campaign didn't use it: “Even if it comes from a Russian, or a German, or an American, it doesn’t matter. And they never used it, is the main thing. They never used it. They rejected it."

July 30, 2018: Giuliani doubles down on collusion not being a crime: "I don't even know if that's a crime, colluding with Russians. Hacking is the crime. The president didn't hack! He didn't pay for the hacking."

Dec. 16, 2018: Giuliani addresses reports that Michael Cohen has given special counsel Robert Mueller "valuable information" about possible ties between the Trump campaign and Russia: "I have no idea what they're talking about. I know that collusion is not a crime. It was over with by the time of the election.”

Jan. 16, 2019: Giuliani says on CNN, "I never said there was no collusion between the campaign, or between people in the campaign…If the collusion happened, it happened a long time ago.”

But, you see, Mueller was actually a closeted liberal all his life, so it makes sense to defensively lie about everything to protect oneself from the Vast Liberal Conspiracy.
 

Objective Voice

DP Veteran
Joined
Apr 14, 2008
Messages
12,201
Reaction score
4,726
Location
Huntsville, AL (USA)
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Moderate
If it were all business you have to wonder what Russia would want with internal polling data. This is the type of data you might be interested in if you were going to try to target specific areas of the Country with a disinformation campaign.

It's why I've said for quite some time now that Cambridge Analytica is the key that connects it all. It should be clear to anyone whose followed this Trump campaign collusion story that the Trump campaign had a two-prong attack plan going: 1) get whatever dirt they could on Hillary no matter where it came from to undermine her; and, 2) coordinate with any entity they could find that was willing to help give Trump the edge in this election. If they could do either or both discretely, it's all good.

It wouldn't surprise me to learn per the Mueller report (once he finishes it) that Team Trump used 3rd party entities close to the campaign or Trump himself but not directly part of the campaign itself to act as intermediaries to obtain the information they wanted. Roger Stone, Michael Cohen, Donald Trump, Jr fit that bill. You could even throw Jeff Sessions in the mix since few people would have suspected him as a politician who routinely works with foreign officials. In fact, the entire storyline that every "businessman" in the Trump campaign were only conducting business very likely was a rouse to give them cover in the dealings with the Russians. In that way, who would question their interactions?

Now that we know Manafort leaked polling data to the Russians and Roger Stone actually communicated with people inside WikiLeaks (if not Julian Assange himself) and Donald Trump, Jr was eager to meet with Russians in Trump Tower to get dirt on Hillary, I don't think folks can ignore collusion anymore. They question now is "Who gave the order and how far did it go?"
 

Objective Voice

DP Veteran
Joined
Apr 14, 2008
Messages
12,201
Reaction score
4,726
Location
Huntsville, AL (USA)
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Moderate
In addition to the above, people appear to fall into two camps over this Russian collusion:

a) Trump's innocent, he did nothing wrong even if others around him broke the law; or,

b) He's guilty as sin; Mueller's going to find that smoking gun to nail him to the wall.

I'm in the c) camp...there is no definitive smoking gun. As I stated above, you won't find a memo, an audio/video tape or anything like that which perfectly spells out "Trump gave the Code Red". That's just not going to happen. But what has already been shown is there are enough dots to connect to make a clear case that Pres. Trump knew what the FBI's initial investigation under Comey would ultimately lead to and he tried to stop it on at least three separate occasions. Here are the facts:

1. ~NEW DETAIL~ According to former Gov. Chris "Crispy-Cream" Christie, Pres. Trump's son-in-law, Jared "The Boy" Kushner convinced his father-in-law that by firing Michael Flynn, the Russia investigation would be stopped dead in its tracks. WRONG! That just led to more questions than answers.

2. Despite the excuse Pres. Trump and Deputy AG Rosenstine gave in firing former FBI Director James Comey (all six memos can be found here), Pres. Trump gave a completely different reason during his interview with NBC's Lester Holt.

3. And then there is the constant harassment and subsequent firing of former U.S. Attorney General Jeff Sessions whose only mistake was recusing himself from the Russia investigation, whereby, he could no longer provide adequate cover for Trump. This protection ranged from halting the Russia investigation outright to attempting to declare "executive privilege" on the President's behalf.

Now, one could say this is all part of obstructing justice not collusion, but think about it this way: "Why would the President of the United States try so hard to halt an investigation AND protect himself from it if he had nothing to hide?"

I think the dots have already been connected. People just need to take the blinders off to see it. You don't try covering up your dirty deeds unless your hands are dirty.
 

Moderate Right

DP Veteran
Joined
Oct 21, 2015
Messages
53,813
Reaction score
10,864
Location
Kentucky
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Slightly Conservative
https://www.axios.com/trump-giuliani-evolving-denials-russian-collusion--d04aeed1-24cc-4609-bcf4-0632a2e193bd.html

Timeline

Nov. 11, 2016: Hope Hicks denies a report that Russian experts were in contact with the Trump campaign: “It never happened. There was no communication between the campaign and any foreign entity during the campaign.”

