Epstein Files | Ghislaine Maxwell

  • Thread starter Thread starter nycfan
  • Start date Start date
  • Replies: 2K
  • Views: 75K
  • Politics 
I don’t understand
CNN/MSNBC, because of their persistent and biased coverage of Russia Collusion/Conspiracy, convinced (brainwashed) many people into believing Trump actually conspired/colluded with Russia regarding their election interference activities.
 
CNN/MSNBC, because of their persistent and biased coverage of Russia Collusion/Conspiracy, convinced (brainwashed) many people into believing Trump actually conspired/colluded with Russia regarding their election interference activities.
Tough shit. Fox and all convinced people Trump was sane. Now that was a crime against humanity.
 
So, you don't understand the difference between Russia interfering, which they obviously did, and the claim the Trump colluded/conspired WITH Russia and their interference.

Got it.
No, you haven’t “got it.” You’re very far from getting it.

Russia did interfere with the election. Trump DID ask for any help he could get in that regard. Which, btw, shouldn’t be a surprise. He asked Zelenskyy to dig up dirt on his most likely opposition in the 2020 election. This guy doesn’t believe in a fair fight. He’s constantly looking for an angle or workaround.

The Republican Committee nor Robert Mueller could find no evidence that the Trump team actively colluded with Russia, but Mueller himself said that does not mean it didn’t happen. And he did find that voting data was actually shared. The scope of his investigation simply didn’t delve that deep.

But being the dumb fuck that you are, incapable of any nuance, you actually equate the brainwashing done by Fox News to gloss over or erase the myriad of misdeeds by this current administration with CNN/MSNBC reporting on something that ACTUALLY happened in 2016.
 
CNN/MSNBC, because of their persistent and biased coverage of Russia Collusion/Conspiracy, convinced (brainwashed) many people into believing Trump actually conspired/colluded with Russia regarding their election interference activities.
And Trump was a willing co-conspirator in all that coverage. He actively egged it on because he thought it was helpful to him. If he wanted to shut it down, he could have fully cooperated with Muller and the investigation would have been over in six months. Instead, Trump did what he always does: lie, obfuscate, delay, and misdirect.
 
i thought the report showed that they shared voting data?
Polling....

From the Mueller Report:

Although the investigation established that the Russian government perceived it would benefit from a Trump presidency and worked to secure that outcome, and that the Campaign expected it would benefit electorally from information stolen and released through Russian efforts, the investigation did not establish that members of the Trump Campaign conspired or coordinated with the Russian government in its election interference activities.

For many Dems, this is borderline shocking information (because of the aforementioned brainwashing), as I'm sure is the case with many Republicans who get all the news from Fox News, read Breitbart, Daily Wire etc ...
 
Polling....

From the Mueller Report:

Although the investigation established that the Russian government perceived it would benefit from a Trump presidency and worked to secure that outcome, and that the Campaign expected it would benefit electorally from information stolen and released through Russian efforts, the investigation did not establish that members of the Trump Campaign conspired or coordinated with the Russian government in its election interference activities.

For many Dems, this is borderline shocking information (because of the aforementioned brainwashing), as I'm sure is the case with many Republicans who get all the news from Fox News, read Breitbart, Daily Wire etc ...
Reading is not one of your finer skills, is it? " Did not establish..." is not "could not find any evidence." There's a world of leeway between the two.
 
Reading is not one of your finer skills, is it? " Did not establish..." is not "could not find any evidence." There's a world of leeway between the two.
My reading is just fine, thanks.

If the most powerful and investigative body on the planet could not establish that the Trump campaign colluded or conspired with Russia, what do you think the opinion of informed and reasonable people should be as it relates to the Trump campaign colluding or conspiring with Russia?

I'm not saying anything about 100% certainty. I'm saying, if you are going to lean one way or the other and express an opinion one way or the other, which way should you lean? Should you lean toward The campaign conspiring / colluding or should you lean toward the campaign not conspiring or colluding?
 
