Mueller does not find Trump campaign knowingly conspired with Russia

[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.

That is some mighty impressive twisting you're doing there! It's remarkable, really, that you're taking the SC's findings (or rather, lack thereof) and turning it into some sort of negative-proving. Wow.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:With Trump fully exonerated, the only option is to gear up for the 2020 election. I bet his GOP challengers won’t run now. His chances of re-election just went way up.

+1

[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.

You would think, but that's probably asking far more of them than they're capable of. They simply can't move on. Which is why the rest of the country is going to leave them behind.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote: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.

Precisely.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote: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.

Stop. Not only is collusion unproven, Russian actions seem to be basically meaningless in determining the election.

No, you stop. Nobody is saying Trump and Russia were in bed together. Russia wanted Trump to win not to have an ally but to weaken America. Read Alexander Dugin's book "Foundations of Geopolitics" - it is a playbook for what went on, and what is continuing to go on. Trump had no clue what was going on. He is an incompetent buffoon. He was still trying to cozy up to Putin offering sanctions to Russia still stupidly hoping for hotel deals even as the Russians ramped up even harder on their efforts to undermine us. Unbelievable.

You’re a fool. Trump is President because domestic politics has been a disaster for decades. Russian ‘active measures’ were an absolute joke.


The only foreign powers Trump has sold us out to are KSA and Israel. Unfortunately, those relationships are decades-old bipartisan habits.

[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.

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?

Oh, dear. You'll never get over this, will you? It's like 2016 all over again.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote: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.

Precisely.

Huh. W all heard Trump ask Russia to give him Hillary's emails.

So he was "joking". It's all ok now. Amirite?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

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.

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?

Oh, dear. You'll never get over this, will you? It's like 2016 all over again.

You sound really desperate.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote: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.

Stop. Not only is collusion unproven, Russian actions seem to be basically meaningless in determining the election.

No, you stop. Nobody is saying Trump and Russia were in bed together. Russia wanted Trump to win not to have an ally but to weaken America. Read Alexander Dugin's book "Foundations of Geopolitics" - it is a playbook for what went on, and what is continuing to go on. Trump had no clue what was going on. He is an incompetent buffoon. He was still trying to cozy up to Putin offering sanctions to Russia still stupidly hoping for hotel deals even as the Russians ramped up even harder on their efforts to undermine us. Unbelievable.

You’re a fool. Trump is President because domestic politics has been a disaster for decades. Russian ‘active measures’ were an absolute joke.


The only foreign powers Trump has sold us out to are KSA and Israel. Unfortunately, those relationships are decades-old bipartisan habits.

There's lots of fools around.

[Anonymous]

If the Democrats had an ounce of sense, they would just say that all they wanted was a thorough investigation by Mueller on the collusion charge and now that Mueller has determined that there was none, it is time to focus on policy differences and why the country would be better off with a Democratic president.

But it will take the likes of Pelosi and Schumer to actually get their more nutty colleagues to toe the line. Pelosi needs to take charge like she did on impeachment and say that it is not worthwhile to do so.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote: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.

Stop. Not only is collusion unproven, Russian actions seem to be basically meaningless in determining the election.

What evidence do you have that the Russian actions didn’t matter?

Pretty sure you're the one who needs to prove that their actions did matter.

The St. Petersberg troll farm spent less than $100K, most of AFTER the election. And the election involved, what $1B? What a joke!

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote: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.

Precisely.

Huh. W all heard Trump ask Russia to give him Hillary's emails.

So he was "joking". It's all ok now. Amirite?

And Mueller was aware of this and yet he concluded that there was no collusion ...............

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

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.

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?

Oh, dear. You'll never get over this, will you? It's like 2016 all over again.

You sound really desperate.

This entire thread (and others) showcase desperation, all right. Liberal desperation.

[Anonymous]

There’s that propaganda bubble again. You’re the one who said the meddling didn’t matter so you should be able to back that up. The intelligence agencies and the Mueller investigation detailed the many actions taken by the Russians. All in favor of trump. Trump won the election (though not the popular vote).

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

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.

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?

Oh, dear. You'll never get over this, will you? It's like 2016 all over again.

You sound really desperate.

This entire thread (and others) showcase desperation, all right. Liberal desperation.

And hysteria. Lol.