You do realize the Clinton campaign hired Fusion to obtain the Steele dossier who got all his information from Kremlin agents.....don't you? Sounds like collusion to me.
Funny, I remember a bunch of hyperactive tools got all excited on here when it was reported Steele used a CNN website for some info in his dossier... https://www.cnn.com/2019/03/16/politics/steele-information-dossier/index.html But to your point, as unethical as that may have turned out (and since ZERO of the Steele Dossier was used in the election process, that answer is not very), there's still several levels between the Clinton campaign and actual Russians... Not so with the direct connection between Trump campaign and Russians...
Somebody submitted it as evidence to a FISA Court, that person is headed for a very LONG stretch in prison.
This quote says he didn't come to the conclusion Trump committed a crime nor that he exonerates him. In other words I can't say he committed a crime but some things could be seen that way. In other words I don't have the goods and it would never hold up in court but there is circumstantial evidence. I "Accordingly, while this report does not conclude that the President committed a crime, it also does not exonerate him." I do find it hilarious that all of a sudden you off the collusion train, you were one of the freaking engineers guaranteeing us Trump had colluded and was a traitor. Goal posts move noted.
and some take one sentence and post it without context because they just can't stand how damn wrong they were. Oh how you were lead around on the collusion leash by the wacko libs and MSM, unfortunately the smartest guys in the room just happened to be the Trump supporters and told you over and over you were getting set up. Gotta suck for you, sorry.
I said all along I thought Mueller would clear Trump. I didn't anticipate that Trump would be dumb enough to obstruct Mueller.
And by obstruct you mean he told someone in a private meeting to fire Mueller, not because he wanted the investigation stopped but because he felt Mueller was conflicted. The person he told didn't do it and DT didn't follow through with it. Seems like the lamest case of obstruction I've ever heard. It's not like he bleached and smashed subpoenaed hard drives.
And by obstruct you mean he told someone in a private meeting (Wrong - Called McGahn on the weekend - not in a meeting) to fire Mueller, not because he wanted the investigation stopped (Wrong - but irrelevant) but because he felt Mueller was conflicted (Correct - But he was told by everybody that there were no legit conflicts, including McGahn and the DOJ Ethics Office - "silly" and "not real" some terms used). The person he told didn't do it and DT didn't follow through with it (Wrong - he called McGahn a second time that weekend and asked if it had been done). Seems like the lamest case of obstruction I've ever heard (Wrong - there are much lamer cases of obstruction in this very document) It's not like he bleached and smashed subpoenaed hard drives (Correct but irrelevant)
Where did I say that he didn't betray this country by knowingly accepting help from Russia. You know what I find "hilarious"? You trumpers continuing to make **** up about that unpatriotic self-aggrandizing incompetent in the WH and what other posters believe. The Mueller Report outlines what they've done vis-a-vis Russia; it's sickening.
Bonespurs J. Halfwit has a very flexible idea of what constitutes a "conflict", depending only on whether it suits him to perceive one or not. With respect to Mueller, that "conflict" was that "he and Comey are best friends!", which wasn't true anyway. They were colleagues. Of course, he didn't believe that a witness or subject of the investigation (Sessions) had a conflict, (having a mongoloid hissyfit over his recusal), which was equally absurd for the opposite reason.
*LOL* It's pretty plain that he wanted to fire Mueller because of the Russia investigation. "Conflicted"? *LOL*
And that traitorous dickwad DID collude with Russia. As I've stated, what we know publicly is bad enough. What the Mueller Report further revealed was even worse: https://www.washingtonpost.com/outl...ia-read-between-lines/?utm_term=.dbfc2e94bd99 Phew. Mop your brow. Turns out there were links between Russia and Trump — but nothing that would stand up in a court of law. What a relief. No one should be reassured by this interpretation. Just as no parent would be reassured if the police returned a teenage son or daughter late at night, saying, “We discovered your child in possession of opioids, but they are not old enough to be charged as an adult.” You wouldn’t just roll over and go back to sleep. Lunching daily with the Mafioso John Gotti would not have been prosecutable, either, but nobody would turn over their life savings to Gotti’s unindicted buddies. Mueller’s report said that “While the investigation identified numerous links between individuals with ties to the Russian government and individuals associated with the Trump campaign, the evidence was not sufficient to charge any campaign official.” This is far from a clean bill of health for the Trump administration and its dealings with President Vladimir Putin’s Russia. We can deduce what lies just beneath the surface of the Mueller team’s work. Wow! He's fake exonerated!
