Watch: CNN Cuts Tulsi Gabbard Off as She Lays Out the Inconvenient Facts of the Russia Hoax

The Barbarian · Friday at 8:31 AM

A New Dawn said:
That still doesn't show collusion,

Mueller's indictiments of Trump underlings involved with Russian agents does that.

A New Dawn said:
but essentially the same thing Soros has been doing through all elections since Hillary introduced him to the US political arena in 2010.

You can show that Soros was colluding with Russian agents to affect elections? Show us that.

The Barbarian · Friday at 8:33 AM

A2SG said:
Are you referring to shoveling money towaed winning elections? Per SCOTUS in Citizens United, that's just fine and dandy.

What's the problem?

They didn't intend it to apply to liberals.

essentialsaltes · Friday at 8:40 AM

A New Dawn said:
That still doesn't show collusion, but essentially the same thing Soros has been doing through all elections since Hillary introduced him to the US political arena in 2010.

Soros is an American citizen and can free speech all he wants during an election. It is illegal for foreign governments to do the same, which is why we've indicted a number of Russian nationals for this.

The Barbarian · Friday at 8:49 AM

essentialsaltes said:
Soros is an American citizen and can free speech all he wants during an election.

But... but... he's liberal. And not a "legacy American!"

A New Dawn · Friday at 9:01 AM

essentialsaltes said:
Soros is an American citizen and can free speech all he wants during an election. It is illegal for foreign governments to do the same, which is why we've indicted a number of Russian nationals for this.

Cool. I guess if you hate someplace the way to go about destroying it is to become a citizen. Good to know.

A2SG · Friday at 9:15 AM

The Barbarian said:
They didn't intend it to apply to liberals.

Ah yes. The "rules for thee but not for me" principle.

-- A2SG, so unfair!

The Barbarian · Friday at 9:21 AM

A New Dawn said:
Cool. I guess if you hate someplace the way to go about destroying it is to become a citizen. Good to know.

We know...."All citizens are equal, but some are more equal than others." It was easier in the Russiagate collusion for them to just pretend to be American citizens on social media. A lot of that going around, um?

A New Dawn · Friday at 10:06 AM

The Barbarian said:
We know...."All citizens are equal, but some are more equal than others." It was easier in the Russiagate collusion for them to just pretend to be American citizens on social media. A lot of that going around, um?

There’s that unproven collusion word again.

The Barbarian · Friday at 10:37 AM

We know...."All citizens are equal, but some are more equal than others." It was easier in the Russiagate collusion for them to just pretend to be American citizens on social media. A lot of that going around, um?

A New Dawn said:
There’s that unproven collusion word again.

Number of contacts by Trump associates with Russians

By April 19, 2019, The New York Times had documented that "Donald J. Trump and 18 of his associates had at least 140 contacts with Russian nationals and WikiLeaks, or their intermediaries, during the 2016 campaign and presidential transition."[27]

The Moscow Project – an initiative of the Center for American Progress Action Fund – had, by June 3, 2019, documented "272 contacts between Trump's team and Russia-linked operatives ... including at least 38 meetings.... None of these contacts were ever reported to the proper authorities. Instead, the Trump team tried to cover up every single one of them."[28]

2015–2016 foreign surveillance of Russian targets

In late 2015, the British eavesdropping agency GCHQ, during the course of routine surveillance of "known Kremlin operatives already on the grid", used "electronic intelligence" to collect information from these Russian targets. They found that "Russians were talking to people associated with Trump...According to sources in the US and the UK, [the conversations] formed a suspicious pattern."[6] The British passed this information about "suspicious 'interactions'" between "members of Donald Trump's campaign team" and "known or suspected Russian agents" to US intelligence agencies.[6][5]

Over the next six months, European and Australian allies began to "pass along information about people close to Mr. Trump meeting with Russians in the Netherlands, Britain and other countries."[7] Reports of these "contacts between Trump's inner circle and Russians" were shared by seven allied foreign intelligence agencies (reportedly those of the United Kingdom, Germany, Estonia, Poland, Australia, France, and the Netherlands).[6][5] The New York Times also reported that British and Dutch agencies had evidence of meetings between "Russian officials – and others close to Russia's president, Vladimir V. Putin – and associates of President-elect Trump".[7]

