It wasn't a hoax

Okay, but not my questions, the Special Counsel's questions. If the matter was just a big hoax why not set the record straight under oath?
Because if he answered honestly he would implicate himself in a crime. If he didn't he'd be committing perjury.

BTW, Mueller said he was confident an enforceable subpoena could be issued to compel Individual 1's testimony but choose not to in order to expedite the completion of the investigation.

I'm afraid my advantage over you is my familiarity with the facts and what is in Mueller's report.

 

I imagine in your mind you posted that because you think it refutes Mueller's characterization of Russia's efforts to get Trump elected as "sweeping and systematic." If so, gee, what a pathetic effort. You really should read the report so you can come at this from an informed perspective.

 

You have no evidence for that allegation.

Dismissed.

 

What an incompetent rebuttal! Hoax says it all and people are now getting indicted for it.

 

You countered my claim that the Dossier is not fake, but is raw intel and that the investigation was not, per the IG report, predicated on the dossier.

You countered with some kind of rant about the deep state and referring to numerous off topic declarations and inquiry..

I explained to you that 'deep state' is a thought terminating cliché, and, as such, a non argument.

Nonarguments are not counter arguments, they do not merit a counter argument since they are not arguments to begin with.

Please stick to the above topic (highlighted) as previously requested, where I wrote:

Please provide well -reasoned counter argument without thought-terminating clichés, loaded phrases, sentiment, emotion, but with sound logic and sourcing your claims, if possible.

 

You are the one who repeatedly brings this up.

 

Without the dossier, it quite likely would never have come up.

 

Without the dossier, the "pretenses" would not have aroused interest.

 

Simply that it all would have otherwise been dismissed as the usual campaign chatter.

 

Try harder.

 

What is it about not being required to answer questions that is above your head?
And if you had familiarity of the Mueller report you wouldn't need to post leftist media garbage to support your made up claims.

 

Except everything I posted is from your own article.
And if you had read the report you wouldn't need debunked media garbage to support your claims. You could post it right from the report.
Which is why posters accuse you of making stuff up.

 

To convince you of facts? Can’t convince the deaf.

 

Your unsubstantiated speculation is always welcome, but in truth, adds nothing to the discussion.

 

Not for you to respond with nonarguments, but for others to respond with merit worthy counter arguments.

 

I'll file that in the wishful thinking file. Congrats!

 

Counter arguments for nonsense?

 

So? It does nothing to change Mueller's characterization of Russia's efforts to get Trump elected as "sweeping and systematic."

"Which is why posters accuse you of making stuff up."

Those with whom I disagree accuse me of all sorts of things.................without evidence.

 

True, convincing you of facts will never happen.

 

Is it working?

 

So lets break down your fakery, shall we.

Meaning all of that would have to be proven in order to even consider obstruction which is why Mueller (Not being fired) would have no chance of proving.
Which is why no recommendations of obstruction were ever considered for impeachment.
How would you prove that discussing firing Mueller would obstruct the investigation or grand jury proceedings?
You couldn't. Thats idiotic
If you can't hold Trump for Obstruction for actually firing Comey, How the hell are you going to charge obstruction for not firing Mueller.
NEXT

Now, in your own report, it claims the information about Trump simply wanted McGahn to bring conflicts of interest to the DOJ is supported by McGahns previous claims.
NEXT

That isn't substantial evidence of anything other than tell the DOJ Mueller has a conflict of interest and needs to go.
NOTHING in that statement direct McGahn to fire anyone or demand anyone be fired.
This is what people are talking about with you on made up claims.

 

Proof? His entire body of work. Not to mention your poor attempt to end the issue.

 

Mueller should have indicted Steele.

“He was charged with five counts of making false statements to the FBI, according to the indictment that was unsealed Thursday, and faces up to five years in prison for each count.

Danchenko was a key source of information used by former British intelligence operative Christopher Steele in a dossier that alleged Trump was compromised by ties to Russia ahead of the 2016 election. The dossier, which many of the claims in it were never proven, became one of the most controversial parts of the FBI's 2016 investigation into Trump and Russia, known as "Crossfire Hurricane," which led to special counsel Robert Mueller's investigation.

Among the salacious claims Danchenko has said he passed on was that the Russians had a tape of Trump with women that became infamously shorthanded as the pee tape.”
CNN, Russian analyst who was source for Steele dossier arrested and charged with lying to FBI, By Zachary Cohen, Evan Perez and Katelyn Polantz, CNN, November 4, 2021.
https://www.cnn.com/2021/11/04/politics/igor-danchenko-arrested/index.html

 

So Sweeping and systematic is 100K of Facebook ads, Mueller claiming Russian hackers breached some Florida Government computer but couldn't verify it, and accusing 25 hackers of spreading inflammatory post on social media?
Oh boy, Thats some claim you have there.
More Russian fakery is afoot. lol

Then you could show me. Betcha can't. But I can show you.

Nope, those who you have seen what you post. Like me for example.
Most of what you post is leftist debunked garbage.

 

Please read the damn report and relieve us all of dealing with your woeful ignorance of the facts. Seriously, read it.