• Hey, guest user. Hope you're enjoying NeoGAF! Have you considered registering for an account? Come join us and add your take to the daily discourse.
  • Hi Guest. We've rebooted and consolidated our Communities section, so be sure to check it out and subscribe to some threads. Thanks!

Guardian source: "“They now have specific concrete... evidence of collusion"

Status
Not open for further replies.

tbm24

Member
Apr 17, 2013
5,281
1
0
Well, from an outsider's perspective things are looking better. That's all we got. What you do inside the US is your business. I'm talking geo-politcs. For the US, Trump is an utter desaster and nothing else.
I honestly don't understand how you can come to this conclusion, especially if you're looking at it from a group-political perspective. You're talking about a President who said all that he did during the campaign, to come out swinging as President in his innauguration speech and actions in the first months of his presidency. To now reversing on a portion of that bullshit in the span of one week and influenced by just one meeting. What country is looking at the US and the President now with confidence in anything? Hell NATO must be terrified knowing any given moment he could hop back in Twitter and blast them again. Trump's flip flopping is worse for them than him holding steadfast to his awful views.
 

yanipheonu

Member
May 8, 2014
6,321
0
0
I suspect we get months of stories like this. If something comes of it, it'll be sudden with little warning.

Maybe they can do it within one year...
 

Autoignition

Member
Apr 13, 2016
1,919
363
265
I don't see how accusing the president of treason without hard evidence is not something to be worried about.
Because we're not lawyers or law enforcement or congresspeople. We're people on the internet playing detective with an incomplete puzzle. You're handwringing to shut down discussion just for the sake of doing it. That is concern trolling. You are concern trolling.
 

Fantastapotamus

Wrong about commas, wrong about everything
Aug 5, 2013
16,801
2
535
The Zoo
Because we're not lawyers or law enforcement or congresspeople. We're people on the internet playing detective with an incomplete puzzle. You're handwringing to shut down discussion just for the sake of doing it. That is concern trolling. You are concern trolling.
No, it's preventing people from expecting Trump to be impeached next week.
Constantly posting that "It's happening" gif leads to people getting impatient and losing hope because "nothing is happening". "Don't get too excited yet" is a perfectly valid response to this news, not because nothing will happen but because this doesn't mean that Trump will be in a jail cell come June.
 

Autoignition

Member
Apr 13, 2016
1,919
363
265
No, it's preventing people from expecting Trump to be impeached next week.
Constantly posting that "It's happening" gif leads to people getting impatient and losing hope because "nothing is happening". "Don't get too excited yet" is a perfectly valid response to this news, not because nothing will happen but because this doesn't mean that Trump will be in a jail cell come June.
I don't think that anyone actually believes that he's going to be in jail by June.

God, nofunallowed.jpg in full force right now.
 

Stinkles

Clothed, sober, cooperative
Sep 5, 2004
66,974
3
1,590
Arakeen
What goalposts have I moved? Couple of months? I've been saying the same thing since 2015.

You've been stridently insisting Trump and his campaign have no meaningful Russian links, which even Fox has the common sense to dance around. And as each aspect of the dossier continues to hold water you've decided the real scandal is the peepee tape despite that being the only legal thing described in the dossier.

Trump's campaign is bizarrely connected to an ever widening set of banks, spies and oligarchs- something that isn't even contested at this point. He's lost four senior staffers over their links to Russian shenanigans. Sessions and Nunes recused themselves from their own investigations.

But you for some reason are convinced his "suspicious" activity is purely financial.

It's not purely financial. What was the single GOP platform element the Trump campaign asked to be changed?

Just answer the above question. Just that single question.
 

jellies_two

Member
Jun 14, 2014
5,510
1
0
The last well connected journalist on the hill said privately senate republicans are taking bets on how long trump will last.

Every week another unresolved issue gets added to the pile and nothing gets resolved - either way - from prior revelations. There is a growing black hole or blind spot covering more and more stuff. it has to break sooner or later, or Comey will be fired by Trump which will precipitate something else.

I just hope that if the plan is to lasso a bunch of trump people after a case is made, that there are a few adults in the loop that will render harmless any stupid distraction attempts by a cornered White House.
 

Rentahamster

Rodent Whores
Jun 26, 2007
37,174
3,270
1,520
Best Coast
Because we're not lawyers or law enforcement or congresspeople. We're people on the internet playing detective with an incomplete puzzle. You're handwringing to shut down discussion just for the sake of doing it. That is concern trolling. You are concern trolling.
1. I'm not trying to shut down the discussion. I'm adding to the discussion, or should I mischaracterize your post like you did mine and accuse you of concern trolling me?

2. I'm adding in my 2 cents not for the sake of doing it. It's for the sake of adding an unrepresented opinion and analysis to the overall discussion to see what other think about it.
 

Stinkles

Clothed, sober, cooperative
Sep 5, 2004
66,974
3
1,590
Arakeen
Do you think Paul Ryan has a shadow transition team formed yet
I think that they're probably desperate to formulate some kind of strategy but have no idea who or what will be left after it all craters. Like, mcconnell and cruz even Ryan have all covered for some pretty bizarre aspects of Trump's presidency. Their own reputations are going to need careful ministrations.
 

Chumley

Banned
Jul 18, 2016
7,147
0
0
No, it's preventing people from expecting Trump to be impeached next week.
Constantly posting that "It's happening" gif leads to people getting impatient and losing hope because "nothing is happening". "Don't get too excited yet" is a perfectly valid response to this news, not because nothing will happen but because this doesn't mean that Trump will be in a jail cell come June.
So you're being an armchair psychologist to justify concern trolling.

It's still concern trolling.
 

theWB27

Member
Feb 6, 2014
9,149
1
400
1. I'm not trying to shut down the discussion. I'm adding to the discussion, or should I mischaracterize your post like you did mine and accuse you of concern trolling me?

2. I'm adding in my 2 cents not for the sake of doing it. It's for the sake of adding an unrepresented opinion and analysis to the overall discussion to see what other think about it.
Your argument was well represented when there was a lack of evidence to go against it. Knowing what we know... not to mention what we don't.... it just comes off like you are shutting it down.
 

Rentahamster

Rodent Whores
Jun 26, 2007
37,174
3,270
1,520
Best Coast
Your argument was well represented when there was a lack of evidence to go against it. Knowing what we know... not to mention what we don't.... it just comes off like you are shutting it down.
Well, take it for what it's worth, but my intention isn't to shut it down. If the media want to continue in a path that is good for their pocketbooks, but bad for the Democrats, then I can't really do much else to convince them to change their minds. (on this forum anyway).
 

oti

Banned
Aug 5, 2012
37,120
0
0
I honestly don't understand how you can come to this conclusion, especially if you're looking at it from a group-political perspective. You're talking about a President who said all that he did during the campaign, to come out swinging as President in his innauguration speech and actions in the first months of his presidency. To now reversing on a portion of that bullshit in the span of one week and influenced by just one meeting. What country is looking at the US and the President now with confidence in anything? Hell NATO must be terrified knowing any given moment he could hop back in Twitter and blast them again. Trump's flip flopping is worse for them than him holding steadfast to his awful views.
Trump says NATO is obsolete, NATO general talks with Trump, Trump says NATO is not obsolete.

Again, we're talking Realpolitik. This is not ideal or great or good. The US is not the trusted partner it once was. All I'm saying is that he did change his tune. That's something.

Germany isn't buddy buddy with Trump all of a sudden. Every move he makes has the potential to be a desaster. But at last the political/diplomatic establishment has pushed him in the direction of making concessions. If those concessions are worth a damn is anybody's guess. Trump is unpredictable. But again, he did change his tune.

And just to make it clear yet another time before people who don't know what Realpolitik means jump on me, Trump is an idiot and should be impeached ASAP.
 

Autoignition

Member
Apr 13, 2016
1,919
363
265
1. I'm not trying to shut down the discussion. I'm adding to the discussion, or should I mischaracterize your post like you did mine and accuse you of concern trolling me?

2. I'm adding in my 2 cents not for the sake of doing it. It's for the sake of adding an unrepresented opinion and analysis to the overall discussion to see what other think about it.
You're dominating the discussion, which is shutting down the discussion otherwise. The last, like, three pages of this thread are mostly filled with people just arguing with you along the same few lines of reasoning and logic. What makes you think that your opinion -- which you've admitted is tainted by confirmation bias -- is so important that it should become the focus of the discussion here?

I'm gonna back out now because I know that this conversation is going to head down the path towards bansville real fast if I don't, but damn dude.
 

oti

Banned
Aug 5, 2012
37,120
0
0
Problem with this^^ thinking is that you dont account for the fact that Trump could (and almost certainly will) change his opinion again at some point.

This phase of being "sensible" might last all of 2 weeks.
I know. It could all mean nothing in the end. We're talking Trump here after all.
 

KingV

Member
Jul 30, 2004
5,541
2
1,450
Maybe you're making a semantic argument that is irrelevant.



That is?
The dossier, and several pieces of that being confirmed. The contacts between his campaign and Russian officials. Carter Page. Paul Manaforts confirmed payments from Russian-backed ukrainians just prior to the campaign. Trumps public statements and action on russia prior to the Syria bombing. Leaked statements from American and foreign intelligence agencies. Kushner purposefully omitting meetings with Russians from Security clearance paper work. Ditto for both Sessions and Flynn. Multiple instances of Russian Agents being documented as being in the same physical location as Trump, his sons, and his son-in-law during the campaign.

None of that is 100% proof of collusion, but it is all evidence. Much of it is in fact proven facts. Understand that it is unlikely that there is like a recording of Trump holding Putins dick saying "you're my huckleberry I can't quit you." But there is a lot of currently public evidence, and potentially proof elsewhere.
 

mjp2417

Member
Jan 12, 2012
3,095
0
410
Well, take it for what it's worth, but my intention isn't to shut it down. If the media want to continue in a path that is good for their pocketbooks, but bad for the Democrats, then I can't really do much else to convince them to change their minds. (on this forum anyway).
Trump's time in office being besieged by scandal is not bad for Democrats.
 

Rentahamster

Rodent Whores
Jun 26, 2007
37,174
3,270
1,520
Best Coast
You've been stridently insisting Trump and his campaign have no meaningful Russian links, which even Fox has the common sense to dance around.
Misunderstanding #1 - I haven't said that. I've said there are lots of links, lots of smoke, but none that suggest anything treasonous.

And as each aspect of the dossier continues to hold water you've decided the real scandal is the peepee tape despite that being the only legal thing described in the dossier.
Misrepresentation #2 - I've stated that any bombshell revelations in the dossier (including peepee tape) that might directly link Trump to collusion, have not been verified yet. A lot of other things have, but those are relatively minor things that aren't evidence of Trump being a Manchurian Candidate.

Trump's campaign is bizarrely connected to an ever widening set of banks, spies and oligarchs- something that isn't even contested at this point. He's lost four senior staffers over their links to Russian shenanigans. Sessions and Nunes recused themselves from their own investigations.
I don't believe I ever denied these things have happened. They could be part of a huge case against Trump, or mostly coincidences, or something in between. But it's not hard evidence of collusion of the kind that a lot of Democrats seem to be pushing.

But you for some reason are convinced his "suspicious" activity is purely financial.
Misunderstanding #3 - I didn't say they're purely financial. I said that it looks to me like it's financial, because that seems the most plausible at this juncture. It is less clear to me currently that it is more than that, but I leave open the possibility that it is.

It's not purely financial.
You don't know that for sure either, and there's as of yet not enough evidence to show it wasn't.

What was the single GOP platform element the Trump campaign asked to be changed?

Just answer the above question. Just that single question.
If you're talking about taking out the part about supplying Ukraine with lethal weaponry, and making it more like President Obama's position, then I don't see what is supposed to be so nefarious about that.
 

theWB27

Member
Feb 6, 2014
9,149
1
400
Well, take it for what it's worth, but my intention isn't to shut it down. If the media want to continue in a path that is good for their pocketbooks, but bad for the Democrats, then I can't really do much else to convince them to change their minds. (on this forum anyway).
Oh... this is hurting the dems. Ok.
 

Rentahamster

Rodent Whores
Jun 26, 2007
37,174
3,270
1,520
Best Coast
You're dominating the discussion, which is shutting down the discussion otherwise. The last, like, three pages of this thread are mostly filled with people just arguing with you along the same few lines of reasoning and logic. What makes you think that your opinion -- which you've admitted is tainted by confirmation bias -- is so important that it should become the focus of the discussion here?

I'm gonna back out now because I know that this conversation is going to head down the path towards bansville real fast if I don't, but damn dude.
I'm responding to people not understanding what I'm saying, like you are doing in this post.

I didn't admit my opinions are tainted by confirmation bias. I stated that I realize that I am human, and all humans are susceptible to it.
 

TAJ

Darkness cannot drive out darkness; only light can do that. Hate cannot drive out hate; only love can do that.
Jun 9, 2004
24,940
0
0
Watch the smoking gun go public the day of the 40th anniversary, followed by gifs of the torpedo going in.
Glorious.
 

Rentahamster

Rodent Whores
Jun 26, 2007
37,174
3,270
1,520
Best Coast
The dossier, and several pieces of that being confirmed. The contacts between his campaign and Russian officials. Carter Page. Paul Manaforts confirmed payments from Russian-backed ukrainians just prior to the campaign. Trumps public statements and action on russia prior to the Syria bombing. Leaked statements from American and foreign intelligence agencies. Kushner purposefully omitting meetings with Russians from Security clearance paper work. Ditto for both Sessions and Flynn. Multiple instances of Russian Agents being documented as being in the same physical location as Trump, his sons, and his son-in-law during the campaign.

None of that is 100% proof of collusion, but it is all evidence. Much of it is in fact proven facts. Understand that it is unlikely that there is like a recording of Trump holding Putins dick saying "you're my huckleberry I can't quit you." But there is a lot of currently public evidence, and potentially proof elsewhere.
It's not enough to claim that we know Trump colluded with Russia to be a Manchurian Candidate. It might be for you, but it isn't for me. There's a lot of connections to other foreign nations too.
Trump's time in office being besieged by scandal is not bad for Democrats.
Oh... this is hurting the dems. Ok.
If they keep pushing this too hard at the expense of advocating for progressive policies, then it will hurt them. Especially if it actually does turn out to be overblown. We'll see in 2020 how it turns out.
 

Stinkles

Clothed, sober, cooperative
Sep 5, 2004
66,974
3
1,590
Arakeen
Misunderstanding #1 - I haven't said that. I've said there are lots of links, lots of smoke, but none that suggest anything treasonous.


Misrepresentation #2 - I've stated that any bombshell revelations in the dossier (including peepee tape) that might directly link Trump to collusion, have not been verified yet. A lot of other things have, but those are relatively minor things that aren't evidence of Trump being a Manchurian Candidate.


I don't believe I ever denied these things have happened. They could be part of a huge case against Trump, or mostly coincidences, or something in between. But it's not hard evidence of collusion of the kind that a lot of Democrats seem to be pushing.


Misunderstanding #3 - I didn't say they're purely financial. I said that it looks to me like it's financial, because that seems the most plausible at this juncture. It is less clear to me currently that it is more than that, but I leave open the possibility that it is.


You don't know that for sure either, and there's as of yet not enough evidence to show it wasn't.



If you're talking about taking out the part about supplying Ukraine with lethal weaponry, and making it more like President Obama's position, then I don't see what is supposed to be so nefarious about that.
My god. Right down to the squirrelly obama talking point detail.
 

KingV

Member
Jul 30, 2004
5,541
2
1,450
It's not enough to claim that we know Trump colluded with Russia to be a Manchurian Candidate. It might be for you, but it isn't for me. There's a lot of connections to other foreign nations too.




If they keep pushing this too hard at the expense of advocating for progressive policies, then it will hurt them. Especially if it actually does turn out to be overblown. We'll see in 2020 how it turns out.
That he colluded with Russia isn't even up for debate. He did it in the open. He called on them to hack his opponent, and release the information. He actively used information produced by their intelligenxe agencies as talking points in their campaign. Some of which was true but hacked, some of which was specifically false. In response he played nice and spoke nicely of them.

That he colluded is 100% proven fact. I think what you mean is that we can't prove he conspired
 

theWB27

Member
Feb 6, 2014
9,149
1
400
It's not enough to claim that we know Trump colluded with Russia to be a Manchurian Candidate. It might be for you, but it isn't for me. There's a lot of connections to other foreign nations too.




If they keep pushing this too hard at the expense of advocating for progressive policies, then it will hurt them. Especially if it actually does turn out to be overblown. We'll see in 2020 how it turns out.
Oh....you're moving goals again by bringing the dems into it. I'm out. I should've been out a few responses ago.
 

Chumley

Banned
Jul 18, 2016
7,147
0
0
It's not enough to claim that we know Trump colluded with Russia to be a Manchurian Candidate. It might be for you, but it isn't for me. There's a lot of connections to other foreign nations too.




If they keep pushing this too hard at the expense of advocating for progressive policies, then it will hurt them. Especially if it actually does turn out to be overblown. We'll see in 2020 how it turns out.
"At the expense of advocating for progressive policies"? What the fuck are you talking about? Do you have even the foggiest idea of what the party has been doing lately?

Also, you're shifting goalposts and not doing a good job of obfuscating the transparent (and bannable) shitposting you're doing in this thread.
 

Rentahamster

Rodent Whores
Jun 26, 2007
37,174
3,270
1,520
Best Coast
That he colluded with Russia isn't even up for debate. He did it in the open. He called on them to hack his opponent, and release the information. He actively used information produced by their intelligenxe agencies as talking points in their campaign. Some of which was true but hacked, some of which was specifically false. In response he played nice and spoke nicely of them.

That he colluded is 100% proven fact. I think what you mean is that we can't prove he conspired
I don't believe the evidence for Russia being behind the hacking is as strong as you think it is.


Oh....you're moving goals again by bringing the dems into it. I'm out. I should've been out a few responses ago.
How is that moving goalposts? I've always said that.

"At the expense of advocating for progressive policies"? What the fuck are you talking about? Do you have even the foggiest idea of what the party has been doing lately?

Also, you're shifting goalposts and not doing a good job of obfuscating the transparent (and bannable) shitposting you're doing in this thread.
Did you see the Maddow stuff I linked earlier? This is taking up a lot of airtime. I'm not shifting any goalposts.

Do you have even the foggiest idea of what the party has been doing lately?
A few examples - I saw a Medicare for all bill be introduced by Conyers that hardly anyone talks about. I saw a town hall by Nancy Pelosi where she doesn't give straight answers about universal coverage. I saw a bipartisan marijuana bill that isn't getting much coverage. The discussion of the fact that we're still in Iraq and Afghanistan after 16 years is low. The only reason we've even been talking about Afghanistan recently is because we dropped a huge ass bomb on it.
 

Prof. Bathtub

Member
Jul 11, 2012
1,260
0
0
Boston, MA
Are you calling me a sea creature? I'm not sure what this means.
Trump was watching the movie in the WH before leaving partway through to tweet that McCain and Graham wanted to start WWIII because they were asking about his Russian connections. They're on board now that he's discovered bombs though, so courageous.
 

kaching

"GAF's biggest wanker"
Jun 8, 2004
21,854
1
0
I don't see how accusing the president of treason without hard evidence is not something to be worried about.
I'm not sure how electing a president who refused to share his taxes for completely bogus reasons, readily equates minorities with rapists, terrorists and worse, was caught on tape bragging about sexually assaulting women, and casually suggested Russian hackers and "2nd Amendment People" should go after his opponent, isn't something to be worried about either; but we seemed to clear that hurdle just fine.

Trump has happily run every principle and ideal that this country was founded on through the muck. What makes treason so special? What harder evidence do you need?
 

Stinkles

Clothed, sober, cooperative
Sep 5, 2004
66,974
3
1,590
Arakeen
I don't believe the evidence for Russia being behind the hacking is as strong as you think it is.




How is that moving goalposts? I've always said that.
You are actually giving more credence to the idea that this is all just a big coincidence or a frame up? I'm sure you'll stick around after it all goes down to discuss how wrong or right you were huh?
 

Chumley

Banned
Jul 18, 2016
7,147
0
0
I don't believe the evidence for Russia being behind the hacking is as strong as you think it is.
It isn't even disputable anymore, unless you're Alex Jones or Julian Assange. The entire intel committee said they were behind it.

Keep digging that hole you're making for yourself.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.