One more great pick by Trump

[Care4all]

What part of "no collusion, no crime" doesn't the judge get?

What part of "no collusion, no crime" is a lie do you not get?

You still don't seem to appreciate that Billy the Bagman completely mischaracterized Mueller's report. The Trumpleton lies are so ingrained you can't admit the truth.
Mueller proved obstruction but felt he could not indict the prez because of the OLC prohibition. He said it in the report, he said it in open testimony. You just can't deal with the facts because...............brainwashed.

WRONG!! Its not "Mueller's Report" its "AG Barr's Report written by Mueller"
There are two parts to the Mueller Report, Part-1 is the "No Collusion" part, and Part-2 is the "No Obstruction" part.
The Mueller Report belongs to the AG, it was authorized by the AG, it was presented to the AG, its his fucking report, he could have shredded it if he wanted to. The AG summarized his report as "No Collusion, No Obstruction". There was no crime, period.

We The people own that report, the special counsel was appointed for us, so that we could know the truth, a truth we would likely not get, if it was just an administrations DOJ crony taking over Comey's investigation.

It wasn't for the DOJ, it was for us, and our confidence in getting to the truth.

 

[JusticeHammer]

What part of "no collusion, no crime" doesn't the judge get?

What part of "no collusion, no crime" is a lie do you not get?

You still don't seem to appreciate that Billy the Bagman completely mischaracterized Mueller's report. The Trumpleton lies are so ingrained you can't admit the truth.
Mueller proved obstruction but felt he could not indict the prez because of the OLC prohibition. He said it in the report, he said it in open testimony. You just can't deal with the facts because...............brainwashed.

WRONG!! Its not "Mueller's Report" its "AG Barr's Report written by Mueller"
There are two parts to the Mueller Report, Part-1 is the "No Collusion" part, and Part-2 is the "No Obstruction" part.
The Mueller Report belongs to the AG, it was authorized by the AG, it was presented to the AG, its his fucking report, he could have shredded it if he wanted to. The AG summarized his report as "No Collusion, No Obstruction". There was no crime, period.

We The people own that report, the special counsel was appointed for us, so that we could know the truth, a truth we would likely not get, if it was just an administrations DOJ crony taking over Comey's investigation.

It wasn't for the DOJ, it was for us, and our confidence in getting to the truth.

You idiots care less about the truth.

 

[berg80]

There are two parts to the Mueller Report, Part-1 is the "No Collusion" part, and Part-2 is the "No Obstruction" part.

You keep repeating that lie as if it makes it true. Billy the Bagman's deceitful summary achieved its goal, which..........."cause(d) the Court to seriously question whether Attorney General Barr made a calculated attempt to influence public discourse about the Mueller Report in favor of President Trump despite certain findings in the redacted version of the Mueller Report to the contrary,” the judge said.

Cooperation between the Russians and Trumpers may not have reached the level of a criminal conspiracy (the criteria Mueller set), but his report is chalk full of unethical and unpatriotic if not illegal conduct. Just a sampling.........

3. The Trump Campaign chairman and deputy chairman (Paul Manafort and Rick Gates) knowingly shared internal polling data and information on battleground states with a Russian spy; and the Campaign chairman worked with the Russian spy on a pro-Russia “peace” plan for Ukraine.

4. Trump Campaign chairman periodically shared internal polling data with the Russian spy and with the expectation it would be shared with Putin-linked oligarch, Oleg Deripaska.

5. Trump Campaign chairman expected Trump’s winning presidency would mean Deripaska would want to use Manafort to advance Deripaska’s interests in the United States and elsewhere.

What the Mueller Report says:

Trump Campaign chairman Paul Manafort and Rick Gates shared internal campaign polling data periodically with a Russian spy, Konstantin Kilimnik. “In accordance with Manafort’s instruction, [Gates] periodically sent Kilimnik polling data via WhatsApp; Gates then deleted the communications on a daily basis.” “Manafort expected Kilimnik to share that information with … Deripaska,” a Russian oligarch closely aligned with Vladimir Putin. “Manafort noted that if Trump won, Deripaska would want to use Manafort to advance whatever interests Deripaska had in the United States and elsewhere.”

Supplemental information/analysis:

The Report’s wording – “whatever interests Deripaska had” — is notable given a well-known interview by Deripaska in which he said, “I don’t separate myself from the state. I have no other interests.”

What the Mueller Report says:

Manafort began working for Deripaska in 2005. The memo between the two men described the benefits Manafort’s work in the mid-to-late 2000s would confer on “the Putin government.” The work was “to install friendly political officials in countries” in post-Soviet republics.

