Growing evidence that "Russian collusion" was a set up...

[middleview]

What is was…was entrapment. Stupid, a rookie mistake, but not the least bit criminal.

As for it being about "collusion"…it wasn't. It ended up a discussion about the Magnitsky Act. It was a classic bait and switch set up...

Unreal....so you think Trump may have wanted Russian help to get elected, but it was entrapment....there was an offer of Russian help and Trump took the bait.

So in fact there was a hack on the DNC email server, there was an attempt to use those emails to hurt CLinton and help Trump.....

There goes your attempt to say it was all faked.

 

[middleview]

I see you won't even entertain the accounts that these "Russians" met both before AND after this meeting, with people from the very firm that Hillary (and the DNC, and the FBI) paid to create the phony "dossier." Typical!

You attempt to take a microscope to various details...and taken out of context you can twist them how ever you or Tyler Durden like...but the Timeline of the investigation tears your agenda to shreds.

https://www.factcheck.org/2017/06/timeline-russia-investigation/

 

[Raoul_Luke]

You attempt to take a microscope to various details...and taken out of context you can twist them how ever you or Tyler Durden like...but the Timeline of the investigation tears your agenda to shreds.

https://www.factcheck.org/2017/06/timeline-russia-investigation/

Actually it does no such thing. A "timeline" by definition, takes events out of context and simply puts them in a string. If you aren't looking at the events "in detail" are you really even looking? What I am seeking is the truth. And I hate to break it to you, but you won't find the truth at "factcheck.org."

 

[Bugsy McGurk]

Unreal....so you think Trump may have wanted Russian help to get elected, but it was entrapment....there was an offer of Russian help and Trump took the bait.

So in fact there was a hack on the DNC email server, there was an attempt to use those emails to hurt CLinton and help Trump.....

There goes your attempt to say it was all faked.

Trump sycophants are having a hard time continuing their denial of the collusion without getting laughed at, so they’re testing out new “defenses.”

Like, “Sure, they did it, but they were entrapped!”

;-)

 

[middleview]

In Trumplandia, the Team Trump/Kremlin meeting in Trump Tower for the express purpose of collusion was not collusion.

;-)

meanwhile let's just forget about the hack of the DNC email system, the delivery of those stolen emails to Wikileaks and their subsequent publishing of those emails with bullshit headlines suggesting that there was evidence of anything at all....

 

[Raoul_Luke]

Unreal....so you think Trump may have wanted Russian help to get elected, but it was entrapment....there was an offer of Russian help and Trump took the bait.

So in fact there was a hack on the DNC email server, there was an attempt to use those emails to hurt CLinton and help Trump.....

There goes your attempt to say it was all faked.

There's all just too many coincidences. This shadowy "professor" who approached Papadopoulos with the "offer" of Russian help seems to be more tied into the Brit intelligence agency than to any actual "Russians." Then a couple of months later Papadopoulos "mentions" this offer to an Aussie who just happens to be an associate of the "Clinton Global Initiative."

Then this goofy Brit Goldstone steps forward to offer "Russian" help and sets up a meeting between Trump people and a couple of "Russians" with demonstrable links to Fusion GPS, and the promised "Clinton dirt" doesn't even exist!

As for the "hack" on the DNC server, the simple fact that the FBI, the CIA, Mueller, etc. have never even examined the damn thing, and it's all based on the "conclusions" of a contractor with verifiable links to anti-Putin Ukrainian interests, is not even a "coincidence" but rather a screaming red flag!

None of this raises any questions for you because you have an ideological bias against Trump and in favor of Big Government (read: Deep State). But anyone without a political axe to grind is going to naturally be drawn to "the details" in an effort to uncover the actual facts.

 

[Raoul_Luke]

meanwhile let's just forget about the hack of the DNC email system, the delivery of those stolen emails to Wikileaks and their subsequent publishing of those emails with bullshit headlines suggesting that there was evidence of anything at all....

Then where's the Mueller indictment of "the Russians" in that effort?

 

[Raoul_Luke]

Facts are facts...Mifsud was standing next to someone who arguably "may" have been
linked to British intelligence...that is a fact. The rest is pure speculation.

In summary, Mifsud’s appearance with Claire Smith at the LINK campus, in addition to her discussion on intelligence at yet another university where Mifsud was also employed, as well as her long-standing role in UK intelligence vetting and her position as a member of the UK Joint Intelligence Committee, would suggest that the roving scholar is not a Russian agent, but is actually a UK intelligence asset. The possibility that such a high-ranking member of this extremely powerful intelligence supervisory group was photographed standing next to a “Russian” asset unknowingly is patently absurd.

This is a fact...Mifsud bragged about a private meeting with Putin.

