Welcome guest, is this your first visit? Create Account now to join.
  • Login:

Welcome to the Online Debate Network.

If this is your first visit, be sure to check out the FAQ by clicking the link above. You may have to register before you can post: click the register link above to proceed.

Page 4 of 8 FirstFirst 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 LastLast
Results 61 to 80 of 154
  1. #61
    Registered User

    Join Date
    Jan 2016
    Posts
    1,059
    Post Thanks / Like

    Re: Where are the Russia Collusion Charges?

    Quote Originally Posted by SharmaK View Post
    1. That Cohen didn't have any direct evidence doesn't mean that there isn't any, nor that he may suspect but can't prove collusion.
    Same could be said of both Clintons.

    And the same should apply to all.

    Get your hand caught in the cookie jar, pay the price. If Trump broke the law let the chips fall where they may.
    Would you say the same of Clintons (assuming there were even capable of doing wrong of course...) if they were caught?

  2. Likes Squatch347, Dionysus liked this post
  3. #62
    Registered User

    Join Date
    Sep 2009
    Posts
    2,274
    Post Thanks / Like

    Re: Where are the Russia Collusion Charges?

    Quote Originally Posted by Belthazor View Post
    Same could be said of both Clintons.

    And the same should apply to all.

    Get your hand caught in the cookie jar, pay the price. If Trump broke the law let the chips fall where they may.
    Would you say the same of Clintons (assuming there were even capable of doing wrong of course...) if they were caught?
    I'm the last person to say the Clintons are clean - their trail of bodies has to be more than coincidental. But both Clintons were caught via years of fishing expeditions - Whitewater and Benghazi went nowhere so the GOP dredged until they found something and caught Bill on a lie and Hilary on nonsense.

    I'm all for another year or so of looking into Trump until something is found - we just need to run out his clock until there is enough to force a loss in 2020.

  4. Likes CowboyX, Dionysus liked this post
  5. #63
    Registered User

    Join Date
    Oct 2012
    Location
    Boston
    Posts
    2,534
    Post Thanks / Like

    Re: Where are the Russia Collusion Charges?

    Quote Originally Posted by Belthazor View Post
    Same could be said of both Clintons.

    And the same should apply to all.

    Get your hand caught in the cookie jar, pay the price. If Trump broke the law let the chips fall where they may.
    Would you say the same of Clintons (assuming there were even capable of doing wrong of course...) if they were caught?
    They were caught. They were investigated relentlessly.

    And the same should apply to all.
    "Real Boys Kiss Boys" -M.L.

  6. #64
    ODN Community Regular

    Join Date
    Mar 2008
    Location
    Seattle, Washington USA
    Posts
    7,389
    Post Thanks / Like

    Re: Where are the Russia Collusion Charges?

    Quote Originally Posted by SharmaK View Post
    2. The "no collusion" is masking the other scenario where is what Communists like to call "useful idiots", which is a more likely scenario, the more about how smart Trump isn't.
    That's been my bet most of the time. But it isn't a crime to be a useful idiot in this case.
    Feed me some debate pellets!

  7. #65
    ODN Community Regular

    Join Date
    Jul 2008
    Posts
    3,593
    Post Thanks / Like

    Re: Where are the Russia Collusion Charges?

    Quote Originally Posted by SharmaK View Post
    Two errors going on here:

    1. That Cohen didn't have any direct evidence doesn't mean that there isn't any, nor that he may suspect but can't prove collusion.
    Not an error. This thread is about the absence of charges. The fact that Trump's personal attorney has nothing to spill on the issue suggests there will not be collusion charges against Trump.


    Quote Originally Posted by SharmaK View Post
    2. The "no collusion" is masking the other scenario where is what Communists like to call "useful idiots", which is a more likely scenario, the more about how smart Trump isn't.
    Do you have ANY evidence that Trump has been played by Russia? If so, do start a new op on that subject. I'll be happy to crush it.
    "If we lose freedom here, there is no place to escape to. This is the last stand on Earth." - Ronald Reagan

  8. #66
    Registered User

    Join Date
    Sep 2009
    Posts
    2,274
    Post Thanks / Like

    Re: Where are the Russia Collusion Charges?