Supplemental information/analysis:

The Associated Press published a detailed investigative report based on documents the media organization obtained detailing Manafort’s arrangement with Deripaska in the mid-to-late 2000’s. The Associated Press published excerpts from the original documents that are lengthier than some of those in the Mueller Report. For example, Manafort wrote to Deripaska, “We are now of the belief that this model can greatly benefit the Putin Government if employed at the correct levels with the appropriate commitment to success.” These initiatives, Manafort also wrote, “will be offering a great service that can re-focus, both internally and externally, the policies of the Putin government.”

What the Mueller Report says:

At an Aug. 2, 2016 meeting, Manafort provided Kilimnik a briefing that included “the Campaign’s messaging and its internal polling data,” and the discussion of battleground states which Manafort identified as “Michigan, Wisconsin, Pennsylvania, and Minnesota.”

Supplemental information/analysis:

The reference to Michigan is notable. After Manafort officially left the Campaign, he remained in communication with Trump, Bannon, Kushner, and Gates (p. 141). In the final days of the campaign, Manafort offered Trump “pointers on how to handle the Clinton email news and urging him to make a play in Michigan,” according to Politico Magazine.

What the Mueller Report says:

The Aug. 2, 2016 meeting also included the start of what would be a series of discussions between Manafort and Kilimnik about a so-called peace plan for Ukraine, which Manafort admitted to prosecutors was “a ‘backdoor’ means for Russia to control eastern Ukraine.”

Supplemental information/analysis and analysis:

A senior prosecutor in the Special Counsel’s Office told a federal judge that the Aug. 2 meeting and what happened at the meeting goes “very much to the heart of what the Special Counsel’s Office is investigating.”

Caveats:

First, although Kilimnik and Manafort shared the view that Trump’s support for the Ukraine “peace” plan would help it succeed, “[t]he investigation did not uncover evidence of Manafort’s passing along information about Ukrainian peace plans to the candidate or anyone else in the Campaign or the Administration.” That said, the Report then notes that the Special Counsel could not gain access to all of Manafort’s electronic communications, and that Manafort lied to the Special Counsel Office about the peace plan and his meetings with Kilimnik. Also, the Report states that Kilimnik continued “efforts to promote the peace plan to the Executive Branch (e.g., U.S. Department of State) into the summer of 2018.”

Second, the Special Counsel’s Office “did not identify evidence of a connection between Manafort’s sharing polling data and Russia’s interference in the election, which had already been reported by U.S. media outlets at the time of the August 2 meeting.”

Loose ends: The report states that the Special Counsel’s Office “could not reliably determine” Manafort’s purpose in sharing the internal polling data with Kilimnik (p. 30).

Missing intelligence analysis:

The Mueller Report apparently omits any intelligence analysis and significant intelligence products such as signals intercepts, the kind of information that would also likely not be admissible at trial. What might those intelligence products add to the description of events? Consider this report by CNN in 2017:

“CNN has learned that investigators became more suspicious when they turned up intercepted communications that US intelligence agencies collected among suspected Russian operatives discussing their efforts to work with Manafort, who served as campaign chairman for three months, to coordinate information that could damage Hillary Clinton’s election prospects, the US officials say. The suspected operatives relayed what they claimed were conversations with Manafort, encouraging help from the Russians.”


6. Trump Tower meeting: (1) On receiving an email offering derogatory information on Clinton coming from a Russian government official, Donald Trump Jr. “appears to have accepted that offer;” (2) members of the Campaign discussed the Trump Tower meeting beforehand; (3) Donald Trump Jr. told the Russians during the meeting that Trump could revisit the issue of the Magnitsky Act if elected.

What the Mueller Report says:

The Report notes that Rob Goldstone “passed along an offer purportedly from a Russian government official and that “Trump Jr. appears to have accepted that offer and to have arranged a meeting to receive those materials.” On June 9, 2016, “senior representatives of the Trump Campaign met in Trump Tower with a Russian attorney expecting to receive derogatory information about Hillary Clinton from the Russian government…. Members of the Campaign discussed the meeting before it occurred, and Michael Cohen recalled that Trump Jr. may have told candidate Trump about an upcoming meeting to receive adverse information about Clinton, without linking the meeting to Russia.” At the June 9 meeting, the Russian delegation raised the issue of overturning the Magnitsky Act, a statute that imposes financial sanctions on Russian officials. In response, Trump Jr. “suggested that the issue could be revisited when and if candidate Trump was elected.” The Mueller Report notes significant discrepancies in what the Russian lawyer told Congress about the purpose of the meeting and the body of other information available to the Special Counsel’s office (p. 119; see also fn. 676).

Caveat:

The Report provides no evidence that more significant information was exchanged during the meeting.

Supplemental information/analysis:

Removal of the Magnitsky Act has been a long-term, important goal for Putin.

The Report’s statement that senior representatives of the Trump Campaign went to the meeting “expecting to receive derogatory information about Hillary Clinton from the Russian government” (see also p. 185) is consistent with Rep. Devine Nunes’ memo, which refers to Trump Jr., Manafort and Kushner by name (see Finding #12). As I have previously discussed, that finding contradicts Kushner’s written statement to Congress.

