There's no point in listing articles because you'll discount it as fake news, so it's a waste of my time.

You still haven't answered my question:  What are the effects that prove Trump colluded with Russia?  Not evidence, just the facts you used to support your deductive reasoning.

New WSJ article:

Comey’s Firing Came as Investigators Stepped Up Russia Probe

https://www.wsj.com/articles/james-comey-had-requested-more-money-for-fbi-s-russia-investigation-before-being-fired-u-s-official-1494433061

Flapp Jackson!!! 

I think it is Flynn.

Ahh.  Yeah, that is Flynn. 

New WSJ article:

Comey’s Firing Came as Investigators Stepped Up Russia Probe

https://www.wsj.com/articles/james-comey-had-requested-more-money-for-fbi-s-russia-investigation-before-being-fired-u-s-official-1494433061

Correlation is not causation. If there is causation, there couldn't be any evidence more clear than the collusion of DOJ/Holder and BATFE in Fast and Furious... and we see what's happened there: absolutely nothing (unless you include promotions and full benefit package retirements as "consequences"). I suppose with 90% of the media out to lynch Trump (compared to gloriously deifying Obama) something could actually happen if similar evidence were found in this case.

Note that just prior to Comey's firing vandals cut down numerous trees on one of Trump's golf courses.

Not evidence, just the facts you used to support your deductive reasoning.

What's the difference?

Note that just prior to Comey's firing vandals cut down numerous trees on one of Trump's golf courses.

TRUMP'S GUILTY AS SIN!!!   

What's the difference?

Evidence = sourced facts.

Facts = whatever you based your opinion on.

Not asking for sources.  Just list your facts.

Evidence = sourced facts.

Facts = whatever you based your opinion on.

Not asking for sources.  Just list your facts.

Right. Evidence = facts. Facts = opinions. Therefore, Evidence = opinions. Sorry dude, not falling for it.

Right. Evidence = facts. Facts = opinions. Therefore, Evidence = opinions. Sorry dude, not falling for it.

You've zoomed past Troll status to Argumentative Moron status in one post.     

 

Quote from: punaperson on Today at 10:35:21 AM:

Note that just prior to Comey's firing vandals cut down numerous trees on one of Trump's golf courses.

TRUMP'S GUILTY AS SIN!!!   

Have you been taking logic and critical thinking tips from your relatives?! 

Quote from: punaperson on Today at 10:35:21 AM:

Note that just prior to Comey's firing vandals cut down numerous trees on one of Trump's golf courses.
Have you been taking logic and critical thinking tips from your relatives?! 

Why do you ask?

Do I sound like a climate change loving, Russian scandal mongering Liberal? 

Interesting to listen to the many viewpoints on the media on this matter.  One of the most insightful that I've listened to so far was from John Negroponte.  Basically a no-win situation in this case for Trump. 

http://www.npr.org/2017/05/11/527895039/john-negroponte-on-trump-lavrov-and-russias-goals

One thing that keeps coming up is people thinking that investigations will stop due to Comey's firing.  What?  While it has been reported that Comey had more than a "usual" level of interest in this case, it's not like he was heading the investigation and it's not like the FBI was the only organization/agency looking into it. 

Why do you ask?

Do I sound like a climate change loving, Russian scandal mongering Liberal? 

Don't ask questions where you aren't prepared for an honest response. 

And yes. . . 

Interesting to listen to the many viewpoints on the media on this matter.  One of the most insightful that I've listened to so far was from John Negroponte.  Basically a no-win situation in this case for Trump. 

http://www.npr.org/2017/05/11/527895039/john-negroponte-on-trump-lavrov-and-russias-goals

One thing that keeps coming up is people thinking that investigations will stop due to Comey's firing.  What?  While it has been reported that Comey had more than a "usual" level of interest in this case, it's not like he was heading the investigation and it's not like the FBI was the only organization/agency looking into it.

The way I see it is if they get evidence, they will do what they will do. It is what it is. They may already have evidence. Who knows, there may be something to what the Democrats are saying. To be honest, I wouldn't be surprised if there is something to this investigation. On the other hand, so far from what I can tell, there has been no significant evidence discovered. I would question an investigation that goes on for a year or so without any significant progress as a witch hunt.

Don't ask questions where you aren't prepared for an honest response. 

And yes. . . 

Good! Just keeping you on your toes.... 

The way I see it is if they get evidence, they will do what they will do. It is what it is. They may already have evidence. Who knows, there may be something to what the Democrats are saying. To be honest, I wouldn't be surprised if there is something to this investigation. On the other hand, so far from what I can tell, there has been no significant evidence discovered. I would question an investigation that goes on for a year or so without any significant progress as a witch hunt.

That's pretty much how I see things.  Not knowing what they are finding, it's tough to say what I would think is right.  Then again, I would have wanted HRC drawn and quartered for the many things she appears to be skating on. . .

I too wouldn't be surprised if they find some apparently damning "evidence".  As mentioned previously (maybe in another thread), it's not like evidence of apparent wrong doing was never found on other administrations.  That and I would think it would be tough to prove many of the accusations.  Same thing with HRC and handling of classified information.  However, in that case, the simple mishandling of the information, which was never disputed, should've been grounds for quite a bit. 

That's pretty much how I see things.  Not knowing what they are finding, it's tough to say what I would think is right.  Then again, I would have wanted HRC drawn and quartered for the many things she appears to be skating on. . .

I too wouldn't be surprised if they find some apparently damning "evidence".  As mentioned previously (maybe in another thread), it's not like evidence of apparent wrong doing was never found on other administrations.  That and I would think it would be tough to prove many of the accusations.  Same thing with HRC and handling of classified information.  However, in that case, the simple mishandling of the information, which was never disputed, should've been grounds for quite a bit.

I'd be crazy-happy if Trump declares HRC and Huma are forbidden from ever holding a clearance or federal position ever again, including President, as an administrative sanction for their demonstrated negligence in handling and protecting classified information, some of which was so sensitive even the Congress was unable to see it.

For what its worth Rklapp they always do this when someone voices an opinion different than theirs.   They love them echo chambers they are used to.   As for on topic posting, Flynn is definitively connected to Russia and should of never got nominated.  Who knows who else is connected to Russia but I still don't think Trump personally is. 

The fact is that all of the evidence now is circumstantial, so Trump is safe from jail time but not from a potential impeachment. In the end, it doesn't matter if Trump is prosecuted for breaking the law because his VP will just pardon him like Ford did with Nixon.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Impeachment_in_the_United_States

Overall, I agree with what Joe says from one Republican to another.

http://www.msnbc.com/morning-joe/watch/joe-s-tough-message-to-republicans-941318211768

For what its worth Rklapp they always do this when someone voices an opinion different than theirs.   They love them echo chambers they are used to.   As for on topic posting, Flynn is definitively connected to Russia and should of never got nominated.  Who knows who else is connected to Russia but I still don't think Trump personally is.

That's another unsupported opinion.

It's not that your opinions are in opposition that make you a target.  it's just that your arguments and supporting "facts" are so full of holes, Stevie Wonder could drive a dump truck through them without touching the sides!