Trump's Russia Connections

[dneal]

In the UK encouraging a crime is one of the inchoate offences punishable by law. Does the US have a similar law? Clearly Trump encouraged the committing of crimes - interference with an election, hacking online accounts and so on, not to mention the insurrection thing.

More deflections. Curious.

[Empty_of_Clouds]

More labeling. Curious.

[Chip]

If you look back at post #4, you'll see I linked the redacted report directly from the DOJ website.

The redacted version is the Barr whitewash. Did you read the entire report?

If that's the case, how can you go on claiming that there was no Russian influence or involvement in the Trump campaign?

"In July 2019, Mueller testified to Congress that a president could be charged with crimes including obstruction of justice after the president left office. In 2020, a federal judge decided to personally review the report's redactions to see if they were legitimate. The judge said Barr's "misleading" statements about the report's findings led him to suspect that Barr had tried to establish a "one-sided narrative" favorable to Trump."

[dneal]

More labeling. Curious.

Just pointing out obvious facts, like Hillary’s involvement in the Steele Dossier, which the FEC fined her campaign for funding, and her campaign manager’s sworn testimony in federal court that she approved sharing of the narrative.

[Chip]

Obvious facts? Don't forget the Seth Rich murder plot. Or Benghazi.

[dneal]

If you look back at post #4, you'll see I linked the redacted report directly from the DOJ website.

The redacted version is the Barr whitewash. Did you read the entire report?

If that's the case, how can you go on claiming that there was no Russian influence or involvement in the Trump campaign?

"In July 2019, Mueller testified to Congress that a president could be charged with crimes including obstruction of justice after the president left office. In 2020, a federal judge decided to personally review the report's redactions to see if they were legitimate. The judge said Barr's "misleading" statements about the report's findings led him to suspect that Barr had tried to establish a "one-sided narrative" favorable to Trump."

I think you’ll find I predicted the inevitable smear of Barr in post. But I didn’t link his opening statement to congress. I linked the actual Mueller report, and quoted the text from it.

So more shoot the messenger, deflection, cognitive dissonance and TDS. Not surprising.

[dneal]

Obvious facts? Don't forget the Seth Rich murder plot. Or Benghazi.

Yes, deflect more. It strengthens you echo chamber, I suppose.

Let’s start with an easy one. Did the FEC fine Hillary’s campaign for funding the Steele Dossier?

[Empty_of_Clouds]

More labeling. Curious.

Just pointing out obvious facts, like Hillary’s involvement in the Steele Dossier, which the FEC fined her campaign for funding, and her campaign manager’s sworn testimony in federal court that she approved sharing of the narrative.

Didn't answer the question though. Bit of a trend there.

[dneal]

Didn't answer the question though. Bit of a trend there.

Which question? The one about “how can I go on claiming…”?

I’m not claiming anything. I’m citing the Mueller report on the DOJ website. You’ll find the link in post 4.

There’s no genuine question to answer. Thanks for playing.

—edit—

Do you mean your question here?

In the UK encouraging a crime is one of the inchoate offences punishable by law. Does the US have a similar law?

Of course not. I said I’m not entertaining deflections, which is what your post is (and why I accurately labeled as such). That includes irrelevant questions. Now if you have more questions on what to search for, since you noted you weren’t completely up to speed, I’m happy to help.

[Empty_of_Clouds]

The question about inchoate law.

[dneal]

The question about inchoate law.

See above, the edit to post 69.

[Chip]

Back to basics. You said that you posted the Mueller Report.

You did not. I think you're confused.

[Empty_of_Clouds]

Which question? The one about “how can I go on claiming…”?

I’m not claiming anything. I’m citing the Mueller report on the DOJ website. You’ll find the link in post 4.

There’s no genuine question to answer. Thanks for playing.

—edit—

Do you mean your question here?

In the UK encouraging a crime is one of the inchoate offences punishable by law. Does the US have a similar law?

