Mueller withheld Exculpatory Evidence from Court to Exonerate Trump – Mueller LIED to the Court!

a reply to: Aallanon

What has trump been charged with in court?

a reply to: Sillyolme

Nothing that has to do with Russia, which makes me wonder why the Ttards are all up in arms over not being exonerated.

originally posted by: chr0naut
mediabiasfactcheck.com...a reply to: Aallanon

The entire article is based upon the assumption that Trump didn't have contact details for Putin.

No, the entire article is based on the assumption that COHEN didn't have contact details for Putin, which suggests that the Trump administration wasn't running a 'back channel' communication with the Kremlin. All we need to see as evidence of this is that Cohen's emails were sent to the general press email address of the Kremlin, not a specific contact name, which is what the article alleged.

The premise of the article is that if Cohen used the general press email address to make contact, which it appears he might have if he had to follow up with another email 2 days later (as Mueller claims), then suggestions of direct communication and collusion are simply false.

originally posted by: Sillyolme
a reply to: Aallanon

What has trump been charged with in court?

Nothing, since Mueller has stated himself that Trump is not a target of his investigation. The media and never Trumpers just have proprogandized this whole issue for their own agendas. Not understanding that as a "subject" simply means that Mueller believes others may have attempted to use him. Thus, Trump is innocent.

originally posted by: Deetermined
a reply to: chr0naut

Sometimes you are so dense. Putin would know who runs the Miss Universe pageants and they don't take place everyday or in Moscow every year. This would have been good publicity for Putin and it's only normal that he would thank the person who owns and organizes the pageant, especially since they chose Moscow to hold it. Anyone could have informed him of Trump's tweet, as I mentioned in my post that you chose to ignore.

Trump was there in person



But that is beside the point, this whole thread is based on the assumption that Trump didn't have Putin's direct e-mail (which is unlikely, but still possible) and that Mueller was the presiding judge and produced Cohen's confession (which we know to be untrue).

At that point, this whole thread topic is debunked.

originally posted by: chr0naut

At that point, this whole thread topic is debunked.

What utter nonsense. See my post above.

originally posted by: Rewey

originally posted by: chr0naut
mediabiasfactcheck.com...a reply to: Aallanon

The entire article is based upon the assumption that Trump didn't have contact details for Putin.

No, the entire article is based on the assumption that COHEN didn't have contact details for Putin, which suggests that the Trump administration wasn't running a 'back channel' communication with the Kremlin. All we need to see as evidence of this is that Cohen's emails were sent to the general press email address of the Kremlin, not a specific contact name, which is what the article alleged.

The premise of the article is that if Cohen used the general press email address to make contact, which it appears he might have if he had to follow up with another email 2 days later (as Mueller claims), then suggestions of direct communication and collusion are simply false.

Cohen was Trump's lawyer and 2IC. If Cohen was to communicate something to Putin, and instead put it out to someone else, then Cohen wasn't worth his pay.

But beside that, we have no reason to assume that Cohen didn't know a direct e-mail to message Putin. The suggestion is a really poor excuse.

a reply to: chr0naut

this is one of those things. If it can be prove that Trump lied, and did in fact collude with Russia, he's bad and should be punished. If it turns out that he didn't, then a whole lot of people need to be punished. As was told to Ben Gates, somebody has to go to jail.

originally posted by: Rewey

originally posted by: chr0naut

At that point, this whole thread topic is debunked.

What utter nonsense. See my post above.

Mueller didn't claim it. Mueller didn't prosecute the case. Robert Khuzami prosecuted the case which was unrelated to the Russian collusion probe of Mueller. During the court case, Cohen revealed that he had lied about dealings with the Russians during Trump's campaign.

The report being tabled was not Muellers, it was Cohen's confession.

So Mueller made none of those statements.

So Mueller cannot have "lied in court" making statements he didn't make. End of speculative thread.

a reply to: chr0naut

Sorry , you are wrong

A 9-page charging document filed with the plea deal shows Mueller is using the Moscow tower talks to connect Trump to Russia. But congressional investigators with House & Senate committees involved say Mueller withheld from the court details that would exonerate the president...

originally posted by: chr0naut

originally posted by: Rewey

originally posted by: chr0naut
mediabiasfactcheck.com...a reply to: Aallanon

The entire article is based upon the assumption that Trump didn't have contact details for Putin.

No, the entire article is based on the assumption that COHEN didn't have contact details for Putin, which suggests that the Trump administration wasn't running a 'back channel' communication with the Kremlin. All we need to see as evidence of this is that Cohen's emails were sent to the general press email address of the Kremlin, not a specific contact name, which is what the article alleged.

The premise of the article is that if Cohen used the general press email address to make contact, which it appears he might have if he had to follow up with another email 2 days later (as Mueller claims), then suggestions of direct communication and collusion are simply false.

Cohen was Trump's lawyer and 2IC. If Cohen was to communicate something to Putin, and instead put it out to someone else, then Cohen wasn't worth his pay.

