Russia Collusion Fallacy Falls On It's Face

First off, lets not forget where this BS in the public arena started. It was a huge deflection by one Hilary Clinton, to try and deflect attention away from her unfolding email and server scandal along with the DNC hacking and revelation of how deep their corruption was.

"The Russians hacked us" she cried!

Trump makes a joke about Putin being able to find the missing 30,000 emails she deleted and it's off to the races. Relentless wall to wall coverage of Trump / Russia collusion. Russia is a big bad boogy man, be afraid, be very afraid.

Zero evidence of collusion.

Story after story about Russia "hacking" the election and Trump working with Putin to undermine our election. Even after the media and Democrats ridiculed Trump for suggesting the election could be rigged.

Zero evidence of collusion.

Fake dossier is released by CNN and Buzzfeed. The very definition of fake news it is even ridiculed by fellow left wing outfits.

Zero evidence of collusion.

Eventually Trump decides to send one simple tweet that causes the media and the lefts collective heads to explode.

"Just found out that Obama had my 'wires tapped' in Trump Tower just before the victory. Nothing found. This is McCarthyism!"

In a general sense he was right. We now know that for over a YEAR Susan Rice had been ordering for the unmasking of Trump team people. That's right, the same dope who went on no less then 5 media outlets to blame the Benghazi terrorist attacks on a YouTube video that no one had seen. Unmasking is the perfect way for the ex-prez to get around laws. You cant just order surveillance on a political opponent, but you can on foreign actors. As an incoming administration you would have communications with Russian and other countries representatives. When an american is caught up in these collections, their name is removed and the transcript will just read 'American 1' and 'American 2' etc. So what do you do?

1) Order surveillance on the foreign actors involved in talks with incoming administration.
2) Order unmasking of Americans, specifically your political opponent and his team.
3) Write executive order allowing for raw NSA data to be widely disseminated.

agencies can apply for access to various feeds of raw, undoctored NSA intelligence. Analysts will then be able to sift through the contents of those feeds as they see fit, before implementing required privacy protections. Previously, the NSA applied those privacy protections itself, before forwarding select pieces of information to agencies that might need to see them.

4) Watch the leaks roll out and the news coverage to roll in painting your adversary as a foreign puppet.

The White House Counsel’s office identified Rice as the person responsible for the unmasking after examining Rice’s document log requests. The reports Rice requested to see are kept under tightly-controlled conditions. Each person must log her name before being granted access to them. Upon learning of Rice’s actions, H. R. McMaster dispatched his close aide Derek Harvey to Capitol Hill to brief Chairman Nunes.

“White House lawyers last month discovered that the former national security adviser Susan Rice requested the identities of U.S. persons in raw intelligence reports on dozens of occasions that connect to the Donald Trump transition and campaign, according to U.S. officials familiar with the matter.”

She requested their identities. In other words she demanded that they be unmasked so she could find out who they were. You put this together with Evelyn Farkas, who appeared on MSNBC on March 2nd admitting that they were gathering evidence.
Link
Link

But we KNOW the media will do anything to protect their dear leader Obama.

This reporter has been informed that Maggie Haberman has had this story about Susan Rice for at least 48 hours, and has chosen to sit on it in an effort to protect the reputation of former President Barack Obama.

Zero evidence of collusion.

* House Permanent Select Committee on Intelligence Chairman Nunes finds this and shares it with the media and then with the white house.
* His fellow intelligence committee chairman Peter Schiff looses his mind. Goes all over TV, all but calling for Nunes to commit hara-kiri.
* Schiff says THERE IS EVIDENCE OF COLLUSION
* After seeing the information for himself, Schiff has to backtrack on his statement, he goes on the Sunday talk shows to say it is too early to draw a Russia conclusion.
Schiffs Lie
Schiffs Backtrack

They want this to be true so bad. They will never be able to come to terms with the loss of this election. The Russian story will not go anywhere any time soon. It is their only out. They can't see that they had a flawed candidate that was represented by a corrupt DNC that was caught cheating during the primary.

Zero Evidence of collusion.

The Senate holds a rare public hearing on Russian election interference. What do we learn from this hearing?

