TheHill: Senate report describes closer ties between 2016 Trump campaign, Russia

I suppose this falls into the category of “It is what it is”.

Here is a link to the report

Pretty much the same conclusions that came out in the Mueller report. …”found overwhelming evidence of Russia’s efforts to interfere in the election through disinformation and cyber campaigns but found a lack of sufficient evidence that the Trump campaign conspired with the Kremlin to impact the outcome of the 2016 election.”

But one does have to wonder with as many documented contacts between the campaign and the Kremlin, how the conspiracy couldn’t be proven. Just from a layman’s view.

47 thoughts on “TheHill: Senate report describes closer ties between 2016 Trump campaign, Russia

  1. Pretty much what everyone knew, or knew of, since the election.

    Manafort was the campaign chairman and he also gave polling info and strategies to Kilminick, the Russian intelligence officer.

    Of all this was poo pooed by the nutjobs on the right in office and media.

    And this is from a GOP majority Senate.

    Of course, the Trump fans will ignore this too. They have too much invested both psychologically and politically in the worst president to come down on the wrong side of history.

    Yet, this revelation is much worse than any murder victim on 5th Avenue. This was selling out our whole nation for personal gain.

    Liked by 2 people

    1. All of the foreign telemarketing calls I get actually have US phone numbers showing.

      Manafort was as slimy as the day is long and he got off easy with a 7 1/2 year sentence. Treason calls for hanging in war time.

      But that’s OK with you. You love what Trump as done: Trampling the Constitution more than any other President has even attempted. Attacks women, the disabled, and anyone who has the audacity to criticize him.

      You sold you libertarian soul to the devil, my friend.

      Liked by 1 person

      1. Trump is no libertarian, but he has done a lot to make us more free.

        However, he is no threat to the Constitution. He appoints SCOTUS justices who will protect it, even from him.

        Is he a nice guy? Nope. If he were on this forum he would get moderated a lot, but he’s not Hillary, and he isn’t whoever is pulling Biden’s strings.


          1. You mean higher deficits and debt, fouled air and water and two right wing ideologues.

            Those are “positives”, I suppose, in a banana republic.

            Liked by 1 person

          2. So, reading the Constitution as written instead of robed despots making law on the spur of the moment is now right wing.

            I am glad I am not left wing.


          3. Your view, not mine.

            Jefferson said that one would no more expect the man to fit the clothes he had as a child than to subject future generations to laws from his time. Amendments are fine, but interpreting the Constitution as a living document is often a good use of judicial participation.

            To borrow an old quip, if I agreed with you, we’d both be wrong

            Liked by 1 person

          4. Would you play cards if the dealer decided that Hoyle was a living document?

            How about if your bank decided your mortgage was a living document and the term or interest rates you contracted for no longer appealed to them.


          5. Your comparisons are as bogus as Trump’s leadership. If my kids or grandkids tried to make that argument, I would send them back to the drawing board and tell them to try again.


          6. “Lower corporate taxes, reduced regulation, and two SCOTUS justices who will follow the Constitution.”

            I don’t feel more free. The large tax break for corporations did nothing for me and my bottom line. Reduced regulation has me worried about the health and well being of my grandchildren. And radical, right wing activist judges have more of an agenda than any liberal justice.

            That ain’t freedom for Main Street; it IS freedom for polluters to destroy our environment, corporations to have more capital than labor (, and voting, civil and women’s reproductive rights are under attack.

            Not freedom; oppression of the radical right wing Trumpists who only care about lining their pocketbooks.


          7. When they are lining them with dollars that could go to pay my mortgage, buy my food, pay my electric bill or any other of the needs of modern life, THAT is a huge problem.

            The C suite folks get richer and the workers who provide them the labor for that to happen get left behind.


          8. Then don’t buy from them. Buy from some co-op that charges more but makes no profit.

            No one can force you to buy from the seller who gives you the best value if you prefer to pay more for less.


          9. You’re talking about something that I am not talking about. I am talking about wages, which are kept artificially low so that c suite denizens can get richer.


          10. Well then instead of not buying from them, don’t work for them.

            Sell your skills to a higher bidder. If your skills are really worth more than he is willing to pay, you should have no problem, If you do, then maybe you’re being paid what you’re worth.


          11. You are missing the point about artificially low wages. It is rarely possible to find someone who is going to pay more when the “market rate” is held low by all employers.

            I heard this when I first retired: “We don’t need to pay you what you are worth because you get a government retirement check.” And that was said at EVERY place I tried to get in with.


          12. That’s not how markets work.

            If you can prove collusion, then do so, but it is very hard to get employers to pass up a good employee if they can steal them from another employer by paying a little more.


          13. “That’s not how markets work.”

            In a perfect world, no. But this world ain’t perfect and those at the top of the food chain are eating our lunch and washing them down with Bombay Sapphire martinis instead of paying workers living wages.


          14. Then you would call me a “taker” because I am having to receive benefits because the jobs offered don’t cover my bills. The systemic underpayment of many workers, especially “essential” workers is an issue you think can be solved by the market. It can’t because those that run “the market” don’t want to pay a fair living wage.


          15. The way to raise the wages at the bottom is to create a labor shortage, which is what, prior to COVID, Trump was doing. Median wages last fall were rising faster than inflation for the first time in 30 years.

            COVID will pass and the resurgence in manufacturing will raise all ships, unless the Democrats get control and drive good jobs overseas again with high taxes and strangling regulation.


