"No Collusion, No Collusion"

[_MeDotOrg]

None of the above. No one cared about Russians until Hillary Clinton lost (see Obama and Romney, etc.) or even the long history of Russia trying to influence elections (today Facebook yesterday op-eds in NYT, etc.) ...

Parsing this statement:

No one cared about Russians until Hillary Clinton lost.
No one? I have this vague recollection of a certain politician repeatedly leading chants of "lock her up!".

Russia, if you’re listening, I hope you’re able to find the 30,000 emails that are missing

or even the long history if Russia trying to influence elections.
Let's look where we started. November 11, 2016. Hope Hicks, Presidential spokesperson:

There was no communication between the campaign and any foreign entity during the campaign.

We know of over 100 contacts between Russia and Trump's Team.

There is a subtle conflation of two separate issues:

• Russia/Soviet Union trying to influence elections
• and American cooperation with that effort

For the 1960 Presidential election, The Russians approached Adlai Stevenson to run again. He was decidedly more dovish that Kennedy or Johnson. Stevenson's recollection of the incident:

“Before returning last week from Moscow, he [Menshikov] had spent considerable time alone with Premier Khrushchev. He [Khrushchev] wishes me [Menshikov] to convey the following: When you met in Moscow in August, 1958, he [Khrushchev] said to you that he had voted for you in his heart in 1956. He says now that he will vote for you in his heart again in 1960. We have made a beginning with President Eisenhower and Khrushchev’s visit to America toward better relations, but it is only a beginning. We are concerned with the future, and that America has the right President. All countries are concerned with the American election. It is impossible for us not to be concerned about our future and the American Presidency which is so important to everybody everywhere.

Unlike Donald Trump Jr., Paul Manafort or Jared Kushner, Stevenson then notified the United States government of the contact.

Yes, Russia tried to interfere in the election. You are right, foreign interference in elections is nothing new. What IS new is consistently lying about the contacts. And, according to Manafort's attorney, polling data was given to a foreign national connected with a foreign intelligence service. THAT is new.

We have gone from no contacts to over 100 contacts (so far). We have gone from no business interests in Russia to the ongoing Trump Tower Moscow contacts. There is evidence that a Ukrainian peace plan was being formulated that would remove sanctions from the funding sources for Trump Moscow. Why are we lifting sanctions on Oleg Deripaska's companies? Inquiring minds want to know.

And again, this is all before we've seen the Mueller report. Perhaps it will contain a bit more information.

[_Kevin Graham]

Trump Concealed Details Of Putin Meetings From Administration Officials: Report

The Washington Post reports the president instructed his interpreter not to disclose any details of what transpired during the meeting to administration officials.

President Donald Trump has repeatedly sought to conceal details of his personal interactions with Russian President Vladimir Putin, including on at least one occasion when he seized the notes of his own interpreter, according to The Washington Post.

Citing current and former U.S. officials, the report claims that after a 2017 meeting between the two heads of state in Germany, Trump also instructed the translator not to disclose any details of what transpired with administration officials.

Trump’s actions were reportedly brought to light when a White House advisor and senior State Department official requested further information from the interpreter in addition to a handout provided by former Secretary of State Rex Tillerson, who also attended.

Speaking on the condition of anonymity, a White House spokesperson told the Post that the Trump’s administration has attempted to “improve the relationship with Russia” after the Obama administration “pursued a flawed ‘reset’ policy that sought engagement for the sake of engagement.”

When asked about the report by Fox News’ Jeanine Pirro Saturday evening, Trump said that he wasn’t “keeping anything under wraps” and that he would be happy to share what was discussed with Putin.

The Post’s revelation has come one day after a New York Times article reported the FBI had opened an investigation into whether Trump was secretly working on behalf of Russia.

In the same interview with Pirro, Trump referred to the Times’ article as “the most insulting article I’ve ever had written [about me].”

“And I can tell you this, if you ask the folks in Russia, I’ve been tougher on Russia than anybody else, any other ― probably any other president period,” he said. “But certainly the last three or four presidents, modern day presidents, nobody’s been as tough as I have from any standpoint.”

Both reports have come as special counsel Robert Mueller closes in on the president while investigating Russian interference in the 2016 election and allegations Trump obstructed justice.

[_EAllusion]

Short of openly confessing, is it even possible for Trump to have behaved more guilty than he has? I'm not sure it is.

