6 ms·

Collusion, like "Crooked Hillary" are terms Trump used courtesy of Cambridge Analytica to control the narrative. The investigation was to look for coordination

Collusion, like "Crooked Hillary" are terms Trump used courtesy of Cambridge Analytica to control the narrative. The investigation was to look for coordination and links between Russia and the Trump campaign, along with obstruction of justice as well as "any matters that arose or may arise directly from the investigation."

s_y_n_t_a_x 8y ago
Collusion is a euphemism, my point was noone was indicted for coordinating with the campaign, and noone was indicted in the campaign other than for tax fraud and processing crimes. If you can point out who exactly you think coordinated with Trump that'd be great.
- dragonwriter 8y ago
  > noone was indicted in the campaign other than for tax fraud and processing crimes. Pappadopolous was convicted for lying about his attempts, approved by higher ups in the campaign, to coordinate with Russia. Stone was indicted for lying about his role in coordinating between the Trump campaign and WikiLeaks about the DNC document release in which, from other indictments, WikiLeaks was acting as either an agent or dupe of Russian intelligence.
  - s_y_n_t_a_x 8y ago
    Those are processing crimes. And Stone denies the accusation.
    - dragonwriter 8y ago
      > Those are processing crimes. Irrelevant, the actual facts charged in the indictment involve collusion. “Collusion” isn't a legal charge, it's a fact pattern, and it's part of the fact pattern in both the Stone and Pappadopolous indictments. The claim that there are no indictments involving collusion is false. > And Stone denies the accusation. Which is irrelevant to any claims about the content of indictments of findings of the Mueller probe. It would be relevant if the claim was “no convictions involving collusion” or “no confessions involving collusion”, though Pappadopolous would still disprove both of those claims.
      - Fjolsvith 8y ago
        > The claim that there are no indictments involving collusion is false. As there is no actual crime of collusion for which a person can be indicted, this is a subjective viewpoint.
        dragonwriter 8y ago
        It is a “subjective viewpoint” only in the trivial sense in which every description using human language (including terms whose uses include named legal offenses) relies on the subjectivity of interpretation of definitions in context, and in which there are no actual discussable concrete fact claims. On any other level, “collusion” is a word with a clear meaning, and the Stone and Pappadopolous indictments (the latter of which is subject of a conviction with guilty plea and detailed statement of the offense confirming this) involve what is unambiguously actual collusion between the Trump campaign and WikiLeaks (on a matter which the facts alleged in other indictments identify WikiLeaks as advancing a Russian propaganda operation) and attempted (from the Trump campaign side) collusion between the Trump campaign and Russia directly. Everything that denied this is lies and sophistry to support lies.
        Fjolsvith 8y ago
        > Everything that denied this is lies and sophistry to support lies. It seems to me that the lack of further Mueller indictments denies it. But, we could argue it either way, and that is what makes it subjective.
    - manicdee 8y ago
      Al Capone was only convicted of tax evasion. I am sure he denied that accusation at the time, and he also boasted about a plea bargain that the sentencing judge reminded him wasn’t between Al Capone and the court.
overwhelm 8y ago
"Collusion" was so central to Russiagaters that the buffoonish Luke Harding even named his silly book that: https://www.amazon.com/Collusion-Secret-Meetings-Russia-Helped/dp/0525562516/ref=sr_1_1 https://www.amazon.com/Collusion-Secret-Meetings-Russia-Help.... (To see how buffoonish, https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=9Ikf1uZli4g. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=9Ikf1uZli4g.)

s_y_n_t_a_x 8y ago

Collusion is a euphemism, my point was noone was indicted for coordinating with the campaign, and noone was indicted in the campaign other than for tax fraud and processing crimes. If you can point out who exactly you think coordinated with Trump that'd be great.

dragonwriter 8y ago
> noone was indicted in the campaign other than for tax fraud and processing crimes. Pappadopolous was convicted for lying about his attempts, approved by higher ups in the campaign, to coordinate with Russia. Stone was indicted for lying about his role in coordinating between the Trump campaign and WikiLeaks about the DNC document release in which, from other indictments, WikiLeaks was acting as either an agent or dupe of Russian intelligence.
- s_y_n_t_a_x 8y ago
  Those are processing crimes. And Stone denies the accusation.
  - dragonwriter 8y ago
    > Those are processing crimes. Irrelevant, the actual facts charged in the indictment involve collusion. “Collusion” isn't a legal charge, it's a fact pattern, and it's part of the fact pattern in both the Stone and Pappadopolous indictments. The claim that there are no indictments involving collusion is false. > And Stone denies the accusation. Which is irrelevant to any claims about the content of indictments of findings of the Mueller probe. It would be relevant if the claim was “no convictions involving collusion” or “no confessions involving collusion”, though Pappadopolous would still disprove both of those claims.
    - Fjolsvith 8y ago
      > The claim that there are no indictments involving collusion is false. As there is no actual crime of collusion for which a person can be indicted, this is a subjective viewpoint.
      - dragonwriter 8y ago
        It is a “subjective viewpoint” only in the trivial sense in which every description using human language (including terms whose uses include named legal offenses) relies on the subjectivity of interpretation of definitions in context, and in which there are no actual discussable concrete fact claims. On any other level, “collusion” is a word with a clear meaning, and the Stone and Pappadopolous indictments (the latter of which is subject of a conviction with guilty plea and detailed statement of the offense confirming this) involve what is unambiguously actual collusion between the Trump campaign and WikiLeaks (on a matter which the facts alleged in other indictments identify WikiLeaks as advancing a Russian propaganda operation) and attempted (from the Trump campaign side) collusion between the Trump campaign and Russia directly. Everything that denied this is lies and sophistry to support lies.
        Fjolsvith 8y ago
        > Everything that denied this is lies and sophistry to support lies. It seems to me that the lack of further Mueller indictments denies it. But, we could argue it either way, and that is what makes it subjective.
  - manicdee 8y ago
    Al Capone was only convicted of tax evasion. I am sure he denied that accusation at the time, and he also boasted about a plea bargain that the sentencing judge reminded him wasn’t between Al Capone and the court.

overwhelm 8y ago

"Collusion" was so central to Russiagaters that the buffoonish Luke Harding even named his silly book that: https://www.amazon.com/Collusion-Secret-Meetings-Russia-Helped/dp/0525562516/ref=sr_1_1 https://www.amazon.com/Collusion-Secret-Meetings-Russia-Help.... (To see how buffoonish, https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=9Ikf1uZli4g. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=9Ikf1uZli4g.)