These ties demand an investigation. Too much smoke.

http://www.politico.com/trump-russia-tie...-of-events

(03-08-2017 12:00 PM)Machiavelli Wrote:  These ties demand an investigation. Too much smoke.

http://www.politico.com/trump-russia-tie...-of-events

All this demonstrates is that the Democrats are really, really, really stupid when it comes to computer security.

Seriously, the nuttiest one world government conspiracy theorist in Idaho can come up with stuff better than this. There's more smoke in the Clintons knocking off 50 people. There's no "there" there.

Did you read the timeline. No one can say there is no there there after reading that. You didn't read it. I know this because you wouldn't type such nonsense if you did.

There's nothing definitive there. If you see something that you think is definitive, what is it and what does it define and how and why?

(03-08-2017 12:00 PM)Machiavelli Wrote:  These ties demand an investigation. Too much smoke.

http://www.politico.com/trump-russia-tie...-of-events

Why would DNC refuse to let FBI Comey inspect D Server that Putin hacked
-- @PrincessBibiRF_

SOMETHING'S AMISS

(03-08-2017 12:32 PM)Machiavelli Wrote:  Did you read the timeline. No one can say there is no there there after reading that. You didn't read it. I know this because you wouldn't type such nonsense if you did.

I read it. I was amazed anyone would think it showed anything, again, except the extraordinary incompetence of Democrats in giving away access to their computer systems.

How did a Roger Stone know what wiki leaks was going to drop next?

Changing of the GOP platform and the first denials. He's been a proven liar throughout the campaign. It spells them out. Do I really have to list them?

Maybe the people who voted for Trump don't give a **** if he is Putin's buddy or not?

(03-08-2017 03:40 PM)49RFootballNow Wrote:  Maybe the people who voted for Trump don't give a **** if he is Putin's buddy or not?

Well I didn't vote for Trump but I sure am happy that he, and not Hillary, will be filling three vacancies on the Supreme Court.

(03-08-2017 03:29 PM)Machiavelli Wrote:  Changing of the GOP platform and the first denials. He's been a proven liar throughout the campaign. It spells them out. Do I really have to list them?

Obama's approach to Ukraine has been a loser for the Ukrainians. Trump's idea is to make a deal.

Platforms do change. Remember when Obama and HRC were bigots and opposed to gay marriage in 2008?

There are no bigger liars in American politics than HRC and Bill Clinton. Trump has been proven to be the "Great exaggerator."

(03-08-2017 12:00 PM)Machiavelli Wrote:  These ties demand an investigation. Too much smoke.

http://www.politico.com/trump-russia-tie...-of-events

Good grief.

I got to July 26th, realized what a waste of my time that was.

That's got to be about the flimsiest "case" of anything I've ever had the misfortune to spend 5 minutes of my life on.

By the time I got to the 26th, I was waiting for the Kevin Bacon connection to rear it's ugly head.

I did pull this little nugget though:

Quote:He calls for better relations with Russia in the speech: “We desire to live peacefully and in friendship with Russia and China. We have serious differences with these two nations, and must regard them with open eyes, but we are not bound to be adversaries.

What on earth could be the problem there? Isn't this what we should all be striving for regardless of the other party's?

Isn't this essentially what the billion -four cash ransom was paid to Iran for? Trying to improve "relations"?

I get a more compelling "case" from the dog when she tears into the new bag of dog food...

Read after that JMU

I'm sorry, Mach, but I don't see anything even remotely approaching a smoking gun. I'm going to Russia in a couple of months. Does that mean that I've been compromised? I just don't get it. None of this proves anything.

Maybe it's because I'm a lawyer, so I tend to think of evidence as things that would prove up a case in a courtroom, but I just don't see anything remotely close to evidence of any wrongdoing here.

March 21: When asked who his foreign policy advisers are (in an interview with The Washington Post), Trump names, among others, Carter Page. Page is an American banker who had lived in Moscow for three years.


Later found to have multiple dealings during the campaign with Russian officials.

July 18: The Republican National Convention adopts the official Republican Party platform, with the following language on Ukraine: “We support maintaining and, if warranted, increasing sanctions, together with our allies, against Russia unless and until Ukraine’s sovereignty and territorial integrity are fully restored. We also support providing appropriate assistance to the armed forces of Ukraine and greater coordination with NATO defense planning. … We will not accept any territorial change in Eastern Europe imposed by force, in Ukraine, Georgia, or elsewhere, and will use all appropriate constitutional measures to bring to justice the practitioners of aggression and assassination.”

The Washington Post reports the same day: “The Trump campaign worked behind the scenes last week to make sure the new Republican platform won’t call for giving weapons to Ukraine to fight Russian and rebel forces, contradicting the view of almost all Republican foreign policy leaders in Washington.”

Gordon, one of Trump’s national security advisers, would later tell CNN that he opposed efforts to add language that was more aggressively pro-Ukraine because he believed that would have been inconsistent with Trump’s public statements on the matter.

July 20: Sen. Jeff Sessions, an early Trump endorser who led his national security advisory committee, meets with Ambassador Kislyak and a group of other ambassadors at a Republican National Convention event.

July 22: WikiLeaks publishes about 20,000 emails stolen from the DNC. The emails appeared to show a preference for Hillary Clinton over Sen. Bernie Sanders among DNC leadership.

