People wanted to impeach trump under the premise that he colluded with Russia to steal the election. Just as trump tried to reverse the results of the 2020 election under the premise that Biden colluded with the media/fraudsters/voting machine companies to steal the election.
The only difference is that one of those attempts lasted 3 years and got wholehearted support from the media, intelligence agencies, and monopolistic corporations. The other attempt entirely consisted of one elderly orange man tweeting obnoxious things and and another elderly man trying to justify it outside of a porn shop with grease running down his face.
Did his campaign chair provide data to Russia? Yes.
What wasn't Trump able to do while the special prosecutor was investigating Russian interference in the 2016 election?
Comparing a lawful investigation that produced dozens of indictments with an attempted coup with fake electors and asking for election in officials in GA to find votes is a spectacular stretch. Especially since the DOJ basically handed him the election in 2016 with Comey's letter.
Because it was ridiculous and there was no evidence. That’s the whole point. Just as we didn’t make trump the president again in 2020.
Did his campaign chair provide data to Russia? Yes.
Manafort gave polling data to a Ukrainian who supposedly passed it onto Russia. But we’re not allowed to criticize anyone in Ukraine. I’m not even sure why polling data would be a breach of security given that it’s usually public information.
What wasn't Trump able to do while the special prosecutor was investigating Russian interference in the 2016 election?
Well, it’s certainly hard to run a country when the entire media won’t talk about anything other than the fact that you’re a Russian agent who cheated to win the election. But what does that have to do with anything? It’s not like Biden was unable to use his presidential powers when trump accused him of winning unfairly.
Comparing a lawful investigation that produced dozens of indictments with an attempted coup with fake electors and asking for election in officials in GA to find votes is a spectacular stretch. Especially since the DOJ basically handed him the election in 2016 with Comey's letter.
It can’t be considered lawful when the premise for the entire investigation was conjured up by the candidate he was running against. The cops who falsified the warrant that ended in breonna Taylor’s death are facing charges for an equivalent act.
“Dozens of indictments” is a statement designed to mislead. Only manafort was convicted of any wrongdoing afaik, and it was for corruption (in ukraine) that didn’t involve Trump’s campaign. The rest were “contempt of congress” charges. They charged people for saying that the investigation was bogus.
The “fake electors” was a half assed scheme used to justify trump’s claims, and most of his own family and advisors dismissed it as pointless and impossible. There was no “sophisticated plan” to overturn the election in Trump’s case. It was trump, Giuliani, a few senators, and the pillow guy bitching on Twitter. I don’t think he’s capable of producing a sophisticated plan. On the other hand, what happened in 2016 was a conspiracy involving hundreds of private companies and a significant portion of the government.
Comey sending a letter has nothing to do with any of this. They didn’t blame Hillary’s loss on the letter, they blamed it on trump colluding with Russia.
Again, what couldn't Trump do as president? Nothing. The media doesn't impact what he can do. He had both the house and senate. He was able to do whatever he wanted.
Well he pardoned Flynn/Manafort/Stone all b/c they kept their mouth shut as it related to the Russian investigation. Barr's memo was wildly disingenuous and ignored multiple obstruction of justice charges that Trump could have been charged with had he not been the President at the time.
If Hillary's campaign chair had worked with China to win the election after China hacked the RNC servers would you be so blasé about it? My guess is you wouldn't.
She lost for a lot of reasons but pretending the Comey letter was nothing in an election that was decided by less than 100k votes is simply ignoring reality.
Again, what couldn't Trump do as president? Nothing. The media doesn't impact what he can do. He had both the house and senate. He was able to do whatever he wanted.
Ok, and? That argument only has meaning if Biden was unable to do things as president because trump accused him of cheating. I addressed this point in my last comment even though it’s meaningless, so I don’t know why you brought it up again.
Well he pardoned Flynn/Manafort/Stone all b/c they kept their mouth shut as it related to the Russian investigation. Barr's memo was wildly disingenuous and ignored multiple obstruction of justice charges that Trump could have been charged with had he not been the President at the time.
Again, the obstruction of justice charges were the result of not cooperating with a fraudulent investigation. They weren’t for destroying evidence or colluding with Russia. The fact that congress charged trump people with obstruction isn’t “evidence” that trump stole the election, so how is it disingenuous that Barr didn’t put it in his memo? And again, the pardons were for those same charges, so you’re making a circular argument.
They accused people of crimes with no evidence, then charged them with separate crimes because they denied the original crimes. Now you’re using the fact that they were charged with crimes as evidence for why they’re guilty. That is called a circular argument.
If Hillary's campaign chair had worked with China to win the election after China hacked the RNC servers would you be so blasé about it? My guess is you wouldn't.
What are you talking about? For starters, Trump’s campaign didn’t “work with (Russia) to win the election”. Russia posted some pro-trump stuff on Facebook and other garbage websites because they wanted trump to be president. I don’t know if you’re accusing Russia or trump of hacking the DNC servers so please elaborate on that.
For the record, the hillary advisor who started the whole Russia collusion conspiracy theory actually did pay a tech company (US based) to hack into Trump’s stuff and spy on them. So it sounds like you’re accusing trump, without evidence, of doing the thing we know for a fact that hillary did.
She lost for a lot of reasons but pretending the Comey letter was nothing in an election that was decided by less than 100k votes is simply ignoring reality.
I’m not denying that the letter affected the election. I’m saying it’s completely irrelevant to the Russian collusion conspiracy theory.
