RUSSIAN COLLUSION-RELATED CRIME UNCOVERED! (Bad News for CNN Sycophants)

[CdnFox]

1 hour ago, robosmith said:

No one has proven any element of the dossier false, despite YOUR desperation to claim that.

Not only was the entire dossier proven false, but the fbi were critisized heavily for ever believing it was true without corroborating evidence because that's unprofessional, and hillary's campaign and the dems were fined for it.

Sorry kiddo   See - this right there, that's why people are always laughing at you.

 

[Nationalist]

8 hours ago, robosmith said:

No one has proven any element of the dossier false, despite YOUR desperation to claim that.

Only a superficial jackass would post a fake picture as though it means something other than you being a jack ass.

Says the gullible dweeb who thinks the Steele dosier was truthful.

[Nationalist]

8 hours ago, West said:

That's one ugly "lady" lol

Indeed. Inside and out.

[West]

8 hours ago, Hodad said:

You can dip, dodge and deflect all you want, still won't change that Manafort was passing sensitive political intelligence to a spy, who passed it to the Kremlin, which was targeting US citizens for election interference.

There's no evidence Kilminik was Russian intelligence nor that Manafort knew he was Russian intelligence and gave him publicly available polling data to interfere in an election. There's also no evidence this was illegal and is within constitutional rights to associate with whomever the hell you want to 

They had to legitimize an investigation because they filed false applications to a secret court to usurp the constitutional rights of freedom from unreasonable search of several American citizens. Democrats had to save face after lying for close to 5 years about collusion. That's all it is. 

Either way Hillary didn't lose because of Russia. She lost because it was uncovered she rigged her own primary and then told people in swing states she was going to put them out of work. Furthermore it was obvious Comey gave her special treatment when he chose not to indict and Bill had the infamous secret meeting with Loretta Lynch just days before they let her off.

Blame Russia all you like but Hillary did it to herself. And collusion allegations were just the "insurance policy" in case she lost.

Edited November 14, 2023 by West

[Hodad]

4 hours ago, West said:

There's no evidence Kilminik was Russian intelligence nor that Manafort knew he was Russian intelligence and gave him publicly available polling data to interfere in an election. There's also no evidence this was illegal and is within constitutional rights to associate with whomever the hell you want to 

They had to legitimize an investigation because they filed false applications to a secret court to usurp the constitutional rights of freedom from unreasonable search of several American citizens. Democrats had to save face after lying for close to 5 years about collusion. That's all it is. 

Either way Hillary didn't lose because of Russia. She lost because it was uncovered she rigged her own primary and then told people in swing states she was going to put them out of work. Furthermore it was obvious Comey gave her special treatment when he chose not to indict and Bill had the infamous secret meeting with Loretta Lynch just days before they let her off.

Blame Russia all you like but Hillary did it to herself. And collusion allegations were just the "insurance policy" in case she lost.

You are just lying again.

1. The Republican-led Senate Intelligence Committee report was conclusive: "The Committee found that Kilimnik is a Russian intelligence officer." If you, random internet guy, want to disagree, take it up with the CIA, FBI and NSA.

2. The information WAS NOT publicly available. "On numerous occasions, Manafort sought to secretly share internal Campaign information with Kilimnik." -- "Manafort shared sensitive internal polling data or Campaign strategy with Kilimnik"

^^Note that this is exactly the information the Russian election interference effort would need to coordinate with Trump campaign activities and target the right Americans with the right messages for maximal effect. 

You say it's not big deal, but Manafort, Gates and Kilimnik went to extraordinary lengths to hide and cover their communications of what you call "publicly available" information. ?

And now I see you've shifted tactics. You say, "Well, even if the Trump campaign did collude with Russian intelligence operatives who were trying to tilt the election for Trump, that's not the reason Trump won." Nice try. 

Edited November 14, 2023 by Hodad

[robosmith]

12 hours ago, CdnFox said:

Not only was the entire dossier proven false, but the fbi were critisized heavily for ever believing it was true without corroborating evidence because that's unprofessional, and hillary's campaign and the dems were fined for it.

Sorry kiddo   See - this right there, that's why people are always laughing at you.

 

Posters here are laughing at YOU because you keep pretending ^these OPINIONS mean something. LMAO

Meanwhile you STILL have NO EVIDENCE anything in the dossier was false and all you do is DEFLECT. Duh

5 hours ago, Nationalist said:

Says the gullible dweeb who thinks the Steele dosier was truthful.

