Trump and His Associates Had More Than 100 Contacts With Russians Before the Inauguration

[marke]

The facts of the case don't verify any such thing because Mueller hasn't come out and stated which links are suspect and which are legitimate. So you don't know crap, you are just taking the NYT's word at face value, which is just a stupid thing to do.

Except your hypothetical anecdote compared a murder contract a public speech in which a joke was being made. That is, NO ONE took it seriously, as you are well aware. Now we have partisans, like yourself, coming back and claiming it was totes legit and stuff. :roll:

Muller had better wrap up his sham investigation and get out of town because a new boss is finally coming to set his messy affairs kin order and clean his dirty messes up. His new Boss who will be his boss and will act like it for a change.

 

[iguanaman]

Muller had better wrap up his sham investigation and get out of town because a new boss is finally coming to set his messy affairs kin order and clean his dirty messes up. His new Boss who will be his boss and will act like it for a change.

No one is going to "boss" Mueller around. He will go straight to Congress and they will take your "boss" to the cleaners. Congress is responsible for oversight of the executive and interfering with Muller is abuse of power.

 

[marke]

No one is going to "boss" Mueller around. He will go straight to Congress and they will take your "boss" to the cleaners. Congress is responsible for oversight of the executive and interfering with Muller is abuse of power.

Congress can do the Herr Muller whine and dance to the tune of fake Vietnam Indian chief drum beaters.

 

[ashurbanipal]

The facts of the case don't verify any such thing because Mueller hasn't come out and stated which links are suspect and which are legitimate.

What are you talking about? It doesn't take Mueller, or anyone else, saying anything about anything. The mere fact that Trump said "find the emails, Russian hackers" and Russian hackers went after the emails in a matter of hours is the verified direct link. That's all that is needed for a direct link. It's like you're thinking of Mueller as some kind of priest who has to come forward and bless a ritual or something before it becomes part of reality...which is absurd.

Except your hypothetical anecdote compared a murder contract a public speech in which a joke was being made. That is, NO ONE took it seriously, as you are well aware.

I hate to tell you, but a lot of people took it seriously. Including some Russians. I took it seriously. So did most of the people I know, and that was before the emails were hacked. To quote a song from the 90's: you can't shake the Devil's hand and say you're only kidding.

 

[OpportunityCost]

What are you talking about? It doesn't take Mueller, or anyone else, saying anything about anything. The mere fact that Trump said "find the emails, Russian hackers" and Russian hackers went after the emails in a matter of hours is the verified direct link. That's all that is needed for a direct link. It's like you're thinking of Mueller as some kind of priest who has to come forward and bless a ritual or something before it becomes part of reality...which is absurd.

https://www.businessinsider.com/sep...jim-mcgreevey-elected-governor-of-the-state-6

These all happened on 9/11 there must be a link...somewhere...

Mueller has all the evidence, if there were something in a communication eliciting Russian help in a real context and not a joke, it would corroborate.

I hate to tell you, but a lot of people took it seriously. Including some Russians. I took it seriously. So did most of the people I know, and that was before the emails were hacked. To quote a song from the 90's: you can't shake the Devil's hand and say you're only kidding.

You're right, a lot of butthurt democrats looking for a scapegoat why their chosen one lost believed it. Because they needed to.

 

[srexob715]

LOL I'm so glad you aren't sure. Try to use that as court evidence, the dismissal will be so fast your lawyer wont even have billable time.

Sadly you don't have to go to court to form beliefs like you think. Lmao

 

[ashurbanipal]

https://www.businessinsider.com/sep...jim-mcgreevey-elected-governor-of-the-state-6

These all happened on 9/11 there must be a link...somewhere...

Do any of those involve instances of the 9/11 terrorists telling someone to do something, and then that person doing it? Is there video of Mohammed Atta talking to the Condit grand jury, telling them to reject the accusation against him? Or video of him telling Liz Lange to hold a maternity fashion show in Bryant Park? No? Then these are hardly relevant to my point. Find a case where person A instructs person B to do X, B then does X, and explain how there's not a direct link from A to X, and then you may have a case. Otherwise, you're (apparently deliberately) missing the point.

Mueller has all the evidence, if there were something in a communication eliciting Russian help in a real context and not a joke, it would corroborate.

In this case, we have all the evidence necessary to draw the conclusion that there's a direct link. Trump said to the Russians "Hey, if you're listening, find Hillary's emails" and then a few hours later the Russians went and did just that. Calling it a joke only makes you look worse, frankly. That's the tactic of a five-year-old trying to avoid responsibility.

