There Was Spying On The Trump Campaign

[oxmixmudd]

But it is an excellent reason not to trust anonymous sources citing anonymous sources.

That just isnt true. First we know a lot of shady things went between members of the trump campaign and the Russians. The fact we can't find enough evidence to indict the president himself doesnt mean that there was not coordination between the trump campaign and the russians. It just means that the parties involved were careful enough to keep their noses clean enough to keep trump himself from being proven to have been involved.

And again, it is unbecoming for christians to rejoice in this sort of thing. He isnt clean. How many associated with him and his campaign went down over this?

Bottom line: He got away with getting help from the russians by letting others take the fall coupled with even public statements that functioned as requests for help but that were carefully designed to allow plausible deniability.

And you are happy about that?



Jim

[rogue06]

FWICT the document was given to American intelligence shortly after Trump was elected. That would be at the end of 2015 or the start of 2016.

[Mountain Man]

First we know a lot of shady things went between members of the trump campaign and the Russians.

False.

"[T]he investigation did not establish that members of the Trump Campaign conspired or coordinated with the Russian government in its election interference activities."
-Special Counsel Robert Mueller

[rogue06]

Here's what he said:

"No, they were not [spying on the Trump campaign]. They were spying on, a term I don't particularly like, but on what the Russians were doing. Trying to understand were the Russians infiltrating, trying to gain access, trying to gain leverage or influence which is what they do."

https://www.realclearpolitics.com/vi...campaign.html#!

In other words, yes, they were spying on the Trump campaign but under the false pretense of monitoring Russian activity.

And in every other case like this they informed those involved but not being spied what is going on (see Diane Feinstein and the Chinese spy in her employ for 20 years).

[oxmixmudd]

No, Jim, I don't -- you really need to stop these false allegations.



You are so obsessed with this so much that you slip into false accusations of a brother, and that's sad.

Get a grip - for now, he's POTUS. It won't always be, and God is still on His Throne.

No. You cut the examples out of my response. They are critical to making the point. In doing so your response ignores the two examples given. So you most certainly did ignore them.

As for those on this board going along with trumps attacks on sessions for doing the right thing, see MMs post above.

There is no false accusation involved.

Jim

[oxmixmudd]

False.

"[T]he investigation did not establish that members of the Trump Campaign conspired or coordinated with the Russian government in its election interference activities."
-Special Counsel Robert Mueller

Yes in fact we do know a lot of shady things went on.

We know a back channel was sought to the russians. We know the russians tried to influence the campaign in trumps favor. We know there was the shady trump tower meeting with the russian operative and so on.

How that translates into muellers conclusion can only be understood when the content of the report is revealed.

Jim

[oxmixmudd]

The fact that Mueller quickly wrapped up his fraudulent investigation shortly after Barr was appointed suggests that Trump made the right decision. I wonder how many more months or even years the dirty cop would have carried on if feckless Sessions was still AG?


There is no good evidence that Trump did anything legally questionable with regard to Nielson. And, no, "a friend of a friend who knew a guy" stories from unreliable news sources with a long history of publishing fake news are not good evidence.

How about Trumps tweet saying he wanted to unload illegals on santuary cities as payback? That would be ILLEGAL, and it is the pushback on that which factors into her firing.

Your no evidence claim is simply not true

Jim

[rogue06]

Yes in fact we do know a lot of shady things went on.

We know a back channel was sought to the russians.

Fairly typical of a new Administration as they come into power.

Strike one.

We know the russians tried to influence the campaign in trumps favor.

Actually they were more interested in stirring up trouble and sowing distrust in general. They could have never dreamed just how helpful the Democrats would be.

Anyway, as Mueller concluded, Trump or others in his campaign had nothing to do with it (no collusion).

Strike two.

We know there was the shady trump tower meeting with the russian operative and so on.

Which amounted to nothing.

Strike three. You're outta there.

How that translates into muellers conclusion can only be understood when the content of the report is revealed.

The smart money is on that he stuck to facts and evidence rather than relying on wishful thinking.

[Mountain Man]

Yes in fact we do know a lot of shady things went on.

We know a back channel was sought to the russians. We know the russians tried to influence the campaign in trumps favor. We know there was the shady trump tower meeting with the russian operative and so on.

How that translates into muellers conclusion can only be understood when the content of the report is revealed.

To a conspiracy nut like you, the lack of evidence is the most convincing evidence of all.

"It's proof of a cover-up! "

[oxmixmudd]

Fairly typical of a new Administration as they come into power.

Strike one.

Actually they were more interested in stirring up trouble and sowing distrust in general. They could have never dreamed just how helpful the Democrats would be.

Anyway, as Mueller concluded, Trump or others in his campaign had nothing to do with it (no collusion).

Strike two.


Which amounted to nothing.

Strike three. You're outta there.

The smart money is on that he stuck to facts and evidence rather than relying on wishful thinking.

Mm said nothing shady went on. And it did. Nothing you have said changes that fact. Operating in the shadows is usually an indication there is something to hide, but it doesnt prove there is something to hide, nor does it define what it is that is being hidden.

Jim

[Mountain Man]

How about Trumps tweet saying he wanted to unload illegals on santuary cities as payback? That would be ILLEGAL, and it is the pushback on that which factors into her firing.

Your no evidence claim is simply not true

We have no evidence that Trump ordered his people to violate the law and then fired them when they refused. According to your CNN source, the proposal never even reached Nielson's desk, and according to your FOX News source, she resigned because she was ineffective at working with Congress to push the President's agenda through the proper channels. Again, that's what YOUR sources say.

That's my last word on it.

[oxmixmudd]

To a conspiracy nut like you, the lack of evidence is the most convincing evidence of all.

"It's proof of a cover-up! "

Ah, back to calling names now I see.

You havent understood a word I have said - but that is not particularly unusual

Jim

[KingsGambit]

We have no evidence that Trump ordered his people to violate the law and then fired them when they refused. According to your CNN source, the proposal never even reached Nielson's desk, and according to your FOX News source, she resigned because she was ineffective at working with Congress to push the President's agenda through the proper channels. Again, that's what YOUR sources say.

That's my last word on it.

Both Trump and Sanders have said in the last 2-3 days that the proposal is very much on the table.

From a national security perspective, it seems self-defeating to me. Sending potential MS-13 members into San Francisco obviously holds national security risks to the entire nation.

[Mountain Man]

Mm said nothing shady went on.

No, I quoted Mueller's own words saying that the Trump campaign did nothing shady.

Your dispute is not with me but with the facts.

[Mountain Man]

Both Trump and Sanders have said in the last 2-3 days that the proposal is very much on the table.

From a national security perspective, it seems self-defeating to me. Sending potential MS-13 members into San Francisco obviously holds national security risks to the entire nation.

Of course the proposal is on the table, and Trump wants it pushed through the proper legal and political channels. All it really does is expose the hypocrisy of the left when they say we should invite these people in who have broken our laws, but then they balk when Trump says, "Fine, then you take care of them!"

But more importantly, what we don't have is evidence that Trump fired people because they refused to break the law, or told them he would pardon them if they got in trouble, like ox has falsely claimed.