Missing intelligence analysis:

The Mueller Report does not include an analysis whether the Russian lawyer was working on behalf of Russian intelligence, or if the exchanges with the Trump Campaign before and during the Trump Tower meeting were part of a Russian intelligence operation.

One of the individuals accompanying the Russian lawyer was Rinat Akhmetshin, reportedly a former Soviet intelligence officer who “apparently has ties to Russian intelligence,” and “allegedly specializes in ‘active measures campaigns’” such as subversive political operations involving disinformation and propaganda. (See Sen. Charles E. Grassley letter to Sec. John Kelley, Apr. 4, 2017.) In testimony before the House Intelligence Committee, Rep. Dana Rohrabacher “acknowledged that [Veselnitskaya and Akhmetshin] were probably spies,” based on his own interactions with them.

Why did the Russians not offer more at the meeting? Former intelligence officials have assessed that the publicly reported facts (which are now included in the Mueller Report) are characteristic of Russian intelligence tradecraft, that the Russians would want to dangle the prospect of more valuable information and would observe whether the campaign reported them to federal authorities or instead welcomed the offer and wanted more. (Another former intelligence official assessed that the meeting was a Russian intelligence operation not designed to collude, but rather designed to sow political turmoil upon its discovery.)

Finally, the Report notably references the fact that Goldstone led the effort to bring Putin to the Miss Universe contest in 2013 on Trump’s invitation (p. 111). That might suggest Goldstone has the capacity to provide these connections, which would be another reason for the Campaign to take the initial email very seriously. According to Irakly “Ike” Kaveladze’s and Goldstone’s Senate Judiciary testimony, the attempt to meet Putin in 2013 never happened due to a last-minute change in Putin’s schedule. Putin’s press secretary, Dmitry Peskov instead extended an offer for Trump to meet Putin at the Sochi Olympics.
Guide to the Mueller Report’s Findings on “Collusion”

 

[Care4all]

What part of "no collusion, no crime" doesn't the judge get?

What part of "no collusion, no crime" is a lie do you not get?

You still don't seem to appreciate that Billy the Bagman completely mischaracterized Mueller's report. The Trumpleton lies are so ingrained you can't admit the truth.
Mueller proved obstruction but felt he could not indict the prez because of the OLC prohibition. He said it in the report, he said it in open testimony. You just can't deal with the facts because...............brainwashed.

WRONG!! Its not "Mueller's Report" its "AG Barr's Report written by Mueller"
There are two parts to the Mueller Report, Part-1 is the "No Collusion" part, and Part-2 is the "No Obstruction" part.
The Mueller Report belongs to the AG, it was authorized by the AG, it was presented to the AG, its his fucking report, he could have shredded it if he wanted to. The AG summarized his report as "No Collusion, No Obstruction". There was no crime, period.

We The people own that report, the special counsel was appointed for us, so that we could know the truth, a truth we would likely not get, if it was just an administrations DOJ crony taking over Comey's investigation.

It wasn't for the DOJ, it was for us, and our confidence in getting to the truth.

You idiots care less about the truth.

Me thinks you need to look in the mirror, when you say that....

 

[JusticeHammer]

What part of "no collusion, no crime" doesn't the judge get?

What part of "no collusion, no crime" is a lie do you not get?

You still don't seem to appreciate that Billy the Bagman completely mischaracterized Mueller's report. The Trumpleton lies are so ingrained you can't admit the truth.
Mueller proved obstruction but felt he could not indict the prez because of the OLC prohibition. He said it in the report, he said it in open testimony. You just can't deal with the facts because...............brainwashed.

WRONG!! Its not "Mueller's Report" its "AG Barr's Report written by Mueller"
There are two parts to the Mueller Report, Part-1 is the "No Collusion" part, and Part-2 is the "No Obstruction" part.
The Mueller Report belongs to the AG, it was authorized by the AG, it was presented to the AG, its his fucking report, he could have shredded it if he wanted to. The AG summarized his report as "No Collusion, No Obstruction". There was no crime, period.

We The people own that report, the special counsel was appointed for us, so that we could know the truth, a truth we would likely not get, if it was just an administrations DOJ crony taking over Comey's investigation.

It wasn't for the DOJ, it was for us, and our confidence in getting to the truth.

You idiots care less about the truth.

Me thinks you need to look in the mirror, when you say that....

I know exactly who I am talking to.

 

[JusticeHammer]

There are two parts to the Mueller Report, Part-1 is the "No Collusion" part, and Part-2 is the "No Obstruction" part.

You keep repeating that lie as if it makes it true. Billy the Bagman's deceitful summary achieved its goal, which..........."cause(d) the Court to seriously question whether Attorney General Barr made a calculated attempt to influence public discourse about the Mueller Report in favor of President Trump despite certain findings in the redacted version of the Mueller Report to the contrary,” the judge said.