You're right, a lot of butthurt democrats looking for a scapegoat why their chosen one lost believed it. Because they needed to.

No one had won or lost the election at the time Donald Trump said those words. I'm saying I, and everyone I know (including a few Trump supporters), thought he was being serious at the time he said it. So did a lot of other people, including some anonymous Russian hackers, apparently. Again, you're trying to shake the Devil's hand and then say you're only kidding. Reasonable people see through that straight away.

 

[srexob715]

Muller had better wrap up his sham investigation and get out of town because a new boss is finally coming to set his messy affairs kin order and clean his dirty messes up. His new Boss who will be his boss and will act like it for a change.

And indictments make you look like you have some screws loose. Don't you hate how evidence works. Lmao

 

[OpportunityCost]

Sadly you don't have to go to court to form beliefs like you think. Lmao

Belief is not fact. Proving it in a court of law is fact. Get some facts.

 

[OpportunityCost]

Do any of those involve instances of the 9/11 terrorists telling someone to do something, and then that person doing it? Is there video of Mohammed Atta talking to the Condit grand jury, telling them to reject the accusation against him? Or video of him telling Liz Lange to hold a maternity fashion show in Bryant Park? No? Then these are hardly relevant to my point. Find a case where person A instructs person B to do X, B then does X, and explain how there's not a direct link from A to X, and then you may have a case. Otherwise, you're (apparently deliberately) missing the point.

You are missing the point. It was a joke and almost everyone seems to realize that except extremely partisan butthurt democrats.

In this case, we have all the evidence necessary to draw the conclusion that there's a direct link. Trump said to the Russians "Hey, if you're listening, find Hillary's emails" and then a few hours later the Russians went and did just that. Calling it a joke only makes you look worse, frankly. That's the tactic of a five-year-old trying to avoid responsibility.

Calling it a joke when it was, in fact, a joke doesn't make it anything other than a joke.

No one had won or lost the election at the time Donald Trump said those words. I'm saying I, and everyone I know (including a few Trump supporters), thought he was being serious at the time he said it. So did a lot of other people, including some anonymous Russian hackers, apparently. Again, you're trying to shake the Devil's hand and then say you're only kidding. Reasonable people see through that straight away.

"Everyone you know". Anecdotal.

How about a timeline---the Russians were actively pursuing multiple angles to interfere in the election.

https://www.politifact.com/truth-o-...-investigation-donald-trump-timeline-updated/

 

[marke]

And indictments make you look like you have some screws loose. Don't you hate how evidence works. Lmao

I do not approve of the way the wicked unjustly railroaded Jesus either.

 

[ashurbanipal]

You are missing the point. It was a joke and almost everyone seems to realize that except extremely partisan butthurt democrats.

Apparently staff at the New York Times thought it was serious at the time:

https://www.nytimes.com/2016/07/28/us/politics/donald-trump-russia-clinton-emails.html

You may consider them partisan, but since no one had won the election at that time, it's hard to figure out why they'd be "butthurt." Other organizations that apparently thought they were serious remarks include:

https://www.theguardian.com/us-news/video/2016/jul/27/donald-trump-russia-dnc-email-hack-video

https://www.cnbc.com/2016/07/27/trump-hope-russia-finds-the-30000-emails-that-are-missing.html

https://www.washingtonpost.com/news...py-on-hillary-clinton/?utm_term=.0974f9469964

https://thehill.com/blogs/ballot-bo...-i-hope-russia-is-able-to-get-clintons-emails

http://time.com/4426272/donald-trump-hillary-clinton-russia-emails/

https://www.usatoday.com/story/news...orida-scranton-democratic-covention/87607166/

https://www.businessinsider.com/trump-russian-hackers-clinton-emails-2016-7

https://newrepublic.com/minutes/135614/trump-sarcastic-asked-russia-hack-hillary-clinton

And so on. Your claim that everyone other than "butthurt" partisan democrats realized it was a joke at the time is incorrect. Certainly, democrats tended to hammer on Trump's remarks more, but that's just not relevant. Trump was not joking. He didn't sound like he was joking. Plenty of people thought he was being serious. And again, the Russians did what he asked within a few hours of him asking.

"Everyone you know". Anecdotal.

