Continuing from below - Why would any American POTUS candidate want to share Polling data or any
internal campaign data with a foreign government? What would be a sound reasoning to do so? Here we have the Trump campaign having conversations and meetings with Russians on their election campaign and those Russians are in possession of internal data on Trumps opposition (HRC) - what would be the good reasoning to do so?
Trumpians say there was no collusion and even if there is and was, it's not a crime. So we're to now take it that Trumps campaign for president was just thinking outside the box - now filling the room with all sorts of smoke to fog up the issue of Russian interference. I ask - Why would any American want to do that?
And we do know Trump and his group did work with the Russians to get elected.
In the end Trump is elected and continues to show great deference to Putin and the Russian gov't - Why?
Replies to: Continuing from below - Why would any American POTUS candidate want to share Polling data or any
It's well known that one of distinguish points from Trump in 2016 election is polls are waste of $
His idea has always been that why not use media polls so that he can save money for himself. He repeatedly said it proudly in interview and rallies. Because he know he run his campaign cheap, he doesn't gave a damn to internal polling. This sharing polling data is pure BS if you really follow 2016 election.
But the main point here is the reason why Trump fires Paul Manafort is because of his Ukraine work, nothing else. Manafort made a successful convention for Trump, but he still got fired right after convention. It's because his controversial Ukraine lobby work. This is actually a powerful proof of no Russia collusion.
Right on Cue. Defenders galore. Justifiers R Us.
(no message)
You know, I can see how Don might not be involved in this.
Manafort strikes me more and more as a despicable, desperate buffoon. I can accept a scenario where Manafort was doing this on his own to curry favor with Deripaska.
We'll see if Mueller determines whether Manafort acted alone or in concert with the rest of the campaign team.
Let us assume that Manafort and others (Trump Jr. Cohen) were rogue operators.
Let us assume that Trump was oblivious to all. Not good, but we'll assume it.
Once he finds out, would he not do everything possible to condemn it, and sanction the dog$hit out of Putin and Russia?
But, Trump denies it happened, has fought against sanctions, and has given Putin a pass at every turn.
It it walks like a duck, quacks like a duck ....
When I say I can see how Don might not be involved, I'm referring to this specific act of collusion.
The sharing of polling data by Manafort. That's it.
I'm not referring to any of the other acts. There is zero chance DJTJ drops a deuce without first checking with pops let alone colludes with the Russians.
Knowing that to be true is one thing, proving it is another.
(no message)
Proving it directly back to Orange has always been my issue with the whole thing.
Never been a question in my mind that the campaign was dirty and good for lots of criminal conduct regarding the Puties. Also no question that Orange turned a blind eye to it and has lied about it since it’s been found out.
Still haven’t seen the link directly back to him though of criminal conduct with the collusion. Maybe it’s there, it also may not be. We wait for Bobby Three Sticks.
Helsinki comes to mind immediately.
However, it's possible - not probable.
But more to this, how is it people like Cole, Neddie, Baron, Iggles and so many across the nation don't find any of these coincidences troubling or even down right wrong?
Trumpenkrieger!!
(no message)
The best-case scenario for him is that he is an unwitting asset of Russia
A useful idiot, in Lenin's terms, but too much of an idiot to realize it. That is the only innocent explanation. And it is a distinct possibility - he has spent 70+ years amassing evidence to support the assertion that he is an idiot.
But we live in amazing times if the best-case scenario is that the president is too stupid to realize he is being manipulated by Putin. Jesus. Just look at this new report below.
Link: https://www.cnn.com/2019/01/17/politics/nyt-reporter-trump-putin/index.html
Well, it's been noted quite often here, Trump is not the sharpest tool in the shed but he is a tool.
I agree with your last statement 100%
"unwitting"...that pretty much includes intentional acts, per Clapper.
As I said, it is the BEST case for Trump, the one where he has the least guilt
It is either guilt or stupidity at this point.
Trumpies have to hope the president has merely been a total moron.
But, but......what about Hillary’s server?
(no message)
Re: But, but......what about Hillary’s and Uranium 1?
(no message)
Are you guys blaming NSA's illegal spying on Hillary?
I was just lamenting an unaccountable rogue bureaucracy in what I thought was a very non-partisan comment.
Try to take a breath before posting next time.
Oh right, nonpartisan! - say supporters of Comey 11 days before the election.
And now it's - law agencies and spy agencies that are suddenly partisan.
You don't mind if NSA illegally spies on US citizens, and then lies before Congress about doing so?
(no message)
Missing the point, as usual.
(no message)
Heh. You missing the point of my post is what brought us here. Well done, Jim.
(no message)
Irrelevant to the crimes and misdeeds of Trump and his minions.
(no message)
As was my post under which you posted. So why did you bring it up?
I honestly don't know you got to Hillary from my post. You make it seem like you can't see things except through your bias...llke Jim.
Simply because you brought up Clapper lying.
Which by the way he did and I had my say on that during the day.
Even if it is arguably in a slightly different context with him, the fact that you continually defend and justify Orange with what aboutism is tiresome. I expect that drivel from people like Cole, Eli, and Baron, but I guess I hold you to a higher standard.
C’mon I love ya, man.
Clapper uses that "unwitting" word all the time.
He used it in testimony, and just yesterday in an interview, he used it multiple times. Then Chris posted it. Given how his hero Clapper uses the word, it means that if "unwitting" is a defense for Trump, then it is a defense for everything he does, even intentional acts, and maybe Chris94 doesn't want to use that word as part of his defense.
I don't know how you got to Hillary from there.
It was a knock on the what about approach as she is usually the main villain there.
(no message)
I wasn't making a "what about" argument.
(no message)
Sure sounded like one.
(no message)
Of course, that too. Anything else?
(no message)
Just seemed kind of weird that you went that way. That's not where I was going.
The first step is admitting you have a problem, Frank.