Cooperation between the Russians and Trumpers may not have reached the level of a criminal conspiracy (the criteria Mueller set), but his report is chalk full of unethical and unpatriotic if not illegal conduct. Just a sampling.........

3. The Trump Campaign chairman and deputy chairman (Paul Manafort and Rick Gates) knowingly shared internal polling data and information on battleground states with a Russian spy; and the Campaign chairman worked with the Russian spy on a pro-Russia “peace” plan for Ukraine.

4. Trump Campaign chairman periodically shared internal polling data with the Russian spy and with the expectation it would be shared with Putin-linked oligarch, Oleg Deripaska.

5. Trump Campaign chairman expected Trump’s winning presidency would mean Deripaska would want to use Manafort to advance Deripaska’s interests in the United States and elsewhere.

What the Mueller Report says:

Trump Campaign chairman Paul Manafort and Rick Gates shared internal campaign polling data periodically with a Russian spy, Konstantin Kilimnik. “In accordance with Manafort’s instruction, [Gates] periodically sent Kilimnik polling data via WhatsApp; Gates then deleted the communications on a daily basis.” “Manafort expected Kilimnik to share that information with … Deripaska,” a Russian oligarch closely aligned with Vladimir Putin. “Manafort noted that if Trump won, Deripaska would want to use Manafort to advance whatever interests Deripaska had in the United States and elsewhere.”

Supplemental information/analysis:

The Report’s wording – “whatever interests Deripaska had” — is notable given a well-known interview by Deripaska in which he said, “I don’t separate myself from the state. I have no other interests.”

What the Mueller Report says:

Manafort began working for Deripaska in 2005. The memo between the two men described the benefits Manafort’s work in the mid-to-late 2000s would confer on “the Putin government.” The work was “to install friendly political officials in countries” in post-Soviet republics.

Supplemental information/analysis:

The Associated Press published a detailed investigative report based on documents the media organization obtained detailing Manafort’s arrangement with Deripaska in the mid-to-late 2000’s. The Associated Press published excerpts from the original documents that are lengthier than some of those in the Mueller Report. For example, Manafort wrote to Deripaska, “We are now of the belief that this model can greatly benefit the Putin Government if employed at the correct levels with the appropriate commitment to success.” These initiatives, Manafort also wrote, “will be offering a great service that can re-focus, both internally and externally, the policies of the Putin government.”

What the Mueller Report says:

At an Aug. 2, 2016 meeting, Manafort provided Kilimnik a briefing that included “the Campaign’s messaging and its internal polling data,” and the discussion of battleground states which Manafort identified as “Michigan, Wisconsin, Pennsylvania, and Minnesota.”

Supplemental information/analysis:

The reference to Michigan is notable. After Manafort officially left the Campaign, he remained in communication with Trump, Bannon, Kushner, and Gates (p. 141). In the final days of the campaign, Manafort offered Trump “pointers on how to handle the Clinton email news and urging him to make a play in Michigan,” according to Politico Magazine.

What the Mueller Report says:

The Aug. 2, 2016 meeting also included the start of what would be a series of discussions between Manafort and Kilimnik about a so-called peace plan for Ukraine, which Manafort admitted to prosecutors was “a ‘backdoor’ means for Russia to control eastern Ukraine.”

Supplemental information/analysis and analysis:

A senior prosecutor in the Special Counsel’s Office told a federal judge that the Aug. 2 meeting and what happened at the meeting goes “very much to the heart of what the Special Counsel’s Office is investigating.”

Caveats:

First, although Kilimnik and Manafort shared the view that Trump’s support for the Ukraine “peace” plan would help it succeed, “[t]he investigation did not uncover evidence of Manafort’s passing along information about Ukrainian peace plans to the candidate or anyone else in the Campaign or the Administration.” That said, the Report then notes that the Special Counsel could not gain access to all of Manafort’s electronic communications, and that Manafort lied to the Special Counsel Office about the peace plan and his meetings with Kilimnik. Also, the Report states that Kilimnik continued “efforts to promote the peace plan to the Executive Branch (e.g., U.S. Department of State) into the summer of 2018.”

Second, the Special Counsel’s Office “did not identify evidence of a connection between Manafort’s sharing polling data and Russia’s interference in the election, which had already been reported by U.S. media outlets at the time of the August 2 meeting.”

Loose ends: The report states that the Special Counsel’s Office “could not reliably determine” Manafort’s purpose in sharing the internal polling data with Kilimnik (p. 30).

