What Do Trump and Republicans Mean by “Collusion”?

[Nous]

Trump has repeatedly claimed that the Special Counsel investigation has found “no collusion”. This probably convinces many Trump sycophants and fans that Mueller's investigation has failed to find any evidence of any wrongdoing.

Just within the past couple of days, Representative Mike Conaway told Chuck Todd that the House Intelligence Committee found no evidence of any “collusion”. Conaway: No 'conclusion' on collusion, but 'we found no evidence'

So what do Trump and these Republicans mean by “collusion”?

If you can't specify what is meant by the word “collusion,” then is there any rational purpose in claiming the absence of something that you can't specify?

 

[Revoltingest]

This probably convinces many Trump sycophants and....

Just as a matter of style, such language doesn't
inspire discussion...just echo chambers & bickering.

 

[esmith]

I would have to say that they would go with the legal definition of collusion:
From: Collusion - Wikipedia
"Collusion is an agreement between two or more parties, sometimes illegal–but always secretive–to limit open competition by deceiving, misleading, or defrauding others of their legal rights, or to obtain an objective forbidden by law typically by defrauding or gaining an unfair market advantage."

So in reference to the above those that are trying to prove collusion have to prove that voters legal rights were violated.
So were voters legal rights violated? In my opinion no. That is unless you consider attempting to influence voters an illegal act, and if so a whole bunch of people are in legal trouble.

 

[idav]

Trump has repeatedly claimed that the Special Counsel investigation has found “no collusion”. This probably convinces many Trump sycophants and fans that Mueller's investigation has failed to find any evidence of any wrongdoing.

Just within the past couple of days, Representative Mike Conaway told Chuck Todd that the House Intelligence Committee found no evidence of any “collusion”. Conaway: No 'conclusion' on collusion, but 'we found no evidence'

So what do Trump and these Republicans mean by “collusion”?

If you can't specify what is meant by the word “collusion,” then is there any rational purpose in claiming the absence of something that you can't specify?

Collusion is conspiring illegal activities with another party. Perhaps those who say 'no evidence of collusion' need to look up the definition of evidence. If there was no evidence there would be nothing to investigate. Evidence can be circumstantial.

 

[Audie]

Just as a matter of style, such language doesn't
inspire discussion...just echo chambers & bickering.

Rise to the bait
It's when a person reacts to a tempting statement or material enticement. Sometimes, it results in the person falling into a trap.


invidious
adjective abominable, calculated to proooke resentment, disagreeable, disliked, disobliging, harmful, hateful, hurtful, injurious, irksome, likely to excite ill will, loathsome, malicious, objectionable, obnoxious, odious, offensive, plaguesome, rancorous, spiteful, troublesome, unacceptable, unaccommodating, ungracious, unkind, unpleasant, unwelcome, vexatious
Associated concepts: invidious discrimination

 

[Nous]

I would have to say that they would go with the legal definition of collusion:
From: Collusion - Wikipedia
"Collusion is an agreement between two or more parties, sometimes illegal–but always secretive–to limit open competition by deceiving, misleading, or defrauding others of their legal rights, or to obtain an objective forbidden by law typically by defrauding or gaining an unfair market advantage."

That definition isn't found in any federal statute. In fact, the Wikipedia article cites an economics book as its source.

So in reference to the above those that are trying to prove collusion have to prove that voters legal rights were violated.

Rosenstein's letter appointing Mueller as Special Counsel doesn't say or imply any such thing with regard to the investigation that Mueller is supposed to continue. Right?

Do you believe that what you have stated here is what Trump has meant when he has claimed that Mueller's investigation has found "no collusion"?

Do you believe that what you have stated is what Conaway meant?

Exactly what "voters legal rights" are you referring to?

 

[Nous]

Just as a matter of style, such language doesn't
inspire discussion...just echo chambers & bickering.

You don't think Trump's declarations of "no collusion" convinced any of his sycophants that Mueller has found no wrongdoing?

