Mueller does not find Trump campaign knowingly conspired with Russia

[Anonymous]

The key word is "knowingly". This conclusion just means they didn't "deliberately" conspire with Russia or there wasn't even enough evidence to show that they "intended" to do something unlawful.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I’m a Democrat and I expected nothing more from this investigation, honestly. If you read things other than far left Twitter, it was pretty obvious. But there are still loads of investigations ongoing from the other federal courts, and financial crimes are still crimes. I’m quite sure the Trump org’s shady at best, illegal at worst, financial dealings would have never made public had he never run for president. As soon as he’s out of office, he’s done.

If 6 people in the Obama or Hillary Clinton campaigns were indicted and sentenced to years in prison, right-wingers would be foaming at the mouth. Don’t pretend like this is some “no big deal” thing when, if the shoe was on the other foot, Fox News and the rest of the right-wing media would be screaming about it.

It's March 2019 (almost April). This investigation didn't prove anything. It wasted taxpayers' money and investigators' time. Pelosi said it was a waste of time to impeach. Elections are around the corner. His base feels vindicated. No one to date is running against Trump. Hogan was a hopeful but said if Mueller's report proved nothing, he wouldn't throw his name in.

Either the Ds get their act together, or we have MAGA 2020. I live in an area that's MAGA. Trump did not disappoint many of my neighbors.

Ds better wake up b/c the Neo Ds have destroyed moderation.

There were 34 indictments. How is that nothing?

Here are the indictments - http://time.com/5556331/mueller-investigation-indictments-guilty-pleas/
Here Are All of the Indictments, Guilty Pleas and Convictions From Robert Mueller's Investigation

Unless these indictments are directly connected to a crime Trump committed, guess what???????

People around him have fallen. That's a smart way to run a crooked business. Create a fortress around you and watch everyone fall while you remain safe.

again - Who's pinning anything on Trump? This is a MAGA person's dream!

[Anonymous]

So why was Trump whining so much?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:So why was Trump whining so much?

American politics 101

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:So why was Trump whining so much?

No kidding was this worth 150 tweets and constant whining and crying? Seems he can’t take it like a man. You never heard the Clintons whining about being investigated.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:
No collusion, no conspiracy, no coordination.

End of the story .... except for the crazies.

Sad

The Special counsel states that “while this report does not conclude that the president committed a crime, it also does not exonerate him.”

That quote was in regard to obstruction, friend.
Read the report. Don't get your headlines from CNN.
And, the SC chose not to make decisions regarding obstruction. Likely because there was no underlying crime to obstruct.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Mueller investigation finds no Trump campaign conspiracy with Russia

https://www.axios.com/mueller-report-bill-barr-investigation-congress-d106072d-0120-4b6b-8cef-cbd6915a0f60.html

After taking the weekend to pore over the Mueller report, Attorney General William Barr has sent Congress his summary of the "principal conclusions" from the special counsel's 675-day investigation into the Trump campaign's ties to Russia.

The bottom line: "[T]he investigation did not establish that members of the Trump campaign conspired or coordinated with the Russian government in its election interference activities." On the question of obstruction of justice, Barr writes that while Mueller's report "does not conclude that the President committed a crime, it also does not exonerate him."

No direct collusion.

Yet the 6 criminal indictments of key, high ranking Trump staff still shows that Trump's operation is a criminal trainwreck and that they didn't mind the Russian intervention in undermining American democracy.

And the remainder of the 34 indictments show that the Russians were hard at work to destroy the American elections process regardless of whether there was any direct collusion or not.

None of that goes away and it is still damning for Trump.

WishWishWishWishWishWishWish.

How many Russians in jail, eh? At this point, what I see if Flynn, Stone and especially Manafort being railroaded by Mueller and Weissman. Shades of Enron and Arthur Anderson.

Flynn is a traitor, and Manafort is a criminal and an evil man.

Why do you feel for them?

Because both were used by media and other crookeds to feed their ugly lies and agenda.

Poor traitor. Poor evil man.

Listen to yourself.

You lost. And now Tom Fitton is filing for all the documents related to the investigation. Good luck with that.

Oh no, not Judicial Watch! They were so successful getting Hillary Clinton charged over her emails!

They have blown the doors off this investigation. And in re-opening the investigation of the Clinton email issue.