Missing intelligence analysis:

The Mueller Report apparently omits any intelligence analysis and significant intelligence products such as signals intercepts, the kind of information that would also likely not be admissible at trial. What might those intelligence products add to the description of events? Consider this report by CNN in 2017:

“CNN has learned that investigators became more suspicious when they turned up intercepted communications that US intelligence agencies collected among suspected Russian operatives discussing their efforts to work with Manafort, who served as campaign chairman for three months, to coordinate information that could damage Hillary Clinton’s election prospects, the US officials say. The suspected operatives relayed what they claimed were conversations with Manafort, encouraging help from the Russians.”


6. Trump Tower meeting: (1) On receiving an email offering derogatory information on Clinton coming from a Russian government official, Donald Trump Jr. “appears to have accepted that offer;” (2) members of the Campaign discussed the Trump Tower meeting beforehand; (3) Donald Trump Jr. told the Russians during the meeting that Trump could revisit the issue of the Magnitsky Act if elected.

What the Mueller Report says:

The Report notes that Rob Goldstone “passed along an offer purportedly from a Russian government official and that “Trump Jr. appears to have accepted that offer and to have arranged a meeting to receive those materials.” On June 9, 2016, “senior representatives of the Trump Campaign met in Trump Tower with a Russian attorney expecting to receive derogatory information about Hillary Clinton from the Russian government…. Members of the Campaign discussed the meeting before it occurred, and Michael Cohen recalled that Trump Jr. may have told candidate Trump about an upcoming meeting to receive adverse information about Clinton, without linking the meeting to Russia.” At the June 9 meeting, the Russian delegation raised the issue of overturning the Magnitsky Act, a statute that imposes financial sanctions on Russian officials. In response, Trump Jr. “suggested that the issue could be revisited when and if candidate Trump was elected.” The Mueller Report notes significant discrepancies in what the Russian lawyer told Congress about the purpose of the meeting and the body of other information available to the Special Counsel’s office (p. 119; see also fn. 676).

Caveat:

The Report provides no evidence that more significant information was exchanged during the meeting.

Supplemental information/analysis:

Removal of the Magnitsky Act has been a long-term, important goal for Putin.

The Report’s statement that senior representatives of the Trump Campaign went to the meeting “expecting to receive derogatory information about Hillary Clinton from the Russian government” (see also p. 185) is consistent with Rep. Devine Nunes’ memo, which refers to Trump Jr., Manafort and Kushner by name (see Finding #12). As I have previously discussed, that finding contradicts Kushner’s written statement to Congress.

Missing intelligence analysis:

The Mueller Report does not include an analysis whether the Russian lawyer was working on behalf of Russian intelligence, or if the exchanges with the Trump Campaign before and during the Trump Tower meeting were part of a Russian intelligence operation.

One of the individuals accompanying the Russian lawyer was Rinat Akhmetshin, reportedly a former Soviet intelligence officer who “apparently has ties to Russian intelligence,” and “allegedly specializes in ‘active measures campaigns’” such as subversive political operations involving disinformation and propaganda. (See Sen. Charles E. Grassley letter to Sec. John Kelley, Apr. 4, 2017.) In testimony before the House Intelligence Committee, Rep. Dana Rohrabacher “acknowledged that [Veselnitskaya and Akhmetshin] were probably spies,” based on his own interactions with them.

Why did the Russians not offer more at the meeting? Former intelligence officials have assessed that the publicly reported facts (which are now included in the Mueller Report) are characteristic of Russian intelligence tradecraft, that the Russians would want to dangle the prospect of more valuable information and would observe whether the campaign reported them to federal authorities or instead welcomed the offer and wanted more. (Another former intelligence official assessed that the meeting was a Russian intelligence operation not designed to collude, but rather designed to sow political turmoil upon its discovery.)

Finally, the Report notably references the fact that Goldstone led the effort to bring Putin to the Miss Universe contest in 2013 on Trump’s invitation (p. 111). That might suggest Goldstone has the capacity to provide these connections, which would be another reason for the Campaign to take the initial email very seriously. According to Irakly “Ike” Kaveladze’s and Goldstone’s Senate Judiciary testimony, the attempt to meet Putin in 2013 never happened due to a last-minute change in Putin’s schedule. Putin’s press secretary, Dmitry Peskov instead extended an offer for Trump to meet Putin at the Sochi Olympics.
Guide to the Mueller Report’s Findings on “Collusion”

Alot of hot air there proving nothing. You idiots lost, get over it.

 

[M14 Shooter]

As He Orders Private Review Of Its Redactions
Judge Bashes Barr's Rollout Of Mueller Report As He Orders Private Review Of Its Redactions

The Mueller report was released 323 days ago - and STILL no impeachment.

Nadler says Trump "has violated the law 6 ways from Sunday," and Mueller’s report lays out “very substantial evidence” that Trump is guilty of “high crimes and misdemeanors,”

What are the Democrats waiting for?

 

[kyzr]

What part of "no collusion, no crime" doesn't the judge get?

What part of "no collusion, no crime" is a lie do you not get?