1) This is nothing new, Russia has been doing this for decades
2) Russia uses fake news
3) Russia has troll farms
4) They indiscriminately push fake stories at anyone who will pick it up
5) Marco Rubio's campaign was a target of hacks

Zero evidence of collusion.

The democrats are asking us to believe that the Russians were able to outsmart the American people, that they were able to mess with the minds of the American voter and make them vote against Democrats. The Dems are portraying themselves as weak, ineffective, and incompetent as they attempt to make the case that Trump and Russia colluded to steal the election from them.

There is zero, zip, nadda, nothing, zilch, NOT ONE single shred of hard evidence of collusion between Russia and Trump

There is however plenty of evidence of collusion between the Media, DNC, and Hilary Clinton. But pay no mind to the rabble, pay no mind to the rabble. They'll keep you safe and ignorant

Counting bodies like sheep to the rhythm of the war drums.

Don't fret precious, I'm here.
Step away from the window, go back to sleep.
Safe from pain and truth and choice and other poison devils.
See, they don't give a f### about you like I do.
Count the bodies like sheep.
Counting bodies like sheep to the rhythm of the war drums.

Great post. The liberals just keep beating their drums but that is all they have, noise. The American public rejected their noise last Nov but they don't get it and refuse to accept it. Get over it guys and gals Trump is President.

a reply to: FauxMulder

Let's not forget :

a reply to: FauxMulder

Trump makes a joke about Putin being able to find the missing 30,000 emails she deleted and it's off to the races.

Yeah, and one would imagine if they did indeed collude, this is exactly what he would not do - publically, albeit jokingly, imply collusion.

It made perfect sense as a jab at Hillary though, as she claimed the mails to be nonexistent and thus unhackable - If true, she could not prove that she did not true to hide incriminating stuff, and if not true, if they could be hacked, she would be shown to be lying.

Win/win for Trump - the pretended 'paranoid' outrage was their only option for a response.

a reply to: FauxMulder
Thank you for your time and efforts to put this post together.

TPTB think that we are going to take them at their word and walk away they have a rude awakening coming for them. The people are sick and tired of their bull# and we are putting a stop to it! We don't just listen to what they say we investigate and find out own answers. We will not be fooled by the man behind the curtain!

It has been over a year long stint of psychological projection, fantasy and delusion for the extreme left crowd (does not pertain to a majority of ATS). Even after this Russia boogeyman business is done, there will be something even more ludicrous to take its place sadly.

Having watched their chair over the weekend throw a tantrum was a treat.

Great post and a highly accurate summary of the downward spiral of the Democrats.

I fear the Far Left will not be satisfy unless there is a Democrat in the White House. I hope they will refrain from going off the deep end and start something we will all regret.

The question I've always had, and haven't seen answered, is let's say the Russians did contact Trump. They did release information on the democrats. They did exert some sort of influence to try and sway people against Clinton.

How does any of that change what the democrats did? How does it change that the Russians released stuff the democrats had already done?

Even if the Russians did everything everybody says, how does that change what the democrats did? The Russians are releasing emails and leaking this and leaking that....which means it was all stuff the democrats had already done. But it's not bad that it was done in the first place, it's only bad that we found out about it?

originally posted by: JinMI
It has been over a year long stint of psychological projection, fantasy and delusion for the extreme left crowd (does not pertain to a majority of ATS). Even after this Russia boogeyman business is done, there will be something even more ludicrous to take its place sadly.

Having watched their chair over the weekend throw a tantrum was a treat.

His crap that he is spouting will just drive sane voters away from the party.

Maybe it will be enough to create a group of disenfranchised voters large enough to form a viable party. That would make elections interesting, with the old Democratic Party consisting of just the lunatic fringe.

a reply to: Shamrock6

It doesn't as you well know. Common ATS theme as of late is to throw a tantrum if the opposition is mentioned.

IE. Thiz iz a Trummmp thead!! Nawt Hillareee! and vice versa.

originally posted by: theultimatebelgianjoke
a reply to: FauxMulder

Let's not forget :

That makes no sense. Why would you look back and wonder that?

