Trump is accused of conspiring with Russia and acting as a puppet of a foreign government. That is TREASON. Watergate isn't the same comparison.
WRONG...basis of investigation is that Trump et al may have COLLUDED with Russia to impact the election in favor of Trumpet. That is not Treason. There are no "factual points" that I am aware of giving credence to the puppet claim...however, in my opinion, for some yet unknown reason, Trump is very cautious in his dealings with Putin and Russia.
Also, my comparison was because of investigation of a sitting President. Yours are totally unrelated.
JUST BECAUSE SISSY SAYS SO DOESN'T MAKE IT SO...BUT HE THINKS IT DOES!!!!! JUST BECAUSE MC1 SAYS SO DOESN'T MAKE IT SO!!!!!
WRONG...basis of investigation is that Trump et al may have COLLUDED with Russia to impact the election in favor of Trumpet. That is not Treason. There are no "factual points" that I am aware of giving credence to the puppet claim...however, in my opinion, for some yet unknown reason, Trump is very cautious in his dealings with Putin and Russia.
I believe they are now defining "collusion" as campaign "opposition research" now.
No, OPPO has been the term for the dossier all along...try to stay up with the rest of the world!
Yup...when Trump allegedly pays Russian's for dirt on opponent, it's collusion. When Hillary and DNC actually pay Russian's for dirt on opponent, it's OPPO.
I'm trying to keep up, but when there are 2 definitions for the same action, it takes a bit of time for me to rationalize it.
Yup...when Trump allegedly pays Russian's for dirt on opponent, it's collusion. When Hillary and DNC actually pay Russian's for dirt on opponent, it's OPPO. I'm trying to keep up, but when there are 2 definitions for the same action, it takes a bit of time for me to rationalize it.
No, you are not keeping up. I've read nothing about Trump paying Russia for OPPO. You are misunderstanding something, obviously. OPPO by EITHER party IS NOT COLLUSION and not what is being investigated as collusion, UNLESS it uncovers something detrimental that clearly shows collusion. The OPPO itself IS NOT collusion. The CONTENT of the dossier IS being investigated to determine validity because it contains information that if true could be considered as compromising and might be a cause for collusion, (i.e. being used as influence to have subject of compromise provide favoritism or something else). Understand?
JUST BECAUSE SISSY SAYS SO DOESN'T MAKE IT SO...BUT HE THINKS IT DOES!!!!! JUST BECAUSE MC1 SAYS SO DOESN'T MAKE IT SO!!!!!
No, you are not keeping up. I've read nothing about Trump paying Russia for OPPO. You are misunderstanding something, obviously. OPPO by EITHER party IS NOT COLLUSION and not what is being investigated as collusion, UNLESS it uncovers something detrimental that clearly shows collusion. The OPPO itself IS NOT collusion. The CONTENT of the dossier IS being investigated to determine validity because it contains information that if true could be considered as compromising and might be a cause for collusion, (i.e. being used as influence to have subject of compromise provide favoritism or something else). Understand?
If Hillary won the election, and the dossier succeeded at influencing the outcome of the election. Wouldnt a President Hillary now be compromised because the Russian Government agents that provided the information in the dossier, could blackmail her by threatening to expose that she had help from a foreign government?
No, you are not keeping up. I've read nothing about Trump paying Russia for OPPO. You are misunderstanding something, obviously. OPPO by EITHER party IS NOT COLLUSION and not what is being investigated as collusion, UNLESS it uncovers something detrimental that clearly shows collusion. The OPPO itself IS NOT collusion. The CONTENT of the dossier IS being investigated to determine validity because it contains information that if true could be considered as compromising and might be a cause for collusion, (i.e. being used as influence to have subject of compromise provide favoritism or something else). Understand?
Let me know if I'm understanding what you're saying...A candidate running for political office in the US can hire an OPPO research firm that compiles information gathered from spies working for or formerly worked for a foreign government, and publish a dossier to be used against their political opponent during a campaign? Even if the information is gathered is from an adversarial government? And the candidate or campaign doesn't have to disclose to the public that they paid for the dossier or that it was a product of foreign spies?
Wow...If that's true, then every spy around the globe is going to be soliciting the every US political party and political action committee.
Do you stay up all night dreaming up these extreme far-fetched what-ifs? Your brain must hurt a lot!
Far-fetched? It's actually what is being reported. Clinton Campaign and DNC paid for OPPO-research compiled by former British spy. Info the British spy obtained from Russian Government officials. Info to be used against Donald Trump during the Presidential campaign. This isn't collusion with a foreign government for the purpose of affecting the outcome of an election?
Far-fetched? It's actually what is being reported. Clinton Campaign and DNC paid for OPPO-research compiled by former British spy. Info the British spy obtained from Russian Government officials. Info to be used against Donald Trump during the Presidential campaign. This isn't collusion with a foreign government for the purpose of affecting the outcome of an election?
Well, let's back up to the birth of the dossier...paid for by a REPUBLICAN special interest. Then move to the DNC/Hilary campaign picked up tab going forward...there is still nothing to show that the DNC and/or her campaign paid for this dossier. They deny it, and there is no money trail I am aware of that proves differently. So your what-if is based on unproven assumptions. To go a step further on your point, I have not seen where the compiler of the dossier obtained the/any information from Russian government officials. As for paying for a British "former" spy to compile the info, it is my understanding the OPPO was contracted with a firm that hired the Brit to do the research. Being a former spy is a non-issue.
JUST BECAUSE SISSY SAYS SO DOESN'T MAKE IT SO...BUT HE THINKS IT DOES!!!!! JUST BECAUSE MC1 SAYS SO DOESN'T MAKE IT SO!!!!!
Logged
