3 ms·

Are the supporting facts wrong?

elmerfud 4y ago
If you're correctly using the word facts, then they cannot be wrong. Such is the nature of a fact. If you're saying that the opinions pieces conclusion is stating a fact that there was a Russian collusion with the Trump campaign based upon the various investigative reports then I would submit that you have not read the supporting information. Indeed of Russia has interfered in a great many elections in an attempt to influence their outcome. This was true and 2016 as it's been true for as long as Russia has been a thing and before that the USSR. This is only news to someone who is willfully ignorant of international politics and I also ask you what do you think the CIA does on a day-to-day basis? The reports have continually found that there was no collusion between Russia and the Trump campaign. Reading from the reports you can see they considered a troubling amount of connection between the two but that is the benefit of 5+ years of investigation a hindsight. The reports do not anywhere point out collusion which is an active working together of both parties. It only points out that there was external influence. People who don't like Trump attempted to invent collusion where it didn't exist. This is no different than people who did not like Hillary Clinton who wanted to invent reasons to lock her up over an email server. Both sides showed an extreme ignorance where the facts are involved. Hence why Hillary was not charged with that crime and Trump was never charged with collusion.
- scarface74 4y ago
  > Reading from the reports you can see they considered a troubling amount of connection between the two but that is the benefit of 5+ years of investigation a hindsight How is this not “collusion”? I didn’t follow the whole thing closely at all. This isn’t meant to be a political argument. I don’t trust either party.
  - elmerfud 4y ago
    Collusion; Specifically, in law, a secret understanding between two or more persons to act or proceed as if adversely or at. variance with, or in apparent defiance of, one another's rights, in order to prejudice a third person or to obtain a remedy which could not as well be obtained by open concurrence. None of the reports found there to be actual collusion which means that both parties in this case would be Russia and the Trump campaign as a whole, or at least those directing the Trump campaign including Trump himself, would have had to be working together with them to change the election. This is what the reports could not find. They could find that Russia did exert influence into the election and against the Trump campaign and certain individuals but that does not collusion make. Even if you take the point that there was two bad actors in the Trump campaign actively colluding with Russia That does not mean the Trump campaign as a whole was in collusion with Russia. Again the report supports this position that there was no collusion from the campaign. There was influence and manipulation but I ask you what does the CIA do on a day-to-day basis if not the same thing. I would submit if you spent 5 years investigating any presidential campaign of the last 50 years you would find similar evidence of manipulation from the USSR or Russia because it is how the game is played. Just as the United States actively influences elections around the world to ensure outcomes are in line with what we want to see.

If you're correctly using the word facts, then they cannot be wrong. Such is the nature of a fact. If you're saying that the opinions pieces conclusion is stating a fact that there was a Russian collusion with the Trump campaign based upon the various investigative reports then I would submit that you have not read the supporting information. Indeed of Russia has interfered in a great many elections in an attempt to influence their outcome. This was true and 2016 as it's been true for as long as Russia has been a thing and before that the USSR. This is only news to someone who is willfully ignorant of international politics and I also ask you what do you think the CIA does on a day-to-day basis? The reports have continually found that there was no collusion between Russia and the Trump campaign. Reading from the reports you can see they considered a troubling amount of connection between the two but that is the benefit of 5+ years of investigation a hindsight. The reports do not anywhere point out collusion which is an active working together of both parties. It only points out that there was external influence. People who don't like Trump attempted to invent collusion where it didn't exist. This is no different than people who did not like Hillary Clinton who wanted to invent reasons to lock her up over an email server. Both sides showed an extreme ignorance where the facts are involved. Hence why Hillary was not charged with that crime and Trump was never charged with collusion.

scarface74 4y ago
> Reading from the reports you can see they considered a troubling amount of connection between the two but that is the benefit of 5+ years of investigation a hindsight How is this not “collusion”? I didn’t follow the whole thing closely at all. This isn’t meant to be a political argument. I don’t trust either party.
- elmerfud 4y ago
  Collusion; Specifically, in law, a secret understanding between two or more persons to act or proceed as if adversely or at. variance with, or in apparent defiance of, one another's rights, in order to prejudice a third person or to obtain a remedy which could not as well be obtained by open concurrence. None of the reports found there to be actual collusion which means that both parties in this case would be Russia and the Trump campaign as a whole, or at least those directing the Trump campaign including Trump himself, would have had to be working together with them to change the election. This is what the reports could not find. They could find that Russia did exert influence into the election and against the Trump campaign and certain individuals but that does not collusion make. Even if you take the point that there was two bad actors in the Trump campaign actively colluding with Russia That does not mean the Trump campaign as a whole was in collusion with Russia. Again the report supports this position that there was no collusion from the campaign. There was influence and manipulation but I ask you what does the CIA do on a day-to-day basis if not the same thing. I would submit if you spent 5 years investigating any presidential campaign of the last 50 years you would find similar evidence of manipulation from the USSR or Russia because it is how the game is played. Just as the United States actively influences elections around the world to ensure outcomes are in line with what we want to see.