Well, it's interesting to watch the development of the "conflict" situation with Mueller... It started with 3 possibilities, 1 of which had likely merit and needed to be explored and resolved. 1. Mueller worked for a law firm representing Trump associates - Sure, this is a valid avenue of conflict exploration, and that was resolved on 5/23, almost a full month before Trump called McGahn 2. Mueller "interviewed" for the Head of the FBI - Bannon said Mueller didn't come into the WH seeking that job, but was "interviewed" anyway. 3. The golf club dispute - Obviously a non starter, and this "conflict" was called "Silly" Trump knew all of these were invalid, from many different sources, which is when he came up with the Comey/Mueller bro-fest (A for effort)... Their "relationship", as 2 former heads of the FBI, would only come into play if Mueller was charged with investigating Comey, not Trump. Trump using "conflicts" to fire Mueller is a ridiculous claim, with all the contradicting information out there...
You plainly haven't. Or you're blinded by your unpatriotic love for the Orange Mongoloid. It doesn't matter; you either didn't read it, are being dishonest about what the report says, or don't have the foggiest notion what the report means. Phew. Mop your brow. Turns out there were links between Russia and Trump — but nothing that would stand up in a court of law. What a relief. No one should be reassured by this interpretation. Just as no parent would be reassured if the police returned a teenage son or daughter late at night, saying, “We discovered your child in possession of opioids, but they are not old enough to be charged as an adult.” You wouldn’t just roll over and go back to sleep. Lunching daily with the Mafioso John Gotti would not have been prosecutable, either, but nobody would turn over their life savings to Gotti’s unindicted buddies. Mueller’s report said that “While the investigation identified numerous links between individuals with ties to the Russian government and individuals associated with the Trump campaign, the evidence was not sufficient to charge any campaign official.” This is far from a clean bill of health for the Trump administration and its dealings with President Vladimir Putin’s Russia. We can deduce what lies just beneath the surface of the Mueller team’s work. On the obstruction side, Mueller specifically noted that a sitting president cannot be indicted, laid out at least 10 areas of obstruction, noted that Bonespurs is not exonerated and stated that Congress can address a president's corruption. Whew! That sounds like a guy who's totally innocent. But you fail to even address those damning statements because you've chosen one orange deviant scumbag over your country. Way to go, "patriot".
Great! If you take your biases and use them to "read between the lines" you can come up with an appearance of guilt. Good job! Do you understand that, in order to judge contacts with RUSSIANS! as being nefarious, you must assume that no other possibilities can exist? Why should we judge that THE RUSSIANS! are the greatest evil on Earth? When did we decide that RUSSIA! was the greatest threat to our nation? So far, no one has even attempted to answer this simple question: Why is it that, as late as May 18, 2016, DNI James Clapper didn't mention RUSSIA! as a specific threat? https://apnews.com/936b3fe969a540559ecc7503a547e2ad He specifically mentions China, Iran, and the hacking group "Anonymous". Why didn't RUSSIA! rate a mention? But wait, there's more: The same damn stuff happened in 2008. "Eight years ago, foreign intelligence services “met with campaign contacts and staff, used human source networks for policy insights, exploited technology to get otherwise sensitive data, engaged in perception management to influence policy,” it said. “This exceeded traditional lobbying and public diplomacy.”" Funny that, only now, is it considered evil doing on the part of the candidate. Are we witnessing the use of intelligence for political purposes?...
So, you have no answer. Maybe, with the right search parameters, you can find a Fake News source, with a fake narrative, that might be spun into the appearance of an answer.
Yeah it seems almost like Mueller was stretching for examples. Or perhaps he was just listing every little detail of his research. DT has yet to pardon anyone and I have not heard he is considering any pardons. I know Cohen reached out to DT hoping for a pardon but he was denied. If Mueller could demonstrate witnesses were offered some kind of pardon in exchange for altered testimony that would be significant but as it stands it comes across like just more fodder thrown out there for partisan consumption.
Yes of course and when you can demonstrate that the dossier was used to influence the election we will stop laughing.
