The Mueller Report

[Anonymous]

I knew I wasn't supporting a saint but, I know the candidate I was supporting was the best choice for the America I love. So, shove your only patriots would vote for ABC BS where the sun doesn't shine. Thank you.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I think Barr is the big loser here, his credibility shredded. Sure, plenty of people knew him to be a political hack who puts tribe ahead of country. But a lot of DC insiders seemed to regard him as an honorable man for whatever reason. The fact that he read the report and then making like it reflected positively on Trump leaves him in the position of looking incredibly dishonest now that everyone is able to read much of the report.

Barr is the winner here. He will go down in history as the AG who saved our country. The haters are never his fans anyway.

A fellow American, welcome brother.

Yes I agree, soon all the details about the Mueller investigation was just another tool in a weak attempt to oust an elected President.

Hey, my dear American brothers, can you point to us where in the report Trump and his associates behaved like loyal, law-abiding, patriotic Americans?

You know, when they called the FBI or the CIA or told Republican Congressmen or the State Department or George W. Bush or ANY AMERICAN that, hey, there are a whole bunch of RUSSIANS who want to help us win the election? Or after the election, when did they tell ANYONE, hey, these Russians seem to want something in return for helping us win the election?

You do realize that a hostile foreign power attacked our country and, AT BEST, Trump & his buddies didn't do a damn thing to stop them.

What if, instead, say, North Korea did the hacking, and Hillary and her campaign behaved the way the Trumpkins did - somehow I think you'd believe that was a problem.

This is a good question. Read the Mueller report, you will find Russia started the interference in 2014. The Mueller report is a stunning rebuke of the Obama administration's inaction.

"They" should refer to the Obama administration. They opened a counter-intelligence investigation in 2016. So they knew Russia's activities. Why didn't the Obama tell anyone, including the Trump campaign?? They could have told Trump in August of 2016 during the intel briefing. Perhaps the reason why Obama admin was ineffective in countering Russia is that they focused all their energy surveilling and framing American citizens (Trump campaign)?

I think the interference started much earlier. In 2014 Obama's administration became aware of it.

Another interesting question that report does not address: Mueller and his team knew by November 2018 that there is no collusion, but chose not to release that information by announcing that they will release it after mid-term election. Why?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:I knew I wasn't supporting a saint but, I know the candidate I was supporting was the best choice for the America I love. So, shove your only patriots would vote for ABC BS where the sun doesn't shine. Thank you.

Did you know he was this much “not a saint”? Did you hope for better from him? Or do you think this isn’t such a big deal and the corrupt media and dems are making s**t up?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Something you won't hear from the Democrats...........

Mueller's report looks bad for Obama

The partisan warfare over the Mueller report will rage, but one thing cannot be denied: Former President Barack Obama looks just plain bad. On his watch, the Russians meddled in our democracy while his administration did nothing about it.

The Mueller report flatly states that Russia began interfering in American democracy in 2014. Over the next couple of years, the effort blossomed into a robust attempt to interfere in our 2016 presidential election. The Obama administration knew this was going on and yet did nothing. In 2016, Obama's National Security Adviser Susan Rice told her staff to "stand down" and "knock it off" as they drew up plans to "strike back" against the Russians, according to an account from Michael Isikoff and David Corn in their book "Russian Roulette: The Inside Story of Putin's War on America and the Election of Donald Trump".

Why did Obama go soft on Russia? My opinion is that it was because he was singularly focused on the nuclear deal with Iran. Obama wanted Putin in the deal, and to stand up to him on election interference would have, in Obama's estimation, upset that negotiation. This turned out to be a disastrous policy decision.
Obama's supporters claim he did stand up to Russia by deploying sanctions after the election to punish them for their actions. But, Obama, according to the Washington Post, "approved a modest package... with economic sanctions so narrowly targeted that even those who helped design them describe their impact as largely symbolic." In other words, a toothless response to a serious incursion.

But don't just take my word for it that Obama failed. Congressman Adam Schiff, who disgraced himself in this process by claiming collusion when Mueller found that none exists, once said that "the Obama administration should have done a lot more." The Washington Post reported that a senior Obama administration official said they "sort of choked" in failing to stop the Russian government's brazen activities. And Obama's ambassador to Russia, Michael McFaul, said, "The punishment did not fit the crime" about the weak sanctions rolled out after the 2016 election.

https://www.cnn.com/2019/04/19/opinions/mueller-report-obama-jennings/index.html

If you're angry at Obama for "not doing anything about Russian interference, you must be furious at the Trump people for embracing it.

