Mueller Report is being delivered to Barr today

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:"SC investigation did not find that the Trump campaign or anyone associated with it conspired or coordinated with the Russian Govt. in its election activity."

Direct quote from SC report.

...."despite multiple offers from Russian-affiliated individuals to assist the Trump campaign."

Amazing that we have been in this nightmare for nearly 3 years.

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

On obstruction. And what would he have been obstructing if he had? The non-existence of criminal activity.

[Anonymous]

Fascinating that the SC never interviewed Trump, Jr, or Kushner.

And what about Stone and Corsi? Or Prince? And Cambridge Analytical?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:The Trump supporters think they control the narrative, they want everyone to completely ignore the 34 indictments of Trump campaign staff, his attorney, other close Trump associates, et cetera. Mueller's team turned up a huge amount of gross corruption and criminal behavior. There is absolutely no way the Trump camp can pretend that this was nothing. There is also no way that they can pretend it was some kind of political hit job, either. Dems didn't do this, Manafort, Cohen and the others did it to themselves. Nobody on the Dem side forced them to commit the crimes they did.

Let's get something straight........

Of those "34 indictments" that liberals and the left wing media continue to scream about, only 6 - yes, SIX - of them were associated with Trump's campaign. And, of those 6 - how many were charged with collusion or conspiracy? ZERO. Yep, nada. Most of the charges were around things they did BEFORE serving on the campaign OR process crimes like lying to investigators - something that would have never happened if this investigation had not happened to begin with. The rest of those charged were mostly Russians that had NOTHING to do with Trump's campaign.

Bottom line - a special counsel was not needed to prosecute any crimes here.

+1

+2

The remainder are Russian GRU officials, members of the Russian troll bureau and others connected with Russia but do please continue yammering idiotically how none of it has anything to do with Russia.

And also please do yammer on idiotically about how Trump is totally vindicated when 6 of the people worked directly for Trump. Trump surrounded himself with crooks and criminals.

Yep. Anyone who supports Trump at this point is saying they are fine with a mob-boss type running the country. Ethics and decency be damned.

Disgusting.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:The Trump supporters think they control the narrative, they want everyone to completely ignore the 34 indictments of Trump campaign staff, his attorney, other close Trump associates, et cetera. Mueller's team turned up a huge amount of gross corruption and criminal behavior. There is absolutely no way the Trump camp can pretend that this was nothing. There is also no way that they can pretend it was some kind of political hit job, either. Dems didn't do this, Manafort, Cohen and the others did it to themselves. Nobody on the Dem side forced them to commit the crimes they did.

Let's get something straight........

Of those "34 indictments" that liberals and the left wing media continue to scream about, only 6 - yes, SIX - of them were associated with Trump's campaign. And, of those 6 - how many were charged with collusion or conspiracy? ZERO. Yep, nada. Most of the charges were around things they did BEFORE serving on the campaign OR process crimes like lying to investigators - something that would have never happened if this investigation had not happened to begin with. The rest of those charged were mostly Russians that had NOTHING to do with Trump's campaign.

Bottom line - a special counsel was not needed to prosecute any crimes here.

+1

+2

The remainder are Russian GRU officials, members of the Russian troll bureau and others connected with Russia but do please continue yammering idiotically how none of it has anything to do with Russia.

And also please do yammer on idiotically about how Trump is totally vindicated when 6 of the people worked directly for Trump. Trump surrounded himself with crooks and criminals.

Those people didn’t have anything to do with collusion, which was the focus of the investigation you feckless twit.

Not collusion (exactly). More like treason (Flynn). But you're correct that didn't have anything to do with Trump.

[Anonymous]

Please, Dems, I beg of you. Hang onto the obstruction piece (when there was no crime to cover). Work that angle for all its worth. DO IT.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:Fascinating that the SC never interviewed Trump, Jr, or Kushner.

And what about Stone and Corsi? Or Prince? And Cambridge Analytical?

??? My understanding is the SC did interview Kushner.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Trump derangement syndrome finally laid bare!

Yep. Buy stock in valium because something tells me it's going to be soaring!

If by Trump-derangement syndrome you mean the inability to admit that if you voted for Trump, you voted for a vile, narcissistic criminal, then, yes, it is soaring. The capacity of human beings to live in full denial of obvious facts is astounding.

You should have a rally with the Michael Jackson and R. Kelly defenders. Delusional idiots unite!

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:Please, Dems, I beg of you. Hang onto the obstruction piece (when there was no crime to cover). Work that angle for all its worth. DO IT.

+100
And, go for impeachment too. That's the ticket.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:"SC investigation did not find that the Trump campaign or anyone associated with it conspired or coordinated with the Russian Govt. in its election activity."

Direct quote from SC report.

...."despite multiple offers from Russian-affiliated individuals to assist the Trump campaign."

Amazing that we have been in this nightmare for nearly 3 years.

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

On obstruction. And what would he have been obstructing if he had? The non-existence of criminal activity.

So if Trump had done a better job of looking innocent, then we wouldn't have had the SC.

This isn't crazy libs' fault. It's still Trump's fault.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:What are the consequences for the hysterical buffoons that have been accusing trump of collusion for the past two years?

Some of the idiots in Congress should resign. WaPo, NYTimes, CNN, and MSNBC should all apologize.
None of this will happen. You can see why Trump calls this "fake news."

What about the multiple Hillary Clinton investigations? What are the consequences for the Benghazi and email believers?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:Please, Dems, I beg of you. Hang onto the obstruction piece (when there was no crime to cover). Work that angle for all its worth. DO IT.

Do you labor under the delusion that you are clever?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Fascinating that the SC never interviewed Trump, Jr, or Kushner.

And what about Stone and Corsi? Or Prince? And Cambridge Analytical?

??? My understanding is the SC did interview Kushner.

Oh? When?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:"SC investigation did not find that the Trump campaign or anyone associated with it conspired or coordinated with the Russian Govt. in its election activity."

Direct quote from SC report.

...."despite multiple offers from Russian-affiliated individuals to assist the Trump campaign."

Amazing that we have been in this nightmare for nearly 3 years.

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

On obstruction. And what would he have been obstructing if he had? The non-existence of criminal activity.

So if Trump had done a better job of looking innocent, then we wouldn't have had the SC.

This isn't crazy libs' fault. It's still Trump's fault.

A better job of looking innocent? I think you mean if the Dems in the FBI hadn't been on a mission and weren't so sure Hillary would win. I cannot wait for the IG report.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:What are the consequences for the hysterical buffoons that have been accusing trump of collusion for the past two years?

Some of the idiots in Congress should resign. WaPo, NYTimes, CNN, and MSNBC should all apologize.
None of this will happen. You can see why Trump calls this "fake news."

What about the multiple Hillary Clinton investigations? What are the consequences for the Benghazi and email believers?

The crazy Trump supporters cannot be reasoned with. They live in opposites-land. Trump is innocent and all his lies are true!

Can't argue with crazy, man, don't bother.

[Anonymous]

Trump supporters shouldn’t sing too soon ,this isn’t what you think it is . Why are there still grand juries convened ? Why are there sealed indictments ? What did mueller transfer to Sdny? Personally I always thought the whole obstruction thing wasn’t clear cut and the collusion was rich in circumstantial evidence than clear cut facts

To get trump , you follow the Al Capone rule that is, follow the money . This is where his loyalties reside and I’ve long suspected that much of his deference to Russia is due in part because a disproportionate amount of his lenders were Russian banks and their oligarchs who saw in him a conduit to launder their money . Time will tell .