Debates Forum

Debates Forum

  1. Joined
    07 Dec '05
    Moves
    14798
    14 Nov '18 00:111 edit
    @no1marauder said
    Whether it affected the elections is unknowable; info from it was certainly used in the campaign to discredit the DNC. And while you keep wanting to ignore this, hacking into someone's computers is a crime and knowingly trying to benefit from that crime is also a crime as is lying about your knowledge of it to federal investigators.

    What info about Carter Page in the d ...[text shortened]... he went to Moscow and met with Russian officials there about a month after the Trump Tower meeting.
    It is a crime, but you have too prove it. Indictments are not proof as you well know. The news media largely ignores Debbie W. Shultz considering her intent to conspire against Sanders to swing the primary elections in HRC's favor. It should have been a huge scandal. Same thing with Donna Brazile e-mailing the debate questions to John Podesta and Jennifer Palmieri . She even said she didn't regret it. Very unethical! Thank you wikileaks.

    From the link below:


    "Some press accounts have treated the dossier’s allegation that Russian officials offered Trump adviser Carter Page billions to end US sanctions as confirmed in September 2016 reporting by Yahoo News’ Michael Isikoff. But Isikoff’s “Western intelligence source” was almost surely the dossier itself. So the media used the dossier to corroborate the dossier. (Page, who has repeatedly denied under oath he met with the Russian officials cited in the dossier, is suing Yahoo News over the Isikoff story.)
    What doesn’t check out at all, though, is the dossier’s most serious charge: that Trump officials secretly met with Kremlin officials overseas to hatch the hacking scheme against the Clinton campaign."

    https://nypost.com/2017/11/19/here-are-some-of-the-biggest-myths-of-the-russian-collusion-story/

    Using the dossier to dossier to corroborate the dossier. Whoever did that is pathetic!
  2. Subscriberno1marauder
    Humble and Kind
    In the Gazette
    Joined
    22 Jun '04
    Moves
    40034
    14 Nov '18 02:271 edit
    @metal-brain said
    It is a crime, but you have too prove it. Indictments are not proof as you well know. The news media largely ignores Debbie W. Shultz considering her intent to conspire against Sanders to swing the primary elections in HRC's favor. It should have been a huge scandal. Same thing with Donna Brazile e-mailing the debate questions to John Podesta and Jennifer Palmieri . She e ...[text shortened]... ion-story/

    Using the dossier to dossier to corroborate the dossier. Whoever did that is pathetic!
    You keep using the same year old article to try to prove something. It's claims are completely unverified as well as being out of date; for example, Page's lawsuit was dismissed almost 8 months ago. https://www.politico.com/story/2018/03/21/carter-page-yahoo-lawsuit-477568

    Everybody and their mother knew the DNC favored HRC over Sanders; there is no illegality involved in that.

    Indictments are a substantial step in the criminal process. You can't get to a trial without an indictment.
  3. Subscriberno1marauder
    Humble and Kind
    In the Gazette
    Joined
    22 Jun '04
    Moves
    40034
    14 Nov '18 02:42
    New indictments are expected this week with Roger Stone, Jerome Corsi and others the likely subjects: https://www.bloomberg.com/news/articles/2018-11-13/new-mueller-indictments-expected-as-soon-as-tuesday-cbs-reports
  4. Joined
    07 Dec '05
    Moves
    14798
    14 Nov '18 04:06
    @no1marauder said
    You keep using the same year old article to try to prove something. It's claims are completely unverified as well as being out of date; for example, Page's lawsuit was dismissed almost 8 months ago. https://www.politico.com/story/2018/03/21/carter-page-yahoo-lawsuit-477568

    Everybody and their mother knew the DNC favored HRC over Sanders; there is no illegality involved ...[text shortened]... ents are a substantial step in the criminal process. You can't get to a trial without an indictment.
    "What doesn’t check out at all, though, is the dossier’s most serious charge: that Trump officials secretly met with Kremlin officials overseas to hatch the hacking scheme against the Clinton campaign."

    The most serious charge is false. The dossier contains lies. It has been largely discredited. Pointing to something else in an attempt to digress will not change that fact.

