Proof of collusion: Trump campaign and Russia

Page 3 - Seeking answers? Join the AnandTech community: where nearly half-a-million members share solutions and discuss the latest tech.
Feb 6, 2002
16,899
321
126
#51
Probably he did know. I suppose it's possible Trump just said "do whatever you have to do, I don't need to know about it."

One way or another I hope the court cases can iron it out with no doubt (at least for those that still believe everything isn't a plot by the Dems.)
His fingerprints are all over the GOP platform change, easing sanctions on Russia. Also the constant lying about any involvement with Russia.

BTW - I hope the Democrats supoena the translator in the room with Trump when he talked with Putin in Helsinki. However I could see a valid EP claim unless it doesn't apply when investigating a crime.
 
Feb 4, 2009
18,859
278
126
#52
His fingerprints are all over the GOP platform change, easing sanctions on Russia. Also the constant lying about any involvement with Russia.

BTW - I hope the Democrats supoena the translator in the room with Trump when he talked with Putin in Helsinki. However I could see a valid EP claim unless it doesn't apply when investigating a crime.
I don’t because if so every future D Presidents translators will be summoned.
Every
Single
One
 
Feb 6, 2002
16,899
321
126
#53
I don’t because if so every future D Presidents translators will be summoned.
Every
Single
One
One difference when Presidents have meetings with foreign leaders there are other staffers in the room. Remember when Trump talked to Comey? He sent everyone out of the room.
 

woolfe9998

Diamond Member
Apr 8, 2013
7,393
225
136
#54
His fingerprints are all over the GOP platform change, easing sanctions on Russia. Also the constant lying about any involvement with Russia.

BTW - I hope the Democrats supoena the translator in the room with Trump when he talked with Putin in Helsinki. However I could see a valid EP claim unless it doesn't apply when investigating a crime.
EP is not very well defined in the law, but I highly doubt it would apply to communications with a foreign dignitary. That would imply that the dignitary had the right to hear Trump's words, but not the US Congress.

Also this:

https://www.businessinsider.com/jd-gordon-trump-adviser-ukraine-rnc-2017-3
 
Feb 4, 2009
18,859
278
126
#55
One difference when Presidents have meetings with foreign leaders there are other staffers in the room. Remember when Trump talked to Comey? He sent everyone out of the room.
That won’t matter, I know I’d do it just to get revenge.
 

cytg111

Diamond Member
Mar 17, 2008
7,812
180
126
#56

woolfe9998

Diamond Member
Apr 8, 2013
7,393
225
136
#57
Trump just hired 17 new lawyers to "define" EP... he knows its coming...
There's only like 4 published federal cases which even address EP. That's a whole lot of lawyers to define something based on what amounts to a few hundred words of judicial opinion.
 
Oct 15, 1999
12,839
177
126
#60
At some point you gotta realize that you are playing for team Vlad, no matter how painful that revelation must be... The bad news is that the fucking is ongoing. The good news is that you can quit the team with the snap of a finger, and just like that you are not in reverse-winning mode anymore.
One way I can think of getting the Trump shit-stain off of a conservatives soul is to get on twitter, your favorite social media, spread the word IRL and get #metoo2 trending, #metoo2 - got duped by the Trumpster false prophet! Make it your "walkaway" statement.
I don't have a team, and I don't use any social media. I'm not winning or losing. All I did was point out that you're presenting facts not in evidence. There appears to be a connection between some of Trumps staff and Russia. We don't know the depth of that connection, we don't know what information was exchanged. You then launched off into topics that have nothing to do with the information you posted, or my response.
You're banging your head on a rock, and all it's doing is making a squishy sound. Proclaiming speculation as fact isn't going to speed up the process, or change the result. It will get you acceptance from like minded people, but some day you'll realize that that acceptance only lasts until the next time you disagree with them.
 
Feb 4, 2009
18,859
278
126
#61
I don't have a team, and I don't use any social media. I'm not winning or losing. All I did was point out that you're presenting facts not in evidence. There appears to be a connection between some of Trumps staff and Russia. We don't know the depth of that connection, we don't know what information was exchanged. You then launched off into topics that have nothing to do with the information you posted, or my response.
You're banging your head on a rock, and all it's doing is making a squishy sound. Proclaiming speculation as fact isn't going to speed up the process, or change the result. It will get you acceptance from like minded people, but some day you'll realize that that acceptance only lasts until the next time you disagree with them.
You are right we don’t know any facts but what we do know sounds very fishy.



Also this was leaked by Manafort defense teams sloppiness not by Mueller.
 
Nov 28, 2004
10,789
29
126
#66
I don't have a team, and I don't use any social media. I'm not winning or losing. All I did was point out that you're presenting facts not in evidence. There appears to be a connection between some of Trumps staff and Russia. We don't know the depth of that connection, we don't know what information was exchanged. You then launched off into topics that have nothing to do with the information you posted, or my response.
You're banging your head on a rock, and all it's doing is making a squishy sound. Proclaiming speculation as fact isn't going to speed up the process, or change the result. It will get you acceptance from like minded people, but some day you'll realize that that acceptance only lasts until the next time you disagree with them.
Some? lol, more like over 100 known contacts between the trump campaign and Russians.
 
Nov 11, 1999
49,801
631
126
#67
His fingerprints are all over the GOP platform change, easing sanctions on Russia. Also the constant lying about any involvement with Russia.

BTW - I hope the Democrats supoena the translator in the room with Trump when he talked with Putin in Helsinki. However I could see a valid EP claim unless it doesn't apply when investigating a crime.
Trump & Putin used Putin's translator, iirc.

I'm against what you propose. Start in on that & we won't have translators.
 

cytg111

Diamond Member
Mar 17, 2008
7,812
180
126
#68
I don't have a team, and I don't use any social media. I'm not winning or losing. All I did was point out that you're presenting facts not in evidence. There appears to be a connection between some of Trumps staff and Russia. We don't know the depth of that connection, we don't know what information was exchanged. You then launched off into topics that have nothing to do with the information you posted, or my response.
You're banging your head on a rock, and all it's doing is making a squishy sound. Proclaiming speculation as fact isn't going to speed up the process, or change the result. It will get you acceptance from like minded people, but some day you'll realize that that acceptance only lasts until the next time you disagree with them.
If you identify as a rock, so be it, who am I to judge.
Are you stating the fact that this has not yet been proven in a court of law? If so... Ok? Captain Obvious much? How about water is wet and ....
 
Jan 12, 2005
14,324
1,627
126
#69
You guys are worse than Jade Helm conservatives with your conspiracies. :D
 
Feb 6, 2002
16,899
321
126
#71
Trump & Putin used Putin's translator, iirc.

I'm against what you propose. Start in on that & we won't have translators.
For a normal inquiry I agree but for criminal investigation, all bets off.
 
Jan 25, 2011
13,155
601
146
#72
Meanwhile Giuliani feels that Trump's team should be able to "correct" Mueller's final report before anyone sees it...

https://thehill.com/homenews/admini...am-should-be-allowed-to-correct-final-mueller

Rudy Giuliani says President Trump’s legal team should be allowed to “correct” special counsel Robert Mueller’s final report before Congress or the American people get the chance to read it.

The claim, made in a telephone interview with The Hill on Thursday evening, goes further than the president’s legal advisers have ever gone before in arguing they have a right to review the conclusions of Mueller’s probe, which is now in its 20th month.

“As a matter of fairness, they should show it to you — so we can correct it if they’re wrong,” said the former New York City mayor, who is a member of Trump's personal legal team. “They’re not God, after all. They could be wrong.”
 
Jul 17, 2003
13,294
156
126
#75

ASK THE COMMUNITY