    Quote Originally Posted by evensaul View Post
    Not an error. This thread is about the absence of charges. The fact that Trump's personal attorney has nothing to spill on the issue suggests there will not be collusion charges against Trump.
    Wut? no collusion is not a phrase to describe that at all! It’s a deflation of innocence.


    Do you have ANY evidence that Trump has been played by Russia? If so, do start a new op on that subject. I'll be happy to crush it.
    I think we will be seeing this evidence soon. I’ll wait for that.

  9. #67
    ODN Community Regular

    Join Date
    Jul 2008
    Posts
    3,593
    Post Thanks / Like

    Re: Where are the Russia Collusion Charges?

    Quote Originally Posted by SharmaK View Post
    I think we will be seeing this evidence soon. I’ll wait for that.
    In other words, you have nothing but hopeful accusations.
    "If we lose freedom here, there is no place to escape to. This is the last stand on Earth." - Ronald Reagan

  10. #68
    Registered User

    Join Date
    Oct 2012
    Location
    Boston
    Posts
    2,534
    Post Thanks / Like

    Re: Where are the Russia Collusion Charges?

    Quote Originally Posted by evensaul View Post
    In other words, you have nothing but hopeful accusations.
    We have confirmed attacks upon the United States and Americans who benefited who had contacts with those responsible. Enough reason to investigate thoroughly.
    "Real Boys Kiss Boys" -M.L.

  11. #69
    Registered User

    Join Date
    Jan 2016
    Posts
    1,059
    Post Thanks / Like

    Re: Where are the Russia Collusion Charges?

    Quote Originally Posted by CowboyX View Post
    They were caught. They were investigated relentlessly.

    And the same should apply to all.

    I will note you did not say that IF the Clintons had been caught, they should pay the price, which was my question.
    (now or then, the time frame matters not)

  12. #70
    Registered User

    Join Date
    Oct 2012
    Location
    Boston
    Posts
    2,534
    Post Thanks / Like

    Re: Where are the Russia Collusion Charges?

    Quote Originally Posted by Belthazor View Post
    I will note you did not say that IF the Clintons had been caught, they should pay the price, which was my question.
    (now or then, the time frame matters not)
    They WERE caught. They DID pay the price.
    "Real Boys Kiss Boys" -M.L.

  13. #71
    Registered User

    Join Date
    Jan 2016
    Posts
    1,059
    Post Thanks / Like

    Re: Where are the Russia Collusion Charges?

    Quote Originally Posted by CowboyX View Post
    They WERE caught. They DID pay the price.
    I would love to discuss this just a bit further with you, but I am already off Op and don't want to be scolded again. Perhaps we can explore this in a more appropriate thread sometime?

  14. #72
    ODN Community Regular

    Join Date
    Jul 2008
    Posts
    3,593
    Post Thanks / Like

    Re: Where are the Russia Collusion Charges?

    The Mueller investigation is in, and according to the Attorney General's letter to Congress:

    After taking the weekend to pore over the Mueller report, Attorney General William Barr has sent Congress his summary of the "principal conclusions" from the special counsel's 675-day investigation into the Trump campaign's ties to Russia.

    The bottom line:

    "[T]he investigation did not establish that members of the Trump campaign conspired or coordinated with the Russian government in its election interference activities."
    On the question of obstruction of justice, Barr writes that while Mueller's report "does not conclude that the President committed a crime, it also does not exonerate him."
    Barr says he and Deputy Attorney General Rod Rosenstein concluded that the evidence "is not sufficient to establish that the President committed an obstruction-of-justice offense," noting that the government would have to prove such a case "beyond a reasonable doubt." https://www.axios.com/mueller-report...6915a0f60.html

    For two years, liberals and the media have been hoping Trump and family would be handcuffed and frogmarched out of the White House. It ain't gonna happen, folks. There was no illegal collusion with Russia.
    "If we lose freedom here, there is no place to escape to. This is the last stand on Earth." - Ronald Reagan

  15. Thanks MindTrap028 thanked for this post
    Likes Squatch347, Sigfried liked this post
  16. #73
    ODN Community Regular

    Join Date
    Mar 2008
    Location
    Seattle, Washington USA
    Posts
    7,389
    Post Thanks / Like

    Re: Where are the Russia Collusion Charges?