James Clapper confirmed that the following information was "accurate" and "also quite sensitive": "Over the spring of 2016, multiple European allies passed on additional information to the United States about contacts between the Trump campaign and Russians."[29]

Later, U.S. intelligence overheard Russians, some of them within the Kremlin, discussing contacts with Trump associates,[6][5] with some Russian officials arguing about how much to interfere in the election.[7]

Links between Trump associates and Russian officials - Wikipedia

en.wikipedia.org

Eight Trump underlings were convicted because of their contacts with Russian agents. Two Russian intelligence officers were recorded by the CIA, congratulating themselves on their success in making Trump president. The Russians certainly thought the collusion was effective.

Hans Blaster · Friday at 12:11 PM

A New Dawn said:
There’s that unproven collusion word again.

"Collusion" and "Russiagate" are both ill defined terms that we shouldn't use in this context.

Did Russia attempt to hack US election infrastructure? Yes.
Did they succeed in doing anything? No

Did Russia hack DNC and RNC servers? Yes
Did they take anything? From the DNC, absolutely.
Did they use cut outs to distribute that stolen information? From the DNC, absolutely.

Did Russia hack Hillary's email? No
Did they try after Trump prompted them claiming that they would be treated favorably by the press? Yes, within 48 hours. Still failed.

Did Russia hack any personal emails related to the campaign? Yes, the account of Clinton campaign manager John Podesta.
Did Russia distribute those emails? Yes, through Russian cutouts "wikileaks" on the day of the "Access Hollywood Tape".

Did Russia conduct any operations aimed directly at the American people? Yes, these include:

Social media campaigns with fake personas to generate additional turmoil and partisan confusion on line and distribute and push leaked material and general Russian propaganda. These were run by the "Internet Research Agency" a "private" company in St. Petersburg run and funded by Russian oligarch and Putin pal Evgeny Pregozhin (rest in pieces)
Fake events including fake rallies. One of these was competing Trump and Clinton rallies in the same place. Hiring an actor to portray Hillary in an orange jumpsuit inside a cage (yes that was the Ruskies).

Were Trump associates in contact with Russian agents or cutouts? Yes.

Trump pal and political "dirty tricks" operator, Roger Stone was in contact with Russian cutouts about hacked materials.
Don Jr, Jared Kushner, and campaign manager Paul Manafort met with an unofficial Kremlin representative in Trump Tower for a later claimed discussion about "adoptions".
Jared and Manafort met with an associate of Russian intelligence in a building owned by Jared
Prior to the campaign, Manafort was the political advisor for the President of Ukraine. He was paid for that work by a Kremlin linked oligarch and convicted of money laundering the earnings he made on that job. (Previous to that he was a business partner to Roger Stone in political consulting.)

Which of those things you label "collusion" or "Russiagate" I don't care, but it's why the labels are so useless.

A New Dawn · Friday at 12:25 PM

Hans Blaster said:
"Collusion" and "Russiagate" are both ill defined terms that we shouldn't use in this context.

Did Russia attempt to hack US election infrastructure? Yes.
Did they succeed in doing anything? No

Did Russia hack DNC and RNC servers? Yes
Did they take anything? From the DNC, absolutely.
Did they use cut outs to distribute that stolen information? From the DNC, absolutely.

Did Russia hack Hillary's email? No
Did they try after Trump prompted them claiming that they would be treated favorably by the press? Yes, within 48 hours. Still failed.

Did Russia hack any personal emails related to the campaign? Yes, the account of Clinton campaign manager John Podesta.
Did Russia distribute those emails? Yes, through Russian cutouts "wikileaks" on the day of the "Access Hollywood Tape".

Did Russia conduct any operations aimed directly at the American people? Yes, these include:

Social media campaigns with fake personas to generate additional turmoil and partisan confusion on line and distribute and push leaked material and general Russian propaganda. These were run by the "Internet Research Agency" a "private" company in St. Petersburg run and funded by Russian oligarch and Putin pal Evgeny Pregozhin (rest in pieces)
Fake events including fake rallies. One of these was competing Trump and Clinton rallies in the same place. Hiring an actor to portray Hillary in an orange jumpsuit inside a cage (yes that was the Ruskies).

Were Trump associates in contact with Russian agents or cutouts? Yes.

