We Already Know There Was Collusion

[Fletch]

I think that is absolutely a possibility. Considering the Right is still going around claiming that Hillary is a crook despite James Comey(a Registered Republican at the time) making the call you're in no position to be arguing against the validity of that possibility.

:cuckoo:

 

[Obscurity]

I absolutely do not believe that the dossier was a KGB hit job.

Steele is far too professional and experienced to fall for that.

He claimed that he could not say everything was true, however he predicted that about 70% would be accurate, it has proven far more accurate than that...

Nonsense, Steele used unverified info that the FBI then stove piped through the media, which justified the investigation through the FISA process. The evidence is overwhelming. 0 Indictments for working with the Russians.

I 100% believe that it was a Russian hit job.

 

[uptower]

I guess you got your day ruined.

/thread

Yes it was disappointing when many of us believed there would be ample evidence of collusion over the election. But it's not about me it's about the facts coming out.

At least on one count it looks like the facts favor Trump. However there is likely ample evidence of many other crimes, which the DOj has already handed off to other relevant DAs and prosecutors and we will know more when we see the report. It's coming out one way or another and as noted by some pundits even before the report came out, the investigation into Trump's crimes in and out of office have broadened beyond the Russia probe. Mueller's done, but everyone else is just warming up.

 

[uptower]

Mueller didn't say there wasn't enough evidence to prove that Trump "willingly conspired." He said there was no evidence of a conspiracy-- period.
In other words, Trump might as well have been accused of shooting somebody on 5th Ave. It would be just as preposterous.
Based on this, maybe some humility is in order with regards to other claims of wrongdoing.

From who? The Dems in congress who have their own investigations? It doesn't follow that just because one suspicion they had about Trump has been disproved (the point of an investigation) that they should drop every other concern they have.

For those still demanding more investigations into Clinton - persona non grata - now sounds like a funny time to stop investigating a known liar, and fraud who's also the President of the United States.

 

[tres borrachos]

yes you are lying.
I posted you there is no evidence.
YOu take 1 line out of the other 300 lines that were posted.

WHy are you lying i even posted them for you.
Yes you are making yourself look foolish.

"the Special Counsel did not find that any U.S. person or Trump campaign official or associate conspired or knowingly coordinated with the IRA in its efforts, although the Special Counsel brought criminal charges against a number of Russian nationals and entities in connection with these activities."

From the report
NO EVIDENCE.

The Special Counsel did not find that the Trump campaign, or anyone associated with it, conspired or coordinated" with Russians who worked on those hacking efforts, according to Barr's letter, "despite multiple offers from Russian-affiliated individuals to assist the Trump campaign.

from the mueller report
NO EVIDENCE.

Mueller's report did not reach a conclusion on whether the Trump campaign obstructed justice, and left that decision to Barr and officials at the DOJ -- who determined there was insufficient evidence of obstruction.

No evidence or lack of evidence.
from the mueller report.

I see you left those out tres.

why are you lying and being dishonest?
save your stupid games for someone else.
they are not going to work here.

quit lying and being dishonest.

NO collusion
no obstruction
these are facts.

Does this stupid wall of text have a point? Is this Haiku or something? Please post like an adult.

You need to prove my post wrong. You need to post something from the Mueller report or a redaction from Barr that proves it wrong. Barr said that Mueller did not exonerate Trump on the obstruction of justice claim. Now, you post something that shows that Mueller exonerated Trump on obstruction of justice. Prove that Barr lied. He's the one who said it, not me.

 

[ChezC3]

Ahh, the Unthinking Left....showing us all again how they believe so much in that which isn't so...

:lamo

 

[Born Free]

It is more or less established fact now that the Trump Campaign colluded with foreign agents. What we're waiting on is answers as to what extent Trump himself knew about this and was involved, and therefore the reasons for the other thing we already know: why he has been obstructing justice the whole time.

I take it now you know there was no collusion or obstruction. Of course all you libs were 100% certain Trump colluded with the Russian. You lost, and I'm arty Partying

 

[tres borrachos]

I did it is there in black and white straight from the report.
I see you as typical with you no chance of being honest.

NO collusion
no obstruction

sorry you don't like it you will just have to get over it.

We all know the report says there was no collusion. The report, according to Barr, does not say no obstruction. In fact, Barr specifically said "While this report does not conclude that the President committed a crime, it also does not exonerate him.”

So please stop lying.

 

[American]

Yes it was disappointing when many of us believed there would be ample evidence of collusion over the election. But it's not about me it's about the facts coming out.

At least on one count it looks like the facts favor Trump. However there is likely ample evidence of many other crimes, which the DOj has already handed off to other relevant DAs and prosecutors and we will know more when we see the report. It's coming out one way or another and as noted by some pundits even before the report came out, the investigation into Trump's crimes in and out of office have broadened beyond the Russia probe. Mueller's done, but everyone else is just warming up.

Not sure how many times you want to be wrong. You were sure about collusion, not you're certain of other crimes. Wow.

 

[hanger4]

We all know the report says there was no collusion. The report, according to Barr, does not say no obstruction. In fact, Barr specifically said "While this report does not conclude that the President committed a crime, it also does not exonerate him.”

