3 ms·

The Steele Dossier was paid for by a firm hired by Hillary's campaign. So essentially what you have is some weak circumstantial evidence and a campaign that tr

The Steele Dossier was paid for by a firm hired by Hillary's campaign. So essentially what you have is some weak circumstantial evidence and a campaign that tried to take advantage of existing leaks (about... what? was the information provided truthful?) and another campaign that paid to have false information compiled then leaked to the press in order to discredit a political opponent. Then, when that opponent was in office they tried to use it to overturn his presidency subverting the will of the people. In spite of your "certain" rhetoric you are clearly in the wrong on this issue, as the Mueller investigation ultimately found. But I suppose it's not worth arguing "religion" as this apparently has become, discarding reason and rationality. So as other poster says, have nice day! And I truly mean that, have great one.

myko 5y ago
> The Steele Dossier was paid for by a firm hired by Hillary's campaign. Eventually, you're conveniently ignoring the fact that it was initially paid for by other concerned folks. > So essentially what you have is some weak circumstantial evidence and a campaign that tried to take advantage of existing leaks This is where your argument falls down. It isn't circumstantial evidence that Manafort worked for the Russian government's interest in Ukraine, and was convicted for work he did there. The guy he worked with fled to Russia once their ill deeds were known. Stone worked directly with wikileaks/guccifier 2.0, who were working directly with Russia. I guess you can try to say Junior was just doing what anyone would do, but his attempt to do so involved conspiring with Russia to get dirt on a political opponent - which doesn't make the Russia entanglements non-problematic. Especially considering trump then obstructed justice by lying about the meeting. > as the Mueller investigation ultimately found. Nope, the Mueller investigation was clearly an impeachment referral and documented multiple obstruction counts against the elder trump. > But I suppose it's not worth arguing "religion" as this apparently has become You are ignoring facts because that is convenient to your position, which is not backed by reality. Good day.

myko 5y ago

> The Steele Dossier was paid for by a firm hired by Hillary's campaign. Eventually, you're conveniently ignoring the fact that it was initially paid for by other concerned folks. > So essentially what you have is some weak circumstantial evidence and a campaign that tried to take advantage of existing leaks This is where your argument falls down. It isn't circumstantial evidence that Manafort worked for the Russian government's interest in Ukraine, and was convicted for work he did there. The guy he worked with fled to Russia once their ill deeds were known. Stone worked directly with wikileaks/guccifier 2.0, who were working directly with Russia. I guess you can try to say Junior was just doing what anyone would do, but his attempt to do so involved conspiring with Russia to get dirt on a political opponent - which doesn't make the Russia entanglements non-problematic. Especially considering trump then obstructed justice by lying about the meeting. > as the Mueller investigation ultimately found. Nope, the Mueller investigation was clearly an impeachment referral and documented multiple obstruction counts against the elder trump. > But I suppose it's not worth arguing "religion" as this apparently has become You are ignoring facts because that is convenient to your position, which is not backed by reality. Good day.