No Trump defenders left ...?

[_Markk]

Markk. How can I possibly talk to you when you demonstrate an utter lack of personal situational awareness?

Tell you what. You give me a clue as to what tasty tidbit you're looking for, and I'll do the google-fu legwork in order to give you a good faith answer. But you have to do better than ask, "On this thirty-foot banquet table covered in 40 kinds of snack foods, dishes, sides, desserts, and 5 kinds of punch please pick out the tastiest tidbit and explain why this one, this singular snack, will convince me to grab a plate and dive right in. Mind you I already ate at Chik-fil-A."

- Doc

So you don't have a single evidence that sticks out in your mind, that shows that Trump colluded with the Russians?

This is not about me Doc, I am simply asking you for a evidence of this huge buffet table of evidence that you believe is very concrete.

Why do you have to google it, you should be able to just tell me?

If I was asked why I believe Joseph Smith was a womanizer, I could very confidently, off the top of my head, give you many reasons, right or wrong, why I believe that...then provide the back up for why I believe it...I am simply asking you, right or wrong for your opinion and back up that he colluded with the Russians to get elected...then we can look at it.

Again it is not about me, it is about you backing up what you are claiming, and if you are right the evidence will show it, which is what I am wanting to review.

Just to be clear the "tasty tidbit" I am asking for is as my OP suggested..."In your view, what is the single most damming evidence that Trump colluded with Putin or the Russians in general, in regrads to his being elected?"

[_Markk]

Markk - The totality and interdependence of the evidence is what makes the case strong rather than a single smoking gun. Lots of things are like this. Most things worth thinking about, I imagine.

Then all these evidences prove he did what...when and where? If the case is strong, and you are the prosecutor...what is your opening argument in regards to what he did?

[_subgenius]

Markk - The totality and interdependence of the evidence is supposition, accusation, and faith are what makes the case strong rather than a single smoking gun actual evidence. Lots of things are like this. Most things worth thinking about, I imagine.

FIFY

[_Doctor CamNC4Me]

Markk,

Again. I've posted dozens of well-sourced comments and started a few threads that provide exactly what you're asking for.

But, since you insist:

Butina.

There you go. You're welcome.

eta: In case that one doesn't work for you I got:

The SDNY detailing how Michael Cohen violated Federal laws by paying off women at the direction of President Trump and members of his campaign.

And in case neither of those work for you I can probably crap out a few more if you'd like.

- Doc

[_Markk]

Markk,

Again. I've posted dozens of well-sourced comments and started a few threads that provide exactly what you're asking for.

But, since you insist:

Butina.

There you go. You're welcome.

- Doc

LOL I am not insisting anything, I am asking you to support what you preach...if you don't want to,or can't, don't.

Ok keep going with her...how did Trump collude with her?

[_Doctor CamNC4Me]

Oh my “F”. Read the damned threads, Markk. I'm not copying and pasting everything that I posted here because you think you're being clever.

damned Jesus Christ Trumpers.

- Doc

[_Markk]

Oh my ____. Read the ____ threads, Markk. I'm not copying and pasting everything that I posted here because you think you're being clever.

____ Jesus Christ Trumpers.

- Doc

Butina was involved with Obama's White House...does that mean Obama colluded with Russia. I am asking you to expound on your own. If you actually posted on what I am asking give me a link...if you think I follow you guys you are mistaken.

[_EAllusion]

Markk - The totality and interdependence of the evidence is supposition, accusation, and faith are what makes the case strong rather than a single smoking gun actual evidence. Lots of things are like this. Most things worth thinking about, I imagine.

Fixed it for you

I love that you get into the most ludicrous conspiracy theories while an avalanche of evidence of actual conspiratorial behavior doesn't move you at all. It's like wearing a giant neon "partisan hack" from your neck at all times.

[_Kevin Graham]

LOL I am not insisting anything, I am asking you to support what you preach...if you don't want to,or can't, don't.

Ok keep going with her...how did Trump collude with her?

You've been refuted over and over going on two years now...

18 months ago you were going on about this, you were refuted, and then you disappeared. Now you pop in and pretend like this hasn't been thoroughly hashed out for you already... like several times!

This is what I posted back in July of 2017 in response to one of your threads asserting the "no evidence for collusion" mantra.

1) Trump requested that Russia hack into Hillary Clinton's emails. He did this on camera because he's an idiot. You can only dismiss this evidence by assuming he was just joking around.

2) Roger Stone predicted with precision that Wikileaks would soon publish Podesta's hacked emails. To dismiss this as non-evidence you have to assume Stone just made a lucky guess and that he had no insight from Russia beforehand.

