Mueller indicts Russians

[ElFenix]

They didn’t need to turn 63 million, he won by less than 90,000 across three states.

ffs they didn't even need trump to win. if he'd have lost we'd have had even more made up bullshit about stolen elections, gowdy doing his best to continue the bengazi circus for years, fake news, alex jones going nuts, etc., and the base would have lapped it up. we'd be at least as far down the path of being at each others' throats as we are now. russia has an interest in stoking the fires.

 

[realibrad]

It proves that she was the victim of Russian attacks. I suspect they'd have done the same only different with Bernie. For the MAGA!

Oh, it does prove that Russia worked against her for sure. It just does not prove she did not try to work with them. That was all. No innuendo. Make sense?

I think you guys are assuming that my stance is too simple and straightforward and I must mean something more. I really just meant that the indictment meant nothing beyond the indictment.

 

[jackstar7]

He clearly believes that I have suspicions. I have no reason to believe she did, I just think that this indictment does nothing to prove or disprove anything by her.

Sure sure. You've got nothing but respect and admiration for Hillary. I've misconstrued everything.

 

[ivwshane]

It is true that I have seen nothing to indicate Hillary. Its also true that Trump being compromised has nothing to do with the possibility of Hillary being compromised. If he were highlighting that, then explain the next post he made?



He clearly believes that I have suspicions. I have no reason to believe she did, I just think that this indictment does nothing to prove or disprove anything by her.

Maybe he believes that because he puts you in the same category as bandonbull and people who like to use innuendo up push an agenda.

Do you understand that, you are viewed as being like brandonbull. That's got to hurt your ego.

 

[realibrad]

Sure sure. You've got nothing but respect and admiration for Hillary. I've misconstrued everything.

Nope, I do not but that changes nothing. Again, that does not logically change the truth of my previous statement. This indictment proves nothing in terms of Hillary other than Russia did target her. It was asked if we could now agree that she did not, and all I said was that this indictment does not do anything to answer that question.

Full stop.

 

[Puffnstuff]

Nope, I do not but that changes nothing. Again, that does not logically change the truth of my previous statement. This indictment proves nothing in terms of Hillary other than Russia did target her. It was asked if we could now agree that she did not, and all I said was that this indictment does not do anything to answer that question.

Full stop.

I agree that this indictment is just another milestone in the progress of this investigation.

 

[ElFenix]

Nope, I do not but that changes nothing. Again, that does not logically change the truth of my previous statement. This indictment proves nothing in terms of Hillary other than Russia did target her. It was asked if we could now agree that she did not, and all I said was that this indictment does not do anything to answer that question.

Full stop.

Cartman:"Or does she?" See, that's a question. I'm asking questions, Stan! I've called for Wendy to come on my show and defend herself, but she won't do it!

 

[realibrad]

Maybe he believes that because he puts you in the same category as bandonbull and people who like to use innuendo up push an agenda.

Do you understand that, you are viewed as being like brandonbull. That's got to hurt your ego.

If I did not understand that, would I have asked my original question? And no, it does not hurt my ego. I could be a person that believes my judgement over others. I believe I disagree because of tests that I have run and continue to run on myself.

I tend to over explain things anyway, and try to respond in good faith. I truly do not know why you would believe I use innuendo. I speak as explicitly as I am able to do. Perhaps I am not at the level people want, but my ignorance should not be confused with a conspiracy.

 

[brandonbull]

no goalposts have shifted. It just seems that you are only now listening to what has actually been going on for the last 2-3 years isntead of inventing and living in whatever realities are more comfortable for you. welcome back...sorta?

It has because you and your ilk of imbeciles keep saying Trump colluded but have produced zero evidence outside of the dossier. We absolutely know that Clinton, the DNC, and people at the top levels of the DOJ knowingly tried to hide financial and working ties to the dossier. Which could be one of several possible attempts by the Russians to influence the election. We also know the DNC did influence the election on the Democrat side and still some questions about possible money laundering by Clinton once she took over the DNC fund raising. I still don't know how you can continue to question that. Please tell me what part(s) you still refute.

 

[realibrad]

I agree that this indictment is just another milestone in the progress of this investigation.