You still don't seem to appreciate that Billy the Bagman completely mischaracterized Mueller's report. The Trumpleton lies are so ingrained you can't admit the truth.
Mueller proved obstruction but felt he could not indict the prez because of the OLC prohibition. He said it in the report, he said it in open testimony. You just can't deal with the facts because...............brainwashed.

WRONG!! Its not "Mueller's Report" its "AG Barr's Report written by Mueller"
There are two parts to the Mueller Report, Part-1 is the "No Collusion" part, and Part-2 is the "No Obstruction" part.
The Mueller Report belongs to the AG, it was authorized by the AG, it was presented to the AG, its his fucking report, he could have shredded it if he wanted to. The AG summarized his report as "No Collusion, No Obstruction". There was no crime, period.

We The people own that report, the special counsel was appointed for us, so that we could know the truth, a truth we would likely not get, if it was just an administrations DOJ crony taking over Comey's investigation.

It wasn't for the DOJ, it was for us, and our confidence in getting to the truth.

Ok, so now we know the truth from Mueller. No collusion, no obstruction. Thx.
The rest of "the truth" needs to come out too. That the biggest scandal in US history was the Obama admin using the DOJ, FBI, and the intel agencies to setup and illegally spy on the Trump campaign via Operation Crossfire Hurricane. They used foreign intel assets, falsified evidence, lied to the FISA court, used perjury traps, unmasked Americans illegally, etc.
Barr and Durham need to uncover the "truth", and clean up the intel agencies, the DOJ, and the FBI of their partisan deep state conspirators.

 

[M14 Shooter]

There is no lack of evidence.

Why then didn't the Democrats impeach him?

 

[Meister]

What's your point, Edie? You don't like Trump? You have TDS....bad?
You're actually a fence sitter when it comes to Trump?

truth be told Mr Meister I despise the ground that human poc walks on and those surrounding him too My problem lies in the fact that if Sanders wins my financial well being is going down hill That's why I've said I'll only vote for Biden whom I think is twice the human being than that slug Trump

Trump lets you know who he is....take it or leave it type of attitude.
Biden hides who he is, you'll get a smile and wink right before he slices your throat.

Hides his tax returns, hides documents, phone transcripts and keeps member of his administration from testifying.

He also hid the motive for Trump U, the purpose for his 'charity' and paid off at least two people from disclosing his affairs.

But you believed him when he told you Mexico was going to pay for the wall. Yeah, you don't know who he is.

Actually, I really didn't care who paid for the wall, Joy. I was always willing to have our taxes be well spent in the construction of the wall.
Let me know exactly what crimes he has committed regarding his taxes Not sure what you mean by phone transcripts.
The democrats were at fault for not having gone through the courts to get the subpoenas while they had the impeachment
proceedings in the House.
Carry on darling

 

[Nostra]

What part of "no collusion, no crime" doesn't the judge get?

What part of "no collusion, no crime" is a lie do you not get?

You still don't seem to appreciate that Billy the Bagman completely mischaracterized Mueller's report. The Trumpleton lies are so ingrained you can't admit the truth.
Mueller proved obstruction but felt he could not indict the prez because of the OLC prohibition. He said it in the report, he said it in open testimony. You just can't deal with the facts because...............brainwashed.

WRONG!! Its not "Mueller's Report" its "AG Barr's Report written by Mueller"
There are two parts to the Mueller Report, Part-1 is the "No Collusion" part, and Part-2 is the "No Obstruction" part.
The Mueller Report belongs to the AG, it was authorized by the AG, it was presented to the AG, its his fucking report, he could have shredded it if he wanted to. The AG summarized his report as "No Collusion, No Obstruction". There was no crime, period.

We The people own that report, the special counsel was appointed for us, so that we could know the truth, a truth we would likely not get, if it was just an administrations DOJ crony taking over Comey's investigation.

It wasn't for the DOJ, it was for us, and our confidence in getting to the truth.

The redacted material was grand jury testimony and classified info, which is always redacted to keep secret.

Man, you are an idiot.

 

[berg80]

Robert Mueller kneecaps President Trump’s no collusion, no obstruction mantra
https://www.washingtonpost.com/poli...nt-trumps-no-collusion-no-obstruction-mantra/

Former special counsel Robert S. Mueller III wasted no time during his House Judiciary Committee testimony Wednesday in undercutting President Trump’s ongoing insistence that Mueller’s probe cleared him of all wrongdoing.

In fact, it was only about an hour after Trump’s most recent claim that there was “NO COLLUSION, NO OBSTRUCTION” that Mueller slowly read into the record an opening statement that made obvious how wrong Trump was.

“The investigation did not establish that members of the Trump campaign conspired with the Russian government in its election interference activities,” Mueller said. But: “We did not address ‘collusion,’ which is not a legal term. Rather, we focused on whether the evidence was sufficient to charge any member of the campaign with taking part in a criminal conspiracy. It was not.”