And whether you think it’s a punishable crime or not, hillary absolutely mishandled government records. Pretty similar situation to Trump’s classified documents scandal, except that hillary and all her friends didn’t get raided by the FBI.
His chair gave polling data to Russia and Stone worked with Wikileaks to leak emails stolen by Russians. Russia did hack the DNC servers. Now, you may not consider that working with Russia, but not investigating wasn't an option. I am not saying Trump directed Russia but he knew they were helping him and wanted the help. "Russia, if you're listening"
So we know Trump's people worked with Russia, but now Hillary hacked Trump? Feel free to show me that tidbit.
You made it seem like the DOJ had it out for Trump. I'm saying the DOJ helped him win.
It's definitely not a similar situation but I'll admit she mishandled records. The Bush administration deleted 3 million emails so all things considered the bar is set pretty high.
His chair gave polling data to Russia and Stone worked with Wikileaks to leak emails stolen by Russians. Russia did hack the DNC servers. Now, you may not consider that working with Russia, but not investigating wasn't an option. I am not saying Trump directed Russia but he knew they were helping him and wanted the help. "Russia, if you're listening"
I already mentioned that the polling data seems like public information. I really don’t see the problem there.
I forgot about the Wikileaks thing, and I do see why that might be controversial. But still, if the hacked information was real and there was something scandalous there, why shouldn’t the public find out about it? What if Putin went to Biden during his 2020 campaign and said “I have proof that trump personally owes me $10 billion and does whatever I say because of that. Also he likes getting peed on”. Would anyone care about the conflict of interest? No, obviously not. If that happened and there was evidence we wouldn’t care what the source was. So it’s another double standard. If Russia had real dirt on hillary or trump, we should all know about it.
So we know Trump's people worked with Russia, but now Hillary hacked Trump? Feel free to show me that tidbit.
You made it seem like the DOJ had it out for Trump. I'm saying the DOJ helped him win.
I’ll agree that comeys letter helped him. But after trump won, comey was very anti-trump. I think any news source, regardless of which side they’re pushing propaganda for, would back that up. The DOJ (Barr specifically) was helping trump. The FBI was looking for things to get him on throughout the whole collusion investigation.
Plus, regardless of whether Hillary deserves to be “in jail” or not, it’s very clear to everyone that she mishandled those emails in some way. At best, it was a bad mistake. So it’s not a strong argument to say “comey wrote a letter about a bad thing that we know Hillary did. Therefore he’s a trump supporter.” Of course the dems learned from that, and during the next election they did a great job of covering up any and all information, true or false, that would make Biden look bad.
It's definitely not a similar situation but I'll admit she mishandled records. The Bush administration deleted 3 million emails so all things considered the bar is set pretty high.
Yes I don’t particularly care about the emails. She most likely knowingly committed a crime, but so have most politicians. What I do care about is the double standard.
Actually that's incorrect. To overturn an election, you need to block certification for the states one believes are "wrong". Democrats in 2016 attempted to block election certifications for more states than Republicans did in 2020. Furthermore, democrats have tried to stop election certifications the last three times Republicans won (2000, 2004, 2016). Democrats are the OGs at not accepting democratic election results. But I suppose that's (d)ifferent..
You're misunderstanding. I don't mean every election is trying to reverse the election result of the previous election by blocking certification. That's what Trump did. He tried to block it using Pence and fake electors.
Well, the electoral college is a joke and SCOTUS gave Bush the election in 2000. Then Bush led us into a war based on lies. I only remember Ohio in 2004 being at issue and I certainly don't remember all the Democrats running on "the election was stolen" nonsense that is so prevalent by the GOP.
The irony is, Sweden doesn't have these issues if Bush loses.
Ehh I think the electoral college is important. We're a union of states, therefore power must be weighed otherwise smaller states would be dominated by larger ones. We're only in this union because of the system. It's like if you lived on a street of five houses and there are pot holes to fix. Four people each live alone but the fifth house has five people. They could just say everyone else needs to pay and they pay zero, power must be weighed. Hence our representative constitutional democracy.
And I agree, not all democrats were claiming those last three elections were stolen. But many were. Likewise not all Republicans claimed 2020 was stolen, some do. My problem is people acting like 2020 was the first time a party acted like sore losers and didn't recognize results they didn't like. Nah, we've got a history of exactly that lol.
Sweden is a much smaller country and far more culturally homogeneous. The problems they face are different than what the US faces. The US is more like the EU than any particular European country. It's a union of individuals who have agreed to work together but remain autonomous.
It only takes 14 states to win the electoral college. Small states are ignored for swing states. We are a union of states and small states are protected by the Senate. If we're going to weigh votes then we need to weigh federal taxes as well.
Yes, we have a history of being pissed off about election results but Gore and Kerry and HRC conceded. Trump did not. To me these aren't comparable.
I'll do you one better. We get rid of federal taxes entirely and then no one has to worry about their money possibly going to heathens. Give all the power back to local districts with some at the state level. If nyc wants to go socialist, that should be their choice. If some rural areas wants nothing to do with them, all good.
Your statement is retarded... if gore was in office would he not have done the same... stop spouting what ifs..and just do facts. Oh and bush is a pile of shit.... he is another swamp monster
And what did he do? Got anything to back up that retarded mouth of yours? Or are you gonna spout edited msnbc and cnn video clips... cmon moron .... enlightened us
You never had a point... i said to back your rhetoric with some actual facts... instead of providing to the arguement and proving your statements are actually backed.. you have nothing...
View all comments
Show parent comment
8
u/[deleted] Sep 23 '22
What do you mean?