.
http://www.theeroticreview.com/discussion-boards/politics-and-religion-39/ny-times-mueller-report-details-140-contacts-between-trump-and-russia--337846
http://www.nytimes.com/interactive/2019/01/26/us/politics/trump-contacts-russians-wikileaks.html?auth=login-email
"Mueller Report Shows Depth of Connections Between Trump Campaign and Russians"
.
http://www.theeroticreview.com/discussion-boards/politics-and-religion-39/re-i-stand-corrected-----339102
"You [CDL] wrote: "No Americans engaged in collusion with the Russians". Mueller lists over 140 instances where Trump Team Americans engaged in collusion (contacts) with the Russians. "No Americans" does NOT mean the same thing as "numerous Americans on Team Trump (election campaign (Manafort, etc.) and business dealings (Cohen, re: Moscow project))". "
.
http://www.theeroticreview.com/discussion-boards/politics-and-religion-39/re-its-apples-and-oranges-----338920
"Mueller investigated CRIMINAL CONSPIRACY, not collusion. "For that reason, this Office’s focus in resolving the question of joint criminal liability was on conspiracy as defined in federal law, not the commonly discussed term “collusion.” "
.
"Mueller: "The Office therefore did not charge any individual associated with the Trump Campaign with CONSPIRACY to commit a federal offense arising from RUSSIA CONTACTS, either under a specific statute or under Section 371’s offenses clause." ... but there were at least 140 non-trivial Russia contacts (commonly referred to as collusion) in the Report. If the NYT wrote "there's plenty of evidence of Trump-Russia collusion." it is because they felt that "at least 140 contacts" qualifies as "plenty." "
.
http://www.nytimes.com/interactive/2019/01/26/us/politics/trump-contacts-russians-wikileaks.html
"Mueller Report Shows Depth of Connections Between Trump Campaign and Russians"
"Donald J. Trump and 18 of his associates had at least 140 contacts with Russian nationals and WikiLeaks, or their intermediaries, during the 2016 campaign and presidential transition, according to a New York Times analysis. The report of Robert S. Mueller III, released to the public on Thursday, revealed at least 30 more contacts beyond those previously known. However, the special counsel said, “the evidence was not sufficient to support criminal charges.” Very few, if any, of these interactions were publicly known before Mr. Trump took office."
From the article:
"The Federal Election Commission fined the Democratic National Committee and the Hillary Clinton campaign more than $100,000 for secretly funding opposition research that falsely accused Donald Trump of colluding with Russia.
The commission fined the treasurers of the DNC and Clinton campaign for "misreporting the purpose of certain disbursements" related to the infamous Steele dossier, according to a ruling released on Wednesday. The DNC and Clinton campaign paid more than $1 million in 2016 to fund the dossier project, but labeled the payments as legal expenses. The commission fined the DNC and Clinton campaign $105,000 and $8,000, respectively."
This should make it a lot easier for Trump to prove in court that the Dems made up Russian collusion.
The Clinton campaign was not fined for funding the Steele dossier. They were fined for misreporting the expense as legal services (the money was paid to a law firm who hired the opposition research company Fusion GPS) and not as opposition research. Opposition research is legal and conducted by every campaign. In fact, this particular research into trump was started by a republican presidential primary candidate before it was continued by the Clinton campaign. If you want to learn about the trump campaign's frequent contact with Russian intelligence officials/cutouts, you should read the Mueller report.
...this is now a moderated forum and ad hominems are no longer permitted. Yes, the SEC fined them for *hiding* what they were doing by mislabeling the money they paid out for the Steele dossier, a document we now know was fabricated. They hid it to protect themselves from being exposed of working with foreign agents to dig up dirt on an opposing candidate in an election. The Clinton campaign then brought that fabricated document to the FBI, knowing it was bullshit, and then had the FBI spy on the Trump campaign on their behalf. That's a whole hell of a lot worse than Watergate. Had this happened 20 years ago, dozens of people in the Democrat party would now be in prison. Sadly, our system is now so corrupt that things like this goes unpunished. I'm amazed the SEC even managed to slap the Dems on the wrist for this. But what it does is prove, in a court of law, that the Dems did this, and with Trump suing them, it's going to greatly help his case.
Trying to unpack so much fabulist arguments is giving me a headache.
So along the same lines of misreporting an expense for opposition research as a legal expense making a payment to silence a porn actress and reporting the payment amount as a legal expense would be wrong too, right?
deviates from the official party line gives you a headache. Lol
.
http://www.theeroticreview.com/discussion-boards/politics-and-religion-39/ny-times-mueller-report-details-140-contacts-between-trump-and-russia--337846
http://www.nytimes.com/interactive/2019/01/26/us/politics/trump-contacts-russians-wikileaks.html?auth=login-email
"Mueller Report Shows Depth of Connections Between Trump Campaign and Russians"
.
http://www.theeroticreview.com/discussion-boards/politics-and-religion-39/re-i-stand-corrected-----339102
"You [CDL] wrote: "No Americans engaged in collusion with the Russians". Mueller lists over 140 instances where Trump Team Americans engaged in collusion (contacts) with the Russians. "No Americans" does NOT mean the same thing as "numerous Americans on Team Trump (election campaign (Manafort, etc.) and business dealings (Cohen, re: Moscow project))". "
.
http://www.theeroticreview.com/discussion-boards/politics-and-religion-39/re-its-apples-and-oranges-----338920
"Mueller investigated CRIMINAL CONSPIRACY, not collusion. "For that reason, this Office’s focus in resolving the question of joint criminal liability was on conspiracy as defined in federal law, not the commonly discussed term “collusion.” "
.
"Mueller: "The Office therefore did not charge any individual associated with the Trump Campaign with CONSPIRACY to commit a federal offense arising from RUSSIA CONTACTS, either under a specific statute or under Section 371’s offenses clause." ... but there were at least 140 non-trivial Russia contacts (commonly referred to as collusion) in the Report. If the NYT wrote "there's plenty of evidence of Trump-Russia collusion." it is because they felt that "at least 140 contacts" qualifies as "plenty." "
.
http://www.nytimes.com/interactive/2019/01/26/us/politics/trump-contacts-russians-wikileaks.html
"Mueller Report Shows Depth of Connections Between Trump Campaign and Russians"
"Donald J. Trump and 18 of his associates had at least 140 contacts with Russian nationals and WikiLeaks, or their intermediaries, during the 2016 campaign and presidential transition, according to a New York Times analysis. The report of Robert S. Mueller III, released to the public on Thursday, revealed at least 30 more contacts beyond those previously known. However, the special counsel said, “the evidence was not sufficient to support criminal charges.” Very few, if any, of these interactions were publicly known before Mr. Trump took office."
Donald Trump practically gets on his knees for Putin. Trump gives old vlad a better blow job then i ever could and I am damn good!!!!
The corrupt nature of the Clinton campaign activities involving Russia and the FBI will become clearer.
But then you go back ANOTHER four years to Clinton. And you happily ignore the Trump years, which were BY FAR the most corrupt in American history.
Please seek help.