That’s an important distinction, between a colloquial term, collusion, and what Mueller’s team sought to determine, which was whether there was enough evidence to prove criminal conspiracy. Mueller is pointed: There was no determination on “collusion” — and there may have been at least some evidence pointing to possible conspiracy.

This isn’t new. It’s what the report itself said and what Mueller said during the news conference earlier this year in which he announced that he was leaving his position as special counsel.

At the hearing, Rep. Douglas A. Collins (R-Ga.) pressed Mueller on the extent to which “collusion” and “conspiracy” are interchangeable as terms, asking Mueller if the two aren’t colloquially equivalent. Mueller said they weren’t, prompting Collins to follow up by noting that the report equates the two. The difference, of course, is that the report is drawing a legal equivalence to evaluate possible criminal overlap between Trump’s team and Russia. That’s not what Trump is doing when he uses the term.

In his opening statement, Mueller also addressed the question of obstruction: Did Trump try to interfere with the probe?

“We investigated a series of actions by the president towards the investigation,” he said. “Based on Justice Department policy and principles of fairness, we decided we would not make a determination as to whether the president committed a crime. That was our decision then and it remains our decision today.”

He was pressed on this in the first question offered by Judiciary Chairman Jerrold Nadler (D-N.Y.).

“Director Mueller,” Nadler asked, “the president has repeatedly claimed that your report found there was no obstruction and that it completely and totally exonerated him, but that is not what your report said, is it?”

“Correct,” Mueller replied. “That is not what the report said.”

Nadler quoted from a section of the report in which Mueller’s team wrote that it would have exonerated Trump on the question of obstruction if it could. But, the report says, it couldn’t.

“So the report did not conclude that he did not commit obstruction of justice, is that correct?” Nadler asked.

“That is correct,” Mueller replied.

“And what about total exoneration? Did you totally exonerate the president?” Nadler continued.

“No,” Mueller said.

“Does your report state there is sufficient factual and legal basis for further investigation of potential obstruction of justice by the president?” Rep. Sheila Jackson Lee (D-Tex.) later asked.

“Yes,” Mueller replied.

 

[M14 Shooter]

Robert Mueller kneecaps President Trump’s no collusion, no obstruction mantra
https://www.washingtonpost.com/poli...nt-trumps-no-collusion-no-obstruction-mantra/

Why then didn't the Democrats impeach him?

 

[HappyJoy]

What's your point, Edie? You don't like Trump? You have TDS....bad?
You're actually a fence sitter when it comes to Trump?

truth be told Mr Meister I despise the ground that human poc walks on and those surrounding him too My problem lies in the fact that if Sanders wins my financial well being is going down hill That's why I've said I'll only vote for Biden whom I think is twice the human being than that slug Trump

Trump lets you know who he is....take it or leave it type of attitude.
Biden hides who he is, you'll get a smile and wink right before he slices your throat.

Hides his tax returns, hides documents, phone transcripts and keeps member of his administration from testifying.

He also hid the motive for Trump U, the purpose for his 'charity' and paid off at least two people from disclosing his affairs.

But you believed him when he told you Mexico was going to pay for the wall. Yeah, you don't know who he is.

Actually, I really didn't care who paid for the wall, Joy. I was always willing to have our taxes be well spend in the construction of the wall.
Let me know exactly what crimes he has committed regarding his taxes Not sure what you mean by phone transcripts.
The democrats were at fault for not having gone through the courts to get the subpoenas while they had the impeachment
proceedings in the House.
Carry on darling

I guess you're into moving goal posts to because your post was about Trump's honesty and how you admire it or whatever. I'm just demonstrating that Trump lies and now you're off to moving the goalposts and now you don't care if he lied to you or not.

I'd be nice if you and your cult buddies could stick to your original point.

 

[berg80]

Ok, so now we know the truth from Mueller. No collusion, no obstruction.

Ok, so we know for Trumper's up is down and black is white.

Nadler quoted from a section of the report in which Mueller’s team wrote that it would have exonerated Trump on the question of obstruction if it could. But, the report says, it couldn’t.

“So the report did not conclude that he did not commit obstruction of justice, is that correct?” Nadler asked.

“That is correct,” Mueller replied.

“And what about total exoneration? Did you totally exonerate the president?” Nadler continued.

“No,” Mueller said.

“Does your report state there is sufficient factual and legal basis for further investigation of potential obstruction of justice by the president?” Rep. Sheila Jackson Lee (D-Tex.) later asked.

“Yes,” Mueller replied.

 

[OKTexas]

What part of "no collusion, no crime" doesn't the judge get?

What part of "no collusion, no crime" is a lie do you not get?

