Democrats lie about Russia collusion for two years now...

[Marion Morrison]

...now they've dropped it.

What the fuck happened?

Not dropped. There was collusion.

Proof?

 

[Third Party]

...now they've dropped it.

What the fuck happened?

Not dropped. There was collusion.

Wow, you're pathetic.

It's just an honest observation of what the Mueller report said.

There was collusion. The Trump campaign colluded with Russian agents to inuence the 2016 election. Period.

What did you read? Report said NO EVIDENCE OF COLLUSION! Russian interference, yes, but it could have been either or BOTH parties-they never bothered to find out.

It said that they didn't have enough evidence to charge Rump with Collusion. And as for Conspiracy, they laid out enough that he's post toasties the say he leaves office.

No, you are wrong-if there was conspiracy, they would have impeached by now and all Americans would support it,

...now they've dropped it.

What the fuck happened?

Not dropped. There was collusion.

Wow, you're pathetic.

It's just an honest observation of what the Mueller report said.

There was collusion. The Trump campaign colluded with Russian agents to inuence the 2016 election. Period.

What did you read? Report said NO EVIDENCE OF COLLUSION! Russian interference, yes, but it could have been either or BOTH parties-they never bothered to find out.

It said that they didn't have enough evidence to charge Rump with Collusion. And as for Conspiracy, they laid out enough that he's post toasties the say he leaves office.

No conspiracy or he would be impeached already. See red above for collusion or lack thereof

 

[jc456]

...now they've dropped it.

What the fuck happened?

Not dropped. There was collusion.

Read the report. There are big words you should look up

 

[Third Party]

What did you read? Report said NO EVIDENCE OF COLLUSION!

No it didn’t.

I read it, they didn't say no evidence.

Plenty of evidence of the Trump campaign colluding with the Russians, just doesn’t rise to the level of conspiring with the Russians.

NO

 

[Daryl Hunt]

The Mueller Report had plenty about conspiracy.

You mean collusion. lol

They would first have to prove that Trump had prior knowledge of it. That's the yardstick of collusion. He didn't. But he did knowing enjoy the benefits afterwards though and that is conspiracy.

 

[Obejoekenobe]

What did you read? Report said NO EVIDENCE OF COLLUSION!

No it didn’t.

Uh yeah-read it again

Just what answer will satisfy your cognitive bias?

Will a passage quoted from the Mueller report showing collusion between Manafort/Gates and Kilimnik satisfy you?

Go for it

"Paul Manafort served on the Trump Campaign, including a period as campaign chairman, from March to August 2016.838 Manafort had connections to Russia through his prior work for Russian oligarch Oleg Deripaska and later through his work for a pro-Russian regime in Ukraine. Manafort stayed in touch with these contacts during the campaign period through Konstantin Kilimnik, a longtime Manafort employee who previously ran Manafort's office in Kiev and who the FBI assesses to have ties to Russian intelligence.

Manafort instructed Rick Gates, his deputy on the Campaign and a longtime employee,839 to provide Kilimnik with updates on the Trump Campaign-including internal polling data, although Manafort claims not to recall that specific instruction. Manafort expected Kilimnik to share that information with others in Ukraine and with Deripaska. Gates periodically sent such polling data to Kilimnik during the campaign.”

So Popeye, what is Manafort and Gates doing when they're sharing campaign polling data with the Russians?

 

[Marion Morrison]

It said that they didn't have enough evidence to charge Rump with Collusion.

You mean conspiracy.

 

[jc456]

The Mueller Report had plenty about conspiracy.

You mean collusion. lol

They would first have to prove that Trump had prior knowledge of it. That's the yardstick of collusion. He didn't. But he did knowing enjoy the benefits afterwards though and that is conspiracy.

What benefits?

 

[Third Party]

Wow, you're pathetic.

It's just an honest observation of what the Mueller report said.

There was collusion. The Trump campaign colluded with Russian agents to inuence the 2016 election. Period.

What did you read? Report said NO EVIDENCE OF COLLUSION! Russian interference, yes, but it could have been either or BOTH parties-they never bothered to find out.

Did you read?
No meetings but the inferences were clear.
Have you seen "the great hack"?

Are we using inferences or evidence? He said or she said? Real or fake?

We are using the Mueller Report. If you have never read it, you may want to. Yah, I know, reading it, for the most part, is right up there with needing a Root Canal.

Ok- your move copy and paste what you think it says to back you up-anyone else on this board can help you with that

 

[Obejoekenobe]

What did you read? Report said NO EVIDENCE OF COLLUSION!

No it didn’t.

I read it, they didn't say no evidence.

Plenty of evidence of the Trump campaign colluding with the Russians, just doesn’t rise to the level of conspiring with the Russians.

NO

Yup.

 

[Third Party]

What did you read? Report said NO EVIDENCE OF COLLUSION!

No it didn’t.