Careful, you will get connected to me, and then you will be in on this conspiracy. Far too reasonable of a position.

 

[realibrad]

Cartman:"Or does she?" See, that's a question. I'm asking questions, Stan! I've called for Wendy to come on my show and defend herself, but she won't do it!

You ass. You are using humor to get me to let down my guard. How dare you invoke the greatness of South Park.

But, I did not ask questions. I just pointed out the logical truth that his question cannot be answered by this indictment. Hillary right now has nothing to defend against in terms of Russia, so asking her to do so would be stupid.

 

[emperus]

It has because you and your ilk of imbeciles keep saying Trump colluded but have produced zero evidence outside of the dossier. We absolutely know that Clinton, the DNC, and people at the top levels of the DOJ knowingly tried to hide financial and working ties to the dossier. Which could be one of several possible attempts by the Russians to influence the election. We also know the DNC did influence the election on the Democrat side and still some questions about possible money laundering by Clinton once she took over the DNC fund raising. I still don't know how you can continue to question that. Please tell me what part(s) you still refute.

The problem with all this BS is that in time the truth will come out. You and your ilk seem so obsessed with winning the day, and so enthralled in your conspiracy therories you're not fully seeing anything else. I suspect a month ago you were saying that all the Russian meddling was a nothing burger and a hoax. How far we have come since then, No.

You should feel embarrassed that Trump's campaign, Fox News and properly yourself parroted fake information from Russians designed to sow discord in our country.

 

[Fanatical Meat]

It has because you and your ilk of imbeciles keep saying Trump colluded but have produced zero evidence outside of the dossier. We absolutely know that Clinton, the DNC, and people at the top levels of the DOJ knowingly tried to hide financial and working ties to the dossier. Which could be one of several possible attempts by the Russians to influence the election. We also know the DNC did influence the election on the Democrat side and still some questions about possible money laundering by Clinton once she took over the DNC fund raising. I still don't know how you can continue to question that. Please tell me what part(s) you still refute.

Just so it’s known, what would you agree is collusion? Specifically where is the line or action?

 

[Thump553]

If I did not understand that, would I have asked my original question? And no, it does not hurt my ego. I could be a person that believes my judgement over others. I believe I disagree because of tests that I have run and continue to run on myself.

I tend to over explain things anyway, and try to respond in good faith. I truly do not know why you would believe I use innuendo. I speak as explicitly as I am able to do. Perhaps I am not at the level people want, but my ignorance should not be confused with a conspiracy.

Your position totally ignores the absolute hatred Putin bears towards Hillary Clinton. After his 2012 protests broke out across Russia about rigged ballots, etc. Putin rather brutally repressed them. Clinton, as Sec of State, criticized his actions and the whole Russian closed election system in general. Putin viewed that as a direct attack on his legitimacy and that was really when the second cold war went into full force.

I find it extremely difficult to imagine any set of circumstances where Putin would have his rigging forces working on behalf of Hillary Clinton. His goals were (1) anybody but Clinton and (2) cause as much disruption in US society as possible. He exceeded beyond his wildest expectations.

 

[brandonbull]

Just so it’s known, what would you agree is collusion? Specifically where is the line or action?

And what exactly is "collusion" and the law(s) that "collusion" would violate?

 

[zinfamous]

It has because you and your ilk of imbeciles keep saying Trump colluded but have produced zero evidence outside of the dossier. We absolutely know that Clinton, the DNC, and people at the top levels of the DOJ knowingly tried to hide financial and working ties to the dossier. Which could be one of several possible attempts by the Russians to influence the election. We also know the DNC did influence the election on the Democrat side and still some questions about possible money laundering by Clinton once she took over the DNC fund raising. I still don't know how you can continue to question that. Please tell me what part(s) you still refute.

so....which of Trump's many known investments and relationships with Russian oligarchs and businessfolks do you consider fake news? Are all of them just, completely non-compromising?

It's interesting that you remain stuck on irrelevant, unactionable, and rather acceptable practices from the dems by declaring them somehow scandalous. It tells me that the building stench in your pants is just becoming too unbearable.

 

[Jhhnn]

Oh, it does prove that Russia worked against her for sure. It just does not prove she did not try to work with them. That was all. No innuendo. Make sense?

