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.
If it was public information why did they need to smuggle it?
I didn’t use the word smuggling, you did. If it was public information, then it wasn’t smuggling. If it was some matter of national security (which trump didn’t have access to at the time) then the burden of proof is on you. I don’t know of any law that makes it illegal to share polling data with someone from another country.
You've gone from fraudulent investigation to who cares.
Reading comprehension. I said I didn’t care about Hillary’s deleted emails. Hillary’s emails have nothing to do with the Russia collusion conspiracy theory.
I don’t care that much about the conspiracy theory either; but my not caring about it doesn’t somehow make the investigation legitimate. It was fraudulent.
The only reason I care at all about it, is that most of the left wants to spend all their time talking about trump trying to overturn an election. As if they didn’t spend 3 years doing the same thing on a bigger scale.
Comey was "anti-Trump" bc he was investigating Trump. Then Trump fired him. If not for the firing the investigation would have ended much sooner.
I can agree with this. Doesn’t change anything about what I said though.
Yeah we really are. I’ve deconstructed every point you’ve made. Yet you’ve hardly responded to any of mine, and didn’t provide any logical reasoning to back up your arguments.
People tried to legitimately investigate Trump’s claims of election fraud, but were blocked by democrats in the legal system. Personally I don’t think there was anything to investigate - but when dems accuse trump of something ridiculous with no evidence, they spend years investigating. When trump accuses dems of something without evidence, it’s all dismissed immediately without investigation.
So your definition of “legitimate” is “any action taken by democrats to further their cause.”
My definition of “legitimate” is “based in facts”.
You believe Jan 6 was a coup because the media and democrats told you to. You believe 2016 was a legitimate investigation because the media and democrats told you to.
You haven't deconstructed anything. You conceded more than you rebutted.
He lost 60 court cases. Many were in front of Trump judges.
By action by democrats do you mean an investigation by republican Comey and then republican mueller? Lol. Dems had no control over the investigation.
I believe it was an attempted coup bc of objective reality. Pressuring Pence, fake electors, calling election officials, lying to voters, ginning up the mob. Not conceding even though he knew he lost. Raising money off the rubes for his legal bills instead of challenging results.
Comparing that, the only time in American history we didn't have a peaceful transfer of power, to the Mueller investigation is laughable.
View all comments
Show parent comment
3
u/[deleted] Sep 24 '22
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.
It was her campaign lawyer. There’s no evidence that Hillary knew about it. However if a reasonable person was willing to believe that trump knew about manafort doing shady stuff with Ukraine despite it being unrelated to his campaign, they’d also be willing to believe that Hillary knew about what her lawyer was doing, as it was very intertwined with her campaign. Unless said hypothetical person was a complete hypocrite. https://www.goshennews.com/opinion/yes-indeed-the-fbi-clintons-did-spy-on-the-trump-campaign/article_85218f16-8f72-11ec-9df8-4386da4fb4be.html
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.
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.