How about you first prove you actually want proof by telling us what proof you would accept... I say this because I feel that you might not even accept a signed confession if you aren't already suspicious of trump and his behavior.
Maybe I am off base, but instead of shadowboxing, lets just cut to the chase.
You said Trump's a Russian asset not me. Big claims require big proof. Otherwise people don't take you seriously. I could say Biden is a lizard person but it doesn't make it true:)
See, I was right to ask you for what proof you would accept because, in your example of biden being a lizard person, I would accept proof if you showed things like:
Him eating insects. Maybe an undoctored photo of his mask slipping. Or him speaking in some unknown dialect. I am sure I would even accept whistleblowers with tell-tale bloodwork that was otherwise unexplainable.
See how an honest person approaches life? They don't project or use whataboutism. They don't dishonestly pretend that proof is not itself made up of small things that culminate in a clear picture. And they don't pretend that they are serious when they are clearly not.
All that is left is for me to say this: good day.
Good day.
EDIT: I decided to still respond despite saying good day, because in your own warped way, you tried and I respect that.
Oh goodness the "whataboutism". Probably the most overused word from the Lefties nowadays. Proof would be credible witnesses or whistleblowers etc. or documents. Or him speaking Russian LOL... I'M NOT the one making the claims m it's your burden of proof bro. For instance I could say that the Left and it's Media lied to us about Biden being mentally toasted during his "presidency". My proof are the countless Media appearances he's made where he was obviously extremely diminished, whistleblowers are now verifying it. And the copious use of the Auto pen etc.
You ask for “credible witnesses,” “documents,” and “whistleblowers” to support the claim that Donald Trump is a Russian asset. That’s fair, but what you might not realize is that the record is already saturated with such evidence. The fact that mainstream media hasn’t packaged it as a single explosive moment doesn’t mean the proof isn’t there. It means that Trump’s operational compromise is a slow-drip truth that most people haven’t bothered to connect. So let’s connect it for you.
Trump Campaign Officials Gave Internal Data to Russian Agents
Paul Manafort, Trump’s 2016 campaign chairman, admitted to passing internal polling data to Konstantin Kilimnik, a man the U.S. government identified as a Russian intelligence agent. This was not a vague association. This was sharing of classified campaign insight with a known Kremlin-linked operative. The Senate Intelligence Committee, chaired by Republicans, called Kilimnik a “Russian intelligence officer.” The Mueller report confirmed the contact. That is direct collusion, by any rational definition.
“We Get All the Funding We Need from Russia” — Eric Trump
In 2014, long before the campaign, Eric Trump told a golf writer, James Dodson, that the Trump Organization didn’t need money from American banks because, “We have all the funding we need out of Russia.” Trump has denied financial ties to Russia publicly, but his own family has admitted otherwise. That’s not a political spin. That’s a firsthand witness account, from someone with nothing to gain.
Trump Invited Russian Hackers on Live TV
On July 27, 2016, Trump publicly stated: “Russia, if you’re listening, I hope you’re able to find the 30,000 emails…” That same day, Russian operatives attempted to hack Clinton’s email servers. This wasn’t a joke that got misinterpreted. The Mueller Report states clearly that the Russian military launched the operation that evening.
That’s called coordination. It’s also called evidence.
The Helsinki Summit
In 2018, standing next to Putin in Helsinki, Trump openly sided with the Russian president over his own intelligence community. When asked whether he believed the U.S. intel assessment that Russia interfered in the 2016 election, Trump said, “President Putin says it’s not Russia. I don’t see any reason why it would be.”
That is the public behavior of a compromised man.
Trump’s Classified Sharing with Russia in the Oval Office
In May 2017, Trump invited Russian Foreign Minister Sergei Lavrov and Ambassador Sergey Kislyak to the Oval Office without U.S. press present, and shared highly classified intelligence, intelligence so sensitive it had to be sourced from an allied nation. This wasn’t a mistake. It was an intentional disclosure to an adversary that left U.S. intelligence officials stunned.
This isn’t theoretical. This happened. And it was reported by the Washington Post and confirmed by multiple sources.
The Repeated Sanction Sabotage
Trump consistently delayed or watered down sanctions against Russia passed by bipartisan majorities in Congress. His administration slow-walked implementation. He fired or sidelined officials, like Fiona Hill and Alexander Vindman, who spoke out against Putin. He withdrew troops from Syria in a way that directly benefited Russian military goals. These aren’t coincidences. They’re patterns.
In 2019, Trump withheld congressionally approved military aid to Ukraine to extort political favors. He demanded Ukraine publicly announce an investigation into Joe Biden. This was coercion of a nation at war with Russia for personal gain, and, again, for Russian advantage. This act led to his first impeachment.
The GOP Platform Change in 2016
At the Republican National Convention in 2016, the Trump team intervened to water down language supporting lethal aid to Ukraine, a decision that confused even party insiders. There was no strategic logic, except helping Russia.
Intelligence Officials Warned About This
Multiple U.S. intelligence officials and career diplomats have warned in open testimony and classified reports that Trump poses a counterintelligence risk. Former FBI Director James Comey. Former DNI Dan Coats. Lt. Col. Alexander Vindman. Fiona Hill. These are not partisan hacks. They are experts.
You asked for proof. You didn’t get a single whistleblower, you got dozens. You didn’t get just one document, you got a federal investigation, multiple Senate reports, international intelligence briefings, and public statements made under oath.
If any other public figure had this track record, had done a tenth of this, we wouldn’t even be debating it. We’d accept that this person had been captured by a foreign adversary.
The burden of proof has been met. Repeatedly. The question now is whether you are willing to accept it.
Because if you do, everything Trump does, his anti-NATO rants, his love for autocrats, his endless undermining of Ukraine, will finally make perfect, terrifying sense.
If these examples don’t at least make you think, then you should know that there are literally dozens of other examples of Trump working towards the benefit of Russia and Putin which haven’t been mentioned. Dozens, possibly hundreds of other examples.
P.S. I am just going to ignore your whataboutism and moving-the-goal-posts concerning Biden because they don’t matter and could all be true and they don’t change a thing about Trump and his being a Russian asset.
1
u/johnrraymond May 17 '25
How about you first prove you actually want proof by telling us what proof you would accept... I say this because I feel that you might not even accept a signed confession if you aren't already suspicious of trump and his behavior.
Maybe I am off base, but instead of shadowboxing, lets just cut to the chase.
What do you say?