Silly arguments being made by the right

That is not the same as colluding.

 

nope. not your fault. trump and his deregulation frenzy did that.

 

we have NOTHING "better to do" than keep trump and his foreign handlers out of power.

the money is nothing. we spend tons of millions so trump can rent golf carts from himself.

 

Lord help us all.... when you literally just left out the word "and"...

 

Why don't we spend another 30 million to be absolutely sure he didn't watch prostitutes pee on a bed in Moscow? The money is nothing.

 

I never denied Russian meddling. The question is Trump's complicity in same. The answer is ... none that I can tell.

BTW, an indictment is not a conviction.

 

i don't care about the sex games. putin provided the prostitutes , and the camera, so that he would have leverage over a billionaire. events since that time suggest strongly that such leverage is effective.

 

a pee pee tape believer.... that says a lot right there..

 

i didn't see the tape. did you? putin received very good value for that kompromat, and will collect another installment when trump surrenders ANOTHER country that was never his.

 

Strange when you tell us "putin provided the prostitutes , and the camera"... you are putting out the claim... own it..

 

But the U.S. intelligence community says their own report may not be factual and could be wrong...

 

When the investigated began the extent of Trump "lies, deception, and suspicious activity" was his running for president, which was the sole and only reason for the investigation.

 

lets translate that as "their report may be factual and could be right.

and while we are here, where in durham's, or muller's report does it say that steele is wrong? where does "debunked" appear on either or any other document?

 

“Russia, if you’re listening — I hope you are able to find the 30,000 emails that are missing. I think you will probably be rewarded mightily by our press. Let’s see if that happens.”

THAT VERY DAY RUSSIA TARGETED CLINTON'S ACCOUNTS. Just a coincidence huh?

Yes weird how 12 of Russia's military that were indicted, haven't been handed over to US right?

 

Oh, how ridiculous. He wasn't inviting collusion, he was taking a shot at the Justice Department. People with guilty minds don't confess their mens rea out loud on national TV.

I have no idea how you think Russia' refusal to extradite members of its military is evidence of collusion.

In any event, it is obvious that it was the Clinton campaign, though I don't say Hillary herself, that was colluding with Russia to affect the election.

 

`

Weird I didn't link that? Are you refuting Marco Rubio? The Senate report?


BUT

Senate Report Affirms U.S. Intelligence Findings on 2016 Russian Interference
Heavily redacted bipartisan report is latest volume by Senate Intelligence Committee

The U.S. intelligence community’s conclusion that Russia interfered in the 2016 election to help elect Donald Trump was accurate and based on strongly sourced information and sound analytical judgment, a bipartisan Senate report has concluded.

https://www.wsj.com/articles/senate...ings-on-2016-russian-interference-11587483408

 

Sure, lots of her people were convicted of crime right? Durham even indicted some of her people right? lol

The U.S. intelligence community’s conclusion that Russia interfered in the 2016 election to help elect Donald Trump was accurate and based on strongly sourced information and sound analytical judgment, a bipartisan Senate report has concluded.

https://www.wsj.com/articles/senate...ings-on-2016-russian-interference-11587483408

 

I didn't say anyone committed a crime. I don't get hysterical either.


https://www.reuters.com/article/us-...rump-dossier-u-s-firm-discloses-idUSKBN1D15XH

 

I'm genuinely curious: where do you think the preposterous Golden shower story came from? You think the Trump campaign planted that?

 

Sorry I forgot the convictions of Manafort, his assistant, the meeting where "dirt" was expected on Hil in NY with Diaper Donnie JR and Diaper Donnie's son in law in attendance, was kept from Diaper Donnie

 

You evidently also forgot all the communications between Trump and any Russians relative to the election. Because there aren't any.

Also this:

"So far, U.S. officials have not said publicly — or said if they know — what Russian intelligence services did with the data they received, or if the information provided had any impact on Russia’s attempts to interfere in the 2016 election."

https://www.google.com/amp/s/www.nbcnews.com/news/amp/ncna1264371

Fill us in when you get to the bottom of it. Somehow, Mr. Muller and his staff were unable to. Maybe they were paid off by "the Russians."

 

\

Mueller spent almost 200 pages describing “numerous links between the Russian government and the Trump Campaign.” He found that “a Russian entity carried out a social media campaign that favored presidential candidate Donald J. Trump and disparaged presidential candidate Hillary Clinton.” He also found that “a Russian intelligence service conducted computer-intrusion operations” against the Clinton campaign and then released stolen documents.


While Mueller was unable to establish a conspiracy between members of the Trump campaign and the Russians involved in this activity, he made it clear that “[a] statement that the investigation did not establish particular facts does not mean there was no evidence of those facts.” In fact, Mueller also wrote that the “investigation established that the Russian government perceived it would benefit from a Trump presidency and worked to secure that outcome, and that the Campaign expected it would benefit electorally from information stolen and released through Russian efforts.”

To find conspiracy, a prosecutor must establish beyond a reasonable doubt the elements of the crime: an agreement between at least two people, to commit a criminal offense and an overt act in furtherance of that agreement. One of the underlying criminal offenses that Mueller reviewed for conspiracy was campaign-finance violations. Mueller found that Trump campaign members Donald Trump Jr., Paul Manafort and Jared Kushner met with Russian nationals in Trump Tower in New York June 2016 for the purpose of receiving disparaging information about Clinton as part of “Russia and its government’s support for Mr. Trump,” according to an email message arranging the meeting. This meeting did not amount to a criminal offense, in part, because Mueller was unable to establish “willfulness,” that is, that the participants knew that their conduct was illegal. Mueller was also unable to conclude that the information was a “thing of value” that exceeded $25,000, the requirement for campaign finance to be a felony, as opposed to a civil violation of law. But the fact that the conduct did not technically amount to conspiracy does not mean that it was acceptable. Trump campaign members welcomed foreign influence into our election and then compromised themselves with the Russian government by covering it up.

Mueller found other contacts with Russia, such as the sharing of polling data about Midwestern states where Trump later won upset victories, conversations with the Russian ambassador to influence Russia’s response to sanctions imposed by the U.S. government in response to election interference, and communications with Wikileaks after it had received emails stolen by Russia. While none of these acts amounted to the crime of conspiracy, all could be described as “collusion.”

Myth: Mueller found no obstruction.

Response: Mueller found at least four acts by Trump in which all elements of the obstruction statute were satisfied

https://time.com/5610317/mueller-report-myths-breakdown/

 

I wonder why they charged Manafort and not Trump.

 

Simple

"I believe a reasonable person looking at these facts could conclude that all three elements of the crime of obstruction of justice have been met, and I'd like to ask you the reason, again, you did not indict Donald Trump is because of the OLC (the DOJ's Office of Legal Counsel) opinion stating that you cannot indict a sitting president, correct?" Lieu asked.

"That is correct," Mueller

On potential obstruction of justice by President Trump, the investigation "does not conclude that the President committed a crime", as investigators would not indict a sitting president per an Office of Legal Counsel opinion. However, the investigation "also does not exonerate" Trump, finding both public and private actions "by the President that were capable of exerting undue influence over law enforcement investigations".

Ten episodes of potential obstruction by the president were described

JACK SMITH HAS IT NOW

 

Long way of saying they had no evidence.

To be clear, I don't say it doesn't exist. I don't say it does, either.