What is your answer to the question the OP asks?

 

[Nous]

Rise to the bait
It's when a person reacts to a tempting statement or material enticement. Sometimes, it results in the person falling into a trap.


invidious
adjective abominable, calculated to proooke resentment, disagreeable, disliked, disobliging, harmful, hateful, hurtful, injurious, irksome, likely to excite ill will, loathsome, malicious, objectionable, obnoxious, odious, offensive, plaguesome, rancorous, spiteful, troublesome, unacceptable, unaccommodating, ungracious, unkind, unpleasant, unwelcome, vexatious
Associated concepts: invidious discrimination

Perhaps the question the OP asks is too difficult for you?

 

[Revoltingest]

You don't think Trump's declarations of "no collusion" convinced any of his sycophants that Mueller has found no wrongdoing?
What is your answer to the question the OP asks?

Defining "collusion" doesn't seem discussionworthy,
particularly when you insult half your potential respondents.
Would you want to be called a "Democratic sycophant"?
I didn't think so.

 

[BSM1]

Collusion is conspiring illegal activities with another party. Perhaps those who say 'no evidence of collusion' need to look up the definition of evidence. If there was no evidence there would be nothing to investigate. Evidence can be circumstantial.

Suspicion is what causes an investigation; evidence is what is found as a result of said investigation. This investigation was based on hope and innuendo, and there has been zero evidence found. End of story.

 

[Nous]

Defining "collusion" doesn't seem discussionworthy

Prove it.

 

[Nous]

there has been zero evidence found.

Zero evidence of what?

 

[BSM1]

Zero evidence of what?

Collusion. Isn't this your contention?

 

[Nous]

Collusion is conspiring illegal activities with another party.

Of course, the investigation Mueller was appointed to conduct is not limited to conspiracy.

 

[Nous]

Collusion.

Define what you mean by "collusion".

 

[metis]

The issue of "collusion" is somewhat nebulous as there's so many different angles that are possible. For example, money laundering typically involves "collusion", and this is an avenue that Mueller seems to be collecting testimony on. Hacking into government databases may involve collusion. Illegal use of campaign donations may involve collusion. Etc.

 

[esmith]

Define what you mean by "collusion".

Well you didn't like mine so how about you tell us what you think the legal term for "collusion" is. Simple terms, please not your extended wordsmithing

 

[Falvlun]

Suspicion is what causes an investigation; evidence is what is found as a result of said investigation. This investigation was based on hope and innuendo, and there has been zero evidence found. End of story.

How can it be “end of story” when the investigation is not even a year old?

Special Counsel Investigations typically last years, with indictments trickling in throughout. You don’t know what evidence has been found because Mueller’s ship doesn’t leak.*

So far, the investigation has resulted in:
Russian indictments, confirming that the Russian government worked to aid Trump’s candidacy.

Flynn and Papadopolous have plead guilty to lying to the FBI regarding their contacts with Russians.

Manafort and Gates have been indicted for money laundering and being unregistered foreign agents on behalf of pro-Russian interests in Ukraine.

These aren’t bit players. Russian connections and illegal activity keep piling up. Why would we stop the investigation now?

* There is evidence to support that the Trump campaign may have colluded with the Russian government. There’s certainly enough to question the possibility and launch an investigation. I laid some of it out HERE.

 

[Nous]

Well you didn't like mine so how about you tell us what you think the legal term for "collusion" is.

There is no "legal term for 'collusion'".

 

[Nous]

The issue of "collusion" is somewhat nebulous as there's so many different angles that are possible. For example, money laundering typically involves "collusion", and this is an avenue that Mueller seems to be collecting testimony on. Hacking into government databases may involve collusion. Illegal use of campaign donations may involve collusion. Etc.

Seeking to acquire something of value from a foreign entity during an election, such as "dirt" on another candidate," would seem to entail "collusion".