The Democrats blame the Russians (for hacking them), no one claim that the Russians helped them. So no one would claim that the russians helped Hillary get the debate questions.

But perhaps that was your point - the irrational train of thought?

a reply to: DupontDeux

The premise is that the Russians somehow caused Dnna Brazile to do what she did.... losing Hillary votes.
Point is that it is lies on the part of the democrats.
Ties right in with Shamrock's excellent point abpve.
The Democrats dug their own hole... what does it matter who brought their cheating to light?

originally posted by: butcherguy

originally posted by: JinMI
It has been over a year long stint of psychological projection, fantasy and delusion for the extreme left crowd (does not pertain to a majority of ATS). Even after this Russia boogeyman business is done, there will be something even more ludicrous to take its place sadly.

Having watched their chair over the weekend throw a tantrum was a treat.

His crap that he is spouting will just drive sane voters away from the party.

Maybe it will be enough to create a group of disenfranchised voters large enough to form a viable party. That would make elections interesting, with the old Democratic Party consisting of just the lunatic fringe.

Could. Should by any stretch of logic.

When was the last time America had a third party POTUS??

a reply to: FauxMulder

The fact that he was being spied on and still won the presidency and hasn't been impeached yet should tell you all you need know.

originally posted by: Shamrock6
The question I've always had, and haven't seen answered, is let's say the Russians did contact Trump. They did release information on the democrats. They did exert some sort of influence to try and sway people against Clinton.

How does any of that change what the democrats did? How does it change that the Russians released stuff the democrats had already done?

Even if the Russians did everything everybody says, how does that change what the democrats did? The Russians are releasing emails and leaking this and leaking that....which means it was all stuff the democrats had already done. But it's not bad that it was done in the first place, it's only bad that we found out about it?

^^^^^^^^^THIS^^^^^^^^^^
Thank you Shamrock! This is what I have been asking from the beginning and have yet to get an answer. Forget Russia, let's say it's true. But no one has addressed the things that the democrats did do!

a reply to: Shamrock6
Don't hold your breath on that one!

Good OP. Remember when Trump said the election could be rigged and he was laughed at, the media and dems said don't be ridiculous...
Now Hillary lost and it's all Russia did it.

Let's see if the investigations turn up anything, my bet is a few people might be fired and that's about it, none of it will come to anything.

The US dems have now lost most states, lost congress, lost senate and now lost the presidency... A bit of a pattern there, they are so obviously losing popularity. But they keep doubling down on stupid instead of adapting.

And Hillary is vile and repulsive any idiot would've had a good chance at winning an election against her. And I'm not even a Trump fan...

Losing Power Has Left the Democrat Party Dazed and Confused

The Democrats know they are in trouble, but they probably don’t know just how deep the trouble is. At the national level the party is now further out of power than it’s been since 1928. This lack of power and control is a problem in and of itself, but it is an even larger problem for what it portends for the party’s future. The party’s problems are deep and systemic and there are no clear remedies. For the first time in over three generations the Republican Party controls the U.S. Senate, the Congress, and the White House.

spectator.org...

Must be all Russia's fault...

originally posted by: Shamrock6
Even if the Russians did everything everybody says, how does that change what the democrats did? The Russians are releasing emails and leaking this and leaking that....which means it was all stuff the democrats had already done. But it's not bad that it was done in the first place, it's only bad that we found out about it?

You're absolutely right and the law has this to say about it (from Wikepedia):

Clean hands, sometimes called the clean hands doctrine or the dirty hands doctrine,[1] is an equitable defense in which the defendant argues that the plaintiff is not entitled to obtain an equitable remedy because the plaintiff is acting unethically or has acted in bad faith with respect to the subject of the complaint—that is, with "unclean hands".

a reply to: Shamrock6

so, why aren't they locking her up? trump won, he campaigned on the promise...


just cuz it's so cute here's trumps tweet yesterday.

Twitter: Donald J. Trump‏Verified account @realDonaldTrump 17h17 hours ago
"Did Hillary Clinton ever apologize for receiving the answers to the debate? Just asking!"

the country is in bad shape according to trump and he's still obsessed with this???? lol pathetic.