- Joined
- Apr 22, 2019
- Messages
- 59,842
- Reaction score
- 30,546
- Gender
- Male
- Political Leaning
- Progressive
The topic is Russian attacks to influence our elections, not "collusion".
I have never seen anyone presenting specific compelling evidence to the specific charges of Russian collusion here in the court of public opinion but I have seen wild mobs of leftist democrats clamoring for a finding of "guilty" based upon nothing but hearsay evidence from highly questionable sources.
That's the stupid story line democrats have been pushing for three years. It is a lie invented by democrats in an effort to control the damage done to Hillary and her pals in the DNC when Seth Rich gave the DNC emails to Assange to publish to the whole world.
Here is how the democrat mind works:
'We don't need no evidence to declare George Zimmerman guilty or O.J. Simpson innocent, and we don't need to look deeply into the facts which supposedly support the Russian conspiracy theory allegations, because we already know the truth and condemn to hell anyone wanting the see the facts first before issuing a judgment.'
Democrats once claimed the whole world believed the earth is flat but they refuse to back off the unsupported claims that "19 intelligence agencies" all agreed with the Russian collusion conspiracy claims before the investigation was even begun into the facts. There was never any unanimous support from intelligence officials and there were never any 19 intelligence agencies to begin with. It is all a democrat lie, just like the flat earth nonsense.
The topic is Russian attacks to influence our elections, not "collusion".
That's Republican politicians.
I haven't seen any Republican posters condemn the Russian attacks on our election.
Garbage post supporting the OP's point.
Identify our Republican DP posters then. I can identify exactly one. How many can you identify?
LOL. Republicans hate to criticize Obama for anything. Just like lions ignore zebras because they hate to bother them.
You do realize that sort of makes my point. But good to hear.
OK. Give the court of public opinion your facts
Yu do realize you ignored the fact that the problem with the election occurred under Obama's term.
How did she do that? Steele was British and spying on the Russians.
I didn't ignore that any more than I ignored the fact that LBJ used to use the restroom in front of people. It's not relevant to the topic.
The dishonesty in your comment, at least partly, is in conflating Russian *sources* largely telling the truth, in a search for truth, with Russian *agents* lying and propagandizing, working for a Putin project to interfere in our elections.
In other words, when an investigator learns about the Putin efforts from a Russian source and alerts US authorities, that's a good thing. When Putin's agents spread lies to millions of Americans, that's a bad thing. It's unfortunate you can't tell the two apart.
You did not condemn the Russians who interfered in our elections at Putin's direction. You condemned the Russians who interfered by telling the truth, which you call lies.
Raw intelligence doesn't always contain 100% truth. That doesn't mean that if some of it was wrong, that it wasn't vetted, that Hillary repeated it and spread it. That's what Republicans did, knowingly, with lies, and that's what Putin's attacks did, which I haven't seen one Republican condemn. To be clear, the issue isn't that the Russian info was all lies - even if it was true information, it's still a problem for a foreign power to offer help of value to a candidate.
First, a Republican candidate hired a firm to do opposition research on trump, and they hired Steele. They dropped out of the race, and then Hillary hired them to continue the research. I don't know whether Steele was 'spying' on Russians, but he was collecting information from them, and reported it, with caveats it was not verified and needed to be researched. He ran across strong evidence of Putin's attacks and reported them to the US IIRC.
Ok-- so we trust anonymous Russian sources when they are anti-Trump.
The reality remains true: the only consequential Russian campaign contact in 2016 was the Steele Dossier. And That was a Clinton campaign document.
WASHINGTON — In an extraordinary break with President Donald Trump, the top two Republicans in Congress said unequivocally Tuesday that Russia meddled in the 2016 presidential election and suggested that lawmakers may pass legislation to make sure it doesn’t happen again.
GOP leaders: No doubt that Russia meddled in presidential election
Seems you have forgotten some old news. One of many stories in the news found with a simple search.:mrgreen:
There's no denying that Putin launched a "sweeping and systemic" attack on our elections in 2016, as the Mueller report proved.
Why has every single Republican I've ever seen say anything about the topic, never once objected to the Putin attacks which help their side win, showing that they all are willing to cheat to win?
Highly dishonest post. This source was cultivated by the CIA for years. It wasn't a random phone call and the CIA said 'hey, it's against trump, let's believe it!'
The consequential contacts involved the Putin attacks on the election, which trump welcomed and did not report to authorities. Instead, he orchestrated lies to hide them.
Steele wasnt the source. He compiled his report from numerous sources of whom he has said he doesn't know the identity of many.
Trump knew when everyone else knew.
That's correct.
Don't know what you're saying about trump. The issue now is the risk of trump learning the source and telling Putin. But that's another topic, this is about Republicans not condemning the attacks.
Some Republican politicians have taken some positions against the Russians on this. I have not seen one trump supporter - the public - in hundreds of forum trump supporters, in everyday life - condemn the attacks.
They have nothing to say...
I have never seen anyone presenting specific compelling evidence to the specific charges of Russian collusion here in the court of public opinion but I have seen wild mobs of leftist democrats clamoring for a finding of "guilty" based upon nothing but hearsay evidence from highly questionable sources.
I suggest you broaden your contacts with Republicans. "Why has every single Republican I've ever seen say anything about the topic, never once objected to the Putin attacks which help their side win, showing that they all are willing to cheat to win? " Your statement was proven false. Some Republicans have objected to Russian interference.
We use cookies and similar technologies for the following purposes:
Do you accept cookies and these technologies?
We use cookies and similar technologies for the following purposes:
Do you accept cookies and these technologies?