It's irrelevant that it's anecdotal. Your claim was that:

NO ONE took it seriously

To show your claim false, I need only come up with one counter example. I personally know of several, including myself. And now all the links above.

How about a timeline---the Russians were actively pursuing multiple angles to interfere in the election.

https://www.politifact.com/truth-o-...-investigation-donald-trump-timeline-updated/

What, exactly, is this supposed to show? The Russians were indeed pursuing a number of angles. But they first started pursuing this angle within hours of Trump's remarks. According to the timeline you've posted, the plot to interfere in the 2016 election began in Spring of 2014--over two years before the Russians attempted to hack Hillary's emails. The notion that they were getting to it, but just happened to start right after Trump's remarks, is absurd. The odds of that being correct are so low they approach zero--there were press reports at least as early as December 2014 that her emails were a problem, and it was all over coverage of the democratic primary in late 2015 to early 2016. That the Russians would coincidentally start to pursue those emails, in context of the press coverage up to that point, is implausible. It would be like me telling the police that it's just coincidence my neighbor chose to kill my other neighbor an hour after I told him to do so--no one would, or should, buy such a ridiculous defense.

 

[Athanasius68]

Apparently staff at the New York Times thought it was serious at the time:

https://www.nytimes.com/2016/07/28/us/politics/donald-trump-russia-clinton-emails.html

You may consider them partisan, but since no one had won the election at that time, it's hard to figure out why they'd be "butthurt." Other organizations that apparently thought they were serious remarks include:

https://www.theguardian.com/us-news/video/2016/jul/27/donald-trump-russia-dnc-email-hack-video

https://www.cnbc.com/2016/07/27/trump-hope-russia-finds-the-30000-emails-that-are-missing.html

https://www.washingtonpost.com/news...py-on-hillary-clinton/?utm_term=.0974f9469964

https://thehill.com/blogs/ballot-bo...-i-hope-russia-is-able-to-get-clintons-emails

http://time.com/4426272/donald-trump-hillary-clinton-russia-emails/

https://www.usatoday.com/story/news...orida-scranton-democratic-covention/87607166/

https://www.businessinsider.com/trump-russian-hackers-clinton-emails-2016-7

https://newrepublic.com/minutes/135614/trump-sarcastic-asked-russia-hack-hillary-clinton

And so on. Your claim that everyone other than "butthurt" partisan democrats realized it was a joke at the time is incorrect. Certainly, democrats tended to hammer on Trump's remarks more, but that's just not relevant. Trump was not joking. He didn't sound like he was joking. Plenty of people thought he was being serious. And again, the Russians did what he asked within a few hours of him asking.



It's irrelevant that it's anecdotal. Your claim was that:



To show your claim false, I need only come up with one counter example. I personally know of several, including myself. And now all the links above.



What, exactly, is this supposed to show? The Russians were indeed pursuing a number of angles. But they first started pursuing this angle within hours of Trump's remarks. According to the timeline you've posted, the plot to interfere in the 2016 election began in Spring of 2014--over two years before the Russians attempted to hack Hillary's emails. The notion that they were getting to it, but just happened to start right after Trump's remarks, is absurd. The odds of that being correct are so low they approach zero--there were press reports at least as early as December 2014 that her emails were a problem, and it was all over coverage of the democratic primary in late 2015 to early 2016. That the Russians would coincidentally start to pursue those emails, in context of the press coverage up to that point, is implausible. It would be like me telling the police that it's just coincidence my neighbor chose to kill my other neighbor an hour after I told him to do so--no one would, or should, buy such a ridiculous defense.

Maybe the Russians have a sense of humor.

 

[Athanasius68]

No one is going to "boss" Mueller around. He will go straight to Congress and they will take your "boss" to the cleaners. Congress is responsible for oversight of the executive and interfering with Muller is abuse of power.

Mueller's boss will, or should. Mueller, is after all, subject to Justice Dept. supervision.

 

[ashurbanipal]

Maybe the Russians have a sense of humor.

They do, no doubt. However, since, again, they did what Trump asked them to do shortly after he asked them, I'm not sure how that's relevant. In the example I've brought up repeatedly, my neighbor may have laughed the whole time I was asking him to kill my other neighbor, and may have thought it hilarious even while doing the murder. That's hardly got anything to do with the point, however.

 

[iguanaman]

Mueller's boss will, or should. Mueller, is after all, subject to Justice Dept. supervision.

And his independence is guaranteed by the statute and enforced by Congressional oversight.

 

[Grokmaster]