It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.
Please white-list or disable AboveTopSecret.com in your ad-blocking tool.
Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.
a. On or about February 10, 2016, Defendants and their co-conspirators internally circulated an outline of themes for future content to be posted to ORGANIZATION-controlled social media accounts. Specialists were instructed to post content that focused on "politics in the USA" and to "use any opportunity to criticize Hillary and the rest (except Sanders and Trump—we support them)."
It would be extremely foolish to rule out collusion in the case of Manafort as his emails prove fairly conclusively that he was attempting to peddle influence over Trump/his campaign/platform to his Russian pals.
Not that you care though right?
I'd argue that Donald Trump's weakness in the face of Russian interference is nearly as bad as colluding with the Russian government to get elected.
In fact, he might as well have colluded because he acts like Putin's bitch.
Also, you seem to be under the mistaken impression that Mueller's investigation has concluded and it has not.
II'd also point out that Trump and his supporters have gone from asserting that there was no Russian interference to "there was no conclusion like we've been saying all along!" — except all along you've actually been saying there was no Russian interference and you've moved the goal posts.
I can't wait for indictments to drop in regards to the hacking.
Actually, they were doing both. There's direct quotes contained in the indictment that invalidate your claim.
Nobody has been more instrumental than Donald J Trump. He could have gotten out in front of this from day one and supported investigations into Russian interference. Instead, either his fragile ego or his fear of *something* being turned up have led him to act guilty af and repeatedly lie about Russian interference in he election being a "hoax." He puts himself before the country.
Prove that it didn't. You can't. You can't quantify what effect Russian interference had in the election.
False and misleading. Misleading because nowhere in the indictment does it mention the 2014 midterms. Also misleading because the operation grew and evolved over time. False because there's nothing SOP about the what happened during the 2016 election. The influence campaign exploiting social media is new to the last election cycle. It's a new "battle front" in asymmetrical information warfare, not business as usual.
More importantly, we've never had an election in which the party and campaign chairman of one of the two major party candidate's had their emails, etc stolen and meted out in small batches over months to maximize impact. That's completely new.
You don't know what the word plagiarized means apparently and neither do the idiots who shill at DisinfoWhores (where you "plagiarized" that bizarrely stupid talking point).
The fake media specifically CNN.