Of course not. I said I’m not entertaining deflections, which is what your post is (and why I accurately labeled as such). That includes irrelevant questions. Now if you have more questions on what to search for, since you noted you weren’t completely up to speed, I’m happy to help.

Inaccurate labeling. The question was honestly asked for the purposes of exploring a topic as part of a conversation and (hopefully) gaining some information. It's not irrelevant to me. Is your 'of course not' your answer to whether such laws exist in the US? If so, you could have simply said this instead of offering ill-informed personal remarks.

Edit to add: I never asked a question worded “how can I go on claiming…”? Not sure where you got that from, wasn't from me. My posts in this thread are #s 52, 54, 56, 58, 60, 62, 68, 70 and 73. If you check. nowhere do I use that phrase or anything like it. The record is clear on this. So why make that up?

[dneal]

Back to basics. You said that you posted the Mueller Report.

You did not. I think you're confused.

See post 4, or post 47. Again, the link is clearly labeled, unless your argument has so failed that you’re resorting to absurd pedantry because I didn’t copy and paste each page (i.e. “post”) here.

The pertinent text from the report is quoted, immediately following the link.

[dneal]

Which question? The one about “how can I go on claiming…”?

I’m not claiming anything. I’m citing the Mueller report on the DOJ website. You’ll find the link in post 4.

There’s no genuine question to answer. Thanks for playing.

—edit—

Do you mean your question here?

In the UK encouraging a crime is one of the inchoate offences punishable by law. Does the US have a similar law?

Of course not. I said I’m not entertaining deflections, which is what your post is (and why I accurately labeled as such). That includes irrelevant questions. Now if you have more questions on what to search for, since you noted you weren’t completely up to speed, I’m happy to help.

Inaccurate labeling. The question was honestly asked for the purposes of exploring a topic as part of a conversation and (hopefully) gaining some information. It's not irrelevant to me. Is your 'of course not' your answer to whether such laws exist in the US? If so, you could have simply said this instead of offering ill-informed personal remarks.

Edit to add: I never asked a question worded “how can I go on claiming…”? Not sure where you got that from, wasn't from me. My posts in this thread are #s 52, 54, 56, 58, 60, 62, 68, 70 and 73. If you check. nowhere do I use that phrase or anything like it. The record is clear on this. So why make that up?

Whatever…. I’ll respond when you get back on topic.

[Empty_of_Clouds]

Was on topic, but your misattribution required correction - because if the boot was on the other foot, you would have made a big deal out of it, as is your habit.

[dneal]

Kind of like trolling these threads is your habit? Are you walking a new path, or are you just reverting to your original gig? You know how this all turns out.

[Empty_of_Clouds]

You want to start with me? Remember how that worked out for you last time?

Conversation is interesting and has lots of facets. It's enjoyable, right up to the moment that you, @dneal, start being dismissive of others' opinions or complain that the topic meanders from where you want it to go. Not all members are from the US, and so you should expect some questions to not be grounded all that well. It's all very well disagreeing with stuff but taking the conversation into the realm of personal attacks while doing so is not called for. So why do it? You said you wouldn't be a jerk if others wouldn't. Asking questions about things that people may not know (and that's often the case with me and US affairs) is not an example of someone being a jerk. Nonetheless you go there, instead of seeing an opportunity to offer sincere guidance.

[dneal]

*sigh*

How it worked out for me? Only that you managed to derail another thread. Feign innocence, and blame me (I think FredRydr noted a trend with this sort of thing).

3 simple facts which led to this thread, for some reason cannot be acknowledged. Instead, the inevitable shifting, dodging, deflecting took place. Yeah, "dismissive" is right, it just wasn't me doing it.

p.s.: I'm supposed to consider "sincere guidance" from you? Which you is that? Cryptos? EoC in third person? EoC bot? EoC zen master? No thanks.

[724Seney]

How it worked out for me? Only that you managed to derail another thread. Feign innocence, and blame me (I think FredRydr noted a trend with this sort of thing).

And the beat goes on..................