Please, do tell us all the success they're having with Clinton's emails.

Start here:

https://www.judicialwatch.org/press-room/press-releases/judicial-watch-uncovers-more-classified-emails-in-hillary-clintons-unsecure-email-system/

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:The key word is "knowingly". This conclusion just means they didn't "deliberately" conspire with Russia or there wasn't even enough evidence to show that they "intended" to do something unlawful.

The SC didn't say "knowingly." CNN did. A poster here did.

The SC said there was no collusion despite several attempts on the part of Russian-associated people to get them to.
That, my friend, is exoneration on the collusion/conspiracy allegation.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:The key word is "knowingly". This conclusion just means they didn't "deliberately" conspire with Russia or there wasn't even enough evidence to show that they "intended" to do something unlawful.

The SC didn't say "knowingly." CNN did. A poster here did.

The SC said there was no collusion despite several attempts on the part of Russian-associated people to get them to.
That, my friend, is exoneration on the collusion/conspiracy allegation.

It certainly is.

I love it!

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:The key word is "knowingly". This conclusion just means they didn't "deliberately" conspire with Russia or there wasn't even enough evidence to show that they "intended" to do something unlawful.

The SC didn't say "knowingly." CNN did. A poster here did.

The SC said there was no collusion despite several attempts on the part of Russian-associated people to get them to.
That, my friend, is exoneration on the collusion/conspiracy allegation.

It certainly is.

I love it!

The Special counsel states that “while this report does not conclude that the president committed a crime, it also does not exonerate him.”

[Anonymous]

I want to see the real report. I don’t know if Barr is telling the truth.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Mueller investigation finds no Trump campaign conspiracy with Russia

https://www.axios.com/mueller-report-bill-barr-investigation-congress-d106072d-0120-4b6b-8cef-cbd6915a0f60.html

After taking the weekend to pore over the Mueller report, Attorney General William Barr has sent Congress his summary of the "principal conclusions" from the special counsel's 675-day investigation into the Trump campaign's ties to Russia.

The bottom line: "[T]he investigation did not establish that members of the Trump campaign conspired or coordinated with the Russian government in its election interference activities." On the question of obstruction of justice, Barr writes that while Mueller's report "does not conclude that the President committed a crime, it also does not exonerate him."

No direct collusion.

Yet the 6 criminal indictments of key, high ranking Trump staff still shows that Trump's operation is a criminal trainwreck and that they didn't mind the Russian intervention in undermining American democracy.

And the remainder of the 34 indictments show that the Russians were hard at work to destroy the American elections process regardless of whether there was any direct collusion or not.

None of that goes away and it is still damning for Trump.

WishWishWishWishWishWishWish.

How many Russians in jail, eh? At this point, what I see if Flynn, Stone and especially Manafort being railroaded by Mueller and Weissman. Shades of Enron and Arthur Anderson.

Flynn is a traitor, and Manafort is a criminal and an evil man.

Why do you feel for them?

Because both were used by media and other crookeds to feed their ugly lies and agenda.

Poor traitor. Poor evil man.

Listen to yourself.

You lost. And now Tom Fitton is filing for all the documents related to the investigation. Good luck with that.

Oh no, not Judicial Watch! They were so successful getting Hillary Clinton charged over her emails!

They have blown the doors off this investigation. And in re-opening the investigation of the Clinton email issue.

Please, do tell us all the success they're having with Clinton's emails.

Start here:

https://www.judicialwatch.org/press-room/press-releases/judicial-watch-uncovers-more-classified-emails-in-hillary-clintons-unsecure-email-system/

So, they... got more emails that still haven't prompted further investigaton? That's compelling.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:I want to see the real report. I don’t know if Barr is telling the truth.

b/c you're an expert

Please tweet about it to enlighten us after you've analyzed the document, Dr. Whoever You Are.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I want to see the real report. I don’t know if Barr is telling the truth.

b/c you're an expert

Please tweet about it to enlighten us after you've analyzed the document, Dr. Whoever You Are.

More from the BARR letter: The Special Counsel did not draw a conclusion, "one way or the other," as to whether Trump's examined conduct constituted obstruction.

-DP

[Anonymous]

So was Roger Stone lying about Assange and Fancy Bear?