It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.

Please white-list or disable AboveTopSecret.com in your ad-blocking tool.

Thank you.

 

Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.

 

Trump collusion with Russia? There's no proof either way unless Trump testifies under oath.

page: 1
1
<<   2  3 >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Jun, 15 2017 @ 12:59 PM
link   
Let's say there was a secret deal. Putin hack DNC and in return Trump drops sanctions on Russia. Who can prove this deal? Even if Trump does drop the sanctions, it proves nothing. Trump never talked about dropping sanctions on Russia in his campaign. So there's nothing for anyone to guess if he will or will not drop sanctions. What do you think? Was there collusion?




posted on Jun, 15 2017 @ 01:05 PM
link   
a reply to: allsee4eye

golly golly double oh seven for real. Putin is a real doctor evil ... and trump tha master spy. Really love Cartoon News networks more than Looney toons.



posted on Jun, 15 2017 @ 01:05 PM
link   
a reply to: allsee4eye
No, there was no collusion. Time to move on. The DEMs even gave up on it and are now barking about cover ups. Whatever.



posted on Jun, 15 2017 @ 01:10 PM
link   
a reply to: allsee4eye

If there was some sort of deal cut behind the scenes, it was likely arranged by some of these people we keep hearing about--Page, Manafort, etc.

If actual evidence exists, my bet would be in the form of hard signals intelligence (SIGINT). The thing to do, of course, would be to confront one of those guys with that SIGINT and get them to start singing like a canary. Turn states evidence to save their own bacon and stay out of Leavenworth.

Not saying it's happening or going to happen, just pointing out how it could go down w/out Trump testifying.



posted on Jun, 15 2017 @ 01:12 PM
link   
If this RUSSIA nonsense is just that...nonsense...

WHY did the Senate vote to REMOVE Trump's ability to lift sanctions????

Hm.....




posted on Jun, 15 2017 @ 01:24 PM
link   

originally posted by: DanteGaland
If this RUSSIA nonsense is just that...nonsense...

WHY did the Senate vote to REMOVE Trump's ability to lift sanctions????

Hm.....



If there was a link WHY did the special prosecutor move to look into the matter of Obstruction and not Russia collusion?



posted on Jun, 15 2017 @ 01:30 PM
link   
a reply to: Throes

The SC is already looking at the possibility of collusion. The investigation has expanded to include the possibility of obstruction due to Comey's firing, pressure on Coats, etc. Not saying that's the case, but it does look like Mueller is digging in to that angle as well at this point. He's incredibly thorough. If anything' there, he'll find it.



posted on Jun, 15 2017 @ 01:32 PM
link   
Trump colluded with Russia.

The chief admiral of the NSA confirmed it. He also stated they have hard evidence. recordings, documentation, etc.

The reason this isnt all out in the open right now, and why everyone is running around throwing circumstantial evidence out there..

Is that the hard evidence was most likely obtained illegally by NSA spying programs.

Everyone knows the truth, but they are forced to find other evidence and other ways to prove it because the actual evidence isnt usable.



posted on Jun, 15 2017 @ 01:41 PM
link   
a reply to: allsee4eye



Let's say there was a secret deal. Putin hack DNC and in return Trump drops sanctions on Russia.


Well, to be fair, he did try to have the sanctions dropped, and failed. What he did succeed in doing is changing the National Republican Platform, that condemned Russia for Crimea and supported arming the rebels. The timing of that change correlates with the initial WikiLeaks DNC email dump and Trump's constant reference to and praise for WikiLeaks. Not to mention his very public Putin fawning and outspoken call for Russia to hack and find Hillary's 30,000 deleted private emails. Then there's what's his name who told us about the upcoming Podesta email leaks.



posted on Jun, 15 2017 @ 01:42 PM
link   
a reply to: Lucidparadox

There's also a distinct possibility that some SIGINT came from our allies--other members of the Five Eyes and perhaps even France. It wouldn't necessarily be illegal in many cases because they aren't all subject to the same laws. For example, if French intel recorded a meeting between a Trump associate and a Russian agent, they could share it with the US or even leak it w/out consulting the US. Also, the NSA routinely monitors certain foreigners, & it's perfectly legal. If some of these people (e.g. Page) had a conversation w/Kislyak that didn't look good, that could have been the basis for a FISA warrant, which would have allowed them to legally tap his comms.



posted on Jun, 15 2017 @ 01:44 PM
link   

originally posted by: Lucidparadox
Trump colluded with Russia.

