Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
Except collusion isn't a crime whether Hillary or Trump did it. In the Uranium One case there is a whole laundry list of real crimes like money laundering, bribery, racketeering, influence peddling and others I can't recall now.
Right, so Hillary should be in prison. But, wait, when a Democrat does it, it's acceptable. They are hypocrites.
They have been investigating that for well over a year, not a shred of evidence. When are they gonna bring up Hillary's charges for selling uranium and colluding with Russia?
Yes--
I am trying to be specific about my concerns and not sound like a Trump supporter re the Clintons
I just think having Michael Cohen's files (his safety deposit box!!) taken means this is like Ocean's 11 in the casino vault...
And that Judge is not a push over...
She is pretty staunch support of the law--whether that falls to the prosecution or the defense--from what I have read so far...
And I understand there are deep currents way beyond my depth---
But how could other countries deal with that?
A third-world dictator gets into power because of money/aid from the US or France or Russia or the UK--
That is something the world is used to and people pretty much take in their stride really--
Almost expect things like that to happen because of corporate/global interests in capturing raw materials and trying to keep a balance of powers
Reagan certainly did it and Manafort was totally involved in aspects of Reagan's and Baker's foreign policy implementation
Read The Atlantic's new article about Manafort's history as more than just a lobbyist...
Don 't feel bad. This is all very murky to most of us, I think. And weaponizing our political process is somthing that is brand new, and further complicates it all.
I read one commentary about Cohen that summed it up pretty well for me:
Apparently, Michael Cohen, who has only had one client, Donald Trump, for many years, has recorded about every phone conversation that ever transpired over all those years, and all those tapes are now in the hands of the FBI.
Cohen acted as bag man, a facilitator, and a Trump substitute abroad many times, and he was also active in the Trump campaign organization in 2015-2016. Early evidence from those tapes has already shown Cohen met with the Russians in Ukraine in 2016.
The article's writer stated the outcome of all this is still to early for very much to be predicted, but he expected it to be a lot like Watergate, where the cover-up was much more serious than the crimes that were committed.
He called it the Watergate Circle. Once Trump's Watergate Circle closes, he expects we will all know the outcome of what will come shortly afterward. Nixon never broke in to Watergate, but he knew about it from the first, and that's what did him in. Trump could be awaiting the same fate.
Right, so Hillary should be in prison. But, wait, when a Democrat does it, it's acceptable. They are hypocrites.
I believe all the evidence on Hillary they requested was handed over to the Republican members of the House investigative committee. If they can find a crime, then where's the hypocrisy?
But if they can't, can you then agree Hillary should not be in prison? Or do you favor imprisoning the innocent, just because you don't like their politics?
Either way, this was nothing but a lame attempt at deflection. This thread is about Trump, not Hillary. If you want to talk about her, then start another thread to do it.
Don't we all learn at a young age that if we do something wrong that "So and so did worse" is not a valid defense?
__________________ ____________________________________________
My posts as a Mod will always be in red.
Be sure to review Terms of Service: TOS
And check this out: FAQ
Moderator: Relationships Forum / Hawaii Forum / Dogs / Pets / Current Events
Got any reliable sources with the evidence to back it up or are you just talking out of your ass? It hasn't been proven that Trump colluded with Russia. It HAS been proven that Hillary Clinton colluded with Russia and sold them Uranium. Why not focus on her and the evidence that backs it up?
The million dollar question that is asked every time someone brings up Clinton's "crimes," and which is ignored repeatedly. Let's watch you pretend not to see this question, too.
The GOP holds all the power. They are perfectly positioned to charge Hillary and throw her in jail, and they can do it RIGHT NOW. If they have irrefutable evidence that she's guilty, WHY HAVEN'T THEY?
You won't answer, because even you know the answer. There is no crime. If there was, she'd have been charged by now.
I guess that type of defense is supposed to make those with a rational agenda just throw up our hands and go away--
And thus they win by default...
Doesn't happen that way in real life
Mueller isn't giving up and neither is the USA in SDNY
You would just think that Trump/Cohen/et al would have had better lawyers
In the legal shows I watch the criminals' attorneys are usually top notch and very capable even if they are about as crooked as their clients...
Apparently Trump has just gotten away with second rate attorneys for most of his life
Likely Roy Cohn (even if he was a snake in real life) was the last capable attorney Trump dealt with...
The CPA who did Trump's taxes (and his father's) for decades before he retired said that Ivana was the one who really was interested in tax law
That all Trump did was sign the return--and I guess that same disinterest and distain really is what will catch up with Trump now...
He finally has met someone who won't be bought off or bullied off...Mueller...
I feel sorry for the suckers who have fallen for this false narrative of Trump colluding with Russia when there isn't a shred of evidence.
Trumpsters keep insisting there's no evidence but the circumstantial evidence keeps piling up:
Papadopolous sent to Europe to meet with Russian officials
Cohen went to Prague to meet with Russian officials
George Nader arranges meeting of Erik Prince on a remote ocean island with Russian officials
Trump tower meeting with Russian officials
Russia offers "dirt" on Hillary and Trump campaign is open to accepting it
Roger Stone said he had a backchannel to WikiLeaks
Trump campaign openly welcomed WikiLeaks stolen data being published
Trump's consultant, Cambridge Analytica, was in contact with WikiLeaks plus the FaceBook data
Trump's history of real estate deals, casino deals, meetings in Russia
Manafort's long history with Russia and millions in payments
Communications pre-election on lifting the sanctions
That's a lot of shreds of evidence. Connect the dots. It appears there was a conspiracy to partner with the Russians on election meddling and there was a quid pro quo to lift the 2014 sanctions in return.
Quote:
Originally Posted by PilgrimsProgress
By the way, it's irrelevant because collusion isn't a crime.
Correct. Trump won't be charged with collusion. But if a Russia connection is proved, he can be charged with conspiracy and crimes against the United States. And obstruction of justice. And maybe RICO money laundering and tax evasion for good measure.
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.
Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