Trump pal and political "dirty tricks" operator, Roger Stone was in contact with Russian cutouts about hacked materials.
Don Jr, Jared Kushner, and campaign manager Paul Manafort met with an unofficial Kremlin representative in Trump Tower for a later claimed discussion about "adoptions".
Jared and Manafort met with an associate of Russian intelligence in a building owned by Jared
Prior to the campaign, Manafort was the political advisor for the President of Ukraine. He was paid for that work by a Kremlin linked oligarch and convicted of money laundering the earnings he made on that job. (Previous to that he was a business partner to Roger Stone in political consulting.)

Which of those things you label "collusion" or "Russiagate" I don't care, but it's why the labels are so useless.

I have to laugh because you have absolutely no problem with Hillary’s hacked server (according to Comey), absolutely no problem with Hillary hiring someone to create a fake dossier that the president then used to present to the FISA court to get permission to wiretap Trump’s campaign, and then have problems that someone Trump knows talked to a Russian person to see what information they had on Hillary. This is beyond laughable. Sorry. Do you EVER look in the mirror?

Hans Blaster · Friday at 12:32 PM

A New Dawn said:
I have to laugh because you have absolutely no problem with Hillary’s hacked server (according to Comey),

I just said her server was not hacked by the Russians. Where is your counter evidence?

A New Dawn said:
absolutely no problem with Hillary hiring someone to create a fake dossier that the president then used to present to the FISA court to get permission to wiretap Trump’s campaign,

Hillary didn't hire anyone to do those things.

A New Dawn said:
and then have problems that someone Trump knows talked to a Russian person to see what information they had on Hillary.

Those things acutally happened, or rather what I said. I didn't actually say that Trump's people asked Russian agents what info they had. I said who they talked to and what (in one case) they claimed the conversation was about. Read more carefully, I certainly wrote my post carefully.

A New Dawn said:
This is beyond laughable. Sorry. Do you EVER look in the mirror?

Quit telling me what I do and do not have a problem with. You have no idea about things I have not written about. I'll let you in on one small thing -- I'm beginning to have a problem with your behavior.

A New Dawn · Friday at 12:57 PM

Hans Blaster said:
I just said her server was not hacked by the Russians. Where is your counter evidence?

I didn't say that Comey said that the Russians hacked it, just that it was hacked, revealing state secrets. But, what, it doesn't matter unless it's Russia?

Hillary didn't hire anyone to do those things.

Hillary Clinton, her campaign and the DNC paid for and hired (through her lawyer) the Fusion GPS opposition research group to create a dossier, written by Christopher Steele, with unverified and salatious gossip about Trump. Over a million dollars went in from her campaign and she/the campaign and the DNC were both charged fines for it.

And don't suggest that the dossier would have been created without Hillary. It was her baby from start to finish to take prying eyes off her illegal home server.

DNC, Clinton campaign agree to Steele dossier funding fine

Hillary Clinton’s 2016 presidential campaign and the Democratic National Committee have agreed to pay $113,000 to settle a Federal Election Commission investigation.

apnews.com

https://www.cnn.com/2022/03/30/politics/clinton-dnc-steele-dossier-fusion-gps/

Clinton campaign, DNC fined by FEC for lying about Steele dossier payments

The Clinton campaign and the DNC will be forced to pay $8,000 and $105,000 respectively for mislabeling payments that ultimately went to Fusion GPS.

nypost.com

Those things acutally happened, or rather what I said. I didn't actually say that Trump's people asked Russian agents what info they had. I said who they talked to and what (in one case) they claimed the conversation was about. Read more carefully, I certainly wrote my post carefully.

Quit telling me what I do and do not have a problem with. You have no idea about things I have not written about. I'll let you in on one small thing -- I'm beginning to have a problem with your behavior.

When you repeatedly claim that Trump or his pals or his family did something that YOU consider verboten and get all up in arms about it, yet overlook the same exact thing that was done by people on the other side of the aisle, I feel it is a valid question. Sorry if you don't agree, but everyone sees it.

RocksInMyHead · Friday at 1:20 PM

A New Dawn said:
I didn't say that Comey said that the Russians hacked it, just that it was hacked, revealing state secrets. But, what, it doesn't matter unless it's Russia?

