• Welcome to Baptist Board, a friendly forum to discuss the Baptist Faith in a friendly surrounding.

    Your voice is missing! You will need to register to get access to all the features that our community has to offer.

    We hope to see you as a part of our community soon and God Bless!

Gingrich: The Clintons started the so-called Russian collusion scandal and may be destroyed by it

The Left has been desperately working for months to find any shred of evidence that Donald Trump had even the slightest connection to Russia during the presidential campaign. Despite having the full support of their friends in the media, they have consistently failed to find anything substantive.

At first, I assumed the liberal elites were simply driven by their inability to accept that the American people elected Donald Trump as their 45th president. Now, I have another theory: The Trump-Russia story is meant to serve as a pure distraction aimed at masking real corruption by the Clinton political machine.

As The Hill reported on Sunday, while Hillary Clinton was Secretary of State, a Kremlin-linked bank paid her husband, former President Bill Clinton, hundreds of thousands of dollars. Also during her tenure as top diplomat, earlier reports indicate Canadian and Russian business executives directed many millions more to the Clinton Foundation. In fact, citing recently unsealed Federal Bureau of Investigation reports, The Hill described a thorough Russian campaign aimed at gaining access to the Clintons and capitalizing on their influence, while also spying on them to advance a pro-Russia agenda. In 2010, the FBI arrested 10 so-called “sleeper cell” Russian spies who had reportedly become too close to Hillary Clinton.

Meanwhile, while serving as Secretary of State, Hillary Clinton was also overseeing a laundry list of U.S.-Russian initiatives and dealings.

Among other things, she served on the Committee on Foreign Investment, where she voted in favor of President Obama’s approval of the sale of Uranium One, a Canadian business, to a state-owned Russian nuclear energy outfit. At the time, the Canadian company controlled 20 percent of the U.S. uranium reserves.

Before the sale was approved, a Kremlin-linked bank that supported the deal paid Bill Clinton $500,000 for a 90-minute speech in Moscow to promote the Uranium One’s stock. Bill then met personally with Vladimir Putin. All the while, people linked with Uranium One – and its previous incarnation UrAsia – reportedly paid the Clinton Foundation $145 million in donations.

You can’t make this stuff up, and while the news media continues to acknowledge the facts, they still claim there is no foul play on behalf of the Clintons in terms of the uranium deal. The Media Research Center found that the ABC, NBC, and CBS evening shows have “spent only 3 minutes and 1 second on the Clinton Foundation scandal in more than two years.”

In comparison, another Media Research Center report found that since Inauguration Day evening shows on these three networks have aired “1,000 minutes of coverage discussing Russia’s attempt to boost Trump in 2016, and speculation that Trump’s campaign may have colluded with the Russians in this project.”

And remember: The so-called collusion story came out of supposed opposition research we now know was funded by Clinton and her Democrat allies.

Thankfully, House and Senate Republicans have now launched new investigations into the Clintons’ ties to Russia – as well as Hillary’s illegal use of a private email server as Secretary of State. The email scandal is now even more significant given that we know that she continued to use a private, insecure email server despite the FBI arresting a ring of Russian agents who were specifically targeting her.

As I told Sean Hannity on Monday, I think we are on the edge of the greatest corruption scandal in American history.

The first thing Congress should do is demand that every single dollar donated to the Clinton Foundation and its charity initiatives be made public to show exactly where the Clintons derived their money. I suspect there are millions of foreign dollars hidden away in foreign subsidiaries that were never reported in financial disclosures.

The truth about the level of foreign donation, influence peddling, and outright corruption involved in the Clinton world could change American politics forever.

The great irony of all this though, is that the Clintons started the so-called Russian collusion scandal, and in the end, they may be the ones destroyed by it.

Newt Gingrich: The Clintons started the so-called Russian collusion scandal and may be destroyed by it
 

Use of Time

Well-Known Member
Site Supporter
So then this administration probably shouldn't have been stupid enough to give them anything to sink their teeth into. So much for that.
 
That's adorable.
It's also true. Trump has done nothing that he is accused by Left of doing. His "crime" as far as his critics are concerned, is getting elected. 9 months and four investigations have turned up no evidence of anything. At some point, they have to face reality.
 

InTheLight

Well-Known Member
Site Supporter
9 months and four investigations have turned up no evidence of anything.

A foreign policy advisor to Trump's campaign, when learning that Russians have thousands of Hillary Clinton emails, reports back to a high-ranking Trump campaign official, requests further meetings with the Russian go-between, and urges the campaign to get Trump to meet Russian officials. This campaign advisor recently pleaded guilty to lying to the FBI.

That's what you call "no evidence of anything?"
 
A foreign policy advisor to Trump's campaign, when learning that Russians have thousands of Hillary Clinton emails, reports back to a high-ranking Trump campaign official, requests further meetings with the Russian go-between, and urges the campaign to get Trump to meet Russian officials. This campaign advisor recently pleaded guilty to lying to the FBI.

That's what you call "no evidence of anything?"
How does what he did serve a evidence of any wrong doing by Trump? You appear to be relying on "guilt by association."
 

InTheLight

Well-Known Member
Site Supporter
How does what he did serve a evidence of any wrong doing by Trump? You appear to be relying on "guilt by association."

Never said Trump was guilty of anything. He's probably innocent of direct involvement. But you stated there was no evidence of anything in a thread about Russian collusion. And here is a Trump campaign aide that met with Russians and pursued information on Russians possessing Hillary Clinton e-mails. That definitely fits the bill as far as "the slightest connection to Russia during the presidential campaign," to quote the opening sentence of your post.
 
Never said Trump was guilty of anything. He's probably innocent of direct involvement. But you stated there was no evidence of anything in a thread about Russian collusion. And here is a Trump campaign aide that met with Russians and pursued information on Russians possessing Hillary Clinton e-mails. That definitely fits the bill as far as "the slightest connection to Russia during the presidential campaign," to quote the opening sentence of your post.
There is no evidence of collusion in any of what you are stating. The meeting with the Russians by Trump Jr. was about opposition research. They were lured into a meeting under false pretenses and when that was discovered, Trump Jr. left the room, as did others. The meeting fizzled out into nothing.

In the context of what they are being accused of, the OP is exactly correct. There is not the slightest connection to the Russians in terms of collusion or anything illegal. You appear to be making a non-argument if you don't think Trump is guilty of anything.
 

InTheLight

Well-Known Member
Site Supporter
So your constant obsession with him is just a manifestation of your OCD? You don't believe that he committed any crimes but you continue to harp on and on about him out of just pure hatred?

Classic. Attack the messenger. Play the "hate card." B-O-R-I-N-G.

Look, the thread is about "not one shred of evidence that Trump colluded with Russia."

I've provided a shred of evidence. That's all.
 

InTheLight

Well-Known Member
Site Supporter
There is no evidence of collusion in any of what you are stating. The meeting with the Russians by Trump Jr. was about opposition research. They were lured into a meeting under false pretenses and when that was discovered, Trump Jr. left the room, as did others. The meeting fizzled out into nothing.

I don't know why you're bringing up the Donald Jr. meeting. I'm not talking about that.
 

InTheLight

Well-Known Member
Site Supporter
Which meeting are you referring to?

George Papadopolous, Trump campaign advisor meeting with Russian go-betweens who claimed to have lots of dirt in thousands of stolen Hillary Clinton emails. It's in the news today, well, unless you've been tracking Fox News. Then probably not.

I've posted the relevant section of the indictment in a couple of other threads here, one of those threads was started by you--"The Tables Have Turned." But here you go again:

Papadoupoulos2.jpg
 
Top