So please stop lying.

*"While this report does not conclude that the President committed a crime, it also does not exonerate him.”*

Actually that's Barr quoting Mueller from his report.

Barr also said that Mueller's investigation into obstruction of justice found the President's actions were not "done with corrupt intent."

"In cataloguing the President's actions, many of which took place in public view, the report identifies no actions that, in our judgment, constitute obstructive conduct, had a nexus to a pending or contemplated proceeding, and were done with corrupt intent, each of which, under the Department's principles of federal prosecution guiding charging decisions, would need to be proven beyond a reasonable doubt to establish an obstruction-of-justice offense."

 

[tres borrachos]

*"While this report does not conclude that the President committed a crime, it also does not exonerate him.”*

Actually that's Barr quoting Mueller from his report.

Barr also said that Mueller's investigation into obstruction of justice found the President's actions were not "done with corrupt intent."

"In cataloguing the President's actions, many of which took place in public view, the report identifies no actions that, in our judgment, constitute obstructive conduct, had a nexus to a pending or contemplated proceeding, and were done with corrupt intent, each of which, under the Department's principles of federal prosecution guiding charging decisions, would need to be proven beyond a reasonable doubt to establish an obstruction-of-justice offense."

So did Barr lie or not?

 

[hanger4]

So did Barr lie or not?

Your arguments not with me tres, I don't believe Barr or Rosenstein lied.

 

[pinqy]

Nonsense, Steele used unverified info

Which was always noted as unverified and was not the only justification for the FISA warrant against Page, who had already been the subject of a FISA warrant. And Manafort had also been the subject of FISA warrants well before the Steele documents.

And how are you supposed to verify information without investigating it?

that the FBI then stove piped through the media, which justified the investigation through the FISA process.

I’m not sure what you mean here. Are you claiming there would have been no investigation without media attention? Or that the whole investigation was based on the FISA warrant against Page and Manafort (and I assume there were foreign intelligence FISA warrants against the Russians)?

The evidence is overwhelming. 0 Indictments for working with the Russians.

George Papadopoulos pled guilty to making false statements about contacts with Russian government agents.
Michael Flynn pled guilty to making false statement about his conversations with the Russian ambassador.
Rick Gates and Paul Manafort were involved with Konstantinos Kilimnik as late as 2018.
Richard Pinero pled guilty to identity fraud (presumably for assisting the Russian trolls attempting to influence the election.

So plenty of indictments for working with the Russians.

None for directly conspiring to influence the election by anyone in Trump’s campaign, but plenty for lying about working with Russian agents.

 

[KLATTU]

So did Barr lie or not?

Facts:

"In cataloguing the President's actions, many of which took place in public view, the report identifies no actions that, in our judgment, constitute obstructive conduct, had a nexus to a pending or contemplated proceeding, and were done with corrupt intent, each of which, under the Department's principles of federal prosecution guiding charging decisions, would need to be proven beyond a reasonable doubt to establish an obstruction-of-justice offense."

Cant make it any clearer that. No obstruction of justice .
Give up. You were played.

 

[tres borrachos]

Facts:

"In cataloguing the President's actions, many of which took place in public view, the report identifies no actions that, in our judgment, constitute obstructive conduct, had a nexus to a pending or contemplated proceeding, and were done with corrupt intent, each of which, under the Department's principles of federal prosecution guiding charging decisions, would need to be proven beyond a reasonable doubt to establish an obstruction-of-justice offense."

Cant make it any clearer that. No obstruction of justice .
Give up. You were played.

Facts. Mueller did not exonerate him of obstruction of justice. Barr even said that.

So was Barr lying?

 

[Fenton]

It is more or less established fact now that the Trump Campaign colluded with foreign agents. What we're waiting on is answers as to what extent Trump himself knew about this and was involved, and therefore the reasons for the other thing we already know: why he has been obstructing justice the whole time.

From the first story:

"The president’s shouts of “no collusion” cannot be accurately applied to the man he picked to chair his campaign. Manafort was in cahoots with a fellow alleged to have ties with Russian intelligence, and through this person Manafort was apparently communicating with a Putin ally about a policy issue crucial for the Kremlin, as Putin was underhandedly assisting the Trump campaign. This all comes across as a secret orgy of back-scratching—that is, collusion."

It's more or less established that the Obama administration spied on and unmasked the opposition candidate and his campaign during the run up to the 2016 election.

That shouldn't surprise anyone when you consider the Obama DOJ spied on journalist and our also our NATO allies.
Mueller had 2 years to find a shred of evidence that Trump colluded and he came up empty. This ridiculous collusion conspiracy theory is OVER.

Were still waiting for the IG investigation into FISA abuse to conclude and for Horrowitz to release his reports.

 

[uptower]

Not sure how many times you want to be wrong. You were sure about collusion, not you're certain of other crimes. Wow.

Releasing the report I'm sure would clear those questions up. Fair?

 

[ludin]

Does this stupid wall of text have a point? Is this Haiku or something? Please post like an adult.

You need to prove my post wrong. You need to post something from the Mueller report or a redaction from Barr that proves it wrong. Barr said that Mueller did not exonerate Trump on the obstruction of justice claim. Now, you post something that shows that Mueller exonerated Trump on obstruction of justice. Prove that Barr lied. He's the one who said it, not me.

i already did prove you wrong why do you keep lying?
that is all you have is to lie.
I did post it from the mueller report you are still lying.
Yes he did there is NO EVIDENCE OR LACK OF EVIDENCE.

why do you lie?

 

[upsideguy]

Ii didn't happen. If Mueller didn't charge anyone, it's because was zero evidence of any illegal activity between Russia and the Trump Campaign.

Mueller was out for blood. If he had the slightest evidence of such activity, he would have charged someone.

President Trump is on deck to being the cleanest president in modern history, maybe even in United States history. No other president has ever been placed under the microscope like he has. I doubt any other president could have made it this far.

Sorry, but you have no basis to say there was 'zero evidence'... the fact is there was lots of evidence. The evidence of conspiracy is usually about circumstantial evidence. A crime of conspiracy is charged when that circumstantial evidence can be strung together with intent. The circumstantial evidence, which was plentiful, apparently could not be strung together sufficient to rise to chargeable under federal guidelines, but don't be deceived, there was plenty of circumstantial evidence, hence there was evidence.

Because there was so much circumstantial evidence, the investigation was righteous.

 

[apdst]

Sorry, but you have no basis to say there was 'zero evidence'... the fact is there was lots of evidence. The evidence of conspiracy is usually about circumstantial evidence. A crime of conspiracy is charged when that circumstantial evidence can be strung together with intent. The circumstantial evidence, which was plentiful, apparently could not be strung together sufficient to rise to chargeable under federal guidelines, but don't be deceived, there was plenty of circumstantial evidence, hence there was evidence.

Because there was so much circumstantial evidence, the investigation was righteous.

Show us the evidence, actual evidence, not contrived bull****. Until then, there's zero evidence.

 

[Media_Truth]

He also said on Air Force One that he had no knowledge of the $130,000 check to Stormy Daniels. Now we know he was lying because we saw the reimbursement check.

You can't take anything Trump says at face value.

You can take everything Trump says at face value - simply think of it as a lie.

 

[tres borrachos]

i already did prove you wrong why do you keep lying?
that is all you have is to lie.
I did post it from the mueller report you are still lying.
Yes he did there is NO EVIDENCE OR LACK OF EVIDENCE.

why do you lie?

You didn't prove me wrong. You need to prove me wrong by showing the report from Mueller which says "I am exonerating President Trump of obstruction of justice" in order for my post to be wrong.

You posted from te Mueller report? Link that please. Because I have yet to see the Mueller report posted anywhere. I didn't know we had a poster on DP with an advanced copy. Surely you wouldn't lie when you said you posted something from the Mueller report.

 

[jmotivator]

It is more or less established fact now that the Trump Campaign colluded with foreign agents. What we're waiting on is answers as to what extent Trump himself knew about this and was involved, and therefore the reasons for the other thing we already know: why he has been obstructing justice the whole time.

From the first story:

"The president’s shouts of “no collusion” cannot be accurately applied to the man he picked to chair his campaign. Manafort was in cahoots with a fellow alleged to have ties with Russian intelligence, and through this person Manafort was apparently communicating with a Putin ally about a policy issue crucial for the Kremlin, as Putin was underhandedly assisting the Trump campaign. This all comes across as a secret orgy of back-scratching—that is, collusion."

What "collusion" would that be? If you mean discussing with Russians the possibility of oppo research that never materialized, then where is the collusion? Where is the cooperation?

Now, if you want to talk about clandestine communications with Russian authorities in order to get oppo research then the only REAL collusion was by the Hillary Campaign.

 

[American]

Releasing the report I'm sure would clear those questions up. Fair?

There's not going to be an impeachment, get that through your head. You're wasting your time.

 

[KLATTU]

i already did prove you wrong why do you keep lying?
that is all you have is to lie.
I did post it from the mueller report you are still lying.
Yes he did there is NO EVIDENCE OR LACK OF EVIDENCE.

why do you lie?

You're titilting at windmills, Ludin. Whever a poster breaks into that pedantic annoying parrot repition, ( Was Brr lying...was Barr lying ...was BArr lying ...squawwwwwwk) you know you've won.

The left is hanging on that thread of " Bbb...b...but Barr said he wasn't exonerated"

PFFFFT.

Whatever else Barr said.is TRUMPED by this.

Barr, March 24: Generally speaking, to obtain and sustain an obstruction conviction, the government would need to prove beyond a reasonable doubt that a person, acting with corrupt intent, engaged in obstructive conduct with a sufficient nexus to a pending or contemplated proceeding. In cataloguing the President’s actions, many of which took place in public view, the report identifies no actions that, in our judgment, constitute obstructive conduct, had a nexus to a pending or contemplated proceeding, and were done with corrupt intent, each of which, under the Department’s principles of federal prosecution guiding charging decisions, would need to be proven beyond a reasonable doubt to establish an obstruction-of-justice offense.

So obtsruction is out the window
PERIOD!

almost don't count.