Prove it FALSE, NAZI.

[West]

12 minutes ago, Hodad said:

You are just lying again.

1. The Republican-led Senate Intelligence Committee report was conclusive: "The Committee found that Kilimnik is a Russian intelligence officer." If you, random internet guy, want to disagree, take it up with the CIA, FBI and NSA.

2. The information WAS NOT publicly available. "On numerous occasions, Manafort sought to secretly share internal Campaign information with Kilimnik." -- "Manafort shared sensitive internal polling data or Campaign strategy with Kilimnik"

^^Note that this is exactly the information the Russian election interference effort would need to coordinate with Trump campaign activities and target the right Americans with the right messages for maximal effect. 

You say it's not big deal, but Manafort, Gates and Kilimnik went to extraordinary lengths to hide and cover their communications of what you call "publicly available" information. ?

And now I see you've shifted tactics. You say, "Well, even if the Trump campaign did collude with Russian intelligence operatives who were trying to tilt the election for Trump, that's not the reason Trump won." Nice try. 

?.. 

Again, just justification for a bogus investigation. 

If they could credibly prove what you say they WOULDVE CHARGED SOMEONE. 

I realize the press had a vested interest in proving the collusion delusion because they peddled it for four years and lost ALL CREDIBILITY.

Edited November 14, 2023 by West

[robosmith]

4 hours ago, West said:

There's no evidence Kilminik was Russian intelligence nor that Manafort knew he was Russian intelligence and gave him publicly available polling data to interfere in an election. There's also no evidence this was illegal and is within constitutional rights to associate with whomever the hell you want to 

No one said PUBLIC polling data was given. Try to keep up.

4 hours ago, West said:

They had to legitimize an investigation because they filed false applications to a secret court to usurp the constitutional rights of freedom from unreasonable search of several American citizens. Democrats had to save face after lying for close to 5 years about collusion. That's all it is. 

Either way Hillary didn't lose because of Russia. She lost because it was uncovered she rigged her own primary and then told people in swing states she was going to put them out of work. Furthermore it was obvious Comey gave her special treatment when he chose not to indict and Bill had the infamous secret meeting with Loretta Lynch just days before they let her off.

Blame Russia all you like but Hillary did it to herself. And collusion allegations were just the "insurance policy" in case she lost.

Trump "won" by a razor thin margin in 3 states. EVERY advantage he had was CRUCIAL, including Putin's and his IRA's help. Duh

[West]

4 minutes ago, robosmith said:

No one said PUBLIC polling data was given. Try to keep up.

Trump "won" by a razor thin margin in 3 states. EVERY advantage he had was CRUCIAL, including Putin's and his IRA's help. Duh

Trump won because of Hillarys moronic statements about putting coal miners out of business and rigged an fing primary which ticked off alot of people that chose to stay home and not vote rather than voting for her. Add to that she should've been in jail just like any other military personel that would breach security for her email server. 

This russia bs is just deflection from those FACTS. 

We have TEXT MESSAGES from the FBI agents showing the collusion delusion was just an insurance policy against a Trump presidency and that there was nothing to the claims. Yet you still want me to believe whatever you say?

Edited November 14, 2023 by West

[CdnFox]

13 minutes ago, robosmith said:

Posters here are laughing at YOU because you keep pretending ^these OPINIONS mean something. LMAO

LOL - i'm sure you wish that were true

Quote

Meanwhile you STILL have NO EVIDENCE anything in the dossier was false and all you do is DEFLECT. Duh

I have tonnes of evidence.  And your opinion use useless without proof  

 

Quote

Prove it FALSE, NAZI.

ROFLMAO - now i'm a nazi    LOL - well i guess that's the end of whatever credibility you might have had left  

Edited November 14, 2023 by CdnFox

[Hodad]

6 minutes ago, West said:

?.. 

Again, just justification for a bogus investigation. 

If they could credibly prove what you say they WOULDVE CHARGED SOMEONE. 

I realize the press had a vested interest in proving the collusion delusion because they peddled it for four years and lost ALL CREDIBILITY.

