[gnaritas]

Such a deflection of the topic is unworthy of hacker news. Trump is the president, discussion about Trump's negatives are not an excuse to deflect with "what about Obama", he is not the topic. Giving a speech is in no way comparable to the topic at hand anyway.

[dr_ick]

It sets a precedent that the left does want to acknowledge. There was likely collusion between Obama and "Remainers". Obama made a speech with a threat that was intended to directly influence a vote in a foreign country. Where was the outrage from the Democrats and media when this was done?

Former Acting CIA Director Michael Morell has stated that he has seen no evidence of collusions between Trump and the Kremlin. "On the question of the Trump campaign conspiring with the Russians here, there is smoke, but there is no fire, at all," Morell said.[156]

James Clapper, the Director of National Intelligence under President Obama, said there was no evidence of any collusion between the Trump campaign and Russian operatives as of January 2017 when the intelligence community issued its report on the subject.[157]

[gnaritas]

You're again trying to fly off on a diversion of the topic, I'm not playing. This is not a discussion about Obama, period. Nor are public speeches that influence foreign countries remotely comparable to collusion to affect "our" elections. Your continual citing of only the evidence that supports your politics is nothing more than partisan deflection, you are not engaging in honest debate.

It's like you don't even read the links you post

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Russian_interference_in_the_20...

There's plenty right there in your own source that warrants investigation into Trump simply from the already proved contacts that have occurred between the Russians and Trump's associates. That they have not found direct evidence of Trump's involvement yet is not a reason to stop an investigation who's purpose is simply to find out what did actually happen.

[dr_ick]

I'm happy this is an ongoing investigation. I hope the Democrats keep pushing it. I suspect they will continue to find nothing and the public will become more and more aware of the hypocrisy on the left.

This also keeps the Democrats from addressing real issues in their party. They ran a bad campaign. Instead of owning it and finding ways to address issues with American voters, they have found a scapegoat in Russia. Good Job!

[gnaritas]

You cant' seem to get over the incorrect idea that the dems are just being sore losers; that's childish and not at all what is occurring.

[dr_ick]

What is childish is implying the President of the United States committed treason with nothing to back it up.

Time will tell, but at least some Democrats are starting to address the real issue, and not placing all the blame on the boogeyman (Russia):

http://www.cnn.com/2017/03/30/politics/joe-biden-donald-trum...

[glenndebacker]

"What is childish is implying the President of the United States committed treason with nothing to back it up."

A bit like throwing wild unfounded accusations of blaming your predecessor of "tapping" your wires and when that doesn't fly try to redefine the meaning of words.

Or from the moment that the media writes something you don't like call them "fake" or threaten them with stronger libel laws.

Or when you are getting under fire blame somebody else or cry "this is unfair, look what the other one did".

The only time in my life that I personally witnessed this kind of behavior was when I was in Kindergarten. And I'm not trying to make a joke, I'm very serious about this.

I don't think your POTUS is the physical representation of well-considered mature views or standing, not by a long shot. I was always raised under the impression that all old people had a lot of wisdom in them, but there is one 70 years old one that changed my views on that dramatically.

It's never about the topic at hand but there always seem to be some deflection to things or persons which (honestly) doesn't matter anymore. And what I find particularly strange is that it can be perfectly be the case that there is no "treason", it's the weird behavior shown (and sorry a bit dishonesty) that makes it so damn compelling to believe it.

[gnaritas]

I haven't implied that, you're simply reading what I'm saying via partisan eyes. I merely stated treason is a serious crime.

And no, Clinton's campaign is not the real issue. She lost, that's over, no one is questing that. The issue is whether Trump and team were involved or not with the Russian interference with the election. No amount of deflecting back to Clinton will change the issue.