    The Page lawsuit was against Yahoo news was dismissed because it said this:

    "The Article does not say that Plaintiff actually met with....two Russians, but rather that U.S. officials had received reports of such meetings,"

    It wasn't that he couldn't prove he never met with the 2 Russians, it was because yahoo news said "US officials heard a report".
    Technically it was not false, apparently hearsay is news now. A clever way to imply without lying.
  5. Joined
    07 Dec '05
    Moves
    14798
    14 Nov '18 04:09
    @no1marauder said
    New indictments are expected this week with Roger Stone, Jerome Corsi and others the likely subjects: https://www.bloomberg.com/news/articles/2018-11-13/new-mueller-indictments-expected-as-soon-as-tuesday-cbs-reports
    Nobody by the name Trump.
  6. Subscriberno1marauder
    Humble and Kind
    In the Gazette
    Joined
    22 Jun '04
    Moves
    40034
    14 Nov '18 04:54
    @metal-brain said
    "What doesn’t check out at all, though, is the dossier’s most serious charge: that Trump officials secretly met with Kremlin officials overseas to hatch the hacking scheme against the Clinton campaign."

    The most serious charge is false. The dossier contains lies. It has been largely discredited. Pointing to something else in an attempt to digress will not change that ...[text shortened]...
    Technically it was not false, apparently hearsay is news now. A clever way to imply without lying.
    You can keep stamping your feet and making false claims all you want, but that doesn't make them true. There is ample evidence of contacts between the Trump campaign and Russian agents and officials; Papadopoulos was convicted of lying about one.
  7. Subscriberno1marauder
    Humble and Kind
    In the Gazette
    Joined
    22 Jun '04
    Moves
    40034
    14 Nov '18 05:51
    @metal-brain said
    Nobody by the name Trump.
    We shall see. Rumors are swirling that Donald Jr. could be in the near future.

    No one is expecting the Donald to be indicted; there is a DOJ advisory opinion that sitting Presidents can't be indicted. Mueller could name him as an unindicted co-conspirator (as Nixon was) or simply file a report and leave what to do up to Congress.
  8. Germany
    Joined
    27 Oct '08
    Moves
    3118
    14 Nov '18 07:18
    @no1marauder said
    We shall see. Rumors are swirling that Donald Jr. could be in the near future.

    No one is expecting the Donald to be indicted; there is a DOJ advisory opinion that sitting Presidents can't be indicted. Mueller could name him as an unindicted co-conspirator (as Nixon was) or simply file a report and leave what to do up to Congress.
    Isn't Trump already a non-indicted co-conspirator in the Cohen case?
  9. Joined
    07 Dec '05
    Moves
    14798
    14 Nov '18 22:10
    @no1marauder said
    You can keep stamping your feet and making false claims all you want, but that doesn't make them true. There is ample evidence of contacts between the Trump campaign and Russian agents and officials; Papadopoulos was convicted of lying about one.
    You are the one making the false claims.
  10. Subscriberno1marauder
    Humble and Kind
    In the Gazette
    Joined
    22 Jun '04
    Moves
    40034
    14 Nov '18 23:03
    @kazetnagorra said
    Isn't Trump already a non-indicted co-conspirator in the Cohen case?
    Not exactly. The Criminal Information in that case refers to an "Individual-1" who began his Presidential campaign on June 16, 2015 which is clearly the Donald. It says that Cohen coordinated with one or more members of the campaign about the illegal payments but does not specifically name anyone. https://assets.documentcloud.org/documents/4779489/Cohen-Information.pdf

    At his plea hearing, however " Cohen said the payments were meant to influence the 2016 election, and were made "in coordination with and at the direction of a candidate for federal office."

    https://www.politifact.com/truth-o-meter/article/2018/aug/22/does-michael-cohens-guilty-plea-place-trump-legal-/
  11. Subscribersonhouse
    Fast and Curious
    slatington, pa, usa
    Joined
    28 Dec '04
    Moves
    52866
    16 Nov '18 00:30
    @no1marauder said
    Not exactly. The Criminal Information in that case refers to an "Individual-1" who began his Presidential campaign on June 16, 2015 which is clearly the Donald. It says that Cohen coordinated with one or more members of the campaign about the illegal payments but does not specifically name anyone. https://assets.documentcloud.org/documents/4779489/Cohen-Information.pdf
    ...[text shortened]... politifact.com/truth-o-meter/article/2018/aug/22/does-michael-cohens-guilty-plea-place-trump-legal-/
    But of course every trumpite now says Cohen is lying. We expected nothing else.
Back to Top