That's not what I say, it's what the Republican-led Senate Intelligence Committee report states conclusively. Collusion happened. We know it happened. Kilimnik was involved with the Russian influence campaign in 2016. He was involved with the hack and leak. He was involved in the Russian influence campaign again in 2020. And Manafort was secretly feeding him polling and strategy.

Your defense of this activity is really pathetic. Apparently you'd say that, in spite of all the evidence, Al Capone wasn't involved in organized crime, otherwise he would have been charged. Instead the government was out to get him and only charged him with Trumped up tax crimes! No fair!

The fact is that sometimes people ARE good at covering their tracks. And if you can't conclusively prove in court that someone was engaged in the primary criminal enterprise, you hang them on their financial crimes instead. Either way is a win for society.

[CdnFox]

4 minutes ago, Hodad said:

That's not what I say, it's what the Republican-led Senate Intelligence Committee report states conclusively. Collusion happened. We know it happened. Kilimnik was involved with the Russian influence campaign in 2016. He was involved with the hack and leak. He was involved in the Russian influence campaign again in 2020. And Manafort was secretly feeding him polling and strategy.

Your defense of this activity is really pathetic. Apparently you'd say that, in spite of all the evidence, Al Capone wasn't involved in organized crime, otherwise he would have been charged. Instead the government was out to get him and only charged him with Trumped up tax crimes! No fair!

The fact is that sometimes people ARE good at covering their tracks. And if you can't conclusively prove in court that someone was engaged in the primary criminal enterprise, you hang them on their financial crimes instead. Either way is a win for society.

It clearly did not happen unless you reduce the term 'collusion' to  "they talked at some point" in which case Hillary was just as guilty of 'collusion'.

[Nationalist]

45 minutes ago, robosmith said:

Posters here are laughing at YOU because you keep pretending ^these OPINIONS mean something. LMAO

Meanwhile you STILL have NO EVIDENCE anything in the dossier was false and all you do is DEFLECT. Duh

Prove it FALSE, NAZI.

https://www.hoover.org/research/why-was-steele-dossier-not-dismissed-fake

No kidding Dweebles...you're just an embarrassment to the whole human race.

[West]

33 minutes ago, Hodad said:

That's not what I say, it's what the Republican-led Senate Intelligence Committee report states conclusively. Collusion happened. We know it happened. Kilimnik was involved with the Russian influence campaign in 2016. He was involved with the hack and leak. He was involved in the Russian influence campaign again in 2020. And Manafort was secretly feeding him polling and strategy.

Your defense of this activity is really pathetic. Apparently you'd say that, in spite of all the evidence, Al Capone wasn't involved in organized crime, otherwise he would have been charged. Instead the government was out to get him and only charged him with Trumped up tax crimes! No fair!

The fact is that sometimes people ARE good at covering their tracks. And if you can't conclusively prove in court that someone was engaged in the primary criminal enterprise, you hang them on their financial crimes instead. Either way is a win for society.

No what's pathetic is you continuing on with something that's already been looked at at determined to have no merit. 

Why is it so hard for you to believe that Hillary lost legitimately?

Why do you not answer why I should take the FBI seriously when their agents were talking about insurance policies in the event of Trump presidency. 

 

DO YOU THINK ITS PROPER FOR FBI AGENTS TO HAVE INSURANCE POLICIES IN CASE THEIR PREFERRED CANDIDATE LOSES?

Edited November 14, 2023 by West

[West]

47 minutes ago, CdnFox said:

It clearly did not happen unless you reduce the term 'collusion' to  "they talked at some point" in which case Hillary was just as guilty of 'collusion'.

Exactly. And there's ample evidence any information was tainted by FBI agents who wanted to overthrow am election result

[Hodad]

1 hour ago, West said:

No what's pathetic is you continuing on with something that's already been looked at at determined to have no merit. 

Why is it so hard for you to believe that Hillary lost legitimately?

Why do you not answer why I should take the FBI seriously when their agents were talking about insurance policies in the event of Trump presidency. 

 

DO YOU THINK ITS PROPER FOR FBI AGENTS TO HAVE INSURANCE POLICIES IN CASE THEIR PREFERRED CANDIDATE LOSES?

My concern has zero to do with Hillary losing. I think that interference was a factor in a close election. I think the hack and leak was particularly harmful. 

BUT none of that is the point. The point is that you are willing--eager even--to overlook an incredible amount of evidence that the Trump campaign was aiding the Russian interference efforts and in coordinating the assistance from the hack and leak. And then a US President pardoned the people who had done these things on our behalf and lavished praise on the brutal dictator who ordered these attacks on American democracy--these assaults on the American people. 

