Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

To: Tucker39
How smooooth of Ms. Page to parse her answer in that fashion. Of COURSE they were not able to prove collusion, because there never was any Trump collusion.

Simple logic dictates that Russia wouldn't want a strong-on-defense team like Trump-Pence in the White House, over a very weak/pathetic democrat one, particularly at a time when that are on the move in Eastern Europe and the Middle East. Indeed, part of Obama's "fundamental transformation" was to practically dismantle our military.

9 posted on 09/16/2018 6:55:23 AM PDT by ETL (Obama-Hillary, REAL Russia collusion! Uranium-One Deal, Missile Defense, Iran Deal, Nukes: Click ETL)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 6 | View Replies ]


To: ETL

Almost every pollster, politico, and pundit knew with almost metaphysical certainty that Hillary would win in 2016. It is patently absurd to think that anybody in Russia thought otherwise. Therefore, it would be against the interest of the Russian government to provide clandestine support for a Trump victory regardless of FSB opinion regarding prospective foreign and military policies of the opposing candidates.

I’ve no doubt that the Russian government was engaged in a disinformation campaign in 2016, but the only strong evidence that has been presented thus far suggests that it was limited to some rather lame FaceBook memes. The evidence that WikiLeaks obtained hacked e-mails from the FSB is not persuasive. The argumentation for the “intelligence community’s assessment” regarding Russian interference is so sorely lacking that it can only believed if one has faith in the veracity of professional liars like Brennan and Clapper.


12 posted on 09/16/2018 7:23:40 AM PDT by Skepolitic
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 9 | View Replies ]

Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article


FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson