Jump to content
Sign in to follow this  
Nanker

The Mueller Report. BREAKING NEWS: AG’s Summary Report Released. NO COLLUSION!

Recommended Posts

When Trump loses former New Jersey governor Chris Christie, that’s a problem.

Quote

“Those comments by Bob Mueller about the other processes — obviously impeachment being the only constitutional way — definitely contradicts what the Attorney General said when he summarized Mueller’s report and said he then had to draw the conclusion on that. Mueller clearly contradicts that today in a very concise way.” 

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
7 hours ago, transplantbillsfan said:

 (remember that it was the Comet firing and thus the obstructing justice that actually got this investigation going, NOT collusion)

 

Look at this nonsense.

 

LOOK at this nonsense. Are we seriously going to allow this kind of trash post here?

 

  • Like (+1) 4

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
9 minutes ago, Joe in Winslow said:

 

Look at this nonsense.

 

LOOK at this nonsense. Are we seriously going to allow this kind of trash post here?

 

 

Yeah I cant believe he actually believes that right? Has he been paying attention?

 

The fact that I have to ask that means I cant take anything he says on the subject seriously

  • Like (+1) 2
  • Thanks! (+1) 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2 hours ago, 4merper4mer said:

Russia got a Facebook page

It didn't do diddly

some british dude made up crap about peeing 

Hillary ran with it then lost then kept running with it

Mueller hired Andrew Weismann.  Huge red flag

Even Weismann found no collusion

Shakedowns ensue 

Trump got pissed and ranted about firing Mueller

His advisers tell him "bad idea" so he doesn't.

OBSTRUCTION!

 

 

Read the Mueller report. Or just listen to Mueller talk. You saying this was "only" Russian propaganda through facebook shows you have no clue about how a foreign power helped pick our President. 

 

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
4 hours ago, Doc Brown said:

I was about to mention they'll stall and wait for polling.  It definitely puts more pressure on Pelosi.

 

I wasn't following this that closely and didn't know Mueller actually cited a DOJ policy in his decision not to bring obstruction of justice charges.  I just thought be didn't have enough for a criminal prosecution and said it's up to you Congress.  After listening to him today it seems he strongly implies there is enough evidence to charge the president with obstruction.  

 

If I'm Pelosi I say there's no way the Senate kicks him out of office so let's not waste our time and focus on beating him in 2020.  Then he won't have the same protections he enjoys as president. 


In his report, and to Barr (who testified under oath that Mueller told him it was not a factor) he said no, that wasn't the reason (there was something of a discussion with RR). It was only when he gave his 9-minute speech did he say any such thing. Which then begs the question... if you couldn't indict a sitting president, why investigate him at all?  And why not indict those around President Trump? My gwad, Mueller recommended a Russian troll farm for prosecution! His team laid perjury traps for anyone and everyone. He was definitely not shy about recommending people for prosecution who had no connection to the "Russian Hoax". 

V2 was something outside anything a special counsel has ever done before. 

I'm not certain if you know who Alan Dershowitz is. If you do, you may want to read this article. Keep in mind that Dershowitz has always been (and still is) a loyal Democrat.

Edited by Buffalo_Gal
  • Like (+1) 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
21 minutes ago, Tiberius said:

Read the Mueller report. Or just listen to Mueller talk. You saying this was "only" Russian propaganda through facebook shows you have no clue about how a foreign power helped pick our President. 

 

 

What page discusses how votes were tampered with or swayed?  That would be interesting.  

 

Also, who won that arm wrestling match on Facebook?  

 

Also, what page discusses how Trump obstructed?  Since Mueller will never speak again, those details must be in there, right?

Edited by 4merper4mer

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
55 minutes ago, Joe in Winslow said:

 

Look at this nonsense.

 

LOOK at this nonsense. Are we seriously going to allow this kind of trash post here?

 


It's like the DNC paid trolls have been unleashed. 🤷‍♀️ 

Everyone has a right to their opinion.

Most of us have no idea what political maneuvering is going on behind the scenes. It is interesting that as soon as President Trump allowed for the declassification of all materials, Bob Mueller came out to stir the pot. I wonder why that happened? And, as the next OIG report comes due, Bob Mueller came out to stir the pot. I wonder why that happened? And, as Nancy Pelosi held a meeting with her flock to tell them "no impeachment", Bob Mueller came out to stir the pot. I wonder why that happened?

