It's Official, Russians Corrupted The Election

[finnbow]

Originally Posted by Dondilion

As such Mueller has a problem. As director of the FBI he was quiet when Rosatom deals went through. Deals which benefited Russia. Egregious especially, since the deals involved Uranium.

There is no there there.

https://www.washingtonpost.com/news/...-uranium-deal/

[nailer]

Originally Posted by finnbow

There wasn't a word of speculation in what I wrote.

Based on what I've read not many hard facts either. The indictment alleges and articles citing leaks from unidentified sources are rumors until proven.

[Dondilion]

Originally Posted by finnbow

There is no there there.

https://www.washingtonpost.com/news/...-uranium-deal/

Your link concerns Hillary. I am referring to Mueller's silence. His failure to alert relevant servants and representative of the US re Russian criminality associated with the two deals.

[Rajoo]

Originally Posted by Dondilion

Your link concerns Hillary. I am referring to Mueller's silence. His failure to alert relevant servants and representative of the US re Russian criminality associated with the two deals.

I read that article yesterday and what criminality are you referring to?
Mueller's responsibility is limited Trump, his campaign and people associated with his campaign in their dealings with Russia.

[Dondilion]

Originally Posted by Rajoo

I read that article yesterday and what criminality are you referring to?
Mueller's responsibility is limited Trump, his campaign and people associated with his campaign in their dealings with Russia.

Mueller's "negligence".

Read especially the last paragraph...Not providing information on a corruption scheme

http://thehill.com/policy/national-s...administration

[whell]

Originally Posted by finnbow

There wasn't a word of speculation in what I wrote.

Leaks from anonymous sources aren't the same as facts.

[whell]

Originally Posted by finnbow

There is no there there.

https://www.washingtonpost.com/news/...-uranium-deal/

Your WaPo link would have us believe that Uranium One and UrAsia donated to the Clinton charity out of the goodness of their hearts, because "the majority of these donations were made before and during Clinton’s 2008 presidential run. So Trump’s claim that Hillary Clinton “gave [uranium to] Russia for a big payment” is not accurate." Does anyone who was even passively following the political landscape at that time seriously think that she wasn't going to run?

As far as Mueller and the uranium deal, for this NOT to have attracted at least passing FBI attention is something of a head scratcher.

[nailer]

The Clinton Foundation was a political charity and has nothing to do with what's going on now other than being an excellent Trump base deflection.

[barbara]

So leet me get this straight.... the Manaford thing doesn't mean anyrhing because it happened so long ago ......But the Clinton uranium thing means everything because it was..... uh.... so long ago.... and..... uh.... uh, uh.....

[finnbow]

Originally Posted by whell

Leaks from anonymous sources aren't the same as facts.

What exactly in the following statement of mine is based strictly upon leaks from anonymous sources?

During the campaign, he was actively laundering Russian/Ukrainian money while lobbying on their behalf and working to (and succeeding) in changing the GOP platform to benefit Russia. As for collusion, the affidavit supporting the Papadapoulos guilty plea shows collusion and the fact that he was coordinating said collusion with campaign higher-ups.