Mueller does not find Trump campaign knowingly conspired with Russia

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:This is actually a good day for America.

No American citizen conspired with Russia to sway the election.

If you are not happy about this, check your patriotism.

There is a difference between proof that someone is innocent and lack of proof to support a criminal charge/conviction. The latter does not mean that the person did not commit a crime, only that adequate proof could not be found that the person did commit the crime.

Take it out of the Trump/Mueller context for a moment. If law enforcement were investigating a mugging and trying to determine whether a particular person was responsible, video evidence that the suspect was elsewhere at the time of the mugging would exonerate him because it would prove that he could not have been the mugger. If the suspect's alibi couldn't be corroborated, though, but investigators also couldn't find sufficient evidence to prove the suspect did commit the mugging, that doesn't mean the suspect didn't do it, right? It just means that investigators can't prove that he did, and is different from them finding direct evidence that he didn't.

In this case, nothing has been released so far that suggests there is direct evidence Trump did not collude with Russia, only that there isn't evidence he did. Whether he actually did or not (as a separate question from whether it can be proven) is still an open question about which people will continue to form their own opinions. For those people who aren't convinced there was no collusion, today isn't a happy day because the report didn't prove that no one conspired with Russia, it only means that to the extent anyone may have colluded, they are going to get away with it.

Mueller does not find Trump campaign knowingly conspired with Russia

Reuters
Sunday, 24 March 2019 19:47 GMT
WASHINGTON, March 24 (Reuters) - Special Counsel Robert Mueller's report on Russian meddling in the 2016 election did not find that any U.S. or Trump campaign officials knowingly conspired with Russia, according to details released on Sunday.

Attorney General William Barr sent a summary of conclusions from the report to congressional leaders and the media on Sunday afternoon. Mueller concluded his investigation on Friday after nearly two years, turning in a report to the top U.S. law enforcement officer.

(Reporting by Sarah N. Lynch and Andy Sullivan; Editing by Leslie Adler)

http://news.trust.org/item/20190324193542-i87ff

I have no idea what point you're trying to make here.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:Roger Stone worked with Fancy Bear and Assange, right? How is that not problematic for Trump followers?? Anything goes if you are sticking it to the liberals?

Stop making crap up, it just makes this all worse. Stone, a well known liar, lied to Congress.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:Roger Stone worked with Fancy Bear and Assange, right? How is that not problematic for Trump followers?? Anything goes if you are sticking it to the liberals?

Roger Stone hasn’t been tried yet. How do we know what he has done?

Slow your roll. It’s not working out for you. You haven’t finished today’s crow yet.

Someone’s eyes are bigger than their plate.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:This is actually a good day for America.

No American citizen conspired with Russia to sway the election.

If you are not happy about this, check your patriotism.

There is a difference between proof that someone is innocent and lack of proof to support a criminal charge/conviction. The latter does not mean that the person did not commit a crime, only that adequate proof could not be found that the person did commit the crime.

Take it out of the Trump/Mueller context for a moment. If law enforcement were investigating a mugging and trying to determine whether a particular person was responsible, video evidence that the suspect was elsewhere at the time of the mugging would exonerate him because it would prove that he could not have been the mugger. If the suspect's alibi couldn't be corroborated, though, but investigators also couldn't find sufficient evidence to prove the suspect did commit the mugging, that doesn't mean the suspect didn't do it, right? It just means that investigators can't prove that he did, and is different from them finding direct evidence that he didn't.

In this case, nothing has been released so far that suggests there is direct evidence Trump did not collude with Russia, only that there isn't evidence he did. Whether he actually did or not (as a separate question from whether it can be proven) is still an open question about which people will continue to form their own opinions. For those people who aren't convinced there was no collusion, today isn't a happy day because the report didn't prove that no one conspired with Russia, it only means that to the extent anyone may have colluded, they are going to get away with it.

Mueller does not find Trump campaign knowingly conspired with Russia

Reuters
Sunday, 24 March 2019 19:47 GMT
WASHINGTON, March 24 (Reuters) - Special Counsel Robert Mueller's report on Russian meddling in the 2016 election did not find that any U.S. or Trump campaign officials knowingly conspired with Russia, according to details released on Sunday.

Attorney General William Barr sent a summary of conclusions from the report to congressional leaders and the media on Sunday afternoon. Mueller concluded his investigation on Friday after nearly two years, turning in a report to the top U.S. law enforcement officer.

(Reporting by Sarah N. Lynch and Andy Sullivan; Editing by Leslie Adler)

http://news.trust.org/item/20190324193542-i87ff

I have no idea what point you're trying to make here.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:This is actually a good day for America.

No American citizen conspired with Russia to sway the election.

If you are not happy about this, check your patriotism.

There is a difference between proof that someone is innocent and lack of proof to support a criminal charge/conviction. The latter does not mean that the person did not commit a crime, only that adequate proof could not be found that the person did commit the crime.