[_Dr Exiled]

I'm obviously coming from a different universe here because I want to know more about these supposed secret conversations prior to declaring guilt of anything ......

Isn't is common to classify conversations with foreign leaders, to keep these conversations private so the leaders can be more direct with each other? Here is a link to recently declassified documents of meetings between Gorbachev and Reagan and Bush. https://proquest.libguides.com/dnsa/52sovietus.

How does this make Trump guilty of collusion? Sure, there is always a possibility but merely having private conversations with Putin and wanting to have better relations with Russia isn't a crime. So, what do you think they discussed? What do you think their plans are? Lessening tensions? Is that a bad thing? Don't we want our leaders to speak to foreign leaders? Is there evidence of harm to the U.S.?

[_EAllusion]

I'm obviously coming from a different universe here because I want to know more about these supposed secret conversations prior to declaring guilt of anything ......

Isn't is common to classify conversations with foreign leaders, to keep these conversations private so the leaders can be more direct with each other? Here is a link to recently declassified documents of meetings between Gorbachev and Reagan and Bush. https://proquest.libguides.com/dnsa/52sovietus.

How does this make Trump guilty of collusion? Sure, there is always a possibility but merely having private conversations with Putin and wanting to have better relations with Russia isn't a crime. So, what do you think they discussed? What do you think their plans are? Lessening tensions? Is that a bad thing? Don't we want our leaders to speak to foreign leaders? Is there evidence of harm to the U.S.?

You misread the story. The story is not about Trump engaging in routine classification of meetings with Putin like he has with any number of world leaders and is common practice. The story is about Trump going to great lengths to prevent people typically in the room from being privy to his discussions with Putin and destroying standard record keeping of those meetings.

Humorously, Trump won his election because the media pretended to care about record-keeping protocols in public officials, but really, this is guilty as sin type behavior from Trump.

[_Dr Exiled]

I'm obviously coming from a different universe here because I want to know more about these supposed secret conversations prior to declaring guilt of anything ......

Isn't is common to classify conversations with foreign leaders, to keep these conversations private so the leaders can be more direct with each other? Here is a link to recently declassified documents of meetings between Gorbachev and Reagan and Bush. https://proquest.libguides.com/dnsa/52sovietus.

How does this make Trump guilty of collusion? Sure, there is always a possibility but merely having private conversations with Putin and wanting to have better relations with Russia isn't a crime. So, what do you think they discussed? What do you think their plans are? Lessening tensions? Is that a bad thing? Don't we want our leaders to speak to foreign leaders? Is there evidence of harm to the U.S.?

You misread the story. The story is not about Trump engaging in routine classification of meetings with Putin like he has with any number of world leaders and is common practice. The story is about Trump going to great lengths to prevent people typically in the room from being privy to his discussions with Putin and destroying standard record keeping of those meetings.

Humorously, Trump won his election because the media pretended to care about record-keeping protocols in public officials, but really, this is guilty as sin type behavior from Trump.

Even if he breached protocol, does that necessarily mean guilt? If so, of what? We don't know what was said and there isn't any evidence that something bad happened to the US as a result of the supposed secret conversations with Putin. We are still in the realm of possibility, instead of probability or beyond a reasonable doubt. All we have is Trump not wanting to have anyone know what was said, which could be to cover up something or could be the result of being overly paranoid as a result of what he thinks is an unreasonable witch hunt.

It's a far cry from guilt, still guilt is possible. More is needed for me to declare guilt.

[_Doctor CamNC4Me]

That's weird Exiled would show up to the thread only to ignore the OP and comment on Trump's behavior in the article above as a nothing burger.

- Doc

[_Dr Exiled]

That's weird Exiled would show up to the thread only to ignore the OP and comment on Trump's behavior in the article above as a nothing burger.

- Doc

It's where the thread went. If you notice above, KG wrote about the latest controversy of hiding the notes. EA proclaimed guilt and I pushed back a little.

[Guest]

As I have said prior, there may be guilt. At this point, however, given everything, including the OP, including the convictions, there isn't enough to show collusion with the Russians. Woodward, of Watergate fame, looked hard for collusion for his book on Trump and found none. Perhaps Mueller will when the investigation is over, but he is still investigating .....

[_Dr Exiled]

The N.Y. Times issued a retraction in the original Manafort story. No longer were the polling data sent to a Russian oligarch, but merely Ukrainian oligarchs.

https://www.nytimes.com/2019/01/08/us/politics/manafort-trump-campaign-data-kilimnik.html