View Single Post
  #6   Report Post  
Posted to alt.home.repair
Dean Hoffman[_12_] Dean Hoffman[_12_] is offline
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 1,636
Default OT " Historian dissects 'boogeyman of Russian collusion' "

On 5/19/17 1:51 PM, trader_4 wrote:
On Friday, May 19, 2017 at 11:21:52 AM UTC-4, Gordon Shumway wrote:
On Thu, 18 May 2017 19:26:45 -0700, Oren wrote:
http://video.foxnews.com/v/5440432505001/?playlist_id=5198073478001#sp=show-clips

Better than I could explain it :-)
I saw that interview last night and it was what I believed was the
case all along. My reasoning was simple. With everything that was
"leaked" in an attempt to destroy Trump there has been absolutely
nothing leaked that is evidence of collusion. That should be proof
enough for all the loony leftists, but of course it won't.

ROFL. So, the fact that definitive proof hasn't been leaked, means
there is nothing there? How did that work in Watergate? At this
stage in Watergate, there was no definitive proof that Nixon was a
crook either.


Alan Dershowitz was on whatever talk show. His position is that there
wasn't any crime
committed even if Trump asked the Russians to help him win with all of
their resources.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=QNX6eqTMCEE
Dershowitz is pretty heavy on the Democrat side if memory serves.