(07-18-2018 09:32 AM)RiceLad15 Wrote:  

(07-18-2018 09:24 AM)OptimisticOwl Wrote:  

(07-18-2018 06:17 AM)RiceLad15 Wrote:  OO, the act of investigating an opponent is par for the course. The act of taking information from an unknown source, especially one of foreign nature, isn’t. In that case, you can’t be certain of the veracity of the information or the motives of the individual. And it’s not a great leap of logic to think that someone bringing dirt to a campaign, as opposed to say a news source, would be looking for something in return. Going to a campaign is a clear signal that the person doesn’t care about just getting the information to the public - they clearly want to weaponize it and see that info as having value, this likely wanting something in return.

In comparison to the DNC eventually hiring Fusion GPS, which used Steele,[b]who got it from suspect Russian sources{/b] I think the act of actively trying to get opponent research, as opposed to having it dropped in your lap, potentially in exchange for something, is a big difference.

I don't buy your premise at all. Do you really think the Dems actively sought out Stormy Daniels or the Access Hollywood tape? BS. Who did they hire for that? If somebody calls up and says "I have something on Trump", the normal reaction is "Well, let's see it". So when they went to the Dems, they wanted to collude? No way.

"Let's see it" I think was Trump Jr.'s reaction. And when it turned out to be a sham, he walked. BFD.

But for discussion's sake (is this a a discussion?), let's say there is a difference. WHAT IN HADES DOES IT HAVE TO DO WITH COLLUSION!!!!! yes,, I yelled, because this inanity being repeated is so exasperating. I'll ask again, in my indoor voice, what does it have to do with collusion?

In either campaign, when presented with dirt from on unknown or unreliable source, the normal procedure should be to have some people check it out. You don't just run to the papers with with it. Of course, the Dems failed in this respect with the Steele dossier. But it is what they should have done. may they didn't care about the veracity.

Meeting with somebody to see what they have is not a crime, and refusing to do business with them is not collusion. If it is, then you and I should stop colluding right now.

The DNC was involved with Stormy and the Access Hollywood tape? I believe that news organizations broke both of those things...

And we have evidence that previous presidential nominees told the intelligence community when they were also contacted by a foreign government with the promise of dirt of their opponent. They didn’t accept the invitation.

I’ve never suggested the meeting itself was collusion - I’ve argued that the meeting, and subsequent cover up, is evidence to suppprt an investigation. Sorry, but when you decide you may be willing to play dirty, you can’t get mad that people want to make sure you didn’t go through with it.

Just a thought, but if I were running a campaign that the media was friendly toward, i might suggest that they take it to the press. Just a thought, but no more inane than the stuff you are presenting as suspicious.

So you know for a fact that Trump Jr. KNEW she was a representative of the Russian government when he met with her? Or is this another opinion presented as fact? Did she come in and say Vlad, my boss, wants you to have this info? I would guess people really in collusion with Russia would take the info, not walk out in disgust.

First time you have mentioned a "cover-up". Always it has been about taking the meeting. Is there some wiggling going on?

I get a call from a friend, saying I should meet with this guy who has some interesting investment opportunities. I take the meeting, and when it turns out the guy has nothing and is in fact misrepresenting himself, I walk, and never see him again. According to Prosecutor Lad, I am now in collusion with the scammer. Not only the scammer, but the government of the country he came from.

Cover up - not telling the world that you had a nothing meeting with a scammer and walked out?

Yeah, good logic.

If this is evidence of a conspiracy to you, you will be seeing them everywhere.

heck, back in my Rice days I had a part time job meeting people in their houses to try and sell them vacuum cleaners. I guess every one that took my meeting was in collusion with me.