Maybe Bob Mueller came out, pissed off everyone right and left, for no reason at all? Maybe he came out to reinforce the ridiculous V2 so the Democrats would take up impeachment articles against President Trump? Maybe he walked out to handicap his "good friend"  William Barr? Maybe Bob Mueller is simply a bad prosecutor and doesn't know that our laws state "innocent until proven guilty" and not "guilty until you prove yourself innocent"?

All I know is I am getting pretty tired of #OrangeManBad and #GetTrump. The question is are other voters also tired of this political witch hunt? And what will happen in 2020? Because if they don't #GetTrump before the next election, maybe he'll have a "lot of political freedom" to further drain the swamp? 

Edited by Buffalo_Gal
  • Like (+1) 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
46 minutes ago, Joe in Winslow said:

 

Look at this nonsense.

 

LOOK at this nonsense. Are we seriously going to allow this kind of trash post here?

 

He's an English literature teacher who refuses to read. He prefers to lecture and doesn't have time for conversation. He is done talking in new information as he already has it all. 

I'm sure his students don't even take him seriously. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2 minutes ago, sabrecrazed said:

He's an English literature teacher who refuses to read. He prefers to lecture and doesn't have time for conversation. He is done talking in new information as he already has it all. 

I'm sure his students don't even take him seriously. 

 

I mean, he's in a basic denial of reality assuming of course he thinks that this had nothing to do with "Russian Collusion"

 

  • Like (+1) 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2 minutes ago, sabrecrazed said:

He's an English literature teacher who refuses to read. He prefers to lecture and doesn't have time for conversation. He is done talking in new information as he already has it all. 

I'm sure his students don't even take him seriously. 

 

He also said he doesnt go above and beyond, so why should we expect him to do the same with this?

  • Like (+1) 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

LOL  So Donald lied again did he...  

no big surprise there. 

 

William Barr sold a “false narrative” that special counsel Robert Mueller’s probe into Russian interference in the U.S. election and the Trump campaign were exonerated.  

 

 

Michael Goodwin: America left to face the nasty consequences of Robert Mueller’s actions

https://www.foxnews.com/opinion/michael-goodwin-america-left-to-face-the-nasty-consequences-of-robert-muellers-actions

 

IF we thought there was No COLLUSION we would have said so directly.  

 

Edited by ShadyBillsFan

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, Tiberius said:

When Trump loses former New Jersey governor Chris Christie, that’s a problem.

 

He said that Mueller said one thing yesterday which is counter to how Barr characterized their discussions.  That is true.

 

Where does it say whether Christies aligns with Barr or Mueller.

 

Are Barr and Mueller still buddies?

 

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
4 hours ago, Doc Brown said:

I was about to mention they'll stall and wait for polling.  It definitely puts more pressure on Pelosi.

 

I wasn't following this that closely and didn't know Mueller actually cited a DOJ policy in his decision not to bring obstruction of justice charges.  I just thought be didn't have enough for a criminal prosecution and said it's up to you Congress.  After listening to him today it seems he strongly implies there is enough evidence to charge the president with obstruction.  

 

If I'm Pelosi I say there's no way the Senate kicks him out of office so let's not waste our time and focus on beating him in 2020.  Then he won't have the same protections he enjoys as president. 

The only advantage to at least starting an impeachment hearing, is that it will bring out a lot of the really bad stuff in the Mueller report, concerning Trump. which, apparently so few here have read, or are even curious about.  It is said, before the Watergate impeachment process began, only about 20% of Americans were in favor of impeaching Nixon, but once the details started coming out, that number tripled over the months.  Of course, I don't think Nixon loyalists were quite as willfully ignorant as the Trump base. 

 

As for Barr, he is a bold-face liar, and nothing but a Trump stooge.  

8 hours ago, OJ Tom said:

 

 

Honestly. Go ***** yourself

I'm blocking all these #######s

I'm surrounded by them in Los Angeles, so I don't need to read their nonsense here as well.