Dec. 18, 2016: Kellyanne Conway denies that there was any contact between the campaign and Russians: "Those conversations never happened. I hear people saying it like it’s a fact on television. That is just not only inaccurate and false, but it’s dangerous.”

Feb. 16, 2017: Trump says during a press conference, "I have nothing to do with Russia. To the best of my knowledge no person that I deal with does."

March 2017: In an interview with the New York Times, Donald Trump Jr. says, “Did I meet with people that were Russian? I’m sure, I’m sure I did. ... But none that were set up. None that I can think of at the moment.”

July 8, 2017: Trump Jr. responds to a Times report about the now-infamous June Trump Tower meeting with a Kremlin-linked lawyer: “We primarily discussed a program about the adoption of Russian children that was active and popular with American families years ago and was since ended by the Russian government, but it was not a campaign issue at that time and there was no follow-up."

July 9, 2017: Trump Jr. issues a second statement, after it's revealed that he set up the meeting after being promised damaging information on Hillary Clinton. "Her statements were vague, ambiguous and made no sense. No details or supporting information was provided or even offered. It quickly became clear that she had no meaningful information."

Dec. 28, 2017: Trump says in an interview with the Times, “There is no collusion, and even if there was, it’s not a crime.”

July 29, 2018: Giuliani says on Fox News, "When I say the Trump campaign, I mean the upper levels of the Trump campaign. I have no reason to believe anybody else [colluded]. The only ones I checked with obviously are the top four or five people.”

May 16, 2018: Giuliani tells Fox News' Laura Ingraham that looking for political "dirt" is a common practice, but that the important thing is that the campaign didn't use it: “Even if it comes from a Russian, or a German, or an American, it doesn’t matter. And they never used it, is the main thing. They never used it. They rejected it."

July 30, 2018: Giuliani doubles down on collusion not being a crime: "I don't even know if that's a crime, colluding with Russians. Hacking is the crime. The president didn't hack! He didn't pay for the hacking."

Dec. 16, 2018: Giuliani addresses reports that Michael Cohen has given special counsel Robert Mueller "valuable information" about possible ties between the Trump campaign and Russia: "I have no idea what they're talking about. I know that collusion is not a crime. It was over with by the time of the election.”

Jan. 16, 2019: Giuliani says on CNN, "I never said there was no collusion between the campaign, or between people in the campaign…If the collusion happened, it happened a long time ago.”

The goal posts that have been shifting are on the left. Not one bit of Russian Collusion against Trump or his campaign has ever been proven. In fact, with an almost two year Mueller investigation and 30 million dollars, House Democrats want to open up even more investigations because they apparently have given up on Mueller ever finding anything. If they had confidence in Mueller finding anything they would let Mueller do his job and would need no more investigations by the House. It just proves it is all a political witch hunt to find something, anything, even if it is a Trump fixed parking ticket.
 

Good4Nothin

DP Veteran
Joined
Nov 24, 2018
Messages
11,748
Reaction score
2,618
Gender
Female
Political Leaning
Slightly Conservative
The goal posts that have been shifting are on the left. Not one bit of Russian Collusion against Trump or his campaign has ever been proven. In fact, with an almost two year Mueller investigation and 30 million dollars, House Democrats want to open up even more investigations because they apparently have given up on Mueller ever finding anything. If they had confidence in Mueller finding anything they would let Mueller do his job and would need no more investigations by the House. It just proves it is all a political witch hunt to find something, anything, even if it is a Trump fixed parking ticket.

Yes I think so. And by the way, any president who has done international business could be accused of this kind of thing. Very convenient for the Democrats. But they still can't find any crimes.
 

rjay

Rocket Surgeon
DP Veteran
Joined
Oct 25, 2012
Messages
2,982
Reaction score
2,039
Gender
Undisclosed
Political Leaning
Independent
The goal posts that have been shifting are on the left. Not one bit of Russian Collusion against Trump or his campaign has ever been proven. In fact, with an almost two year Mueller investigation and 30 million dollars, House Democrats want to open up even more investigations because they apparently have given up on Mueller ever finding anything. If they had confidence in Mueller finding anything they would let Mueller do his job and would need no more investigations by the House. It just proves it is all a political witch hunt to find something, anything, even if it is a Trump fixed parking ticket.

Nice try at deflecting. I would be happy to discuss the points you think you are raising but first you have to address the point of the OP.

Don't try to shift the goal posts.

Is it your view that the response from the White House has been consistent and steadfast from day one? If so, support that contention. Then bring up your counter narrative and I will address that.

If your only response is The White House are the good guys and the rest are the bad guys, then you embarrass yourself.

If you want to engage, do so. So far you have not.
 