And the fact that two people in the FBI sent personal messages about how Trump was a unfit for office is another irrelevant deflection. More than half of Americans agree with that. They also said mean things about Chelsea Clinton and Eric Holder, among others. Boo hoo. People think and share thoughts about public figures. It's not a "deep state" plot. Just people talking-people who happened to work at the FBI.

 

Try to be honest for just a second. If you read a report from the Senate Democrats that concluded that Hunter Biden had been meeting with Chinese spies and giving them information that would help the Chinese coordinate campaigns against the American public you'd call him a traitor and call for his head. If there were hundreds of pages of documentation of these cloak-and-dagger meetings and communications, you wouldn't look at it and say there's no evidence and no merit. -- But because you're neck deep in the Trump cult, you're willing to turn off all logic and reason and hand-wave away such egregious actions. And if they ever pin anything real on Hunter you'd be utterly outraged if Joe Biden pardoned him--and doubly so if it appeared that Joe pardoned hunter to prevent him from flipping. There's no question that you would be outraged by any of that. Ask yourself honestly. -- Well, Trumpco has already done all of that, and more, and you're still carrying his water. It's pathetic.

 

[Nationalist]

This is pathetic.

The Democrats, FBI and DOJ outright lie to your faces and get away with it. The accusations, the virtue signaling, the endless persecution...based on...lies. All based on lies. I know it...you know it...Hell the whole frigging world knows it.

"There is no evidence..."

Republicans.. there is a mountain of evidence and all of it is more provable than was that Gawd Damn dossier. 

[West]

53 minutes ago, Hodad said:

Trump campaign was aiding the Russian interference

Again, the guy doing the investigation said this was an insurance policy. 

Forgive me for being skeptical 

[West]

1 hour ago, Hodad said:

And the fact that two people in the FBI sent personal messages about how Trump was a unfit for office is another irrelevant deflection

This is nonsense. 

If YOU were being investigated by somebody who claimed they were doing so as an "insurance policy" so that you couldn't be elected to political office I would be saying the same thing. 

The fact you call this an irrelevant detail is bullshit 

1 hour ago, Hodad said:

you wouldn't look at it and say there's no evidence and no merit

I would if there was four years of investigation and the best you came up with was a Senator talking to an Ambassador.

[West]

1 hour ago, Hodad said:

American public you'd call him a traitor and call for his head

There's more evidence that Biden was accepting Chinese bribes than of Russian collusion

1 hour ago, Hodad said:

you're willing to turn off all logic

No I'm looking at the totality of the evidence. 

[West]

1 hour ago, Hodad said:

pardoned hunter to prevent him from flipping.

He pardoned manafort because the investigation was a joke and was what the nazis did.. this is America. I get you think people who disagree with you shouldn't be allowed to do so

[Hodad]

2 hours ago, West said:

He pardoned manafort because the investigation was a joke and was what the nazis did.. this is America. I get you think people who disagree with you shouldn't be allowed to do so

Bullshit. Regardless of your willful denial of collusion with Russia Manafort was charged and convicted with multiple financial crimes--already found guilty beyond reasonable doubt. Now you cheer that a criminal escaped accountability. is there anything you won't rationalize?

And yes, it certainly was to prevent him from flipping. As soon as talk of a pardon went public, that's when Manafort stopped cooperating with his plea deal.

If Trump were innocent and unaware he should have been absolutely furious with Manafort and Stone for undertaking secret meetings with the Russians that would undermine his legitimacy and his agenda. Instead, he absolved them of their actual crimes. 

How does Trump react to breaches of loyalty and trust? That's right he storms, rages and publicly denounces. But in this case, for two men who had--allegedly without his knowledge--betrayed his trust and put his political ambitions in jeopardy, he was suddenly filled with grace and mercy, lol. 

That's a story too far out of character for even you to believe. Deep down even you know it was transactional.

2 hours ago, West said:

This is nonsense. 

If YOU were being investigated by somebody who claimed they were doing so as an "insurance policy" so that you couldn't be elected to political office I would be saying the same thing. 

The fact you call this an irrelevant detail is bullshit 

I would if there was four years of investigation and the best you came up with was a Senator talking to an Ambassador.