He was, he insisted, just an academic who had “absolutely no contact” with the Russian government. Any suggestion that he had offered to play matchmaker between the future president of the United States and the power players of the Kremlin was, he maintained dismissively, “incredible.”

Or so he told reporters.

But in private exchanges, Joseph Mifsud was proud of his alleged high-level Moscow contacts, reporting that they had extended all the way to the top: He’d had, he told a former assistant late last year, a private meeting with Russian President Vladimir Putin.

The assistant didn’t think much of that claim. But the boastfulness matches the portrait of Mifsud sketched in court papers unsealed Monday that have made him one of the most critical — and enigmatic — figures in special counsel Robert S. Mueller III’s investigation into Russian interference in the 2016 U.S. election.

Natalia Kutepova-Jamom, his onetime assistant at the academy, said he had set out in 2014 to build his contacts with Russian academics and policymakers.

https://www.washingtonpost.com/world/professor-named-in-russia-disclosures-says-he-has-clean-conscious/2017/10/31/41a7a08e-be3b-11e7-959c-fe2b598d8c00_story.html?utm_term=.a5c4ca60b97a

Oh, he had Russian ties, but who was he working them for? The idea that higher ups in Brit Intelligence would consort with a "Russian agent" is absurd!

 

[middleview]

Actually it does no such thing. A "timeline" by definition, takes events out of context and simply puts them in a string. If you aren't looking at the events "in detail" are you really even looking? What I am seeking is the truth. And I hate to break it to you, but you won't find the truth at "factcheck.org."

Right...the truth is the suppositions of an anonymous individual calling himself Tyler Durden...

Can you dispute any of the facts in that timeline? The timeline is the context...

Meanwhile you take the vague analysis that a guy is a British spy because he was standing next to someone who has worked at various jobs in the British government. You completely ignore the links between so many of Trump's campaign and pro-Russian interests, but find the vague accusation of strong ties between Alexander Downer and the Clinton Global Initiative...Did you know that Downer is a conservative and was very pro-Iraq invasion in 2003? Over ten years ago he was Australia's representative to the UN. He was Foreign Minister then and Australia contributed $25 million to the CGI AIDS program.
Got anything else?
Earlier today, former UN ambassador John Bolton told WIND in Chicago that Downer has been “a friend to the US” and would likely have passed the tip along in that capacity alone.

https://hotair.com/archives/2018/03/06/hmm-papadopoulos-tipster-clinton-foundation-connections/

 

[middleview]

Oh, he had Russian ties, but who was he working them for? The idea that higher ups in Brit Intelligence would consort with a "Russian agent" is absurd!

In your mind standing next to someone in a picture is consorting. Wanna see a picture of Trump with Putin?

 

[middleview]

Then where's the Mueller indictment of "the Russians" in that effort?

That there isn't an indictment as yet is not evidence that there was no crime or that the hack didn't happen and it is clear that the hack helped Trump.

 

[Raoul_Luke]

That there isn't an indictment as yet is not evidence that there was no crime or that the hack didn't happen and it is clear that the hack helped Trump.

What it "proves" is that it isn't a settled fact as you like to pretend. Obviously it happened, and was designed to hurt Clinton. But I'm sticking with the theory that it was either a DNC insider or a US intel agent with an ax to grind against Hillary, rather than someone who was simply interested in seeing Trump win.

 

[Boca]

If you’re ever in the mood to reflect on how loony it is to claim it was an “Obama set up,” consider the following...

The American people very nearly never even learned about the Trump Tower collusion meeting. Team Trump did everything they could to cover it up, and nearly got away with it. The existence of the meeting was only revealed when Kushner again amended his security clearance application (he kept lying about/omitting things) and provided information leading to the discovery of the meeting. If it was an “Obama set up” designed to screw Trump, the government would have revealed the existence of the meeting, and they would have revealed it during the campaign.

Simple question...why did Loretta Lynch have her spokesman lie that the State Department issues visa (which is true), but in this case she was the only one authorized by law to allow entry under "immigration parole".

She lied through her spokesman for a reason. The only possible one being to cover up the trail back to herself and by association the White House. She couldn't have admitted it was she who authorized the entry simply because it would raise eyebrows and beg the question why was that an extraordinary circumstance? Even though the former administration setting up a meeting between the candidate Trump and a Russian lawyer accompanied by others is a most extraordinary circumstance indeed.

 

[middleview]

What it "proves" is that it isn't a settled fact as you like to pretend. Obviously it happened, and was designed to hurt Clinton. But I'm sticking with the theory that it was either a DNC insider or a US intel agent with an ax to grind against Hillary, rather than someone who was simply interested in seeing Trump win.