You still don't seem to appreciate that Billy the Bagman completely mischaracterized Mueller's report. The Trumpleton lies are so ingrained you can't admit the truth.
Mueller proved obstruction but felt he could not indict the prez because of the OLC prohibition. He said it in the report, he said it in open testimony. You just can't deal with the facts because...............brainwashed.

The attorney general testified Wednesday before Congress and responded to the release of a March 27 letter from Mueller complaining that Barr’s four-page letter about the report “did not fully capture the context, nature and substance” of the special counsel’s “work and conclusions.”

Barr says he called Mueller after receiving his complaints and Mueller told him “he was not suggesting that we had misrepresented his report.”

Barr says Mueller told him press reports were reading too much into Barr’s letter and Mueller wanted the public to see more of his reasoning for not answering the question of whether President Donald Trump committed obstruction of justice.

Mueller’s letter says that Barr’s summary of his Russia report created “public confusion about critical aspects of the results.”

Mueller said Barr’s summary did not misrepresent report but caused ‘confusion’

.

 

[Meister]

What's your point, Edie? You don't like Trump? You have TDS....bad?
You're actually a fence sitter when it comes to Trump?

truth be told Mr Meister I despise the ground that human poc walks on and those surrounding him too My problem lies in the fact that if Sanders wins my financial well being is going down hill That's why I've said I'll only vote for Biden whom I think is twice the human being than that slug Trump

Trump lets you know who he is....take it or leave it type of attitude.
Biden hides who he is, you'll get a smile and wink right before he slices your throat.

Hides his tax returns, hides documents, phone transcripts and keeps member of his administration from testifying.

He also hid the motive for Trump U, the purpose for his 'charity' and paid off at least two people from disclosing his affairs.

But you believed him when he told you Mexico was going to pay for the wall. Yeah, you don't know who he is.

Actually, I really didn't care who paid for the wall, Joy. I was always willing to have our taxes be well spend in the construction of the wall.
Let me know exactly what crimes he has committed regarding his taxes Not sure what you mean by phone transcripts.
The democrats were at fault for not having gone through the courts to get the subpoenas while they had the impeachment
proceedings in the House.
Carry on darling

I guess you're into moving goal posts to because your post was about Trump's honesty and how you admire it or whatever. I'm just demonstrating that Trump lies and now you're off to moving the goalposts and now you don't care if he lied to you or not.

I'd be nice if you and your cult buddies could stick to your original point.

Actually, it would be real nice to explain your post to me, Joy. Please show me where I said what you think I said.
You seem to be making stuff up as you go along.

 

[M14 Shooter]

Judge blasts William Barr for distorting Mueller report

The Mueller report came out 323 days ago - and yet.no impeachment.

Nadler says Trump "has violated the law 6 ways from Sunday," and Mueller’s report lays out “very substantial evidence” that Trump is guilty of “high crimes and misdemeanors,”

What are the Democrats waiting for?

 

[M14 Shooter]

“So the report did not conclude that he did not commit obstruction of justice, is that correct?” Nadler asked.

“That is correct,” Mueller replied.

“And what about total exoneration? Did you totally exonerate the president?” Nadler continued.

“No,” Mueller said.

“Does your report state there is sufficient factual and legal basis for further investigation of potential obstruction of justice by the president?” Rep. Sheila Jackson Lee (D-Tex.) later asked.

“Yes,” Mueller replied.

Why didnt the Democrats impeach him?

 

[HappyJoy]

truth be told Mr Meister I despise the ground that human poc walks on and those surrounding him too My problem lies in the fact that if Sanders wins my financial well being is going down hill That's why I've said I'll only vote for Biden whom I think is twice the human being than that slug Trump

Trump lets you know who he is....take it or leave it type of attitude.
Biden hides who he is, you'll get a smile and wink right before he slices your throat.

Hides his tax returns, hides documents, phone transcripts and keeps member of his administration from testifying.

He also hid the motive for Trump U, the purpose for his 'charity' and paid off at least two people from disclosing his affairs.

But you believed him when he told you Mexico was going to pay for the wall. Yeah, you don't know who he is.

Actually, I really didn't care who paid for the wall, Joy. I was always willing to have our taxes be well spend in the construction of the wall.
Let me know exactly what crimes he has committed regarding his taxes Not sure what you mean by phone transcripts.
The democrats were at fault for not having gone through the courts to get the subpoenas while they had the impeachment
proceedings in the House.
Carry on darling

I guess you're into moving goal posts to because your post was about Trump's honesty and how you admire it or whatever. I'm just demonstrating that Trump lies and now you're off to moving the goalposts and now you don't care if he lied to you or not.

I'd be nice if you and your cult buddies could stick to your original point.

Actually, it would be real nice to explain your post to me, Joy. Please show me where I said what you think I said.
You seem to be making stuff up as you go along.

You said Trump was honest, I showed you differently and now it doesn't matter I guess.