3) Aaron Nevins, a Florida Republican operative, sought and received stolen Democratic voter-turnout files from Guccifer 2.0, a hacker believed by U.S. intelligence to be working for Russia. That hacked information was passed along to Roger Stone and the Trump campaign. STone admits he received a link from Guffifer 2.0 with hacked materials, but he denies sharing it with anyone. You must assume Stone is telling the truth.

4) Trump’s campaign director, Paul Manafort was paid $17 million by a Ukrainian party controlled by Moscow to run a pro-Russian political influence campaign. Another crazy coincidence.

5) Foreign-policy adviser Carter Page has worked with a Russian oil firm, fervently defended Russian policy interests in a way very few Americans have, and was targeted for recruitment by Russian spies. Another crazy coincidence.

6) Michael Flynn was paid $68,000 by Russian entities that he illegally failed to disclose, suggesting he has something to hide. Another crazy coincidence.

7) A recent report in the WSJ suggests Flynn was connected to GOP operative, Peter W. Smith, who was on a mission to obtain Hillary Clinton's hacked emails from Russia.

8) Matt Tait is the CEO and founder of Capital Alpha Security, a UK based security consultancy. Because he was mentioned in the WSJ report he wrote yesterday of his experience with Peter Smith and informed him multiple times that it would be improper to obtain hacked documents provided by Russia. Smith wasn't concerned about ethics, he only cared about harming Clinton because the end justified the means.

9) Trump himself has refused to disclose his tax returns, but his son once boasted, “Russians make up a pretty disproportionate cross-section of a lot of our assets,” and Trump has worked closely with Russian gangsters. Move along, nothing to see here...

So there is plenty of evidence. - viewtopic.php?f=5&t=46424&start=105

Roughly a year later this was posted:

So a quick run down:

1. We have Trump publicly encouraging Russia to engage in illegal espionage against the United States for the sole purpose of getting dirt on Hillary Clinton.

2. Shortly after we find out that Russia did that exact thing by hacking her emails.

3. Trump's advisor was in constant contact with the source leaking those emails to the public, knowing full well they derived from Russia.

4. Trump's campaign reps met with Russians and emails prove it was for the sole purpose of obtaining dirt on Hillary. This proves attempted collusion at the very least.

But to morons like you, there's no evidence of actual collusion. - http://www.mormondiscussions.com/phpBB3 ... =5&t=49146

Former Trump aide Sam Nunberg said: "Carter Page was colluding with the Russians."

There are more threads that go into even more detail because the "drip drip" has been going on for more than 24 months now, and it is hard to keep up with it all.

Of course you're going to cling to the moronic school of thought that no absolute proof = no evidence, and proclaim victory. Your problem is that you're just too damned stupid to understand what constitutes evidence. The evidence for collusion is pretty much a damned mountain as more and more circumstantial evidence mounts. But we both know that you're not interested in getting to the truth or looking at evidence.

[Guest]

This is how it works with these guys. They can't engage in a good faith discussion, even though I just gave him an opportunity. Nope. He wants me to literally repeat whatever nugget he doesn't think exists.

All Markk had to do was type in the the MDB search engine:

Butina

AND THIS WOULD'VE COME UP:

viewtopic.php?f=5&t=50576&p=1159913&hilit=butina#p1159913

After scrolling past our conversation from this thread, a mere four posts, Markk would've seen the first thread titled "Trump Scandal #3745". Had he had the intellectual curiosity of a muppet he would've clicked on it and this would've popped up:

viewtopic.php?f=5&t=50750&p=1161662&hilit=butina#p1161662

And then to his shame he would've seen this (note, I said seen, because like his dopey counterparts on this forum he doesn't actually read anything):

viewtopic.php?p=1161662#p1161662

And then after reading maybe, just maybe he's go back and read through all the Butina stuff that was posted, or perhaps he would've noticed the words 'money laundering' and typed that into the MDB search engine which would've resulted in this:

search.php?keywords=money+laundering&terms=all&author=&sc=1&sf=all&sk=t&sd=d&sr=posts&st=0&ch=300&t=0&submit=Search

And perhaps a quick scan down the list this might've caught his eye:

viewtopic.php?p=1160944#p1160944

He's read the comment, perhaps the thread, and then he would've come back to the comment and read some of the highly sourced articles making their argument.

And the poster in question, after spending a mere lunch break perusing this forum's treasure trove of information now would've felt a surge of heat around his neck, a physical manifestation of shame, that he'd shown is dumb ass once again as nothing more than a Trump-balls-gargling fuckhead who for a moment thought, really thought, that he was clever.

- Doc