Of course you'd stick to the goofy theory it was a DNC insider (based on the very bizarre attempt to make disjointed and unsupported "timings" from some self described and anonymous expert) which also would tend to disagree with the US intel agent stuff...so make up your mind. If the expert's explanation of timestamps makes sense then how could it have been an outsider, since those numbers argue that it had to be someone in the building (which, being an IT professional with 40 years experience and 20 years doing system and network performance work, I find ludicrous).....On the other hand...where is there any evidence that it was a US intel operative or agency behind it?

 

[middleview]

There's all just too many coincidences. This shadowy "professor" who approached Papadopoulos with the "offer" of Russian help seems to be more tied into the Brit intelligence agency than to any actual "Russians." Then a couple of months later Papadopoulos "mentions" this offer to an Aussie who just happens to be an associate of the "Clinton Global Initiative."

Then this goofy Brit Goldstone steps forward to offer "Russian" help and sets up a meeting between Trump people and a couple of "Russians" with demonstrable links to Fusion GPS, and the promised "Clinton dirt" doesn't even exist!

As for the "hack" on the DNC server, the simple fact that the FBI, the CIA, Mueller, etc. have never even examined the damn thing, and it's all based on the "conclusions" of a contractor with verifiable links to anti-Putin Ukrainian interests, is not even a "coincidence" but rather a screaming red flag!

None of this raises any questions for you because you have an ideological bias against Trump and in favor of Big Government (read: Deep State). But anyone without a political axe to grind is going to naturally be drawn to "the details" in an effort to uncover the actual facts.

There is too much funny stuff here not to have a punchline...

Look...There were no ties to British intel, other than what you and Tyler Durden can derive by the professor standing next to some woman you imply had ties to British intelligence.
That is just about worthless.

Then you claim that an Australian government official is an "associate" of the Clinton Gobal Initiative...No he isn't.

What are the "demonstrable links to Fusion GPS" you think you have found?

As far as having the DNC email server in their custody goes...how many times do I have to tell you that it isn't necessary to have the system. I trouble shoot systems in other cities all the time. Have you ever heard of Team Viewer? Look it up.

There is no Deep State. It is a dodge to avoid the undeniable problem of Trump having accused Hillary of criminal acts and being unable to actually get the DOJ to indict her....
Yeah, my guys are in charge, but, you know...."deep state". F*cking silly stuff.

And the punchline....that you think you do not have an ideological bias.

 

[Bugsy McGurk]

Simple question...why did Loretta Lynch have her spokesman lie that the State Department issues visa (which is true), but in this case she was the only one authorized by law to allow entry under "immigration parole".

She lied through her spokesman for a reason. The only possible one being to cover up the trail back to herself and by association the White House. She couldn't have admitted it was she who authorized the entry simply because it would raise eyebrows and beg the question why was that an extraordinary circumstance? Even though the former administration setting up a meeting between the candidate Trump and a Russian lawyer accompanied by others is a most extraordinary circumstance indeed.

Loretta Lynch? Your incoherent babbling is pathetic.

Reread what I said and see if you can develop a coherent response.

 

[Bugsy McGurk]

meanwhile let's just forget about the hack of the DNC email system, the delivery of those stolen emails to Wikileaks and their subsequent publishing of those emails with bullshit headlines suggesting that there was evidence of anything at all....

Yup. The stolen emails, and their absurd lies about them, were the centerpiece of the Trump campaign. Absolutely essential to sliming Hillary and keeping Bernie voters from voting for her.

And there we had Trump shouting “I love WikiLeaks!” and urging Russia to steal and release even more emails. Wingers saw such collusion on national television yet they STILL deny it. They are zombified cultists.

 

[EatTheRich]

So what was his motivation? Why did he lie about the pretenses of the meeting? Why would he lie that the stated purpose was "Russian dirt on Hillary" when it was really about (ostensibly) the Magnitsky Act? If he'd lied that it was to discuss the Magnitsky Act and then when they arrived they turned over Hillary dirt that the campaign then used to win the election, you'd have something. As it is it raises more questions than answers them. Say, for instance: Was it a mere coincidence that the "Russians" he set the meeting with have clearer ties to Fusion GPS than they do to the Kremlin?

Veselnitskaya was an FSB attorney. Rinat Akhmetshin was a KGB agent.

How do we know Goldstone lied about the purpose of the meeting? Because the Trump campaign says so?

 

[Dawg]

Trump sycophants are having a hard time continuing their denial of the collusion without getting laughed at, so they’re testing out new “defenses.”

Like, “Sure, they did it, but they were entrapped!”

;-)

Dossier=Collusion

 

[Dawg]

meanwhile let's just forget about the hack of the DNC email system, the delivery of those stolen emails to Wikileaks and their subsequent publishing of those emails with bullshit headlines suggesting that there was evidence of anything at all....

Inside DNC hack