Quid pro quo that needs to be investigated


July 31: An interview airs on ABC in which Trump says of Russia’s annexation of Crimea: "But you know, the people of Crimea, from what I've heard, would rather be with Russia than where they were. And you have to look at that, also." Trump also says in the interview that he was not involved in efforts to defeat an amendment to the Republican platform that would have added more aggressively pro-Ukraine language.

In an interview on NBC’s “Meet the Press,” Paul Manafort says that the effort to block the pro-Ukraine amendment “absolutely did not come from the Trump campaign. … No one, zero.”

Lies absolute bold face lie

Aug. 14: The New York Times publishes an exposé on Ukrainian documents that appeared to show that $12.7 million in cash was earmarked for Manafort by the Russia-aligned Party of Regions.

Aug. 17: Trump receives his first classified intelligence briefing. It is later reported by NBC that Trump received information at the briefing about “direct links” between the Russian government and the email hacks. Trump names Kellyanne Conway as his campaign manager and Steve Bannon as campaign chief executive in a move that appears to push Manafort to the background.

Aug. 19: Manafort resigns.

Direct Russian link to Trump campaign


Aug. 21: Long-time Trump friend and confidant Roger Stone writes on Twitter: “Trust me, it will soon the Podesta's time in the barrel. #CrookedHillary”



The worst in my opinion. Shows collusion with Wikileaks


Trump tells the Kremlin-backed Russia Today in an interview that “it’s probably unlikely” Russia is interfering in the election.

“I think maybe the Democrats are putting that out,” Trump says. He adds that foreign interference in the election would be “inappropriate.”

In an interview with CNN, Pence says that “it's inarguable that Vladimir Putin has been a stronger leader in his country than Barack Obama has been in this country.”

Lies. All bold face Lies. He was briefed that the Russians were hacking.


Oct. 3: Stone writes on Twitter: “I have total confidence that @wikileaks and my hero Julian Assange will educate the American people soon #LockHerUp”

Oct. 4: Julian Assange makes a 3 a.m. EST announcement via video saying WikiLeaks will publish new information on the presidential election “every week for the next 10 weeks.”

Oct. 7: WikiLeaks dumped a trove of emails hacked from Clinton campaign chairman John Podesta’s personal email account. The release came just hours after a tape emerged in which Trump bragged about groping women by the genitals. The emails were widely covered in the American media, and the Republican National Committee touted them as evidence of “who Hillary Clinton really is.”

The Obama administration accuses Russia of deploying hackers to interfere in the presidential election. A statement from Clapper, the director of National Intelligence, says hacked documents posted on DC Leaks, Guccifer 2.0 and WikiLeaks appear linked to Russian intelligence and accuses “Russia’s senior-most officials” of directing the hacks.

Again shows Stone-Assange collusion.

“She doesn’t know if it’s the Russians doing the hacking,” Trump responds. “Maybe there is no hacking. But they always blame Russia. And the reason they blame Russia because they think they’re trying to tarnish me with Russia. I know nothing about Russia. I know — I know about Russia, but I know nothing about the inner workings of Russia. I don’t deal there. I have no businesses there. I have no loans from Russia.”

Direct LIE



Oct. 10: “I love WikiLeaks,” Trump says at a Pennsylvania rally. He specifically cites some of the hacked emails to attack Clinton.

He should- campaign is in collusion with them.

“It’s pretty clear you won’t admit that the Russians have engaged in cyberattacks against the United States of America, that you encouraged espionage against our people, that you are willing to spout the Putin line, sign up for his wish list, break up NATO, do whatever he wants to do, and that you continue to get help from him because he has a very clear favorite in this race,” Clinton replies.


Dec. 26: Oleg Erovinkin, a former KGB official who was suspected assisting a former British spy in compiling a dossier alleging Trump ties to Russia, is found dead in the back seat of his car in Moscow.

So what does any of that prove?

We have a banker who lived in Moscow for three years and had dealings with Russians. So what? Why would a banker live in Moscow except to have dealings with Russians?

I suppose it can be an interesting narrative, but it doesn't prove anything.

He has said multiple times he doesn't do business with Russians. He doesn't know anybody from Russia. Russia is a ruse....

These are bold face lies. Now you have to investigate them to find theaout what you CAN PROVE! I'm certain we will have these investigations now but for anyone to say we don't have motive. Oh yes we do. Easing of sanctions being numero uno. We have evidence of quid pro quo on the hackings. All you have to do is investigate it.

(03-08-2017 06:48 PM)Machiavelli Wrote:  He has said multiple times he doesn't do business with Russians. He doesn't know anybody from Russia. Russia is a ruse....

These are bold face lies. Now you have to investigate them to find theaout what you CAN PROVE! I'm certain we will have these investigations now but for anyone to say we don't have motive. Oh yes we do. Easing of sanctions being numero uno. We have evidence of quid pro quo on the hackings. All you have to do is investigate it.

Apparently they have been investigating and came up with 0.

No they haven't. Those will be coming in the next couple of months.

Typical of the Dems to try to criminalize policy differences. Trump wants to do a deal on Ukraine. Why does that have to be sinister?
Who knows? Maybe he can get the Russians out when Obama just watched them move in more and more.