Is denial that Russia influenced our elctions reaching flat earth levels of stupid?

in fact its worth mentioning that I do not think there is a single world leader alive (or maybe even dead) that he has not said something bad about EXCEPT for Putin.

if there is I hope someone shares the names

At this point I'm not all that concerned as to collusion. All that aside, it reeks as if Russia is holding some leverage over Trump in some form or another. If I were to wager a guess, I'd imagine it has something to do with immense financial assistance Russia has given Trump in the past. Trump desperately doesn't want this knowledge to come to light (he even stated that Mueller's investigation looking into his financials was crossing the line), as it would expose him as not nearly as successful as he loves to portray to all, a fraud; i.e. effectively a loser. Russia knows this, and this is why they took measures to attempt to ensure his victory.

I think at this point it's fairly obvious it's not so much an issue of "if", but only "what". You'd have to live in serious denial to think that Trump's posture towards Russia is not at all suspicious at this point.

So what are you going to say when nothing is proven? or are you expecting Mueller to wait until the 2019 re-election and then hit him there?

@tryit: I agree it's pathetic. In fact, he praises dictators while bashing allies..

Trump: Mr. Joung Un is a very intelligent and honorable man I think.. talks.. our talks where exceptional."

The rational world: "He murdered his own uncle you idiot!!! Form a complete sentence for once!"

have you considered that you might be placing ego ahead of facts. that your concerns over others thinking they are more important than you or thinking that they are right and you are wrong and all those gushy kids stuff is putting you at risk to the point where you are willing to overlook facts?

Have you considered that it´s insane that we are in a time where people on the left is making a complete and utter mockery of our justice system, where people assumed guilty until proven never innocent.

It´s like the metoo movement.

no not remotely.

everyone does it, including people on the right.

but here is the thing, what we have is the murder case equivalent of the following:

1. we have the gun

2. it matches the bullets

3. we have an email from you that states you did it and when and where

4. when and where you say you did it matches up what we have found

its EXTREEMLY compelling evidence, and hiding behind the curtain of 'any spy from any country can do anything they want and it cant be prooven because we cant bring them to trial even if we have the gun, the bullets, a sign confession.

what if this was a case about a terrorist? you cant tell me with a serious face you would be making the same arguments

what the Actual F is the defense going to say that will prove them innocent? seriously?

No, everyone does not do it.

The reason we have a justice system is to provide equality for all under the law.

And again the indictments are based on one side´s story, and every side has two and the courtroom is where these come out and we learn if the evidence is actually true or not. So sure it´s interesting to see the amount of detail revealed, but until we see both sides, i don´t trust an agency where it´s proven that high-level agent is biased towards a certain political person, and the director of the FBI, leaks classified information and is never charged.

so your saying we have no evidence that Bin Landen was a terrorist.

ok..interesting

or for that matter even Hitler! Hitler was never brought to trial so I guess he never was the head of the 3rd Reich. using your exact logic or at least 'we will never know if he actually was or not'

What on earth are you on about?

Why do you keep answering in the west when we are debating in the east.

try to keep up man.

@tryit: Keep up with what?

I don´t know how many threads now there is about the same thing, and yet you still manage to miss the point in every single one.

You seem to think I have some ego in this fight. It's no secret (especially to you) that I don't much care for Trump. But if he is absolved of this, by evidence or lack thereof, I will (unlike Trump and his supporters), accept the conclusions of OUR institutions instead of giving the benefit of the doubt to foreign ones. Can you say the same? Do you not take the position of Trump currently that you believe Russia's words over our own (despite his transparent claim he "misspoke")?

You in your absolute blinding partisan hatred are going to accept only what is convenient to your beliefs, as will Trump. I won't. If he's not guilty, he's not guilty, and my conceding to that fact is to no credit to the character of Trump, that has already been long-ago established, but to the respect I have for America and its institutions over him, AND over Russia that he (and you and everyone that supports him) believe instead.

Trump supporters believe there is this massive conspiracy going on, that everyone except Trump is wrong. Never have I heard before Americans denying betraying their country as siding with Russia. Putins puppet has to go. Can't wait for Mueller to find the stink in the room.

It took Nixon 3 years, soon we'll find out.

Well, despite what you may think, i will accept any outcome and if Trump is proven guilty and it leads to a impeachment, I will be behind that and not go crazy with "fake news" as long as he gets a fair trial etc...

And I do not believe Russia over our own agencies, what I have said, again and again, is that the meddling has not had any impact on the actual election and the troll posts on facebook and twitter, is just how a free internetwork. And if anyone believed them and moved their vote from one side to the other, well you can´t help someone being a dumbo.

