Russian Collusion After All

[_moksha]

Subgenius, are your denials of the obvious meant to help both Trump and Putin?

Did you see this: https://Twitter.com/actdottv/status/1296881001168158720

[_subgenius]

Subgenius,

Please answer my question. Why was the CEO of the US-sanctioned Russian Direct Investment Fund, Russia's state-owned sovereign wealth fund, a man who reported directly to Putin, engaged communication with various Trump team officials through WhatsApp?

- Doc

How are you unable to read my post? perhaps ask a mod to uncloak it?
Here is your answer (again) - http://mormondiscussions.com/viewtopic. ... 2&start=21

Maybe it was not typed large enough?
to circumvent the bureaucratic process of communicating with Russia in order to get things done - especially since Trump had openly maintained that career National Security officials were loyal to Hillary Clinton and upset over her losing President bid.

At what point in your cold-war conditioning do you have room for the blatant memory of Trump publicly maintaining the position that relations with Russia should improve? even in the wake of him imposing harsher sanctions.

I understand you are relying heavily on your razor sharp ability to "read between the lines", but my simple request remains.

[_Doctor CamNC4Me]

Ok. So subjenius just admitted that Trump team officials broke the law to covertly communicate with Putin's right-hand man who runs a slush fund in order to "get things done". They, by law, couldn't be doing business with the sanctioned RDIF, but did it covertly. Just ONE example of this is:

“Want to talk on a secure line—got Whatsapp?” Except WhatsApp isn't secure. It's just away from monitoring by US officials. Messages, for example, between Stone and the other [redacted] about material that would hurt the Clinton campaign. After the data dump, Steve Bannon sent a text message to Stone that read ‘well done'. THEY LITERALLY COLLUDED WITH RUSSIANS VIA WHATSAPP TO GET HACKED MATERIAL THAT WOULD AID THEIR ELECTION CAMPAIGN.

Anyway. In your mind, Subjenius, what things were Trump officials trying to "get done" with the CEO of the US-sanctioned RDIF?

- Doc

[_Doctor CamNC4Me]

Just a reminder it was literally illegal for Trump team officials to be doing 'business' with a US-sanctioned organization <- that's illegal from a hostile foreign actor <- that's illegal via an unsecure messaging app <- that's illegal in order to get political assistance from said hostile foreign actor on a political opponent <- that's illegal.

- Doc

[_subgenius]

Ok. So subjenius just admitted that Trump team officials broke the law to covertly communicate with Putin's right-hand man who runs a slush fund in order to "get things done". They, by law, couldn't be doing business with the sanctioned RDIF, but did it covertly. Just ONE example of this is:

“Want to talk on a secure line—got Whatsapp?” Except WhatsApp isn't secure. It's just away from monitoring by US officials. Messages, for example, between Stone and the other [redacted] about material that would hurt the Clinton campaign. After the data dump, Steve Bannon sent a text message to Stone that read ‘well done'. THEY LITERALLY COLLUDED WITH RUSSIANS VIA WHATSAPP TO GET HACKED MATERIAL THAT WOULD AID THEIR ELECTION CAMPAIGN.

Anyway. In your mind, Subjenius, what things were Trump officials trying to "get done" with the CEO of the US-sanctioned RDIF?

- Doc

Big leap there from circumvent bureaucracy to covert business deals; but I can wait for how this equates to the original charge of election collusion and/or election meddling. But if you want to move on to another topic because this one is "100s of examples" untenable then ok.
Maybe, since you mentioned him, we could talk about Nader and how his days are going?

How about that "well done"? Got any context other than an event that happened around same time? maybe there is a package of activities that you would want lump into that w.a.g. ? Or just simply link the Bannon text to the aforementioned Stone text in any meaningful way because you simply sequencing it an arbitrary narrative isn't a smoking gun. Remind me again about the evidence that Stone got that particular data dumped at that particular time and for that particular goal.
Should be easy.

[_Doctor CamNC4Me]

You’re free to actually read Volume 5 of the RUSSIAN ACTIVE MEASURES CAMPAIGNS AND INTERFERENCE IN THE 2016 U.S. ELECTION bi-partisan report. I’m just trying to figure out how much to communicate to you in one dose. You seem to not comprehend the illegality of the Trump team’s actions. They were LITERALLY not allowed to do business with RDIF.

Anyway. You didn’t answer the question. Since you said it, what things were Trump officials trying to "get done" with the CEO of the US-sanctioned RDIF?

- Doc

[_Doctor CamNC4Me]

I might as well tuck this other question into this conversation. What quid pro quo deals were the Russians attempting to secure with the Trump team, that were being discussed via WhatsApp and other 'backdoor channels' that they couldn't otherwise achieve through legitimate means?

What deals did the Russians want to secure with the Trump's so they could legitimize their actions in Ukraine? Hint: It's all in Volume 5.

- Doc

[_subgenius]

You’re free to actually read Volume 5 of the RUSSIAN ACTIVE MEASURES CAMPAIGNS AND INTERFERENCE IN THE 2016 U.S. ELECTION bi-partisan report. I’m just trying to figure out how much to communicate to you in one dose. You seem to not comprehend the illegality of the Trump team’s actions. They were LITERALLY not allowed to do business with RDIF.

Anyway. You didn’t answer the question. Since you said it, what things were Trump officials trying to "get done" with the CEO of the US-sanctioned RDIF?

- Doc

DOC:
There are 100s of examples in this multi-volume report!
SUB:
Oh? can you provide 1, please? because everyone agrees that its as inconclusive as the Mueller report.
DOC:
Its too simple and easy to prove my claim!! so, i wont and you can read the report for yourself...but you also have to answer my questions about that same report.
SUB:
...
DOC:
*pumps fist

[_Doctor CamNC4Me]

Notice Subjenius can only handwave away the clear violations of US law and keeps demanding ONE example of collusion even though I just offered one up on a silver plate while ignoring my questions? Let’s give some context since my tactic of trying to keep the conversation simple with him isn‘t really working out, most likely because he won’t read the report and I don’t have Trump on camera colluding with Putin.

The 5th volume was approved 14-to-1 by the Senate Intelligence Committee, including the chairman who oversaw most of the investigation, Sen. Richard Burr (R). The Republicans are banking on three things. 1) Their base won’t read the report. 2) Their base doesn’t care about it. 3) Their base just needs to hear someone say the report doesn’t prove collusion. <- Rubio and McConnell ftw.

The report is jam packed with damning details of contacts between the Trump campaign team and Russian operatives. Stone, wikileaks, you name it. All of it.

The report lays out in detail unprecedented and numerous contacts between Russians and all the usual names on the Trump campaign. The Trump campaign officials welcomed that help. From Paul Manafort sharing very specific campaign information with a Russian agent to Stone liaising with wikileaks and Russian agents - it’s in the report - well, what’s not blacked out, which is quite a bit. Never before has a campaign manager shared with a known Russian agent during the middle of a campaign information on an opponent and vice versa. That is collusion.

In the report we have Manafort and Russian intelligence officer Konstantin Kilimnik, the 2016 meeting at Trump Tower among campaign officials and Russian lawyer Natalia Veselnitskaya (who had much closer ties to Russian intelligence than previously was known), Roger Stone’s connection to WikiLeaks, and Trump’s open invitation to Russia to find Hillary Clinton’s emails.

I honestly don’t know how to parse that all down to something someone like subjenius can read, comprehend, and internalize because he’s simultaneously defensive and ignorant. How do you over come that?

Another example is that the report notes that Mueller:

- “successfully secured numerous criminal indictments and convictions. This included indictments of Russian nationals associated with a Russian government-sponsored social media campaign and GRU [Russian intelligence] personnel who hacked into the DNC and other related targets.”

- “also secured convictions of Paul Manafort and Rick Gates,” the former leaders of Trump’s campaign, “for activity stemming from their work in Ukraine, as well as numerous other convictions related to conduct which criminally misled or obstructed investigations into Russian election interference. This latter category included convictions of Roger Stone, Michael Cohen, and Michael Flynn.”

It also lays out the basis for the the convictions of Stone, his former personal lawyer, Cohen, Flynn.

The 14-1 bi-partisan Senate report LITERALLY said:

“These criminal cases, prosecuted while under immense public and political scrutiny, brought to light significant criminal conduct.” SIGNIFICANT CRIMINAL CONDUCT.

Russia came to Trump, through his proxies, and offered up dirt on the DNC server hack. The Trump team welcomed Russia’s efforts. I’m sticking this throwaway sentence here just to prove that he doesn’t read what’s posted, anyway. There was political quid pro quo, namely our tacit acceptance of the Crimean and Ukrainian situations, and probably the weakening of our NATO alliances as recently evidenced.

So, how do I parse down all of this, nearly a thousand pages in Volume 5 alone, so that a a determinedly ignorant fool can read some words and the lightbulb turns on? This is the challenge. I’m not sure how to approach this.

- Doc