DP: I am not angry at Obama. His actions were completely understandable. He had no power to confront Putin when he found out in 2014 that Russian meddling with upcoming election. Obama was too focused on Iran deal to go through and he needed Putin to support that. If Obama accused Putin back in 2014, he knew he will never get his Iran deal, and that was his priority, not American election (since he assumed Hillary is winning regardless).

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:Seth Rich
Uranium One
Central Park 5
Birtherism
Benghazi
Nunes Memo
Wire Tapping


You all keep falling for BS conspiracy theories including now this whole thing that somehow Steel/FusionGPS etc was made up to undermine the Trump presidency. Go ahead and keep believing what you want to believe. You have fallen for these other debunked conspiracies and lies time and time again thus proving that truth and facts don't matter to you. You have an agenda and you will stick with it through thick and thin even though you have proven to be completely gullible to the most racist and anti-American lies ever told.

Seth Rich: Certainly, there is no known killer. It is not unreasonable to speculate. To do it on national television, however, is inappropriate. I have a theory--but it is only speculation. Seems odd that they were so quick to determine that it was a robbery gone bad--when there was no robbery. I do not think Rich was working with Russians.

Uranium One: There appear to be some questionable activities. More than one meeting in Trump tower.

Central Park 5: That was a tragedy upon tragedy. Many fell into that trap. Where is the conspiracy here? The good part is that the truth finally came out. Terrible that it took so long.

Birtherism: Ridiculous. However, Obama did a couple of things that triggered it--and, remember, it first came up in his primary with Clinton. The two things: 1) an error on the original Dreams promotion that said that Obama was born in Kenya. 2) Obama mentioned in his book that his mom had not kept track of his birth certificate--like Ruth had. Ruth was the American stepmother of two half-siblings.

Benghazi: no conspiracy--only cover-up.

Nunes Memo: appearing more and more valid.

Wire tapping: pretty sure there was wire tapping going on somewhere in this investigation.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I knew I wasn't supporting a saint but, I know the candidate I was supporting was the best choice for the America I love. So, shove your only patriots would vote for ABC BS where the sun doesn't shine. Thank you.

Did you know he was this much “not a saint”? Did you hope for better from him? Or do you think this isn’t such a big deal and the corrupt media and dems are making s**t up?

I knew his opponent was "this much not a saint" and so did Democrats. You all put that candidate up anyway! I read Lessig. I heard from Bernie supporters and you still put her up. I supported my America and will continue to do so unapologetically.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:
For the love of God, just read the report. We shouldn’t have to spoon feed it to you. It’s not two years of investigating and now nothing; it’s two years of investigating and you refuse to see what’s right in front of you. And because you’re so damn ignorant, you want to investigate the investigators whose results you refuse to even look at. What is wrong with you people?

It's a few hundred pages of an op-ed piece written for the media. Already caught the highlights which so far amounts to hearsay. So "no collusion".

Exactly

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:
For the love of God, just read the report. We shouldn’t have to spoon feed it to you. It’s not two years of investigating and now nothing; it’s two years of investigating and you refuse to see what’s right in front of you. And because you’re so damn ignorant, you want to investigate the investigators whose results you refuse to even look at. What is wrong with you people?

It's a few hundred pages of an op-ed piece written for the media. Already caught the highlights which so far amounts to hearsay. So "no collusion".

Actually there are direct quotes from people who testified before Congress or were interviewed under penalty of perjury before FBI Agents along with emails, notes and collaborating witnesses as primary source material. It is the exact opposite of an op-ed. I don't know what 'highlights' you caught, but unless or until you actually read the full report from cover to cover, you are riding on ignorance.

It’s an Andrew Weissman hit piece. Classically so.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Seth Rich
Uranium One
Central Park 5
Birtherism
Benghazi
Nunes Memo
Wire Tapping


You all keep falling for BS conspiracy theories including now this whole thing that somehow Steel/FusionGPS etc was made up to undermine the Trump presidency. Go ahead and keep believing what you want to believe. You have fallen for these other debunked conspiracies and lies time and time again thus proving that truth and facts don't matter to you. You have an agenda and you will stick with it through thick and thin even though you have proven to be completely gullible to the most racist and anti-American lies ever told.

Seth Rich: Certainly, there is no known killer. It is not unreasonable to speculate. To do it on national television, however, is inappropriate. I have a theory--but it is only speculation. Seems odd that they were so quick to determine that it was a robbery gone bad--when there was no robbery. I do not think Rich was working with Russians.

Uranium One: There appear to be some questionable activities. More than one meeting in Trump tower.

Central Park 5: That was a tragedy upon tragedy. Many fell into that trap. Where is the conspiracy here? The good part is that the truth finally came out. Terrible that it took so long.