But your right i do not respect agencies who are proven to be partisan "elitists" who somehow think they are above everyone else and their opinion is gospel, Like Comey who had my respect until he proved that he deliberately leaked classified information to the press because he got upset he got fired. And someone who can´t keep his d. in his pants and figure out if your married, you do not sleep around and who is clearly biased against a certain political person.

ok several things.

1. according to your OWN LOGIC if a person does not come to defend themselves in court then that means we do not have proof. Bin Landen was never put on trial, Hitler was never put on trial, so we will never have proof. EXACT same logic.

2. A person physically showing up to court and saying 'i didnt do it' is not going to be good enough. what will be needed is documentation of claims, that can be done remotely. So if this is all some massive coverup or some horrible mistake of which these Russians are innocent then by golly Putin and these individuals would be bending over backwards to send us that evidence. Why do you assume (like most reasonable people) that its never going to happen? why is your instinct that 'we will never see these people in court' why would people who know they are innnocent not defend themselves?

Despite your lame attempt to put this in the extremes.

Do you have a problem with our justice system and the concept of "innocent until proven guilty"?

because it IS extreme. that is the point

If the indictments where falling standard protocol for U.S. Citizens i might agree with you. the problem for you is these indictments EXCEED min. requirements exactly BECAUSE they knew it was unlikely that those people would ever show up in court, thus making 1000% of any spy who is not physically here, off the hook for ANYTHING according to you.

to your question. Because they are not U.S. Citizens and because we cant question them.

if we can...GREAT! but hearing what a person has to vocally say in a trial is not of interest to me, they will have to show very strong evidence documented, that can be sent to us, they dont have to be here to say 'i didnt do it'

as far as I am concerned, not sending evidence of defense is admission of guilt. and I think the law says the same. your not stamped with 'we dont know!' if you dont show up to court for your hearing. I am sure the legal system has seen this tactic before

Why is it so hard for people to understand innocent until proven guilty means one is not jailed for a crime of which they have not been convicted. That does NOT mean intelligent people can't look at facts and see a problem and possible guilt.

You got something wrong here. You mean intelligent people do not judge until the person is actually proven guilty. You know the opposite is mob justice, which is the key component in less-intelligent people.

But no surprise you don´t get that.

I didnt know that. Also I dont know how the law addresses 'people who dont come to their defense when its offered' I would assume legally speaking that is considered an admission of guilt.

I know in the 'plead the 5th' situation it means if you plead the 5th the assumption is that the existing evidence is accurate. I am sure this tactic of 'I am innocent because I didnt show up in court' has been tried since the Greek ancient times, I am sure the legal system has checks for that

Ok, let´s stick to one thread since we are pretty much debating the same topic across multiple threads, so pick one.

Innocent until proven guilty is ONLY in reference to legal trials.........not someone seeing and hearing evidence and forming a conclusion. It doesn't have legal consequences but TBH many times the jury isn't given important facts and thus work in the dark and do get verdicts wrong. We are not on a jury and thus we can look at facts and form a valid opinion.

Not sure why people pretend we have to have juries make our minds up. They have a legal burden.

When posting and getting everything wrong in it one shouldn't call out others. It makes their mistakes more glaring. Mob justice is when a mob decides one is guilty without trial and enacts a punishment on said individual. It does NOT mean one cannot look at facts and form an opinion. Wow.....just wow.

And you may want to stop there, but I see you are in favour of Mob Justice.

Which again is not surprising, since you, again and again, seem to deem anyone you don´t like as guilty, Trump, O'Reilly etc. etc. etc. etc. etc...

No I'm in favor of letting investigations continue and not denying facts...........something you do daily.........deny and shut down are your wet dreams.

Not really, you have already found people guilty and the rest is just a formality in your mind.

Opposite you, I wait for the actual guilty verdict before passing judgment.

No I've serious doubts about the innocence of trump considering his son took meetings with the Russians and he's hands on. No way he's in the dark.......plus he drafted the lying statement. But this is a serious issue and should be investigated fully. Not abandoned because if he's involved his fan boys will have a melt down.

Nonetheless I want him removed for incompetence and before he makes more of a mess than he has. Unfortunately I like Pence less.

yeah...given what is currently known its safe to say all the investigations (of which is more than just Muller) is just getting started.

for the record, Choen is technically not part of Muller investigation and surprisingly either is this woman that got arrested yesterday

I think they have something on Trump, but probably something more damaging to Trump's ego than anything else. Given Trump's position as president, if Russia has something that would affect Trump's ego if exposed (such as having proof he's not as nearly as successful financially that he brags about), that directly translates into a national security issue when Trump is reticent to upset Russia at every turn, be it in policy or rhetoric.