The chief admiral of the NSA confirmed it. He also stated they have hard evidence. recordings, documentation, etc.

The reason this isnt all out in the open right now, and why everyone is running around throwing circumstantial evidence out there..

Is that the hard evidence was most likely obtained illegally by NSA spying programs.

Everyone knows the truth, but they are forced to find other evidence and other ways to prove it because the actual evidence isnt usable.


when did this happen?



posted on Jun, 15 2017 @ 01:46 PM
link   
The onus is on Mueller to prove that Trump colluded with Russia. Innocent until proven guilty. Mueller will continue the investigation until he dies of old age. In the interim, President Trump will have accomplished great things for our country.



posted on Jun, 15 2017 @ 01:49 PM
link   

originally posted by: Lucidparadox
Trump colluded with Russia.

The chief admiral of the NSA confirmed it. He also stated they have hard evidence. recordings, documentation, etc.



A link to your claim? Or, at least give us the Admiral's name. Popping in to make such a dramatic statement requires a little documentation on your part, don't cha think, LucidParadox?



posted on Jun, 15 2017 @ 01:56 PM
link   
a reply to: carewemust

Maybe, maybe not. It is telling that Mueller has brought in some heavy hitters from DOJ--experts in criminal law and financial/RICO cases. If they're looking at banks and money laundering, that's yet another layer of complexity in that mess. It could take while....

If Trump is serious about doing great things, he shouldn't spend so much time on this then. If it's a witch hunt, Benghazi style, it will ultimately die. But if Trump keeps shooting off his mouth, he could wind up looking like his own worst enemy. For example, if he'd let things be, there might not be an obstruction investigation underway. Just sayin....



posted on Jun, 15 2017 @ 02:00 PM
link   
a reply to: Gandalf77


I agree, but President Trump said during the campaign that if his personal communications habits cause him to lose the election, so be it... he'd be fine. No doubt he feels the same way now. I think he's more proud of his business and family accomplishments, than becoming President by beating that goat of a candidate Hillary.



posted on Jun, 15 2017 @ 02:04 PM
link   
a reply to: carewemust

But don't you think the stakes are just a little bit higher now that he's actually there? What worked for him in business and on the campaign doesn't necessarily work in the White House.



posted on Jun, 15 2017 @ 02:04 PM
link   

originally posted by: Lucidparadox
Trump colluded with Russia.

The chief admiral of the NSA confirmed it. He also stated they have hard evidence. recordings, documentation, etc.

The reason this isnt all out in the open right now, and why everyone is running around throwing circumstantial evidence out there..

Is that the hard evidence was most likely obtained illegally by NSA spying programs.

Everyone knows the truth, but they are forced to find other evidence and other ways to prove it because the actual evidence isnt usable.


Boy that's a real croc if sh!t, right there.

No NSA has confirmed any kind of collusion with Russia.

You know how I know?

Because it would have been leaked to WaPo by now, whether it was collected illegally or not is irrelevant.

The act of leaking itself is already class 3 felony, yet every other day we are hearing the details of private conversations our POTUS is having with foreign leaders.

Did you think that was legal?

If evidence on Trump or anyone else associated with him ever came to surface it would be leaked to WaPo and echoed all over CNN, MSNBC, ABC, CBS, TNYT, Huff Po, Salon, BBC, you get the idea.



posted on Jun, 15 2017 @ 02:06 PM
link   
the NSA and the previous administration recorded every bit of communication in this country for the last few years.

If they had proof, it'd be front page by now- so they don't have proof.... yet they have every conversation everyone had.

It's just a circus to keep the media jerking in circles.



posted on Jun, 15 2017 @ 02:12 PM
link   
a reply to: ColdWisdom

We do know this involves multiple FISA warrants. We just don't know what that turned up. You don't get a FISA warrant in the first place unless you have good cause.
And you certainly don't get a FISA warrant renewed multiple times if you don't find anything.

I'm guessing they've got hard SIGINT on Page, perhaps others as well.
What it adds up to, or not, is hard to say.



posted on Jun, 15 2017 @ 02:23 PM
link   
I don't think trump colluded with russia. I have no problem believing that russia pulled psy-ops and even physically tampered with codes or machines though. I can even believe that russia did those things because they didn't want hillary as president. But did trump know about it? Of course not. At the most trump is an unwitting pawn in a global game being played by putin. Nothing illegal about being a pawn, that I know of anyway.







 
1
<<   2  3 >>

log in

join