Birtherism: Ridiculous. However, Obama did a couple of things that triggered it--and, remember, it first came up in his primary with Clinton. The two things: 1) an error on the original Dreams promotion that said that Obama was born in Kenya. 2) Obama mentioned in his book that his mom had not kept track of his birth certificate--like Ruth had. Ruth was the American stepmother of two half-siblings.

Benghazi: no conspiracy--only cover-up.

Nunes Memo: appearing more and more valid.

Wire tapping: pretty sure there was wire tapping going on somewhere in this investigation.

All good points

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I knew I wasn't supporting a saint but, I know the candidate I was supporting was the best choice for the America I love. So, shove your only patriots would vote for ABC BS where the sun doesn't shine. Thank you.

Did you know he was this much “not a saint”? Did you hope for better from him? Or do you think this isn’t such a big deal and the corrupt media and dems are making s**t up?

I knew his opponent was "this much not a saint" and so did Democrats. You all put that candidate up anyway! I read Lessig. I heard from Bernie supporters and you still put her up. I supported my America and will continue to do so unapologetically.

Ok. Fine. I get that you made the best decision you feel you could have then. How about now? Hillary is in the rear view mirror. How do you feel about the report and the finding that Trump is more corrupt/corruptible than you presumably imagined when you voted for him? Do you still support him?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I knew I wasn't supporting a saint but, I know the candidate I was supporting was the best choice for the America I love. So, shove your only patriots would vote for ABC BS where the sun doesn't shine. Thank you.

Did you know he was this much “not a saint”? Did you hope for better from him? Or do you think this isn’t such a big deal and the corrupt media and dems are making s**t up?

I knew his opponent was "this much not a saint" and so did Democrats. You all put that candidate up anyway! I read Lessig. I heard from Bernie supporters and you still put her up. I supported my America and will continue to do so unapologetically.

Ok. Fine. I get that you made the best decision you feel you could have then. How about now? Hillary is in the rear view mirror. How do you feel about the report and the finding that Trump is more corrupt/corruptible than you presumably imagined when you voted for him? Do you still support him?

DP here: I do support him. I didn't find anything new in the report that I didn't know before the election. I knew he was a businessman and he had prior dealings. If they rise to the level of criminal corruption, he should be prosecuted by DOJ. If DOJ chose not to prosecute him, it is on them. I am more concerned that after spending so much money on this investigation, now we will be spending more money on Congress investigation. It is time to move on.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I knew I wasn't supporting a saint but, I know the candidate I was supporting was the best choice for the America I love. So, shove your only patriots would vote for ABC BS where the sun doesn't shine. Thank you.

Did you know he was this much “not a saint”? Did you hope for better from him? Or do you think this isn’t such a big deal and the corrupt media and dems are making s**t up?

I knew his opponent was "this much not a saint" and so did Democrats. You all put that candidate up anyway! I read Lessig. I heard from Bernie supporters and you still put her up. I supported my America and will continue to do so unapologetically.

Ok. Fine. I get that you made the best decision you feel you could have then. How about now? Hillary is in the rear view mirror. How do you feel about the report and the finding that Trump is more corrupt/corruptible than you presumably imagined when you voted for him? Do you still support him?

DP here: I do support him. I didn't find anything new in the report that I didn't know before the election. I knew he was a businessman and he had prior dealings. If they rise to the level of criminal corruption, he should be prosecuted by DOJ. If DOJ chose not to prosecute him, it is on them. I am more concerned that after spending so much money on this investigation, now we will be spending more money on Congress investigation. It is time to move on.

Np- the entire point of the report is to give Congress the means to pursue. Literally the entire point. You shouldn’t be shrugging that off, and you shouldn’t be hoping congresses just “moves on”. The ball is in congresses court to do their jobs.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I knew I wasn't supporting a saint but, I know the candidate I was supporting was the best choice for the America I love. So, shove your only patriots would vote for ABC BS where the sun doesn't shine. Thank you.

Did you know he was this much “not a saint”? Did you hope for better from him? Or do you think this isn’t such a big deal and the corrupt media and dems are making s**t up?

I knew his opponent was "this much not a saint" and so did Democrats. You all put that candidate up anyway! I read Lessig. I heard from Bernie supporters and you still put her up. I supported my America and will continue to do so unapologetically.

Ok. Fine. I get that you made the best decision you feel you could have then. How about now? Hillary is in the rear view mirror. How do you feel about the report and the finding that Trump is more corrupt/corruptible than you presumably imagined when you voted for him? Do you still support him?