 

 

Back at you... 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
11 minutes ago, ShadyBillsFan said:

IF we thought there was No COLLUSION we would have said so directly.  

 

 

Conversely, if they thought there WAS collusion, they would have said so. They couldn't prove *****, and in this country you have to actually PROVE ***** before you indict someone.

 

Which is why Trump should unleash the IRS on every major Democratic figure in this country. Let's find out what's in their financial closets.

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
4 minutes ago, Buftex said:

The only advantage to at least starting an impeachment hearing, is that it will bring out a lot of the really bad stuff in the Mueller report, concerning Trump. which, apparently so few here have read, or are even curious about.  It is said, before the Watergate impeachment process began, only about 20% of Americans were in favor of impeaching Nixon, but once the details started coming out, that number tripled over the months.  Of course, I don't think Nixon loyalists were quite as willfully ignorant as the Trump base. 

 

 

I think a lot of people here are giving the president a pass on all of the attempted obstruction because the entire premise of collusion/conspiracy was fabricated by the FBI/CIA/Clinton/Obama.

  • Like (+1) 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
40 minutes ago, Buffalo_Gal said:


In his report, and to Barr (who testified under oath that Mueller told him it was not a factor) he said no, that wasn't the reason (there was something of a discussion with RR). It was only when he gave his 9-minute speech did he say any such thing. Which then begs the question... if you couldn't indict a sitting president, why investigate him at all?  And why not indict those around President Trump? My gwad, Mueller recommended a Russian troll farm for prosecution! His team laid perjury traps for anyone and everyone. He was definitely not shy about recommending people for prosecution who had no connection to the "Russian Hoax". 

V2 was something outside anything a special counsel has ever done before. 

I'm not certain if you know who Alan Dershowitz is. If you do, you may want to read this article. Keep in mind that Dershowitz has always been (and still is) a loyal Democrat.

I can see investigating obstruction even being unable to indict POTUS because others around him could be indicted.  Where are those indictments? Are we to believe Trump personally tried to obstruct and that not a single member of his staff or family went along?

 

This whole thing requires falling off several turnip trucks to believe.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
9 minutes ago, Buftex said:

The only advantage to at least starting an impeachment hearing, is that it will bring out a lot of the really bad stuff in the Mueller report, concerning Trump. which, apparently so few here have read, or are even curious about.  It is said, before the Watergate impeachment process began, only about 20% of Americans were in favor of impeaching Nixon, but once the details started coming out, that number tripled over the months.  Of course, I don't think Nixon loyalists were quite as willfully ignorant as the Trump base. 

 

As for Barr, he is a bold-face liar, and nothing but a Trump stooge.  

Back at you... 

 

Contrary to popular belief many here have read a good portion of the report.   And if you are clinging to Part II of the report to hang your impeachment hat on, be careful that the hook doesn't snare your neck as well.   Part II doesn't surprise anyone who have known for decades that Trump is a temperamental narcissistic man-child.   Doesn't make it illegal though, even by the lower impeachment standards.

 

OTOH, we'll see if you dare show your face here once Horowitz, Huber, etc present their findings.

  • Like (+1) 3
  • Thanks! (+1) 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
 
 
1
5 minutes ago, Joe in Winslow said:

 

Conversely, if they thought there WAS collusion, they would have said so. They couldn't prove *****, and in this country you have to actually PROVE ***** before you indict someone.

 

Which is why Trump should unleash the IRS on every major Democratic figure in this country. Let's find out what's in their financial closets.

 


I don't want that. I thought it was horrible when Obama unleashed the IRS on the tea party and his political enemies. I do not want to see another administration play that corrupt game. Yes, I know it hinders and handicaps one "side" to play by the rules when the other side will not, but the Trump administration appears to be working hard to restore the rule of law in this land. I do not want to see them backslide into the Obama era corruption techniques. 

  • Like (+1) 5

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I get that thinking, @Buffalo_Gal, I really do. But I think you (and the Republican party) are fooling yourself if you think there's anything resembling a rule of law in this country.

 

Sometimes corrupt structures need to be entirely broken to bring true change.

 

  • Like (+1) 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

Loading...
Sign in to follow this  

×
×
  • Create New...