Moderate Right

DP Veteran
Joined
Oct 21, 2015
Messages
53,813
Reaction score
10,864
Location
Kentucky
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Slightly Conservative
Nice try at deflecting. I would be happy to discuss the points you think you are raising but first you have to address the point of the OP.

Don't try to shift the goal posts.

Is it your view that the response from the White House has been consistent and steadfast from day one? If so, support that contention. Then bring up your counter narrative and I will address that.

If your only response is The White House are the good guys and the rest are the bad guys, then you embarrass yourself.

If you want to engage, do so. So far you have not.

No president, nominee, or candidate has been consistent and steadfast from day one. It's called politics.
 

marke

Banned
DP Veteran
Joined
Aug 3, 2018
Messages
34,752
Reaction score
3,961
Location
north carolina
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Very Conservative
https://www.axios.com/trump-giuliani-evolving-denials-russian-collusion--d04aeed1-24cc-4609-bcf4-0632a2e193bd.html

Timeline

Nov. 11, 2016: Hope Hicks denies a report that Russian experts were in contact with the Trump campaign: “It never happened. There was no communication between the campaign and any foreign entity during the campaign.”

Dec. 18, 2016: Kellyanne Conway denies that there was any contact between the campaign and Russians: "Those conversations never happened. I hear people saying it like it’s a fact on television. That is just not only inaccurate and false, but it’s dangerous.”

Feb. 16, 2017: Trump says during a press conference, "I have nothing to do with Russia. To the best of my knowledge no person that I deal with does."

March 2017: In an interview with the New York Times, Donald Trump Jr. says, “Did I meet with people that were Russian? I’m sure, I’m sure I did. ... But none that were set up. None that I can think of at the moment.”

July 8, 2017: Trump Jr. responds to a Times report about the now-infamous June Trump Tower meeting with a Kremlin-linked lawyer: “We primarily discussed a program about the adoption of Russian children that was active and popular with American families years ago and was since ended by the Russian government, but it was not a campaign issue at that time and there was no follow-up."

July 9, 2017: Trump Jr. issues a second statement, after it's revealed that he set up the meeting after being promised damaging information on Hillary Clinton. "Her statements were vague, ambiguous and made no sense. No details or supporting information was provided or even offered. It quickly became clear that she had no meaningful information."

Dec. 28, 2017: Trump says in an interview with the Times, “There is no collusion, and even if there was, it’s not a crime.”

July 29, 2018: Giuliani says on Fox News, "When I say the Trump campaign, I mean the upper levels of the Trump campaign. I have no reason to believe anybody else [colluded]. The only ones I checked with obviously are the top four or five people.”

May 16, 2018: Giuliani tells Fox News' Laura Ingraham that looking for political "dirt" is a common practice, but that the important thing is that the campaign didn't use it: “Even if it comes from a Russian, or a German, or an American, it doesn’t matter. And they never used it, is the main thing. They never used it. They rejected it."

July 30, 2018: Giuliani doubles down on collusion not being a crime: "I don't even know if that's a crime, colluding with Russians. Hacking is the crime. The president didn't hack! He didn't pay for the hacking."

Dec. 16, 2018: Giuliani addresses reports that Michael Cohen has given special counsel Robert Mueller "valuable information" about possible ties between the Trump campaign and Russia: "I have no idea what they're talking about. I know that collusion is not a crime. It was over with by the time of the election.”

Jan. 16, 2019: Giuliani says on CNN, "I never said there was no collusion between the campaign, or between people in the campaign…If the collusion happened, it happened a long time ago.”

Democrats have no proof that Trump colluded with the Russians to influence the elections. However, all politicians have proof that Hillary and the DNC, along with Obama followers in the FBI, colluded with anti-Trump seditionists working with Russians to derail Trump in the 2016 election.
 

rjay

Rocket Surgeon
DP Veteran
Joined
Oct 25, 2012
Messages
2,982
Reaction score
2,039
Gender
Undisclosed
Political Leaning
Independent
Democrats have no proof that Trump colluded with the Russians to influence the elections. However, all politicians have proof that Hillary and the DNC, along with Obama followers in the FBI, colluded with anti-Trump seditionists working with Russians to derail Trump in the 2016 election.

Giuliani
"I don't even know if that's a crime, colluding with Russians. Hacking is the crime. The president didn't hack! He didn't pay for the hacking."

Giuliani :
"I have no idea what they're talking about. I know that collusion is not a crime. It was over with by the time of the election.”
 

lwf

DP Veteran
Joined
Aug 15, 2018
Messages
16,785
Reaction score
10,811
Location
PNW
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Independent
No president, nominee, or candidate has been consistent and steadfast from day one. It's called politics.

So is it your view that a good politician should be expected to constantly lie through his teeth to the FBI and his own voters about things that aren't really crimes even if they were true?
 
Top Bottom