I'm not aware of any statements by Comey (or anyone, for that matter) confirming that anyone successfully hacked Clinton's email server. There were certainly attempts to do so, but there's no indication that anyone actually got in. Other people around Clinton had their email accounts compromised, but not Clinton - at least as far as we know.

A New Dawn said:
Hillary Clinton, her campaign and the DNC paid for and hired (through her lawyer) the Fusion GPS opposition research group to create a dossier, written by Christopher Steele, with unverified and salatious gossip about Trump. Over a million dollars went in from her campaign and she/the campaign and the DNC were both charged fines for it.

The Clinton campaign hired Fusion GPS through Perkins Coie to conduct opposition research - which, I'll add, is a perfectly normal campaign expenditure. Fusion GPS hired Steele as part of that in order to investigate Trump's ties to Russia. The Clinton campaign and the DNC were fined for obfuscating the payments as "legal services" rather than specifying that they were for opposition research, but it's not clear whether that was deliberate or simply negligence as they chose not to contest the fines. Everything else that you've claimed here is fantasy and speculation.

A New Dawn said:
And don't suggest that the dossier would have been created without Hillary. It was her baby from start to finish to take prying eyes off her illegal home server.

It seems unlikely that the dossier would have existed without Clinton, simply by virtue of the fact that a different candidate (and their campaign staff) would almost certainly have made different decisions because - surprise, surprise - they're different people.

A New Dawn · Friday at 2:15 PM

RocksInMyHead said:
I'm not aware of any statements by Comey (or anyone, for that matter) confirming that anyone successfully hacked Clinton's email server. There were certainly attempts to do so, but there's no indication that anyone actually got in. Other people around Clinton had their email accounts compromised, but not Clinton - at least as far as we know.

Comey said she was extremely careless and the server was most likely hacked. But of course he didn't do any deep investigation or submit charges against her because she destroyed the evidence before they had a chance to examine it. Isn't that a crime, in and of itself? To destroy evidence after being asked to hand it over? I do believe it is. And the fact that she destroyed the evidence makes one tend to believe that she was hacked. But that's just my take on it. Otherwise, why would she do it?

The Clinton campaign hired Fusion GPS through Perkins Coie to conduct opposition research - which, I'll add, is a perfectly normal campaign expenditure. Fusion GPS hired Steele as part of that in order to investigate Trump's ties to Russia. The Clinton campaign and the DNC were fined for obfuscating the payments as "legal services" rather than specifying that they were for opposition research, but it's not clear whether that was deliberate or simply negligence as they chose not to contest the fines. Everything else that you've claimed here is fantasy and speculation.

They were fined because they didn't file the correct paperwork, yada, yada, yada, but it wasn't "perfectly normal" for campaigns to do that. It was an attempt to undermine the election process (just the way the left complained the release of Hunter's laptop just before the election was to sway the election). It did used to be illegal for that kind of interference, especially when it went all the way up to Obama using it to obtain wiretapping from the FISA court.

It seems unlikely that the dossier would have existed without Clinton, simply by virtue of the fact that a different candidate (and their campaign staff) would almost certainly have made different decisions because - surprise, surprise - they're different people.

That's the way to spin it! Or you could say that another candidate would have had more integrity. But yours is good, too.

RocksInMyHead · Friday at 3:01 PM

A New Dawn said:
Comey said she was extremely careless

Yes, he did - and I agree. But that wasn't your claim.

A New Dawn said:
and the server was most likely hacked.

No, he didn't.

A New Dawn said:
But of course he didn't do any deep investigation or submit charges against her because she destroyed the evidence before they had a chance to examine it.

She didn't.

A New Dawn said:
Isn't that a crime, in and of itself?

The fact that she wasn't prosecuted for it suggests otherwise.

A New Dawn said:
They were fined because they didn't file the correct paperwork, yada, yada, yada, but it wasn't "perfectly normal" for campaigns to do that.

To do what?

A New Dawn said:
It was an attempt to undermine the election process

What was?

A New Dawn said:
It did used to be illegal for that kind of interference, especially when it went all the way up to Obama using it to obtain wiretapping from the FISA court.

What kind of interference?

A New Dawn said:
That's the way to spin it! Or you could say that another candidate would have had more integrity. But yours is good, too.