    Quote Originally Posted by evensaul View Post
    For two years, liberals and the media have been hoping Trump and family would be handcuffed and frogmarched out of the White House. It ain't gonna happen, folks. There was no illegal collusion with Russia.
    So, now that we have a summary answer, do you think this was a fair investigation or an unfair one?


    Me, I think it was fair and I generally trust the conclusion because of that. That after all is why an independent prosecutor was posted so that when all was said and done, we can't just assume it was a political hit job or intentionally whitewashed by the sitting administration.
    Feed me some debate pellets!

  17. Likes Squatch347 liked this post
  18. #74
    Registered User

    Join Date
    Oct 2012
    Location
    Boston
    Posts
    2,534
    Post Thanks / Like

    Re: Where are the Russia Collusion Charges?

    Quote Originally Posted by evensaul View Post
    Barr says he and Deputy Attorney General Rod Rosenstein concluded that the evidence "is not sufficient to establish that the President committed an obstruction-of-justice offense," noting that the government would have to prove such a case "beyond a reasonable doubt." https://www.axios.com/mueller-report...6915a0f60.html[/INDENT][/INDENT]
    Of course Trump's lackey would conclude that.

    ---------- Post added at 11:43 AM ---------- Previous post was at 11:43 AM ----------

    Quote Originally Posted by Sigfried View Post
    So, now that we have a summary answer, do you think this was a fair investigation or an unfair one?
    Sure wasn't a witch hunt.
    "Real Boys Kiss Boys" -M.L.

  19. #75
    ODN Community Regular

    Join Date
    Aug 2004
    Location
    Southern California
    Posts
    6,362
    Post Thanks / Like

    Re: Where are the Russia Collusion Charges?

    Quote Originally Posted by Sigfried View Post
    So, now that we have a summary answer, do you think this was a fair investigation or an unfair one?


    Me, I think it was fair and I generally trust the conclusion because of that. That after all is why an independent prosecutor was posted so that when all was said and done, we can't just assume it was a political hit job or intentionally whitewashed by the sitting administration.
    There is an article by Andrew McCarthy in FoxNews that addresses this a bit, but I'll plagiarize/summarize. The article asked how long Mueller knew that there was no case regarding Russian collusion. Remember, that was Mueller's primary directive as special counsel. No collusion investigation, no Mueller. We agree on that, right? So, how long he knew there was no case is important, right? I mean, if he figured it out a few days ago, we can agree the investigation was not a witch hunt.

    What would you think if you believed Mueller has known since 2017? First, if you are paying attention, you'd say whoa there. 2017? Mueller was appointed in 2017. You'd be correct. He was appointed in May of 2017. This is important. What was the basis of this investigation of Trump and Russia and collusion between the two? Well, we know the DOJ used the Steele dossier to get approval for a warrant of Trump and associates and per regulation, that warrant had to be renewed (I think) every 6 months. However, when it lapsed in Sept, Mueller's team didn't attempt to renew the allegations. To be clear, the DOJ and FBI used the Steel dossier to support their allegation that Carter Page was a Russian agent. However, in Sept of 2017 Mueller didn't attempt to renew this allegation and Page was never indicted by Mueller. Not indicted for anything. Period. So, how long did Mueller know? McCarthy believes Mueller has known for at least a year and a half.

    So, the question here is, if Mueller knew since fall of 2017 that there was no case to be made for Russian collusion, do you still believe that this case was fair? Now, I understand you are making the case that it was fair in the sense that its outcome was just. I agree. However, this whole investigation was absurd from day 1. Certainly, from Mueller, it appears to have leapt into lunacy by Sept of 2017. This case, at the very least, should have ended 1 1/2 years ago.