I think you guys are assuming that my stance is too simple and straightforward and I must mean something more. I really just meant that the indictment meant nothing beyond the indictment.

The notion that she might have is scurrilous.

 

[brandonbull]

Your position totally ignores the absolute hatred Putin bears towards Hillary Clinton. After his 2012 protests broke out across Russia about rigged ballots, etc. Putin rather brutally repressed them. Clinton, as Sec of State, criticized his actions and the whole Russian closed election system in general. Putin viewed that as a direct attack on his legitimacy and that was really when the second cold war went into full force.

I find it extremely difficult to imagine any set of circumstances where Putin would have his rigging forces working on behalf of Hillary Clinton. His goals were (1) anybody but Clinton and (2) cause as much disruption in US society as possible. He exceeded beyond his wildest expectations.

If anything, Putin and his Russian buddies wasn't going to get the ROI on their investment into Clinton like they did with Obama so they wanted to poison her presidency.

 

[realibrad]

Your position totally ignores the absolute hatred Putin bears towards Hillary Clinton. After his 2012 protests broke out across Russia about rigged ballots, etc. Putin rather brutally repressed them. Clinton, as Sec of State, criticized his actions and the whole Russian closed election system in general. Putin viewed that as a direct attack on his legitimacy and that was really when the second cold war went into full force.

I find it extremely difficult to imagine any set of circumstances where Putin would have his rigging forces working on behalf of Hillary Clinton. His goals were (1) anybody but Clinton and (2) cause as much disruption in US society as possible. He exceeded beyond his wildest expectations.

I ignore nothing, because I'm not saying anything on if she did or did not work with him.

Someone asked if we could now say that for sure Hillary did not work with Russia. I said this indictment does not prove anything in terms of that question. Your information is outside of the indictment and even if it were part would not prove anything in that one narrow regard.

Now, if Putin did hate Hillary, it could be that he would want to get dirt on her and trick her people into working with him. I know of no reason to believe this, but if you are using the logic that he hated her and wanted her to lose, there are multiple ways of her working with him that would accomplish just that. I think Putin is a bad person, but I do not think he is dumb. That is what makes him so dangerous and it is scary the Right is so okay with him right now.

 

[Hayabusa Rider]

And what exactly is "collusion" and the law(s) that "collusion" would violate?

Collusion is a word too often misused. The proper term of illegality is conspiracy.

 

[Jhhnn]

If anything, Putin and his Russian buddies wasn't going to get the ROI on their investment into Clinton like they did with Obama so they wanted to poison her presidency.

"Like they did with Obama" explains sanctions against Russia in the wake of their aggression in Ukraine & the expulsion of Russian diplomats from this country...

 

[realibrad]

The notion that she might have is scurrilous.

How so? If that is the root of this, then I have misunderstood. I see no reason to believe she did or did not, but you are saying that is in and of itself spreading scandalous claims?

 

[interchange]

Let it ring that the only thing President Trump has ever said or done to condemn or deter Russia in any way comes on 2/16/18 at 12:18PM and reads:

Russia started their anti-US campaign in 2014, long before I announced that I would run for President. The results of the election were not impacted. The Trump campaign did nothing wrong - no collusion!
​

All he has ever said and done to help was say it wasn't his fault. Jesus effing Christ how can anyone thing this is OK?

 

[Jhhnn]

I ignore nothing, because I'm not saying anything on if she did or did not work with him.

You entertain the possibility that she might have in some way for which there is literally no evidence. Tha's the intro to conspiracy theory.

 

[ivwshane]

It has because you and your ilk of imbeciles keep saying Trump colluded but have produced zero evidence outside of the dossier. We absolutely know that Clinton, the DNC, and people at the top levels of the DOJ knowingly tried to hide financial and working ties to the dossier. Which could be one of several possible attempts by the Russians to influence the election. We also know the DNC did influence the election on the Democrat side and still some questions about possible money laundering by Clinton once she took over the DNC fund raising. I still don't know how you can continue to question that. Please tell me what part(s) you still refute.

/facepalm

I didn't question you, I gave a reason why other people thought you were dealing in innuendo. I've already agreed with your point and I realize people keep missing your point which is why I tried explaining to you why that may be.