Polling....

From the Mueller Report:

Although the investigation established that the Russian government perceived it would benefit from a Trump presidency and worked to secure that outcome, and that the Campaign expected it would benefit electorally from information stolen and released through Russian efforts, the investigation did not establish that members of the Trump Campaign conspired or coordinated with the Russian government in its election interference activities.

For many Dems, this is borderline shocking information (because of the aforementioned brainwashing), as I'm sure is the case with many Republicans who get all the news from Fox News, read Breitbart, Daily Wire etc ...
While you have it open, can you remind us why Don Jr wasn’t charged related to his Trump tower meeting?
 
My reading is just fine, thanks.

If the most powerful and investigative body on the planet could not establish that the Trump campaign colluded or conspired with Russia, what do you think the opinion of informed and reasonable people should be as it relates to the Trump campaign colluding or conspiring with Russia?

I'm not saying anything about 100% certainty. I'm saying, if you are going to lean one way or the other and express an opinion one way or the other, which way should you lean? Should you lean toward The campaign conspiring / colluding or should you lean toward the campaign not conspiring or colluding?
Conspiring. "Does not establish" means less than a reasonable doubt.
 
So, you don't understand the difference between Russia interfering
There is nothing that you understand that other posters cannot.

If you are typing a sentence that includes a phrase like, "you don't understand . . . " then you should probably check yourself because 99% probability it's you who fail to understand.
 
Conspiring. "Does not establish" means less than a reasonable doubt.
Again....

(Copy/Paste)

If the most powerful and investigative body on the planet could not establish that the Trump campaign colluded or conspired with Russia, what do you think the opinion of informed and reasonable people should be as it relates to the Trump campaign colluding or conspiring with Russia?

I'm not saying anything about 100% certainty. I'm saying, if you are going to lean one way or the other and express an opinion one way or the other, which way should you lean? Should you lean toward The campaign conspiring / colluding or should you lean toward the campaign not conspiring or colluding?
 
Again....

(Copy/Paste)

If the most powerful and investigative body on the planet could not establish that the Trump campaign colluded or conspired with Russia, what do you think the opinion of informed and reasonable people should be as it relates to the Trump campaign colluding or conspiring with Russia?

I'm not saying anything about 100% certainty. I'm saying, if you are going to lean one way or the other and express an opinion one way or the other, which way should you lean? Should you lean toward The campaign conspiring / colluding or should you lean toward the campaign not conspiring or colluding?
I answered the question. Colluding/conspiring.

You seem to think "failing to establish" is informative. It's not. It just means they can't make their case beyond a reasonable doubt. There could be a 75% chance of collusion that would have been "failure to establish."

Once again, you confuse your own ignorance with the state of the world. Just because you don't know what it means for the FBI or DOJ to "fail to establish" doesn't make it so.
 
I answered the question. Colluding/conspiring.

You seem to think "failing to establish" is informative. It's not. It just means they can't make their case beyond a reasonable doubt. There could be a 75% chance of collusion that would have been "failure to establish."

Once again, you confuse your own ignorance with the state of the world. Just because you don't know what it means for the FBI or DOJ to "fail to establish" doesn't make it so.
Thanks for confirming your brainwashing.
 
Polling....

From the Mueller Report:

Although the investigation established that the Russian government perceived it would benefit from a Trump presidency and worked to secure that outcome, and that the Campaign expected it would benefit electorally from information stolen and released through Russian efforts, the investigation did not establish that members of the Trump Campaign conspired or coordinated with the Russian government in its election interference activities.

For many Dems, this is borderline shocking information (because of the aforementioned brainwashing), as I'm sure is the case with many Republicans who get all the news from Fox News, read Breitbart, Daily Wire etc ...
Why do you think they shared it with Russia? do you think Putin asked for it or they just volunteered it?What do you think Putin did with the info?
 
Back
Top