I 100% believe Trump would put his own interests far above the country's without a second's hesitation. He'll sell America out if it means salvaging his own reputation.

He's already done that..........

I think what's even more insane are the people still in denial about Trump's involvement in the whole thing given him basically spouting Kremlin talking points at any opportunity, even when his own senate rebukes those talking points.

I heard somewhere in all these billion different stories that the comment was made by a Russian spy or official along the lines of 'we are really shocked at how easy this was'

Americans really are amazingly stupid

*some*

A lot of you deniers must love trump more then you love America.....

I think its more fear liberals and specifically change in race and gender roles, then they are afraid of nuclear war with Russia

Deniers of what?

And there is no evidence of any collusion between Trump and Russia, so what is there to deny.

@Jacanuk: That’s because you live with your head up your ass, look around in the real world and you will see the plethora of evidence that posters on this board have been trying to through to you for what feels line an eternity but you either just don’t want to believe or you are doing a lot more then only “playing” dumb.

Rumours and fake reports are not evidence, neither is enough to convict a president.

But we will never disagree, the sides are to different and hopefully, your side won´t destroy the country.

the only risk to you being wrong about your convinction that he has done nothing wrong is only a lose of democracy and control of the U.S. Goverment by Russia which very likely means State run media and a strick restrictions on speech. This of course assuming we capitulate fully to any physical threat Putin would likely do.

Show me evidence.

I'm still in shock about the Trump administration openly considering handing over American officials for questioning in Russia. I'm even more in shock that people don't see how absurdly ridiculous that is. It's pretty surreal, the way things are going these days.

It's almost treasonous.

What makes it treasonous?

If any of those twelve Russians surface in a country that is more US-friendly, we would immediately expect them to hand them over to us. Why do you think Assange is hiding at the Ecuadorian embassy

While I do agree that America should not hand over Americans to countries where they will be treated inhumanly, The hypocrisy is sickening from the left, if we want other countries citizens to be handed over to us, we should, of course, do the same.

Also, there is not even a talk about handing over anyone, there was a rumour that to get the twelve Russians we needed to reciprocate by letting them interview a few americans in america.

Well now, this says it all don't it?

http://api.ning.com/files/L5ZZJDd4wb7Ilcmmjx-k1hnCM0sYAiJd3i7qcFO10Nca9KHndXAuHeTBxVn5GqaC7oTS28ADHPd-WZ9zOgMFep3Epim*jes7/TRUMPPUTINARELOVERS_b.jpg?width=750

I've been hesitant to use the "T" word, but Trump is looking more like a manchurian candidate each and every day. There's just no good explanation as to why his administration is taking up Russian positions on just about every issue. If these positions were Republican-held positions before Trump then fine, but they weren't. He just excuses everything that Putin does and says and gives absolutely no solid policy reasons for it. Even the line that there needs to be more engagement with Russia hasn't been backed up with more diplomatic contact. Handing over American officials to Russian custody would probably have been tiptoeing ever closer to that line.

You are comparing Russian government operatives who hacked an American election and were indicted by an open and transparent legal process to American diplomatic officials who are wanted for "questioning" on spurious charges by a government that is well-known for keeping political prisoners. That is patently idiotic. There aren't words to describe how stupid that is. The officials that Russia wants to "question" are diplomats who were performing their jobs and should be protected by diplomatic immunity. The Russians that we want were breaking our laws and were not covered by diplomatic immunity. And yes, there absolutely was talk about handing American officials over. Putin floated a deal which Trump described as "an incredible offer," and Sarah Huckabee Sanders confirmed that the deal was being discussed.

You do know diplomatic immunity is not a blank check that lasts forever, there are numerous incidents where a country has waived the immunity when the person in question has committed a crime.

And sorry that indictment is not an open process, in fact, the Grand Jury is a closed and sealed proceeding and all we have is what the FBI/Mueller decided to release in the indictment itself.

Diplomatic immunity covers diplomats while they are doing their jobs, which is exactly what the people Putin wants to "question" were doing. It does not cover government operatives carrying out a covert operation to sabotage an election so that they can have a candidate they can manipulate into taking up their preferred positions in office. Your comparison is pure, unadulterated bullshit.

That is the new norm. These are the same people who think Liberals are a massive minority and attacking people in the street daily. Trump has a cult of personality and has million buy into whatever nonsense he spews.

No, its more like half of America...