- My Forums
- Tiger Rant
- LSU Recruiting
- SEC Rant
- Saints Talk
- Pelicans Talk
- More Sports Board
- Coaching Changes
- Fantasy Sports
- Golf Board
- Soccer Board
- O-T Lounge
- Tech Board
- Home/Garden Board
- Outdoor Board
- Health/Fitness Board
- Movie/TV Board
- Book Board
- Music Board
- Political Talk
- Money Talk
- Fark Board
- Gaming Board
- Travel Board
- Food/Drink Board
- Ticket Exchange
- TD Help Board
Customize My Forums- View All Forums
- Show Left Links
- Topic Sort Options
- Trending Topics
- Recent Topics
- Active Topics
Started By
Message
re: Do you believe President Trump colluded with the Russians to win the election?
Posted on 5/12/17 at 11:28 am to ShortyRob
Posted on 5/12/17 at 11:28 am to ShortyRob
quote:
We can't get liberals to spell it out.
I gave the gist of the theory a page back.
Trump's team promised Russia an easing of sanctions in exchange for Russia releasing hacked DNC info via Wikileaks, and spreading propaganda.
It's really not that outrageous a theory when you look at the people Trump put on his campaign - people that had prior connections to Russia. Doesn't mean it happened, but it's certainly plausible.
2
Posted on 5/12/17 at 11:28 am to BamaAtl
quote:
Trump's team meeting with Russia to coordinate their hacks and leaks during the elections is a bridge too far!
I read it to mean that its a bridge too far for a fully functioning mind, but I don't want to speak for him.
Posted on 5/12/17 at 11:29 am to Y.A. Tittle
quote:This
If so, it still beats having Hillary as president.
But, no, it seems ludicrous on its face.
Posted on 5/12/17 at 11:29 am to DawgfaninCa
This is old news now. Trump is in way hotter water with his actions of the last week.
Posted on 5/12/17 at 11:29 am to ShortyRob
quote:
Liberals seem 100% convinced that "it" happened
Not one single person in this thread has said it 100% happened. Get a grip and actually read through the responses in the thread.
Posted on 5/12/17 at 11:30 am to The Spleen
quote:
Not one single person in this thread has said it 100% happened. Get a grip and actually read through the responses in the thread.
OK.
Let me clarify.
What the frick is "it".
Posted on 5/12/17 at 11:31 am to chRxis
quote:
ope there is nothing to it, and that it is proven by an independent investigation
bad reasoning here - you cannot prove a negative.
There is no way in the world to prove that there was 'no collusion' between any two people/entities.
The investigation with this goal will never end - they will always report = 'no evidence yet.'
This whole thing needs to be called out for the travesty that it is. The investigation needs to have a name = something that can be specifically identified that they are looking for and their theory of the case for what that would mean if they found it.
DIM/LIB/MSN doesn't want this 'investigation' to ever end - that way they can keep up their outrage for decades, still looking for the evasive 'evidence' and alleging 'coverups.'
Posted on 5/12/17 at 11:31 am to ShortyRob
quote:
What the frick is "it".
I've posted the "it" twice now in this very thread.
Posted on 5/12/17 at 11:32 am to DawgfaninCa
No, and it's dumb.
Posted on 5/12/17 at 11:32 am to The Spleen
quote:
Trump's team promised Russia an easing of sanctions in exchange for Russia releasing hacked DNC info via Wikileaks, and spreading propaganda. It's really not that outrageous a theory when you look at the people Trump put on his campaign - people that had prior connections to Russia. Doesn't mean it happened, but it's certainly plausible.
OK.
Well. There's literally zero evidence of that. Despite the fact that we know the US was listening like crazy to Trump's conversations.
So. I'm gonna have to go with nyet on that.
Posted on 5/12/17 at 11:33 am to The Spleen
quote:
I've posted the "it" twice now in this very thread.
I found it.
For me to believe that "it", I have to believe that Obama was in on it.
Because we KNOW that conversations were being listened to. And, we KNOW that those conversations were getting unmasked.
So. I would have to believe that Obama was aware of such an arrangement and chose to do nothing.
Posted on 5/12/17 at 11:33 am to ShortyRob
quote:
There's literally zero evidence of that.
Publicly there's not. We don't know what the FBI may or may not have.
Posted on 5/12/17 at 11:34 am to The Spleen
quote:
Publicly there's not. We don't know what the FBI may or may not have.
See above post.
Posted on 5/12/17 at 11:39 am to The Spleen
quote:
Trump's team promised Russia an easing of sanctions in exchange for Russia releasing hacked DNC info via Wikileaks, and spreading propaganda.
What info from the DNC was detrimental to HRC? other than the illegal/unethical behavior of the DNC? Are you referring to the pizza-gate crap as the 'propaganda?'
Do you actually think that was relevant to the election?
Anything that was detrimental to the DNC could have been easily defeated by the DNC/HRC not having done anything illegal in the first place.
The e-mail crap didn't come from the Russians.
Posted on 5/12/17 at 11:41 am to DawgfaninCa
I don't...know. However, even if they did collude in some way, the emails were real and there is zero evidence that it messed with the voting process. Therefore, I don't understand the big issue here. I also don't understand why our president can't just ignore this and quit tweeting about it. He helps to make this look bigger than it is.
This post was edited on 5/12/17 at 11:42 am
Posted on 5/12/17 at 11:43 am to DawgfaninCa
To what end? Did Trump get the Russians to hack Hillarys server to leak all the illegal shite she was doing? So the Russians did the job our FBI should have done?
Posted on 5/12/17 at 11:44 am to ShortyRob
quote:
For me to believe that "it", I have to believe that Obama was in on it.
Because we KNOW that conversations were being listened to. And, we KNOW that those conversations were getting unmasked.
So. I would have to believe that Obama was aware of such an arrangement and chose to do nothing.
Now that is a very good point. There's no way he wouldn't have known.
Posted on 5/12/17 at 11:44 am to JuiceTerry
quote:
Trump is in way hotter water with his actions of the last week.
firing someone?
Posted on 5/12/17 at 11:45 am to DawgfaninCa
Right now I don't know.
No hard evidence has come out, but there are some facts that have not been explained. Trump's call for the Russians to get Hillary's emails; Trump's continued denial that he has done any business in Russia which has been contradicted by earlier statements by his 2 sons; Roger Stone's tweets with Guccifer 2.0 and Stone's warning that Podesta would the the next target of email leaks, before it actually happened.
But as much as anything - Trump doesn't act like someone who has nothing to hide as far as the Russians are concerned.
No hard evidence has come out, but there are some facts that have not been explained. Trump's call for the Russians to get Hillary's emails; Trump's continued denial that he has done any business in Russia which has been contradicted by earlier statements by his 2 sons; Roger Stone's tweets with Guccifer 2.0 and Stone's warning that Podesta would the the next target of email leaks, before it actually happened.
But as much as anything - Trump doesn't act like someone who has nothing to hide as far as the Russians are concerned.
Posted on 5/12/17 at 11:48 am to ShortyRob
quote:
Because we KNOW that conversations were being listened to.
Not every conversation. We also have instances of Trump campaign folk traveling overseas to meet with Russian agents - no phone records of in-person meetings.
And they just started the financial crimes look, to trace any wire transfers between Trump/RNC and the Russian hackers.
In it for the long haul!
Page 4 of 9
Back to top
Follow TigerDroppings for LSU Football News