    If you are interested in reading the entire story
    https://www.foxnews.com/opinion/andrew-mccarthy-how-long-has-mueller-known-there-was-no-trump-russia-collusion

    I understand the trepidation some have regarding Fox News. However, I am not quoting Sean Hannity here. MacCarthy is a former federal prosecutor who has a good reputation. I first read his stuff on National Review and I find he is quite compelling.
    The U.S. is currently enduring a zombie apocalypse. However, in a strange twist, the zombie's are starving.

  20. Thanks MindTrap028 thanked for this post
    Likes Squatch347 liked this post
  21. #76
    ODN Community Regular

    Join Date
    Mar 2008
    Location
    Seattle, Washington USA
    Posts
    7,389
    Post Thanks / Like

    Re: Where are the Russia Collusion Charges?

    Quote Originally Posted by Ibelsd View Post
    There is an article by Andrew McCarthy in FoxNews that addresses this a bit, but I'll plagiarize/summarize. The article asked how long Mueller knew that there was no case regarding Russian collusion. Remember, that was Mueller's primary directive as special counsel. No collusion investigation, no Mueller. We agree on that, right? So, how long he knew there was no case is important, right? I mean, if he figured it out a few days ago, we can agree the investigation was not a witch hunt.
    What do you mean by Know? Generally, what an investigator does is run down the leads and do their due diligence to see what they can find. They try not to "know" what is true or what is not. They collect evidence, follow leads, and when they have found what they think they can find, they try to draw a conclusion. The charter includes alll crimes they discover in the course of the investigation, so even if they ran one aveunue dry, they may well have others they need to wrap up.

    What would you think if you believed Mueller has known since 2017?
    Again "known" is kind of a misnomer here. His job is to investigate, and then, after investigating, draw a conclusion. If you think an investigator should make conclusions before they start investigating... well that would be pretty strange.

    Well, we know the DOJ used the Steele dossier to get approval for a warrant of Trump and associates and per regulation, that warrant had to be renewed (I think) every 6 months. However, when it lapsed in Sept, Mueller's team didn't attempt to renew the allegations.
    That was a specific warrant on a specific individual: Carter Page

    Whether Carter Page is clean does not tell us if everyone else is.

    As for the story, its fine, its just an Op-Ed speculating. And Op-Eds are just opinion pieces. He can suspect whatever he wants to suspect. But just like he says there is no evidence of collusion, there is no evidence of what Mueller thought or didn't think in our hands either. So its whistling in the wind more or less. A lot of folks would like that investigated, and go for it i say. But I don't think they will find anything but a guy doing his job investigating what he was hired to investigate.
    Feed me some debate pellets!

  22. #77
    Super Moderator

    Join Date
    Feb 2006
    Location
    Louisiana
    Posts
    9,051
    Post Thanks / Like

    Re: Where are the Russia Collusion Charges?

    @ sig, i get the you are making the point about how investigations work and all. However you sort of ignored the question or the point IMO. That is, if the conclusion was known closer to the beginning.. does that change how we should see the investigation
    I think you are adding neuance where it isn't needed.

    Even if we agree that we don't know if the premise is the case, we can still consider the question. And I think it is true that if the premise of the question is true, then it does change the light we should understand the investigation as fair and well done.

    ---------- Post added at 10:54 AM ---------- Previous post was at 10:53 AM ----------

    @ sig, i get the you are making the point about how investigations work and all. However you sort of ignored the question or the point IMO. That is, if the conclusion was known closer to the beginning.. does that change how we should see the investigation
    I think you are adding neuance where it isn't needed.

    Even if we agree that we don't know if the premise is the case, we can still consider the question. And I think it is true that if the premise of the question is true, then it does change the light we should understand the investigation as fair and well done.
    To serve man.

  23. #78
    ODN Community Regular

    Join Date
    Aug 2004
    Location
    Southern California
    Posts
    6,362
    Post Thanks / Like

    Re: Where are the Russia Collusion Charges?