          16. You seem to believe that the Biden plan to rebuild our manufacturing base is based on regulations and taxes. But, as usual, your blindness of and hatred for any thing Democratic, keeps you form seeing the big picture and possibly coming to grips with the facts.

            And as far as all ships being raised, it was only the OWNERS of those ships that were getting raised. Main St. was left in the wake, in a dinghy, without a paddle.


        1. Who do you think is pulling Trump’s strings?

          His interviews are almost incoherent. His tweets ramble or retweet stuff he either hasn’t read or understood. His hires and appointees have come and gone at record rates. Many have no qualifications other than obsequious behavior towards Trump.

          His probable dementia is showing in my opinion.

          Liked by 1 person

          1. His style is annoying. He will throw out half baked ideas and then wait for his advisors to evaluate them.

            But for all his careless talk, he does follow the advice of experts on policy.


      1. Missing, or avoiding, the point.

        Telemarketers pursue you without your invitation or cooperation, and it is the same with foreign intelligence agencies. They pursue politicians with no invitation or cooperation,

        Trump is no more guilty of the Russians pursuit of hum than you are of the telemarketers.


        1. It is YOU who is missing the point. You compared telemarketers to foreign intelligence and claim it is no big deal that the chairman of the campaign had numerous contacts with a Russian Intelligence Operative, including handing over polling data and other information that could be used to facilitate the disinformation campaign used by Russia and Putin.

          But I guess “it is what it is” in your trump blinded mind.

          Your disdain for honest democratic processes is duly noted.


          1. No, I am saying that there is no more blame in being solicited by by foreign interests and ignoring them than there is in hanging up on a telemarketer.

            It is not Trump’s fault they tried, and even Mueller admits their efforts were rejected.


          2. Delusional revisionist history. Mueller did not say they were rejected. He said they could not prove collusion (conspiracy). But the Senate report makes things even more clear. I wouldn’t call this a rejection by the campaign:


            Or this taken from The’s assessment of the report:
            “The committee determined that Manafort posed a “grave counterintelligence threat” as a result of both his access to and standing in the Trump campaign and his contacts with Russian-linked individuals.

            “Taken as a whole, Manafort’s high level access and willingness to share information with individuals closely affiliated with the Russian intelligence services, particularly Kilimnik and associates of Oleg Deripaska, represented a grave counterintelligence threat,” the report states.”

            Yeah. Rejected. Sure.


        2. “They pursue politicians with no invitation or cooperation,”

          Manafort didn’t cooperate? You’re kidding, right? He already had business ties and dealings whit the Kremlin. They didn’t have to chase him very far and he fully cooperates.

          But that is what telemarketers do, right?


  2. Intelligent Americans have been living with this knowledge since ‘djt’ was campaigning.

    We heard, we saw and we FELT the results in our minds and hearts as one Trumpster after another told us we just hated ‘djt’ because he beat a smart, prepared candidate who could mentally whip his ass every day!

    By his own actions and words we knew that all along this man and all those who were close to him were using our country for their own benefit/profit.

    And, it didn’t take us 4 years to know (not suspect) that there was something wrong and unAmerican between TRUMP & PUTIN.

    We have been sick to our stomachs to watch, over and over again, as one GOP member or another in congress attempted to make us feel stupid for even suggesting TRUMP would be behind all this criminal activity.

    We had no choice but to suck it up, knowing darn well that we did not imagine what our ears heard and our eyes saw.

    DJT doesn’t love America and he’s been dishonest to our country every day with his lies about his Russian connections, his secret phone calls and what members of his inner team were taking care of for him.

    And, it took an investigation in Senate nearly 4 years to admit it.


    Liked by 2 people

    1. Trump did tell us not to believe anything we saw or heard. Unless, of course, it came directly from him.

      If he said the sky was blue and the grass was green, I’d take a walk outside to verify. And even then, I would question his motives.

      Liked by 2 people

  3. Beating a dead horse will not revive it. The report comes to the EXACT same conclusion as Mueller’s. Russia interferred, which we all know, and Trump is NOT guilty, which we all know!!! Further, Manaford, the opening salvo of this pathetic story, was convicted of banking activities of years prior that had NO connection to Trump or the campaign. What is your giddy point?


    1. The point is there are a lot more charges that should have been filed against Manafort. You also forget about his failing to register as a foreign lobbyist, to which he plead guilty to avoid another trial. He got off easy with 7-1/2 years.

      And I am not giddy about it. I am angry that Trump supporters think it is just fine for a foreign, adversarial power to interfere in our elections and for an American citizen to aid and abet that interference.

      Liked by 1 person

      1. RE: “The point is there are a lot more charges that should have been filed against Manafort.”

        Like what? The report didn’t name any.


        1. RE: “Conspiracy with foreign agents to interfere in the election comes to mind.”

          Conspiracy is not a crime, unless there was a conspiracy to break the law. My challenge to you is to name the law that Manafort broke, but I don’t think you can because the Senate report doesn’t name any.


          1. “Conspiracy is not a crime,”…

            There are thousands of folks in Federal prison that will disagree with your assessment. And if assisting a foreign power to interfere with our elections isn’t criminal, then there is something very wrong with the system

            The Senate report doesn’t name any because the Senate cannot bring criminal charges. They could refer the report to the DOJ, but they know Bill Barr will never do anything with it.

            Your defense of the indefensible is disgusting.

            Liked by 1 person

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in: Logo

You are commenting using your account. Log Out /  Change )

Google photo

You are commenting using your Google account. Log Out /  Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )

Connecting to %s