No Collusion; So What Was The Goal?

Nobody…and I mean nobody…doubles down on utter horseshit more than Trump and his Army of Minions (again…no disrespect meant to Bob, Kevin, Stewart and the guys…)

Thanks for the thoughtful, nuanced response. I can’t refute your argument or its underpinning evidence.

You misunderstand the origins of the investigation and how federal law enforcement investigations and intelligence operations are conducted.

Contrary to Trump and his enablers, the Steele Dossier was not the impetus for the Mueller investigation (even though many of its broad threads have been substantiated, including by the Mueller report.) Rather, it was the George Papadopoulos’ situation that triggered the initial investigation. Beyond that, the FISA warrants targeted at Carter Page weren’t contingent on the Steele Dossier. Rather, the claims in that document were added to a package of evidence which included human and signal intelligence sources that substantiated further investigation.

From the report you didn’t read:

In late July 2016, soon after WikiLeaks’ first release of stolen documents, a foreign government contacted the FBI about a May 2016 encounter with Trump Campaign foreign policy adviser George Papadopoulos, Papadopoulos had suggested to a representative of that foreign government that the Trump Campaign had received indications from the Russian government that it could assist the Campaign through the anonymous release of information damaging to Democratic presidential candidate Hillary Clinton. That information prompted the FBI on July 31, 2016, to open an investigation into whether individuals associated with the Trump Campaign were coordinating with the Russian government in its interference activities.”

In conclusion, there shouldn’t be much controversy regarding the origins of the FBI investigation given the US intelligence community’s strongly evidenced report that Russia interfered in the 2016 election with the explicit aim of bolstering Trump and the campaign’s numerous contacts with Russian operatives. It was have been nothing short of malfeasance for there to have NOT been an investigation given these circumstances. In the end, the work of Mueller’s team is a great work of public service given its systematic documentation of Russian influence operations.

2 Likes

I’m with you on this but you’re playing chess( using facts) and some are playing checkers(believing trumps bullshit).

1 Like

The word is forever changed to “oranges”

What’s the song say…:

“Know when to hold 'em…when to fold them…know when to walk away…know when to run…”

The best thing for Trump to do right now is 1) have a few ego-boosting rally’s and 2) now that he has “won”, just leave it alone (which he won’t do…)

Pride and arrogance have done in people far greater that Trump.

1 Like

I don’t think this is accurate - there wasn’t sufficient evidence to prove a case of criminal conspiracy re: Russian relations. Collusion? Yes. No American should be ok with how interested the Trump campaign was in working with a hostile foreign power to help win the election. We’re not in a good place when the American President is shown to be not guilty based on what most people would consider a “technicality”.

To your question: I think the Russians favored Trump because they had signals that he was a fellow traveler on the kinds of ethnonationalist politics they want and he had affinities for strongman politics and a need to be approved by them, making him easily manipulated to Russia’s gain.

3 Likes

TB. Thanks!

Kind of sounds like the dilemma prosecutors had with American Gangsters and Crooked Politicians prior to RICO statues/laws and going after them because of Income Tax Evasion.

There also seems to be a consensus that proving criminal conspiracy was a high bar, especially when dealing with a sitting President.

I think that’s a perfect analogy. These statutes (including obstruction) weren’t written with the kind of facts we have here - these rules don’t contemplate needing to deter and ultimately punish a United States Presidential candidate and President from teaming up with a hostile foreign power to try and both win an election and further his private business interests. It’s always been presumed that of course a person motivated to run for President wouldn’t have these motivations.

It’s probably a good time to update legislation to reflect that, yes, this is now a thing to be guarded against. It sounds absurd, but the Mueller report is proof we should.

5 Likes

Isn’t the point of an investigation to find out if something happened? Don’t you think investigating what the intelligence community accepted was Russian interference was worthwhile?

It led to 34 individual indictments and many people already being charged with felonies. And we basically learned that our own President really wanted to do more but he kept getting stopped from his own people. You know his own people that aren’t going to end up behind bars.

I mean compared to the Benghazi investigation this was far cheaper and caught a shit ton more wrong doing.

It also showed multiple times where Trump directly lied to the American people. Though we already knew that.

2 Likes

Did you notice how he left out, between charged and imprisoned, due process?

You know what else I have noticed, @H_factor?

Not one…not even one…GOP member of the House and Senate…or any conservative for that matter…going through the uncontrollable fits of “rage” and apoplexy that they did when it came to Benghazi.

And this blows me away even more…

Trump, his Minions and Conservatives shitting on the investigators MORE THAN THE DAMN RUSSIANS!

Tell me this…how much has Trump tweeted vitriol about Comey…and how much has he tweeted about Putin?

It sometimes seems like this Nation is going through some strange alternate Universe with Trump,

2 Likes

What is (late 60s in age and lofty reputation) Barr’s motivation for refuting the op-ed spewings of Mueller, Nadler, Schiff, et al?

Maybe he knows more than you political, living room coaches.

1 Like

Fwiw, I don’t believe Barr would flip to evilness or some shit to land his son a job.

But it’s not like the WH is refusing to give people material

1 Like

To further your very good point, for a fun thought exercise, take a Word version of the Mueller report, replace Trump with Obama in every sentence, and Russia with Iran. “Conservatives” would not only call for impeachment, they’d want an execution for treason.

A hostile foreign power with the sole goal of humbling the US so it can rise to power tried to penetrate ans corrupt our democracy (and did, to a certain extent), and all “conservatives” can say is “take that libs! No legal action! Exonerated!”

“Conservatives” hate (fellow American) liberal Democrats more than they do ethnonationalist fascist and treacherous Russians. Let that sink in. Imagine Reagan believing that. Or Barry Goldwater. You can’t, because they were…patriots.

5 Likes

Yes, he belongs to a group of people, older men in power, who have never done anything wrong in the world. The “why would I” defense always works.

This means you know more? And knowing more does not mean the same thing as being honest. But I know, we should never be cynical when it comes to politics (unless it’s someone from the other tribe).

I can’t imagine the people behind things like WMDs in Iraq to Obama being born in Kenya would be that unreasonable and petty.

Appeal to authority is a logical fallacy. Credentials and experience don’t take away the need for a cogent argument supported by strong corroborative evidence (which the special counsel’s report has put the wazoo). You need to address the specific issues the report brings to light and that other posters have highlighted.

By the way, Mueller is an authority in his own right. He graduated from Princeton and then volunteered to serve as an Marine infantry officer. He received a Bronze Star and Purple Heart for his service in Vietnam. He served as FBI director under George W. (largely because of his reputation as a staunch Republican) and began his service at the bureau a week before 9/11. He was chosen as special counsel because his expertise, service, and character are unimpeachable.

Do you believe the 448 page special counsel report to be an “op-ed”? Have you actually read the report or understand it’s law enforcement and intelligence underpinnings?

P.S., as shocking and politically damning as the report is for Team Trump, it’s interesting to note that a parallel counter intelligence investigation continues.

1 Like

Without question…

And FOX would televise it with Hannity giving the color commentary.