Uh yeah-read it again

Just what answer will satisfy your cognitive bias?

Will a passage quoted from the Mueller report showing collusion between Manafort/Gates and Kilimnik satisfy you?

No-it has to be Trump-that's what we are talking about

 

[Third Party]

What did you read? Report said NO EVIDENCE OF COLLUSION!

No it didn’t.

I read it, they didn't say no evidence.

Plenty of evidence of the Trump campaign colluding with the Russians, just doesn’t rise to the level of conspiring with the Russians.

NO

Yup.

NOPE

 

[Daryl Hunt]

It's just an honest observation of what the Mueller report said.

There was collusion. The Trump campaign colluded with Russian agents to inuence the 2016 election. Period.

What did you read? Report said NO EVIDENCE OF COLLUSION! Russian interference, yes, but it could have been either or BOTH parties-they never bothered to find out.

Did you read?
No meetings but the inferences were clear.
Have you seen "the great hack"?

Are we using inferences or evidence? He said or she said? Real or fake?

We are using the Mueller Report. If you have never read it, you may want to. Yah, I know, reading it, for the most part, is right up there with needing a Root Canal.

Ok- your move copy and paste what you think it says to back you up-anyone else on this board can help you with that

That's been done over and over. OBonewhatever just did. He seems to have the time so I'll let him have the glory. I can tell you have NEVER read the Mueller Report. And I doubt if anyone here wants all over400 pages pasted into here. But volume 2 is just riddled with this information. I suggest you go read it.

 

[Third Party]

What did you read? Report said NO EVIDENCE OF COLLUSION!

No it didn’t.

Uh yeah-read it again

Just what answer will satisfy your cognitive bias?

Will a passage quoted from the Mueller report showing collusion between Manafort/Gates and Kilimnik satisfy you?

Go for it

"Paul Manafort served on the Trump Campaign, including a period as campaign chairman, from March to August 2016.838 Manafort had connections to Russia through his prior work for Russian oligarch Oleg Deripaska and later through his work for a pro-Russian regime in Ukraine. Manafort stayed in touch with these contacts during the campaign period through Konstantin Kilimnik, a longtime Manafort employee who previously ran Manafort's office in Kiev and who the FBI assesses to have ties to Russian intelligence.

Manafort instructed Rick Gates, his deputy on the Campaign and a longtime employee,839 to provide Kilimnik with updates on the Trump Campaign-including internal polling data, although Manafort claims not to recall that specific instruction. Manafort expected Kilimnik to share that information with others in Ukraine and with Deripaska. Gates periodically sent such polling data to Kilimnik during the campaign.”

So Popeye, what is Manafort and Gates doing when they're sharing campaign polling data with the Russians?

Don't believe that indicts Trump-which is the ONLY issue I care about. That's like Biden and his son's actions-I don't care.

 

[Daryl Hunt]

No it didn’t.

Uh yeah-read it again

Just what answer will satisfy your cognitive bias?

Will a passage quoted from the Mueller report showing collusion between Manafort/Gates and Kilimnik satisfy you?

Go for it

"Paul Manafort served on the Trump Campaign, including a period as campaign chairman, from March to August 2016.838 Manafort had connections to Russia through his prior work for Russian oligarch Oleg Deripaska and later through his work for a pro-Russian regime in Ukraine. Manafort stayed in touch with these contacts during the campaign period through Konstantin Kilimnik, a longtime Manafort employee who previously ran Manafort's office in Kiev and who the FBI assesses to have ties to Russian intelligence.

Manafort instructed Rick Gates, his deputy on the Campaign and a longtime employee,839 to provide Kilimnik with updates on the Trump Campaign-including internal polling data, although Manafort claims not to recall that specific instruction. Manafort expected Kilimnik to share that information with others in Ukraine and with Deripaska. Gates periodically sent such polling data to Kilimnik during the campaign.”

So Popeye, what is Manafort and Gates doing when they're sharing campaign polling data with the Russians?

Don't believe that indicts Trump-which is the ONLY issue I care about. That's like Biden and his son's actions-I don't care.

It's not the only issue about Rump I care about either. There are worse things. But those worse things are probably not illegal. Rumps conspiracy and obstruction is.

 

[Third Party]

Of course it is. All the Demos have at this point is lies.

Now they are trying to convince people that we are in a recession when the economy is booming.

I ALMOST can't believe it.

Looked at the graph?
Gradual going up for 10 years.
It was pathetic under Obama. Explosive under the con.
Amazing what knees news propaganda can do

Do you honestly believe that Rump has been President for 10 years? Well, I will admit that it just seems like it but no, just 2 1/2 long bumpy years. And the first year of Rumps office belonged strictly to Obama and that is where the greatest gains were shown. You don't want to give Obama credit, fine. But don't expect me to give Rump any free rides.

