Using common sense, what is the difference between cooperation and collusion?

Darth Omar said:
If the lefties were actually serious about this they would be clamoring for an interview with Assange. Assange *knows* since he was the primary source of the leaks.

But they’re afraid Assange will claim it wasn’t a hack but a leak—and if he has evidence of such—then boom, there goes the Russian house of cards. The whole thing blows up and leads to some ‘inconvenient’ questions.

That Mullet didn’t interview Assange was telling. Pardon him if you have to but get him under oath. But Mullet didn’t do that and as far I know no attempt was made.

The *pivotal* figure in the whole affair was Julian Assange—and no one is talking to him or wants to. We have to take the word of ‘authorities’ that it was a hack and not a leak.

At any rate, this all becomes moot if/when Durham reveals criminal behavior within or by the Mullet Investigation and he’s already sniffing around the edges of it with Clinesmith.

Seems to making Weismann say some dumb things.
Click to expand...
I would love to hear from Assange under oath.
 
jacksonsprat22 said:
They never looked at page one of his report.
Click to expand...

I quoted it the other day and someone asked why I hadn't provided a link. LOL. They had no clue that the quote was from the Mueller report because none of them ever bothered to read it. You're right, this is page one material.
 
jacksonsprat22 said:
Mueller explicitly stated the DOJ would not prosecute a sitting President.
Click to expand...

He did, but that is DOJ policy, not law. He is all about the rules. Someone needs to challenge that notion. I'd add that Barr and Trump have no plans to follow DOJ guidelines about announcing the results of a political investigation in the 90 days leading up to an election. So screw DOJ policy. Trump is a criminal.
 
Concart said:
I quoted it the other day and someone asked why I hadn't provided a link. LOL. They had no clue that the quote was from the Mueller report because none of them ever bothered to read it. You're right, this is page one material.
Click to expand...

I cannot be bothered with these folk. They ask you to prove 2+2=4 and then deny that the mathematician made a valid argument.
 
Concart said:
He did, but that is DOJ policy, not law. He is all about the rules. Someone needs to challenge that notion. I'd add that Barr and Trump have no plans to follow DOJ guidelines about announcing the results of a political investigation in the 90 days leading up to an election. So screw DOJ policy. Trump is a criminal.
Click to expand...

No Attorney General would prosecute his own President.
 
Darth Omar said:
If the lefties were actually serious about this they would be clamoring for an interview with Assange. Assange *knows* since he was the primary source of the leaks.

But they’re afraid Assange will claim it wasn’t a hack but a leak—and if he has evidence of such—then boom, there goes the Russian house of cards. The whole thing blows up and leads to some ‘inconvenient’ questions.

That Mullet didn’t interview Assange was telling. Pardon him if you have to but get him under oath. But Mullet didn’t do that and as far I know no attempt was made.

The *pivotal* figure in the whole affair was Julian Assange—and no one is talking to him or wants to. We have to take the word of ‘authorities’ that it was a hack and not a leak.

At any rate, this all becomes moot if/when Durham reveals criminal behavior within or by the Mullet Investigation and he’s already sniffing around the edges of it with Clinesmith.

Seems to making Weismann say some dumb things.
Click to expand...

How do the Democrats interview Assange? How could Mueller interview Assange? And why, if he lies, there is no consequences, and as we have seen, he isn’t quite then epitome of honesty. Only one to interview Assange was Hannity, which kinda says it all, pointless interviewing Assange

And it doesn’t become moot regardless of what billy barr concocts, in fact, what he comes up with is irrelevant, as I’ve said, the evidence is overwhelming, just like OJ, Trump will float, but only those who view him as the Messiah still believe he didn’t collide with the Russians
 
archives said:
Collusion[ kuh-loo-zhuhn ]

noun

- a secret agreement, especially for fraudulent or treacherous purposes; conspiracy:

- Law. a secret understanding between two or more persons to gain something illegally, to defraud another of his or her rights, or to appear as adversaries though in agreement

https://www.dictionary.com/browse/collusion

The GOP Senate investigation confirmed Manafort met several times with Russian agents to exchange campaign data and strategy, that the two “cooperated” to defeat Clinton and elect Trump.

According to the right, Bill Clinton meeting Loretta Lynch on an airport tarmac is collusion, or foreign nations contributing to the Clinton Foundation is collusion, beyond collusion, a whole series of colluding conspiracies, but applying their logic, how is Trump’s campaign manager directly cooperating with Russians not collusion?

If it walks like a duck, looks like a duck, and sounds like a duck, it ain’t an elephant, regardless of what billy barr propagandizes
Click to expand...

no laws were broken remember?

collusion isn't a crime douchebag

but there was none

everything was a set up by the democrat party, Crooked Hillary and a dirty FBI and CIA led by Obama
 
Phantasmal said:
That’s all he’s got these days. It’s not even amusing anymore, it’s just sad.
Click to expand...

It is beyond sad.
He could have been the last one offered the Kool aid in Guyana and still would have drunk it even surrounded by thousands of corpses.
Brain washed beyond belief.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top