It was one guy before he joined the investigation. And there was obviously no "insurance policy." You're apparently more easily swayed by a FOX news sound bite than 900 pages of evidence in the Senate report.

2 hours ago, West said:

There's more evidence that Biden was accepting Chinese bribes than of Russian collusion

No I'm looking at the totality of the evidence. 

Bwahahaha. GTFO 

Edited November 15, 2023 by Hodad

[West]

34 minutes ago, Hodad said:

Regardless of your willful denial of collusion with Russia Manafort was charged and convicted with multiple financial crimes-

Tight which stemmed out of a bogus Russia collusion narrative. Very few if anyone have been charged with that. He was chosen and targeted to deflect from the debacle that was the Clinton campaign.

 

35 minutes ago, Hodad said:

As soon as talk of a pardon went public, that's when Manafort stopped cooperating with his plea deal.

Well that and there was nothing to flip on. In the words of great legal scholars "they not only sing but compose" meaning make up sh^t to appease crazies looking to target and take them out. This time for political purposes. 

38 minutes ago, Hodad said:

was one guy before he joined the investigation.

Lisa Page was the attorney for the debacle and there were folks submitting phony applications to the fisa court lying in their submission.. an attorney was charged for this. Peter Strzok wasn't just one guy but one of the LEAD guys on the nonsense. 

 

39 minutes ago, Hodad said:

Bwahahaha. GTFO 

You are delusional

[WestCanMan]

8 hours ago, Hodad said:

That's not what I say, it's what the Republican-led Senate Intelligence Committee report states conclusively. (1)Collusion happened. We know it happened. Kilimnik was involved with the Russian influence campaign in 2016. (2)He was involved with the hack and leak. (3) He was involved in the Russian influence campaign again in 2020. And Manafort was secretly feeding him polling and strategy.

Your defense of this activity is really pathetic. Apparently you'd say that, in spite of all the evidence, Al Capone wasn't involved in organized crime, otherwise he would have been charged. Instead the government was out to get him and only charged him with Trumped up tax crimes! No fair!

The fact is that sometimes people ARE good at covering their tracks. And if you can't conclusively prove in court that someone was engaged in the primary criminal enterprise, you hang them on their financial crimes instead. Either way is a win for society.

1) Collusion absolutely never happened, the FBI never found any evidence that it did. 
2) There is no evidence that anything was hacked. 2a) Crowdstrike’s CEO testified to that under oath, and 2b) Julian Assange said that his source was from a leak. In all of Assange’s hundreds/thousands of leaked docs, he has never been caught lying about a source. 
That might mean nothing to you, just because you don’t want to acknowledge it, but just keep in mind that the FBI committed crimes and lied several times over the course of this investigation, and people are still quoting the FBI. Assange has far more credibility on this issue than they do. 
3) Polling data. Not strategy. And so what? Manafort manages campaigns for a living. Maybe he was bragging, or pimping his services.

How “secret” can polling data really be anyways? It’s just polling data, and theoretically we get to see polls as well.

Are the Demonrats admitting that there’s some real polling data out there that we’re not allowed to see?

Do you really think that the Russians were smart enough to take a little bit of polling data and spend $200,000 on Facebook ads to decide a US federal election? Do you know how stupid that makes the Dems look?

The Demmies have access to all of that data too - they get it faster than Manafort could ever get it to Kimlik - and they spend hundreds of millions of dollars. Plus they lie, cheat and commit crimes. 

Could the Russians also overthrow the US democracy with one unarmed riot at the capitol? ?

 

The fact is that we are 100% certain that the FBI committed several crimes and lied hundreds of times during the Russian collusion investigation. 
 

There is no proof that the data was hacked. Zero. It’s nothing more than a guess/lie and a whole lot of propaganda. 

Anyhow, the only point of bringing up this post was to show how long it took for leftists to finally admit that the FBI actually committed crimes.

 

[CdnFox]

1 minute ago, WestCanMan said:

1) Collusion absolutely never happened, the FBI never found any evidence that it did.

 

 

It's weird - they keep bouncing back and forth between "collusion doesn't really exist legally so of course tehy didn't find any"  to "they found tonnes of it and it was massive" and back again.

And they point to sharing polling data as an example of this crime that doesn't exist.   Someone should arrest Nick Nanos - that bastards got some serious hard time comin'.