All the signs of a Recession are there. But in all fairness, we go into some kind of Recession every 7 to 10 years. Take a look at the year and count back 10 years. Guess what, that's the year everyone "Claims" the recession was at it's height. The only difference was, the Baby wasn't given away and the Feds had a bumper to shorten it up. It could have run for a couple of decades and turned into a full blown Depression. Today, the Baby has been given away and there is no way that the Feds can do anything about it except lie to you.

Don't agree-Obama set a negative TONE for the economy-people don't spend then.

The real recession began in 2002 and was reported to Congress by Bush Jr. Now, count 7 years forward from there. Now it's 2009. In 2003, Bush Jr. presented a 733 billion dollar buyout plan and congress laughed him right off capital hill. In 2009, it really hit and hit hard. Obama dusted that plan off and presented a 1.3 trillion dollar buyout plan and it was finally accepted. This shortened the Recession down to only a few years. But it could have been completely prevented in 2003.

The time has passed and we are headed into another recession. The Federal government normally has the extra resources to do a kick in the pants. But since the last Tax Break, they gave away the baby and really don't have any way to come up with the capital to prevent a full on recession. You can plug up your ears with your index fingers, and yell over and over "LaLaLa, I can't Hear You" all you want. Didn't do them any good in 2003.

What the Hell are you talking about? Sounds like mumbo jumbo sour grapes. I'll give you Obama did cash for clunkers-I still don't know anybody that benefited from that

 

[LoneLaugher]

...now they've dropped it.

What the fuck happened?

Not dropped. There was collusion.

Wow, you're pathetic.

It's just an honest observation of what the Mueller report said.

There was collusion. The Trump campaign colluded with Russian agents to inuence the 2016 election. Period.

What did you read? Report said NO EVIDENCE OF COLLUSION! Russian interference, yes, but it could have been either or BOTH parties-they never bothered to find out.

Incorrect. Read the report.

 

[Third Party]

What did you read? Report said NO EVIDENCE OF COLLUSION! Russian interference, yes, but it could have been either or BOTH parties-they never bothered to find out.

Did you read?
No meetings but the inferences were clear.
Have you seen "the great hack"?

Are we using inferences or evidence? He said or she said? Real or fake?

We are using the Mueller Report. If you have never read it, you may want to. Yah, I know, reading it, for the most part, is right up there with needing a Root Canal.

Ok- your move copy and paste what you think it says to back you up-anyone else on this board can help you with that

That's been done over and over. OBonewhatever just did. He seems to have the time so I'll let him have the glory. I can tell you have NEVER read the Mueller Report. And I doubt if anyone here wants all over400 pages pasted into here. But volume 2 is just riddled with this information. I suggest you go read it.

No-I watched CNN, MSNBC, and Fox go over the language and nuance, and it boils down to what I said-disagree if you like, but THAT"S what I am going with.

 

[Third Party]

Uh yeah-read it again

Just what answer will satisfy your cognitive bias?

Will a passage quoted from the Mueller report showing collusion between Manafort/Gates and Kilimnik satisfy you?

Go for it

"Paul Manafort served on the Trump Campaign, including a period as campaign chairman, from March to August 2016.838 Manafort had connections to Russia through his prior work for Russian oligarch Oleg Deripaska and later through his work for a pro-Russian regime in Ukraine. Manafort stayed in touch with these contacts during the campaign period through Konstantin Kilimnik, a longtime Manafort employee who previously ran Manafort's office in Kiev and who the FBI assesses to have ties to Russian intelligence.

Manafort instructed Rick Gates, his deputy on the Campaign and a longtime employee,839 to provide Kilimnik with updates on the Trump Campaign-including internal polling data, although Manafort claims not to recall that specific instruction. Manafort expected Kilimnik to share that information with others in Ukraine and with Deripaska. Gates periodically sent such polling data to Kilimnik during the campaign.”

So Popeye, what is Manafort and Gates doing when they're sharing campaign polling data with the Russians?

Don't believe that indicts Trump-which is the ONLY issue I care about. That's like Biden and his son's actions-I don't care.

It's not the only issue about Rump I care about either. There are worse things. But those worse things are probably not illegal. Rumps conspiracy and obstruction is.

Again they DON"T exist. And it is not Rump any more than it is Obammy. Be civil.

 

[LoneLaugher]

...now they've dropped it.

What the fuck happened?

Not dropped. There was collusion.

Wow, you're pathetic.

It's just an honest observation of what the Mueller report said.

There was collusion. The Trump campaign colluded with Russian agents to inuence the 2016 election. Period.

What did you read? Report said NO EVIDENCE OF COLLUSION! Russian interference, yes, but it could have been either or BOTH parties-they never bothered to find out.

It said that they didn't have enough evidence to charge Rump with Collusion. And as for Conspiracy, they laid out enough that he's post toasties the say he leaves office.

Conspiracy. Collusion is not a chargeable offense. They didn't find ENOUGH ( not none ) evidence to charge for CONSPIRACY.

Get your facts straight.