    Quote Originally Posted by Sigfried View Post
    What do you mean by Know? Generally, what an investigator does is run down the leads and do their due diligence to see what they can find. They try not to "know" what is true or what is not. They collect evidence, follow leads, and when they have found what they think they can find, they try to draw a conclusion. The charter includes alll crimes they discover in the course of the investigation, so even if they ran one aveunue dry, they may well have others they need to wrap up.



    Again "known" is kind of a misnomer here. His job is to investigate, and then, after investigating, draw a conclusion. If you think an investigator should make conclusions before they start investigating... well that would be pretty strange.



    That was a specific warrant on a specific individual: Carter Page

    Whether Carter Page is clean does not tell us if everyone else is.

    As for the story, its fine, its just an Op-Ed speculating. And Op-Eds are just opinion pieces. He can suspect whatever he wants to suspect. But just like he says there is no evidence of collusion, there is no evidence of what Mueller thought or didn't think in our hands either. So its whistling in the wind more or less. A lot of folks would like that investigated, and go for it i say. But I don't think they will find anything but a guy doing his job investigating what he was hired to investigate.
    You would agree that as the basis of his conclusion, Mueller now knows there is no case for collusion, right? I mean that's what his report, as summarized by AG Barr is telling us. However, if the primary link between alleged collusion was Carter Page and Mueller knew back in 2017 (soon after he was appointed) that the Page-Russia link was unsupported, then it seems reasonable to conclude that Mueller knew way back in 2017 that no collusion between Trump and Russia existed. To be clear, Carter Page's supposed links to Russia were the primary evidence that the FBI and DOJ used to gain FISA warrants allowing them to investigate Trump and his campaign team. In fact, the FBI and DOJ continued to go to this well, renewing the FISA warrant four times. Meaning, up until Mueller was appointed, the FBI and DOJ presented the Steel Dossier and the information it claimed to hold on Carter Page as the reason Trump needed to be investigated. However, by Sept of 2017, Mueller realized this suspicion was baseless. He either deemed that the dossier was unverifiable or that no case could be made against Page. So, if the foundation of the case investigating Trump was deemed baseless, and Mueller knew this, then it is reasonable to suggest he knew the entire investigation was baseless at the same time.

    Now, you may rebut the above by claiming that Mueller had found some other avenue to investigate. However, I ask whether this process is actual justice? You tell me the man, I'll show you the crime. If someone calls the cops and says they have evidence that you robbed a bank and the evidence is proven bogus, should the cops keep investigating you? Should the just keep digging and digging until they find something? Should they dig into your acquaintances and colleagues seeking out any crimes they may have committed in the hopes of getting them to turn on you for a crime which no one has a basis for investigating in the first place? This isn't how our justice system is supposed to work, is it? So, if Mueller kept investigating a crime for a year and a half after he knew no case could be made from the original basis of the investigation, is the result the only thing that matters here? I am relieved we don't have a President who is in bed with Russia. Great news. A 2 1/2 year investigation when the answer could have been offered at least a year 1/2 ago??? And that's at the very least. The fact that this dossier, a paid political hit job by Trump's opponent was the basis of the investigation, no... justice was not served here. It was distorted and gagged and baffled. If we are entering a new era were every presidential candidate must now fend off years of investigations, then this saga has been anything but just or justice.
    The U.S. is currently enduring a zombie apocalypse. However, in a strange twist, the zombie's are starving.

  24. #79
    Super Moderator

    Join Date
    Jan 2011
    Location
    West / East Coast
    Posts
    3,498
    Post Thanks / Like

    Re: Where are the Russia Collusion Charges?

