You need to listen to Fox News to actually get it!

Circle of Collusion: Assange to Stone to Trump Campaign and Back
The special counsel’s latest indictment is rich with details about the coordination with WikiLeaks during the 2016 campaign.

https://www.bloomberg.com/opinion/a...er-stone-indictment-draws-circle-of-collusion

Showing you how collusion was proven. Weeeeee, this is fun!!

"The indictment of Roger Stone, who was arrested Friday by the FBI and charged with lying to Congress, provides the first detailed evidence that Stone was a go-between for Donald Trump’s presidential campaign with WikiLeaks and its founder, Julian Assange. In 2016, WikiLeaks had and released a large numbers of emails that had been stolen by Russian intelligence from the Democratic National Committee and from Hillary Clinton’s campaign.

Stone’s coordination between the campaign and WikiLeaks is substantive, from what the court filings show. Stone, a Republican political operative and confidant of Trump, got advance notice of WikiLeaks document releases that he passed on to the Trump campaign. That included information about an “October surprise,” which turned out to be the leaking of Clinton campaign chairman John Podesta’s emails."

 

That's a CNBC article.

Where in the SS Mueller report does it say that there was a connection between Stone and Wikileaks?

 

Where in the SS Mueller report does it say that there was collusion between American(s) and the Russians?

I'll wait.

 

Bloomberg? LMFAO!

Where in the long awaited SS Mueller report does it say that there was collusion between American(s) and the Russians?

I'll wait.

 

Are your Congresscitters getting old and senile? If what you folks allege was even close to truth seems to me it should've showed up the articles of impeachment. Thanks for playing though...

 

It was not and is not the role of a prosecutor to "exonerate" and it gave was a report that did not have evidence to accuse let alone convict Trump of anything.

 

Do YOU think repeating that falsehood makes it true?

 

The impeachment was meaningless since it was partisan. I call your talking point and raise you one.

 

It just goes to show that even facts vary by political position.

 

In Volume I.

 

But, they don't. Unless you believe Kellyanne was right and there are "alternate facts," which is absurd on its face.

 

I support sanders. So when you act like there was a cconspiracy of putin and trump even now you are doing what you accuse fox of doing

There was no evidence of a conspiracy. That is fact and you are mentally affected to claim the contrary.

It is so absurd what you are trying to do at best. At worse? I best not say.

 

Post the text of your claim.

 

But they do. Sorry. You say Trump engaged in collusion with the Russians and I don't. I can provide quotes but you have already seen them. There is no fact, only perception. Polirics distorts the truth.

 

Stone also allegedly sent messages back to Assange, through intermediaries, specifying the precise content of Clinton emails he would like to see leaked.
All this appears, according to the indictment, to be supported by documentary evidence in the form of emails. If accurate, it proves a degree of coordination between the Trump campaign and WikiLeaks — which was getting its leak material from Russian intelligence.
The circle of collusion therefore runs from Russian intelligence to Assange to Stone to the Trump campaign, and back again at least as far as Assange.
https://www.bloomberg.com/opinion/a...er-stone-indictment-draws-circle-of-collusion

 

Where in the SS Mueller report are these findings?

 

I see. It is an allegation. Why bother?

 

https://www.vox.com/policy-and-poli...oger-stone-indictment-mueller-trump-wikileaks

Vol. I.

 

Post the text of the report that validates your claim.

 

We’ve got to distinguish between news and opinion. Fox purposely blended the two and in retrospect caused an incredible amount of confusion and changed the nature of news. It was the business model not the quality of product that accomplished that feat.

Their prime time line up is talk shows and billed as such even though they fall under the banner of Fox News. The talk shows are opinion outlets not news.

The News division had been solid until the recent years. After they apparently lost the internal power struggle they’ve been mediocre: the exodus of solid journalists certainly didn’t help.

Overall, as an information outlet FoxNews has perpetually brought up the rear in their ‘informed audience’ scores. It’s audience can’t distinguish news from opinion.

I disagree with the OP. There is readily available information to help them distinguish opinion from news. Afterall Caveat Emptor is the way our system rolls and has for quite a long time.

Oh! Sorry. Caveat Emptor means ‘let the buyer beware’. Likely should have used the latter.

 

Go find it yourself.

 

You have only to look at who owns Fox News and who managed it for him for years to understand why it has become the propaganda mouthpiece for the Libertarian mindset as personified by Murdoch and Ailes.

They support Trump because he has given Libertarians everything they could possibly want in their wildest dreams - Tax cuts for the wealthy; service cuts for everyone else; maximum war industry profiteering and the elimination of environmental regulation.

The list goes on and on. Sources like Fox news could care less what all this is doing to democratic institutions and to American democracy as a whole.

As long as the bucks keep rolling in they will support Trump no matter what - he could grab queen Elizabeth by the &#$$@ or allow Putin to address congress - they wouldn't care.

 

....or see them tweeted by Trump

 

Thanks...just nice to hear the truth once in a while.

 

Yup. He has a habit of impulsively tweeting Rush's and Faux's lies as soon as they come to his attention.