DP here: I do support him. I didn't find anything new in the report that I didn't know before the election. I knew he was a businessman and he had prior dealings. If they rise to the level of criminal corruption, he should be prosecuted by DOJ. If DOJ chose not to prosecute him, it is on them. I am more concerned that after spending so much money on this investigation, now we will be spending more money on Congress investigation. It is time to move on.

Np- the entire point of the report is to give Congress the means to pursue. Literally the entire point. You shouldn’t be shrugging that off, and you shouldn’t be hoping congresses just “moves on”. The ball is in congresses court to do their jobs.

Why? Why do we have DOJ? Why DOJ don't do anything if they have evidence that the crime was committed? Should we fire all those people if they know there were the crime committed, have evidence to prove it and failing to prosecute it?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I knew I wasn't supporting a saint but, I know the candidate I was supporting was the best choice for the America I love. So, shove your only patriots would vote for ABC BS where the sun doesn't shine. Thank you.

Did you know he was this much “not a saint”? Did you hope for better from him? Or do you think this isn’t such a big deal and the corrupt media and dems are making s**t up?

I knew his opponent was "this much not a saint" and so did Democrats. You all put that candidate up anyway! I read Lessig. I heard from Bernie supporters and you still put her up. I supported my America and will continue to do so unapologetically.

Ok. Fine. I get that you made the best decision you feel you could have then. How about now? Hillary is in the rear view mirror. How do you feel about the report and the finding that Trump is more corrupt/corruptible than you presumably imagined when you voted for him? Do you still support him?

DP here: I do support him. I didn't find anything new in the report that I didn't know before the election. I knew he was a businessman and he had prior dealings. If they rise to the level of criminal corruption, he should be prosecuted by DOJ. If DOJ chose not to prosecute him, it is on them. I am more concerned that after spending so much money on this investigation, now we will be spending more money on Congress investigation. It is time to move on.

Np- the entire point of the report is to give Congress the means to pursue. Literally the entire point. You shouldn’t be shrugging that off, and you shouldn’t be hoping congresses just “moves on”. The ball is in congresses court to do their jobs.

So, you believe that Congress can do something that Mueller and his high power attorneys and FBI agents were unable to do?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I knew I wasn't supporting a saint but, I know the candidate I was supporting was the best choice for the America I love. So, shove your only patriots would vote for ABC BS where the sun doesn't shine. Thank you.

Did you know he was this much “not a saint”? Did you hope for better from him? Or do you think this isn’t such a big deal and the corrupt media and dems are making s**t up?

I knew his opponent was "this much not a saint" and so did Democrats. You all put that candidate up anyway! I read Lessig. I heard from Bernie supporters and you still put her up. I supported my America and will continue to do so unapologetically.

Ok. Fine. I get that you made the best decision you feel you could have then. How about now? Hillary is in the rear view mirror. How do you feel about the report and the finding that Trump is more corrupt/corruptible than you presumably imagined when you voted for him? Do you still support him?

DP here: I do support him. I didn't find anything new in the report that I didn't know before the election. I knew he was a businessman and he had prior dealings. If they rise to the level of criminal corruption, he should be prosecuted by DOJ. If DOJ chose not to prosecute him, it is on them. I am more concerned that after spending so much money on this investigation, now we will be spending more money on Congress investigation. It is time to move on.

Np- the entire point of the report is to give Congress the means to pursue. Literally the entire point. You shouldn’t be shrugging that off, and you shouldn’t be hoping congresses just “moves on”. The ball is in congresses court to do their jobs.

Why? Why do we have DOJ? Why DOJ don't do anything if they have evidence that the crime was committed? Should we fire all those people if they know there were the crime committed, have evidence to prove it and failing to prosecute it?

Because they turn it over to Congress to make the decision to impeach. As per the Constitution. It's called separation of powers. You might want to pick up a copy of the Constitution and start reading it.

Former General Counsel of the Senate Judiciary Committee John Yoo has this response to your question: "The Constitution itself establishes impeachment, not prosecution, as the answer to a corrupt sitting president. Impeachment does not require the president to commit a crime, but instead refers to significant political mistakes or offenses. As Alexander Hamilton observed, they "are of a nature which may with preculiar propriety be denominated political, as they relate chiefly to injuries done immediately to the society itself. [t]he Constitution makes Congress alone, not prosecutors, accountable for firing or keeping a president accused of abusing the office."

https://www.washingtonpost.com/opinions/john-yoo-its-now-impeachment-or-bust-as-it-should-be/2019/04/19/e1919860-6214-11e9-9ff2-abc984dc9eec_story.html?utm_term=.d098c5787349