    Quote Originally Posted by Ibelsd View Post
    So, the question here is, if Mueller knew since fall of 2017 that there was no case to be made for Russian collusion, do you still believe that this case was fair?
    I’m not convinced this question was very relevant to the powers that drove this case for two years. In our system of justice, fairness is certainly relevant in the judicial process. However, and this is a personal opinion, I think what trumped fairness in how this case was contrived and inched along was the clear intent to damage President Trump. From the media standpoint, they tried and convicted him a long time ago.
    "The universe is immaterial-mental and spiritual.” --"The Mental Universe” | Nature
    [Eye4magic]
    Super Moderator

  25. #80
    ODN Community Regular

    Join Date
    Mar 2008
    Location
    Seattle, Washington USA
    Posts
    7,389
    Post Thanks / Like

    Re: Where are the Russia Collusion Charges?

    Quote Originally Posted by MindTrap028 View Post
    @ sig, i get the you are making the point about how investigations work and all. However you sort of ignored the question or the point IMO. That is, if the conclusion was known closer to the beginning.. does that change how we should see the investigation.
    That's like saying... What if we saw the destination closer to the start of our journey? You know when you are done investigating. What you are saying is that he was done investigating right around when he started investigating. That's pretty clearly not true. Quite a lot happened in the intervening time. There were dozens of indictments, the most important of which (despite what you may have seen on TV, are the ones against Russians. He spent a lot of time investigating that, following the leads, making his case. That is the meat of the investigation. Its important to know if the Trump campaign was involved, and we learned they are not.

    I don't see how you think he can know a fact before he's investigated a fact. Are you saying he secretly was working on the case long before he was appointed?

    ---------- Post added at 08:32 PM ---------- Previous post was at 08:31 PM ----------

    Quote Originally Posted by eye4magic View Post
    I’m not convinced this question was very relevant to the powers that drove this case for two years. In our system of justice, fairness is certainly relevant in the judicial process. However, and this is a personal opinion, I think what trumped fairness in how this case was contrived and inched along was the clear intent to damage President Trump. From the media standpoint, they tried and convicted him a long time ago.
    The media was not running the Mueller investigation. The department of Justice and the FBI were. Both of which were headed by appointees from the Trump administration.

    ---------- Post added at 08:42 PM ---------- Previous post was at 08:32 PM ----------

    Quote Originally Posted by Ibelsd View Post
    You would agree that as the basis of his conclusion, Mueller now knows there is no case for collusion, right?
    More or less, ya.

    However, if the primary link between alleged collusion was Carter Page and Mueller knew back in 2017 (soon after he was appointed) that the Page-Russia link was unsupported, then it seems reasonable to conclude that Mueller knew way back in 2017 that no collusion between Trump and Russia existed.
    We know that Carter Page was not the only link between Russia and the Trump campaign.

    To be clear, Carter Page's supposed links to Russia were the primary evidence that the FBI and DOJ used to gain FISA warrants allowing them to investigate Trump and his campaign team.
    No. Carter Page's warrant was to allow the FBI to surveil Carter Page, not to investigate other people. it was far fromt he only warrant the FBI was working with.

    You tell me the man, I'll show you the crime.
    What's my crime?

    If someone calls the cops and says they have evidence that you robbed a bank and the evidence is proven bogus, should the cops keep investigating you?
    Generally not. And indeed, Carter Page was never charged with a crime. However, Carter Page was not the only person being investigated. Carter Page was neither the first American under investigation in connection to Russian Espionage nor the last.
    Feed me some debate pellets!

  26. Likes CowboyX liked this post
 

 
Page 4 of 8 FirstFirst 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 LastLast

Similar Threads

  1. Collusion!
    By CowboyX in forum Member Contributed News
    Replies: 40
    Last Post: June 15th, 2019, 09:08 PM
  2. Man defends home, possibly facing charges?
    By Someguy in forum Member Contributed News
    Replies: 1
    Last Post: January 6th, 2014, 10:39 AM
  3. Vicar admits child porn charges
    By pikatore in forum Member Contributed News
    Replies: 18
    Last Post: September 4th, 2008, 04:32 AM
  4. Charges in Haditha case are dropped!
    By Ivan in forum Current Events
    Replies: 7
    Last Post: September 28th, 2007, 02:50 PM
  5. Replies: 34
    Last Post: October 19th, 2005, 07:49 AM

Bookmarks

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •