Hypothetically speaking, what if Trump or his proxies had colluded with the Russians?

[TJustice]

The two foreign trolls bring up whataboutism as they refuse to understand they derailed their own thread.

You can't have conversation with leftist trolls who refuse to define the crimes and the elements of the crimes.

And for morons who don't comprehend agency law... you will always get... she hired an attorney.

Well Trump did not meet with the Russians either... you are trying to nail him through agency... duh.


numb nuts lefties from foreign countries

 

[exGOPer]

The two foreign trolls bring up whataboutism as they refuse to understand they derailed their own thread.

You can't have conversation with leftist trolls who refuse to define the crimes and the elements of the crimes.

And for morons who don't comprehend agency law... you will always get... she hired an attorney. Well Trump did not meet with the Russian either... numb nuts lefties.

Newly registered troll who posts nothing but whataboutism is accusing others of trolling and derailing.

Up is down, black is white.

And he continues to peddle accusations that nobody levelled - who said Trump met with Russians? Trump's son met with Russians, so did Trump's campaign manager and Trump's son in law - which Trump obviously knew about and lied about it under oath and on security clearance forms. Not to mention Roger Stone who was in contact with Wikileaks and Trump's campaign at the same time. And this is all we know from leaks, who knows what else happened.

There is a reason the least educated religious dumbfucks are conservatives, they can't deduce, they can't infer but have the arrogance of a Wittgenstein.

 

[Poindexter]

And like clockwork, what did I say, even their paid lawyers are whatabouters.

Listen troll, prosecute the 'dossier', who gives a shit? Who cares about Hillary? Who cares about Comey?

Get a grip on reality. The post you wrote that I quoted and responded to discussed Hillary, deranged troll. And even if it didn't Hillary's fair game because of a concept you and your ilk despise called "equal justice under law."

 

[bone]

And that would be it? What of all of the executive decisions and whatever enacted by a (hypothetically) corruptly placed president? Would they all still stand as though they were enacted by a legitimate president? And would Pence then be at the helm? Remember, he would have been chosen by a corruptly place president.

Wow it gets difficult to have and intelligent respectful conversation around here.

I'm no constitutional lawyer - just a jagoff trader. That's where things get gray. Beyond "high crimes and misdemeanors" it isn't clearly delineated. IMHO, it would be a level of misconduct that would not allow, in this particular case, Republicans to take cover. It would have to be irrefutable evidence of a level of criminal behavior where politicians would say "fuck it", this is inexcusable and he has to go. Which isn't impossible. But right now it's not there yet. Partisan screeds aside that evidence has not been made known as of yet. Maybe Robert Mueller's report will change that calculus - who knows.

If Robert Mueller's report made known some terrible shit about Trump I personally would not support him. But I don't give a shit about what the Daily Beast or the Daily KOS or Vox or the Atlantic or Slate or Vice or Salon or New Yorker or Vanity Fair or Fox News or Breitbart or some partisan hack from either side of the aisle has to say on a cable channel. But hearing it from Robert Mueller would be convincing for me personally.

 

[exGOPer]

Get a grip on reality. The post you wrote that I quoted and responded to discussed Hillary, deranged troll. And even if it didn't Hillary's fair game because of a concept you and your ilk despise called "equal justice under law."

Except it's not even a 'Clinton dossier' you moron, Turdley is a paid Republican huckster who will sell off his children for a buck like most conservatives. The dossier was never even handed to Clinton, or even her lawyer, it was given to the FBI to be investigated and there is absolutely nothing illegal anyone can point to.

Enjoy the coming indictments, inbred troll.

 

[TJustice]

Did Clinton finance the dossier?
It was therefore under almost every possible legitimate scenario hers.

Go ahead using the principles of Agency law distinguish Hillary's culpability for crimes (if any) from Trump's (if any) .

Now... you fairly conclude neither is legally culpable for any crime or you may conclude both are.

But, it would taken remarkable scholarship to do a fair examination and arrive at opposite conclusions.

So... for once in your thousands of posts... try and be intellectually rigorous.
===

By the way look at the leftist cretins going to the religious bigotry again.
No one even mentioned religion.

 

[exGOPer]

Did Clinton finance the dossier?
It was hers. morons.

No she didn't and even if she did, there is absolutely NOTHING illegal about financing research unlike taking a meeting with a foreign agent for an in kind donation and then lying about it.

Give me the exact law that she broke by hiring an American firm who then hired a foreigner to research an American's potential crimes?

You can't but good luck with your fact free assertions.

 

[TJustice]

All you had to do was go through this list and answer the questions.
But you refused...

So don't wonder why the thread was derailed.
You chose to go with loaded b..s from post one.

First you need to explain what you mean by collusion.
Then you have to define illegal collusion.
Then you have to tell what the crime would be.
Then you have to show that Trump was connected.

Then you would have to explain that getting campaign intelligence on the other side is illegal and why.

But there is no need because there is rumors Mueller will be writing the report for you.
You can almost be sure he will say there was no illegal collusion found by the President although Roger Stone may have encouraged the release of stolen emails with wikileaks.

 

[TJustice]

I did not say she did anything illegal.

That is why I asked your side to define illegal collusion.

Go ahead define it.

Then we can talk about whether paying for oppo research from Russian spies via your own paid foreign spy is illegal.

No she didn't and even if she did, there is absolutely NOTHING illegal about financing research unlike taking a meeting with a foreign agent for an in kind donation and then lying about it.

Give me the exact law that she broke by hiring an American firm who then hired a foreigner to research an American's potential crimes?

You can't but good luck with your fact free assertions.

 

[Poindexter]

Except it's not even a 'Clinton dossier' you moron, Turdley is a paid Republican huckster who will sell off his children for a buck like most conservatives. The dossier was never even handed to Clinton, or even her lawyer, it was given to the FBI to be investigated and there is absolutely nothing illegal anyone can point to.

Enjoy the coming indictments, inbred troll.

LOL you're so deranged you're incapable of even considering anything outside of your demented worldview. In your sick mind everyone who disagrees with you is either a paid shill, pedophile, incel, troll or other such nonsense. But you are entertaining, I'll give you that