Well, you see, "my way" is a factual statement - different people do, indeed, tend to make different decisions. On the other hand, "your way" is a baseless accusation. One of these things is not like the other.

BPPLEE · Friday at 3:50 PM

Hans Blaster said:
I just said her server was not hacked by the Russians. Where is your counter evidence?

Hillary didn't hire anyone to do those things.

Those things acutally happened, or rather what I said. I didn't actually say that Trump's people asked Russian agents what info they had. I said who they talked to and what (in one case) they claimed the conversation was about. Read more carefully, I certainly wrote my post carefully.

Quit telling me what I do and do not have a problem with. You have no idea about things I have not written about. I'll let you in on one small thing -- I'm beginning to have a problem with your behavior.

Hillary funneled the money to pay for the Steele Dossier through a law firm.
She took a plea deal for a campaign finance violation over it and had to pay a fine

The Barbarian · Friday at 4:58 PM

A New Dawn said:
Hillary Clinton, her campaign and the DNC paid for and hired (through her lawyer) the Fusion GPS opposition research group to create a dossier, written by Christopher Steele,

Steele first gathered information on Trump for a conservative republican group. Only later did he approach the Clinton campaign offering to do research on Trump.

A New Dawn said:
Fusion GPS opposition research group to create a dossier, written by Christopher Steele, with unverified and salatious gossip about Trump.

Which of the actual allegations were proven false?
While the 35 pages that comprise Steele's dossier are brimming with explosive and explicit claims based on unidentified sources, some of the dossier's broad implications — particularly that Russian President Vladimir Putin launched an operation to boost Trump and sow discord within the U.S. and abroad — now ring true and were embedded in the memo Steele shared with the FBI before the agency decided to open an investigation.
The Trump-Russia dossier: why its findings grow more significant by the day

It's true that Trump himself was not charged with any crimes in the Russiagate scandal, but at least 8 of his underlings including his national security advisor (lying to the FBI about his contacts with Russian agents) were caught and convicted or pleaded guilty of serious crimes.

A New Dawn · Friday at 5:40 PM

RocksInMyHead said:
Yes, he did - and I agree. But that wasn't your claim.

No, he didn't.

She didn't.

The fact that she wasn't prosecuted for it suggests otherwise.

To do what?

What was?

What kind of interference?

Well, you see, "my way" is a factual statement - different people do, indeed, tend to make different decisions. On the other hand, "your way" is a baseless accusation. One of these things is not like the other.

Comeys claim was that she was extremely careless and the server was likely hacked.

https://www.politico.com/story/2018/06/14/doj-watchdog-james-comey-hillary-clinton-server-647020

Maybe destroy wasn’t the right word. A couple days after the home server was discovered, she was subpoenaed to turn over the server to search the emails for the Benghazi investigation. Before turning it over, she instructed her aide to delete all the emails, then turned it in. And somehow, through h the miracle of the deep state, she was found not guilty of intentional destruction of evidence.

DaisyDay · Friday at 5:51 PM

RocksInMyHead said:
It seems unlikely that the dossier would have existed without Clinton, simply by virtue of the fact that a different candidate (and their campaign staff) would almost certainly have made different decisions because - surprise, surprise - they're different people.

Fusion GPS shopped its services and got two bites, the Clinton campaign was the second.

Watch: CNN Cuts Tulsi Gabbard Off as She Lays Out the Inconvenient Facts of the Russia Hoax

Crabby Old White Guy

Crabby Old White Guy

Fact-Based Lifeform

Crabby Old White Guy

Bind my wandering heart to thee!

Gumby

Crabby Old White Guy

Bind my wandering heart to thee!

Crabby Old White Guy

Number of contacts by Trump associates with Russians​

2015–2016 foreign surveillance of Russian targets​

On August Recess

Bind my wandering heart to thee!

On August Recess

Bind my wandering heart to thee!

God is innocent; Noah built on a floodplain!

Bind my wandering heart to thee!

God is innocent; Noah built on a floodplain!

Well-Known Member

Crabby Old White Guy

Bind my wandering heart to thee!

I Did Nothing Wrong!! ~~Team Deep State

Similar threads

Number of contacts by Trump associates with Russians

2015–2016 foreign surveillance of Russian targets