Drip Drip Drip

[Sol Rosenberg]

I was talking about the theory that Trump (and or associates) wanted to help Russia wrt Ukraine. I understand how not selling weapons to Ukraine helps Russia but it's unclear to me how selling weapons to Ukraine helps Russia.

Were they selling defensive or offensive weapons to Ukraine, and was it before or after Russia had taken what they wanted? 

 

[Blue Crab]

I have worked in factories.  Being a lawyer does not define me.  I am a sailor too.  Rather well, and I trained with my lady.  She is a keeper.

Don't overlook what a great runner you are. Do you get that this is PA, not FB?

Before you answer earnestly, that was sarcasm. Just like my original post was.

Guessing yer pretty good on that trumpet too.

 

[hasher]

Don't overlook what a great runner you are. Do you get that this is PA, not FB?

Before you answer earnestly, that was sarcasm. Just like my original post was.

Guessing yer pretty good on that trumpet too.

Yes  I run, slowly. No trumpets.  A piano now and then.

 

[Blue Crab]

You do a lot of trumpeting here. 

Too subtle?

 

[ShortForBob]

get a cabin you two.

(Hint, giving you an opportunity to out boat each other )

 

[Bent Sailor]

Reversing Obama administration policy (of flexibility) and selling weapons to Ukraine is just smoke then?

No, it's the same red herring you trot out whenever facts indicate that collusion is still a part of the FBI's investigation focus.

Collusion doesn't require that Trump does everything for the Russians. Hell, it doesn't require he does anything for them. It merely requires his campaign to have garnered favour &/or assistance from Russians in exchange for campaign officials promising future leniency in foreign policy. Trump not keeping those promises can merely mean he played them, not that there was no collusion. 

 

[SloopJonB]

You do a lot of trumpeting here.

At least he's not into Trumpery like so many here.

 

[Mark K]

I was talking about the theory that Trump (and or associates) wanted to help Russia wrt Ukraine. I understand how not selling weapons to Ukraine helps Russia but it's unclear to me how selling weapons to Ukraine helps Russia.

It's irrelevant to the lifting of economic sanctions on Russia, the suspected prime item in the quid pro quo for helping Trump get elected, so it's understandable for Putin to have signed off on it. They aren't worried about a few extra weapons changing the situation there, I suspect because Putin has no desire to re-take the western parts by military means. That side is culturally different from Russia, so different they actually fought with Hitler and still honor their fallen Nazis with statues. A few extra weapons in the hands of the guys still dreaming of taking Donbass? Sauce for the goose.  The more money they send out of country the weaker they become. 

 

[Dog]

It's irrelevant to the lifting of economic sanctions on Russia, the suspected prime item in the quid pro quo for helping Trump get elected, so it's understandable for Putin to have signed off on it. They aren't worried about a few extra weapons changing the situation there, I suspect because Putin has no desire to re-take the western parts by military means. That side is culturally different from Russia, so different they actually fought with Hitler and still honor their fallen Nazis with statues. A few extra weapons in the hands of the guys still dreaming of taking Donbass? Sauce for the goose.  The more money they send out of country the weaker they become. 

So you're suspecting a straight quid pro quo and not the Trump is a Russian puppet or is somehow compromised thing?

 

[Dog]

No, it's the same red herring you trot out whenever facts indicate that collusion is still a part of the FBI's investigation focus.

Collusion doesn't require that Trump does everything for the Russians. Hell, it doesn't require he does anything for them. It merely requires his campaign to have garnered favour &/or assistance from Russians in exchange for campaign officials promising future leniency in foreign policy. Trump not keeping those promises can merely mean he played them, not that there was no collusion. 

I would hope that collusion would still be part of the investigation since it was how it was justified.

 

[kent_island_sailor]

I would hope that collusion would still be part of the investigation since it was how it was justified.

I don't think you have to worry. (of course we all realize collusion is not a legal term and you may never see that word in any report)

 

[Bent Sailor]

I would hope that collusion would still be part of the investigation since it was how it was justified.

And yet you continue to trot out red herrings every time it is shown to still be an active focus. 

 

[hasher]

collusion

2010 Georgia Code
TITLE 16 - CRIMES AND OFFENSES
CHAPTER 4 - CRIMINAL ATTEMPT, CONSPIRACY, AND SOLICITATION
§ 16-4-8 - Conspiracy to commit a crime


O.C.G.A. 16-4-8 (2010)
16-4-8. Conspiracy to commit a crime 


A person commits the offense of conspiracy to commit a crime when he together with one or more persons conspires to commit any crime and any one or more of such persons does any overt act to effect the object of the conspiracy. 

 

[Raz'r]

I would hope that collusion would still be part of the investigation since it was how it was justified.

why do you lie? I don't see "collusion" mentioned in the charter....

 

[kent_island_sailor]

Perhaps Dog is worried about government wasting time and money and is anxious to see the payoff when the whole Trump family gets hauled off to jail? That HAS to be it

 

[Dog]

why do you lie? I don't see "collusion" mentioned in the charter....

"Any links and/or coordination between the Russian government and individuals associated with the campaign of President Donald Trump".

 

[Raz'r]

"Any links and/or coordination between the Russian government and individuals associated with the campaign of President Donald Trump".

and he has convictions of people who lied about those links.

 

[Grrr...]

I don't think you have to worry. (of course we all realize collusion is not a legal term and you may never see that word in any report)

Well then he has deniable plausibility doesn't he?  After all, Rudy told us collusion isn't a crime......

Oh wait.  You say the investigation wasn't chartered under collusion?  Amazing.

 

[Dog]

“I don't think there'll be a report,” John Dowd told ABC News in a wide-ranging interview for the premiere episode of "The Investigation," a new podcast focused on the probe led by special counsel Robert Mueller. “I will be shocked if anything regarding the president is made public, other than ‘We're done.’”

Damn.....If he turns out to be right there are a number of TDS afflicted posters here who probably shouldn't be left alone.

https://abcnews.go.com/Politics/trump-lawyer-slams-mueller-probe-maintains-president-cleared/story?id=60967234

 

[Olsonist]

Yes, former Trump lawyer John Dowd would say that.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/John_M._Dowd#Donald_Trump