No, I’m answering the question you posed about Russian influence (or not) on the election, not collusion with Russia. So, how can anyone answer your question at this point until the investigation is complete?
EDIT: the one indisputable fact is that Russia tried to influence the election, to be clear. What’s currently under consideration is whether or not they succeeded.
From what I gleaned from Wikipedia and I didn’t read it all it seems that Russia was engaged in things that Russia has always been engaged in. They are an evil influence to be sure. But I don’t see where they got anything from it.
If there is a specific paragraph or sentence that demonstrates that I am wrong please point it out. As another poster said Obama had concerns of this a few years back. But instead of saying "nothing new here folks its evil Russia being evil Russia we have a full scale attack on a new administration with accusations of collusion and talk by some of impeachment.
Really?
I don’t see it. But again if someone has other info please post it.
Yes, you’re wrong - that’s entirely the point of the special counsel being appointed.
Do you believe the American IC’s stance that, to this day, believes that Russia was behind the DNC hack?
Okay, but how come there is an investigation into the Trump administration for allegedly having colluded with Russia? There is a difference between Russia meddling (may have don’t know no one does) and the Trump team actually helping them.
I am sure you can agree with that. No?
What evidence is there that Trump and his team colluded?
And if you say we don’t know until the investigation is over my answer to that is there is always hard evidence BEFORE an investigation is begun. The investigation will either clear the individual or it will end up in the individual being arrested or indicted.
Where is the hard evidence that Trump and his team colluded? That is after all why we have a special prosecutor right?
Okay, how is Trump and his team behind this?
Where is the hard evidence to even begin such an investigation?
Is “Okay” a yes or a no?
It is I don’t know but let’s assume you are correct. How did Donald Trump get in the mix?
I never said he did. You asked how Russia meddled in the election. I provided a link and more specifically, brought up the DNC hack.
Personally I’m of the opinion that Trump & co aren’t competent enough to successfully collude with Russia without anyone finding out (or tweeting about it).
Because a number of high level principals in the Trump campaign had questionable relationships (some with direct conflicts of interest) with Russian principals at the exact same time the Russians were attempting to influence the election. Let’s say that that looks like probable cause to investigate. (And it’s common sense.)[quote=“zeb1, post:1628, topic:226860”]
And if you say we don’t know until the investigation is over my answer to that is there is always hard evidence BEFORE an investigation is begun.
[/quote]
No, there’s not. That’s the point of an investigation - to gather hard information based on softer information and credible allegations. This is how government investigations operate, and you can trust me on that. No idea where your version of how an investigation operates came from.[quote=“zeb1, post:1628, topic:226860”]
Where is the hard evidence that Trump and his team colluded?
[/quote]
See my above response.
Show us the evidence they found
I don’t personally have the evidence they found as I’m not sitting around with top secret clearanc. I just happen to believe the American IC and (from what I can see) the vast majority of the EU IC.
As every acronym’d agency we have that has looked into this has come to a singular agreement that Russia was behind it, I defer to the experts.
Edit: By all means, if you have found a subset of the IC that has looked into this, and said it WASN’T Russia, feel free to correct me.
I don’t think it is odd for an incoming Presidential team to have some sort of connections with foreign governments do you? These are players on the world stage. I’m sure Henry Kissinger had plenty of foreign contacts. As does Rex Tillerson.
When you say questionable relationships are you saying that certain high level people were involved in nefarious activities with Russian agents?
Okay I am done talking to you then.
Sheesh you don’t even have top secret clearance like the rest of us here on PWI.
Nope, but they’re not looking at run-of-the-mill relationships. They have reason to believe these were different, thus worthy of further investigation. And we already know about Flynn’s, so there’s already fire attached to that strand of smoke.[quote=“zeb1, post:1636, topic:226860”]
When you say questionable relationships are you saying that certain high level people were involved in nefarious activities with Russian agents?
[/quote]
Possibly. That’s precisely the point of the investigation - to find if they were nefarious or not.
“Hillary wants to start WW3”
“Hillary has Parkinson’s”
“Seth Ritch has been killed by Hillary and the DNC”
PizzaGate
…all these and countless others “facts” turned memes were strongly pushed by Kremlin operatives through different channels - notably 4chan and reddit from where they’ve spread to Facebook feeds of disgruntled Midwesterners and consequently to InfoWars followed by Hannity and O’Reilly.
So Russia influenced the election through you and people such as yourself.
Satisfied?
Seeing how faulty US intel lead to the death and displacement of millions of people in the middle east, I’ll wait for actual evidence this time around
Which is why I defer to the brave men and women that risk their lives to gather this intel for us. If you disagree with the IC for whatever reasons you have, please state them.
So you also don’t believe Trump killed 16 ISIS leaders with the MOAB drop?
No, not really. All the things that you listed are fake news and there was as much fake news being reported about Trump as there was Clinton. And to this day there is almost as much fake news about Trump as real news.