Take it out of the Trump/Mueller context for a moment. If law enforcement were investigating a mugging and trying to determine whether a particular person was responsible, video evidence that the suspect was elsewhere at the time of the mugging would exonerate him because it would prove that he could not have been the mugger. If the suspect's alibi couldn't be corroborated, though, but investigators also couldn't find sufficient evidence to prove the suspect did commit the mugging, that doesn't mean the suspect didn't do it, right? It just means that investigators can't prove that he did, and is different from them finding direct evidence that he didn't.

In this case, nothing has been released so far that suggests there is direct evidence Trump did not collude with Russia, only that there isn't evidence he did. Whether he actually did or not (as a separate question from whether it can be proven) is still an open question about which people will continue to form their own opinions. For those people who aren't convinced there was no collusion, today isn't a happy day because the report didn't prove that no one conspired with Russia, it only means that to the extent anyone may have colluded, they are going to get away with it.

Think for just a minute.....
Mueller had dozens of FBI agents and numerous high power attorneys at his disposal. He had unlimited financial resources. He had no time limit.
He issued thousands of subpoenas, hundreds of search warrants, and interviewed around 500 witnesses.

His report indicates that Trump, nor anyone associated with him conspired with Russia. Period.

If he couldn't find it, despite all his human and financial resources, it doesn't exist.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:
Spent over 30 MILLION DOLLARS!!!!!!!!!

And nothing.....

What do you mean, "nothing?"

Have you been lobotomized?

34 indictments, guilty pleas and convictions on dozens and dozens of felony charges, $46 million dollars seized from Manafort from his sketchy dealings with pro-Putin forces in Russia.

Compare that with well over $80 million in taxpayer dollars spent by Republicans on numerous independent investigations of Hillary Clinton and not even one single prosecutable offense came out of that.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:This is actually a good day for America.

No American citizen conspired with Russia to sway the election.

If you are not happy about this, check your patriotism.

There is a difference between proof that someone is innocent and lack of proof to support a criminal charge/conviction. The latter does not mean that the person did not commit a crime, only that adequate proof could not be found that the person did commit the crime.

Take it out of the Trump/Mueller context for a moment. If law enforcement were investigating a mugging and trying to determine whether a particular person was responsible, video evidence that the suspect was elsewhere at the time of the mugging would exonerate him because it would prove that he could not have been the mugger. If the suspect's alibi couldn't be corroborated, though, but investigators also couldn't find sufficient evidence to prove the suspect did commit the mugging, that doesn't mean the suspect didn't do it, right? It just means that investigators can't prove that he did, and is different from them finding direct evidence that he didn't.

In this case, nothing has been released so far that suggests there is direct evidence Trump did not collude with Russia, only that there isn't evidence he did. Whether he actually did or not (as a separate question from whether it can be proven) is still an open question about which people will continue to form their own opinions. For those people who aren't convinced there was no collusion, today isn't a happy day because the report didn't prove that no one conspired with Russia, it only means that to the extent anyone may have colluded, they are going to get away with it.

Think for just a minute.....
Mueller had dozens of FBI agents and numerous high power attorneys at his disposal. He had unlimited financial resources. He had no time limit.
He issued thousands of subpoenas, hundreds of search warrants, and interviewed around 500 witnesses.

His report indicates that Trump, nor anyone associated with him conspired with Russia. Period.

If he couldn't find it, despite all his human and financial resources, it doesn't exist.

I am confused. Your words are too secretive and vague. Just because Mueller said no collusion, doesn’t mean no collusion. He obviously meant there was evidence of collusion. /s

When I get my Mueller report from Target.com, I’ll find collusion. Then DRUMPF is finished!

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:I have mixed feelings about this whole investigation. I am so angry at the division that has resulted from it - and it began with a stupid dossier from Hillary and the DNC.
I am also angry that it implicated so many innocent people whose reputations have been ruined and whose financial futures have been put in peril.

But, if this investigation had never happened, there would remain a cloud over his presidency forever. Thanks, Hillary!!! This is the legacy you have left.
So, now that the investigation - with its dozens of lawyers and agents, and countless numbers of subpoenas and millions of pieces of evidence, and bottomless financial resources - has proven that he did NOT conspire with Russia, for that I am happy.

No other president has been investigated this thoroughly, not even Bill Clinton.

Hopefully the democrats can accept this and move on.

[Anonymous]

For the first time, I actually believe that Trump may win reelection.

I base this on the total misjudgment of the situation with the Mueller investigation and the insistence by Nadler and that dumbass Schiff that there was conspiracy and collusion although Mueller expressly stated that there was none. Combine this with the mindless swing to the left by the progressive wing of the party, and it will give moderates and independents pause on whether they really want a Democratic president.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:This is actually a good day for America.

No American citizen conspired with Russia to sway the election.

If you are not happy about this, check your patriotism.

There is a difference between proof that someone is innocent and lack of proof to support a criminal charge/conviction. The latter does not mean that the person did not commit a crime, only that adequate proof could not be found that the person did commit the crime.

Take it out of the Trump/Mueller context for a moment. If law enforcement were investigating a mugging and trying to determine whether a particular person was responsible, video evidence that the suspect was elsewhere at the time of the mugging would exonerate him because it would prove that he could not have been the mugger. If the suspect's alibi couldn't be corroborated, though, but investigators also couldn't find sufficient evidence to prove the suspect did commit the mugging, that doesn't mean the suspect didn't do it, right? It just means that investigators can't prove that he did, and is different from them finding direct evidence that he didn't.

In this case, nothing has been released so far that suggests there is direct evidence Trump did not collude with Russia, only that there isn't evidence he did. Whether he actually did or not (as a separate question from whether it can be proven) is still an open question about which people will continue to form their own opinions. For those people who aren't convinced there was no collusion, today isn't a happy day because the report didn't prove that no one conspired with Russia, it only means that to the extent anyone may have colluded, they are going to get away with it.

Think for just a minute.....
Mueller had dozens of FBI agents and numerous high power attorneys at his disposal. He had unlimited financial resources. He had no time limit.
He issued thousands of subpoenas, hundreds of search warrants, and interviewed around 500 witnesses.

His report indicates that Trump, nor anyone associated with him conspired with Russia. Period.

If he couldn't find it, despite all his human and financial resources, it doesn't exist.

Sometimes the evidence just doesn't exist. Especially if no one created a paper trail and no one is willing to admit to what happened. If I say something to my friend when no one else was present and we both deny to the end that it was said, does that mean I didn't say it?

[Anonymous]

Not getting the dispositive treatment. Nothing dispositive here.

The release was Barr's view. It didn't come from Mueller.

The "no collusion" finding was limited to one Government-controlled troll farm and related governmental agencies. It didn't include the ruling party.

The Barr letter explicit said that Trump was not exonerated.

There have already been numerous indictments and convictions.

The Barr letter reserved rights under 6(e), meaning that there definitely are MORE indictments coming.

So, no exoneration; potential collusion; Congressional hearings and multiple criminal trials still to come.

[Anonymous]

Basically Trump UN-wittingly colluded with Russia. Putin still manipulated him, and people around him were also a party to it in various ways.

Russians have a word for Trump's role - "useful idiot."

Either way Trump is still unfit to serve. Period.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I have mixed feelings about this whole investigation. I am so angry at the division that has resulted from it - and it began with a stupid dossier from Hillary and the DNC.
I am also angry that it implicated so many innocent people whose reputations have been ruined and whose financial futures have been put in peril.

But, if this investigation had never happened, there would remain a cloud over his presidency forever. Thanks, Hillary!!! This is the legacy you have left.
So, now that the investigation - with its dozens of lawyers and agents, and countless numbers of subpoenas and millions of pieces of evidence, and bottomless financial resources - has proven that he did NOT conspire with Russia, for that I am happy.

No other president has been investigated this thoroughly, not even Bill Clinton.

Hopefully the democrats can accept this and move on.

Just like the repubs moved on from Benghazi, her emails, lock her up.....?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:This is actually a good day for America.

No American citizen conspired with Russia to sway the election.

If you are not happy about this, check your patriotism.

There is a difference between proof that someone is innocent and lack of proof to support a criminal charge/conviction. The latter does not mean that the person did not commit a crime, only that adequate proof could not be found that the person did commit the crime.

Take it out of the Trump/Mueller context for a moment. If law enforcement were investigating a mugging and trying to determine whether a particular person was responsible, video evidence that the suspect was elsewhere at the time of the mugging would exonerate him because it would prove that he could not have been the mugger. If the suspect's alibi couldn't be corroborated, though, but investigators also couldn't find sufficient evidence to prove the suspect did commit the mugging, that doesn't mean the suspect didn't do it, right? It just means that investigators can't prove that he did, and is different from them finding direct evidence that he didn't.

In this case, nothing has been released so far that suggests there is direct evidence Trump did not collude with Russia, only that there isn't evidence he did. Whether he actually did or not (as a separate question from whether it can be proven) is still an open question about which people will continue to form their own opinions. For those people who aren't convinced there was no collusion, today isn't a happy day because the report didn't prove that no one conspired with Russia, it only means that to the extent anyone may have colluded, they are going to get away with it.

Think for just a minute.....
Mueller had dozens of FBI agents and numerous high power attorneys at his disposal. He had unlimited financial resources. He had no time limit.
He issued thousands of subpoenas, hundreds of search warrants, and interviewed around 500 witnesses.

His report indicates that Trump, nor anyone associated with him conspired with Russia. Period.

If he couldn't find it, despite all his human and financial resources, it doesn't exist.

No the summary of the report says that. We don’t know what the reports says.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:Not getting the dispositive treatment. Nothing dispositive here.

The release was Barr's view. It didn't come from Mueller.

The "no collusion" finding was limited to one Government-controlled troll farm and related governmental agencies. It didn't include the ruling party.

The Barr letter explicit said that Trump was not exonerated.

There have already been numerous indictments and convictions.

The Barr letter reserved rights under 6(e), meaning that there definitely are MORE indictments coming.

So, no exoneration; potential collusion; Congressional hearings and multiple criminal trials still to come.

And Congressional subpoenas and likely consequences if Barr isn't forthcoming with the report.