The "Russian Conspiracy" strategam appears to be failing

[Charles]

And Flynn and Kushner look to be a case of bad "optics" as opposed to being guilty of anything illegal.

I had the impression you loved the United States.

[firstfloor]

"[It is claimed Mr Kushner discussed setting up a back channel with the Russian ambassador in December.

The New York Times and Washington Post said he wanted to use Russian facilities to avoid US interception of discussions with Moscow. He is reported to have done so before Mr Trump assumed the presidency, so would have been a private citizen at the time.]"
-BBC news

[Mountain Man]

James Clapper dashes the hopes and dreams of liberals once again:

"I did not see any smoking gun certitude evidence of collusion."

http://www.breitbart.com/video/2017/...-gun-evidence/

[Mountain Man]

I had the impression you loved the United States.

You're right, I do, which is why I and others wish liberals would put this phony conspiracy theory to rest and start working with our duly elected President to make America great again.

[Charles]

James Clapper dashes the hopes and dreams of liberals once again:

"I did not see any smoking gun certitude evidence of collusion."

http://www.breitbart.com/video/2017/...-gun-evidence/

[firstfloor]

James Clapper dashes the hopes and dreams of liberals once again:

"I did not see any smoking gun certitude evidence of collusion."

http://www.breitbart.com/video/2017/...-gun-evidence/

This is a pretty low bar for people in senior public office. Good enough for a Republican is not the same thing as good enough.

[Mountain Man]

That's because anything he says beyond "There is no evidence" is irrelevant.

He can hedge his bets all he wants, but the facts are very simple: no evidence of collusion.

[Charles]

That's because anything he says beyond "There is no evidence" is irrelevant.

He can hedge his bets all he wants, but the facts are very simple: no evidence of collusion.

Wrong again: http://www.theologyweb.com/campus/sh...l=1#post445406

[rogue06]

Please, if it was a Clinton staffer you'd be up in arms.

I wouldn't. Establishing back channel connections to talk to world leaders is pretty much SOP for an incoming president so either way I would dismiss it. Doubly so now since it is no longer arguable that some of Obama's people were monitoring communications by Trump and his people and releasing what they found to the press.

There is one thing to consider though.

If Trump had been colluding with the Russians before the election why would Trump's son-in-law Jared Kushner need to try to establish a back channel connection with the Russians? After all, if he was already secretly working with the Russians then Trump would already have such a connection -- one so good that in over seven months of digging federal investigators haven't found a hint of its existence

[Mountain Man]

Here are some points I made in another thread:

The Washington Post supposedly got a letter detailing this information back in December. Why did they sit on it so long? And why are they being so coy about the details now? Some have begun to speculate that the letter may not even exist, or that it's another "dossier" full of unverified (meaning false) information, and this is why the Post is playing it so close to the vest. The Post itself even describes it as an "anonymous letter", which is certainly suspicious. The first clue that you're dealing with fake news is when the story doesn't give a specific attribution.

Second, why would Kushner be setting up these supposed "back-channels" after the election? Remember, Kushner was hired as part of the transition team. If the Russian conspiracy is true then the Trump team would have already had their "back-channels" in place so they could collude with Russia to win the election. According to the Post, the Russian ambassador was supposedly "taken aback by the suggestion" from Kushner, which doesn't make any sense. Why would he be "taken aback" if Trump was already in league with Putin? If this story is true, doesn't it pretty much blow-up the Russian collusion accusations?

Finally, if we grant that this is true, what crime was actually committed? Well that's an easy answer: none.

[Mountain Man]

And the wheels continue to disintegrate... even the mainstream media is starting to distance itself from these lunatic ravings.

Source: Breitbart

http://www.breitbart.com/video/2017/...ssian-hackers/

© Copyright Original Source

This is coming from Andrea Mitchell. Mitchell's extreme liberal bias is well-documented.

[One Bad Pig]

And the wheels continue to disintegrate... even the mainstream media is starting to distance itself from these lunatic ravings.

Source: Breitbart

http://www.breitbart.com/video/2017/...ssian-hackers/

© Copyright Original Source

This is coming from Andrea Mitchell. Mitchell's extreme liberal bias is well-documented.

Breitbart, therefore your argument is invalid.

[Mountain Man]

[Sparko]

It's not over yet!!

Now Hillary is making claims that Trump colluded with 1000 Russians to flood facebook with fake news to steal the election.

Hillary launches astonishing conspiracy claim that Trump won the election because he 'colluded' with 1,000 Russian agents who filled Facebook with 'lies' and Twitter with 'bots'

Defeated Democrat is back on the speaking circuit, telling a Silicon Valley get-together about her election loss

* Clinton says her defeat isn't her fault as she claims Russians and 'forces in this country' were out to defeat her

* She claims 1,000 Russian agents were filling Facebook with 'lies' and the 'majority' of news on it was 'fake'

* Clinton said she was certain someone had 'colluded' so the Russians knew what fake news worked and added: 'I'm leaning towards Trump.'

* Also blamed her own party for having poor-quality voter data, claimed she was the victim of misogyny, and that she was kept off the air by TV networks


Read more: http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/arti...#ixzz4ilVdmY64
Follow us: @MailOnline on Twitter | DailyMail on Facebook

And for our liberal friends who will cry about the DailyMail being biased, here is the same story from Vox:

https://www.vox.com/policy-and-polit...n-2016-excuses

Even her own side is mocking her on this!

[One Bad Pig]

It's not over yet!!

Now Hillary is making claims that Trump colluded with 1000 Russians to flood facebook with fake news to steal the election.

Hillary launches astonishing conspiracy claim that Trump won the election because he 'colluded' with 1,000 Russian agents who filled Facebook with 'lies' and Twitter with 'bots'

Defeated Democrat is back on the speaking circuit, telling a Silicon Valley get-together about her election loss

* Clinton says her defeat isn't her fault as she claims Russians and 'forces in this country' were out to defeat her

* She claims 1,000 Russian agents were filling Facebook with 'lies' and the 'majority' of news on it was 'fake'

* Clinton said she was certain someone had 'colluded' so the Russians knew what fake news worked and added: 'I'm leaning towards Trump.'

* Also blamed her own party for having poor-quality voter data, claimed she was the victim of misogyny, and that she was kept off the air by TV networks


Read more: http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/arti...#ixzz4ilVdmY64
Follow us: @MailOnline on Twitter | DailyMail on Facebook

And for our liberal friends who will cry about the DailyMail being biased, here is the same story from Vox:

https://www.vox.com/policy-and-polit...n-2016-excuses

Even her own side is mocking her on this!

Facebook? Wasn't FB caught trying to suppress conservative news in favor of the liberal variety?

Sid Blumenthal is really not good for her.