> What exactly are we investigating?
Collusion between Trump/team and Russia. It's one thing for Russia to mess with an election, it's a vastly different thing if the campaign coordinated with them to do it.
Collusion between Trump/team and Russia. It's one thing for Russia to mess with an election, it's a vastly different thing if the campaign coordinated with them to do it.
Who would have thought so many Americans would have a love affair with a KGB Agent that is responsible for murder and oppression and for his entire life worked to undermine America and has accomplished that to some extent with this Administration.
Maybe it's just me but I wouldn't be surprised if a lot of journalists are in some part motivated by their displeasure with the President's demeanor and public behavior. But that motivation doesn't mean they're dishonest, it just means that they will follow through on every lead in an investigation regarding POTUS corruption.
Of all the terrible things the government has done in the past 1 / 10 / 100 years, I don't think that a candidate coordinating with Russia about which fake news to publish is even worth mentioning.
If Congress has the guts to investigate the Steele dossier (which alleged Trump traded eased regulations for oil interests) then that's great. And if he is impeached on that basis, that's great too, although it leaves us with a probably worse Mike Pence. Better yet is if the entire government falls.
I'm not defending Trump or his conduct; I'm just saying this is a distraction.
It's weird. Hearing people talk like this is weird, and reminds me of the run-up to Iraq, except that at least then there were claims to evidence.
Have you read Igor Panarin's work? He and Putin are both "ex"-KGB.
But hey, it's just a hypothesis. Let's see what evidence comes out.
Edit: http://perezhilton.com/2016-12-29-russia-donald-trump-electi...
Sorry your preferred candidate lost the election. Next time don't let violent, intolerant, elitist, smug liberals and celebrities take over your political party. Democrats used to be about Unions and the working family. Appears that era is over.
As noted in previous comments... There is a reason the Rust Belt voted for Trump, and it has nothing to do with Russia.
You really need to learn to have a discussion with someone, without blaming them for all of the perceived faults of the democrats. You don't know my political party, nor my preferred candidate, you're just assuming everything as if everyone who doesn't like Trump is the same.
> There is a reason the Rust Belt voted for Trump, and it has nothing to do with Russia.
No one thinks it does; the Rust Belt is just gullible and fell for a con man promising them things that cannot occur, those jobs cannot come back, they no longer exist. They heard what they wanted to hear because they're unable to hear the truth.
And hey, even W liked Putin. He's a regular sort of manly man. Like the current President seems to idealize, in his own cokehead yuppie way.
Former Acting CIA Director Michael Morell has stated that he has seen no evidence of collusions between Trump and the Kremlin. "On the question of the Trump campaign conspiring with the Russians here, there is smoke, but there is no fire, at all," Morell said.[156]
James Clapper, the Director of National Intelligence under President Obama, said there was no evidence of any collusion between the Trump campaign and Russian operatives as of January 2017 when the intelligence community issued its report on the subject.[157]
It's like you don't even read the links you post
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Russian_interference_in_the_20...
There's plenty right there in your own source that warrants investigation into Trump simply from the already proved contacts that have occurred between the Russians and Trump's associates. That they have not found direct evidence of Trump's involvement yet is not a reason to stop an investigation who's purpose is simply to find out what did actually happen.
This also keeps the Democrats from addressing real issues in their party. They ran a bad campaign. Instead of owning it and finding ways to address issues with American voters, they have found a scapegoat in Russia. Good Job!
Time will tell, but at least some Democrats are starting to address the real issue, and not placing all the blame on the boogeyman (Russia):
http://www.cnn.com/2017/03/30/politics/joe-biden-donald-trum...
A bit like throwing wild unfounded accusations of blaming your predecessor of "tapping" your wires and when that doesn't fly try to redefine the meaning of words.
Or from the moment that the media writes something you don't like call them "fake" or threaten them with stronger libel laws.
Or when you are getting under fire blame somebody else or cry "this is unfair, look what the other one did".
The only time in my life that I personally witnessed this kind of behavior was when I was in Kindergarten. And I'm not trying to make a joke, I'm very serious about this.
I don't think your POTUS is the physical representation of well-considered mature views or standing, not by a long shot. I was always raised under the impression that all old people had a lot of wisdom in them, but there is one 70 years old one that changed my views on that dramatically.
It's never about the topic at hand but there always seem to be some deflection to things or persons which (honestly) doesn't matter anymore. And what I find particularly strange is that it can be perfectly be the case that there is no "treason", it's the weird behavior shown (and sorry a bit dishonesty) that makes it so damn compelling to believe it.
And no, Clinton's campaign is not the real issue. She lost, that's over, no one is questing that. The issue is whether Trump and team were involved or not with the Russian interference with the election. No amount of deflecting back to Clinton will change the issue.
Yes, it is.
> How is it any different than hiring a PR firm based in another country?
One is treason, one is not.
"messed with" means hacking and possible criminal coordination between a campaign and russian officials. if it came out that the clinton campaign had coordinated with [insert historic rival] intelligence, people would be calling for executions.
...not sure which Clinton you mean here, but if you meant Bill, it's quite likely that he did indeed coordinate with Saudi Intelligence in a reasonably similar fashion.
...and so did the man he defeated, George H.W. Bush.
http://www.nytimes.com/1993/08/23/world/clinton-and-his-ties...