But beside that, we have no reason to assume that Cohen didn't know a direct e-mail to message Putin. The suggestion is a really poor excuse.

Umm... That's EXACTLY the point. If Cohen used a general press email address to initiate contact, it proves that neither Trump nor Cohen had some direct secret back channel of communication with the Kremlin. The article suggests that the supporting documentation lodged with Cohen's plea agreement, and signed by Mueller, indicates that a general press email address was used. Hence no back channel and collusion.

What I am suggesting is that if those documents ALSO claim that Cohen followed up with a second email two days later, it points to him following up a general inquiry line, not following up some imaginary personal contact. If so, the ONLY evidence we need to unravel the entire Russian collusion story is copies of those emails showing which email address Cohen contacted.

The ARTICLE is saying that Mueller and his team knowing that Cohen used a general press email address, but keeping that secret, is not fair play.

That's about as simple as I can make it?

originally posted by: Aallanon
a reply to: chr0naut

Sorry , you are wrong

A 9-page charging document filed with the plea deal shows Mueller is using the Moscow tower talks to connect Trump to Russia. But congressional investigators with House & Senate committees involved say Mueller withheld from the court details that would exonerate the president...

Michael Cohen Charging Document.

Presiding judge: William H. Pauley III, Senior United States District Judge of the US District Court for the Southern District of New York.
Prosecutor: Robert Khuzami US Attourney.

Not Mueller.

originally posted by: Rewey

originally posted by: chr0naut

originally posted by: Rewey

originally posted by: chr0naut
mediabiasfactcheck.com...a reply to: Aallanon

The entire article is based upon the assumption that Trump didn't have contact details for Putin.

No, the entire article is based on the assumption that COHEN didn't have contact details for Putin, which suggests that the Trump administration wasn't running a 'back channel' communication with the Kremlin. All we need to see as evidence of this is that Cohen's emails were sent to the general press email address of the Kremlin, not a specific contact name, which is what the article alleged.

The premise of the article is that if Cohen used the general press email address to make contact, which it appears he might have if he had to follow up with another email 2 days later (as Mueller claims), then suggestions of direct communication and collusion are simply false.

Cohen was Trump's lawyer and 2IC. If Cohen was to communicate something to Putin, and instead put it out to someone else, then Cohen wasn't worth his pay.

But beside that, we have no reason to assume that Cohen didn't know a direct e-mail to message Putin. The suggestion is a really poor excuse.

Umm... That's EXACTLY the point. If Cohen used a general press email address to initiate contact, it proves that neither Trump nor Cohen had some direct secret back channel of communication with the Kremlin. The article suggests that the supporting documentation lodged with Cohen's plea agreement, and signed by Mueller,

It wasn't signed by Mueller. He was neither judge nor prosecutor in this case.

indicates that a general press email address was used. Hence no back channel and collusion.

What I am suggesting is that if those documents ALSO claim that Cohen followed up with a second email two days later, it points to him following up a general inquiry line, not following up some imaginary personal contact. If so, the ONLY evidence we need to unravel the entire Russian collusion story is copies of those emails showing which email address Cohen contacted.

The ARTICLE is saying that Mueller and his team

The court case was in New York Southern District Court and had little or nothing to do with Muellers investigation. So, not Mueller and his team. The article gets the facts wrong.

knowing that Cohen used a general press email address, but keeping that secret, is not fair play.

That's about as simple as I can make it?

The charging document, on which this speculative article is based, makes no mention of the e-mail address used.

The article draws conclusions based upon nothing at all.

a reply to: Aallanon

Uranium One will be Herr Mueller's Waterloo . The King Is Dead , Long Live The King !

a reply to: Aallanon

Comey and Mueller badly bungled the biggest case they ever handled. They botched the investigation of the 2001 anthrax letter attacks that took five lives and infected 17 other people, shut down the U.S. Capitol and Washington's mail system, solidified the Bush administration's antipathy for Iraq, and eventually, when the facts finally came out, made the FBI look feckless, incompetent, and easily manipulated by outside political pressure[.] ...

Despite the jihadist slogans accompanying the mailed anthrax, it had nothing to do with Saddam Hussein or any foreign element; the FBI ignored a 2002 tip from a scientific colleague of the actual anthrax killer, who turned out to be a Fort Detrick scientist named Bruce Edwards Ivins; the reason is that they had quickly obsessed on an innocent man named Steven Hatfill; the bureau was bullied into focusing on the government scientist by Democratic Sen. Patrick Leahy (whose office, along with that of Senate Majority Leader Tom Daschle, was targeted by an anthrax-laced letter) and was duped into focusing on Hatfill by two sources – a conspiracy-minded college professor with a political agenda who'd never met Hatfill and by Nicholas Kristof, who put his conspiracy theories in the paper while mocking the FBI for not arresting Hatfill[.] ...

In 2008, after Ivins committed suicide as he was about to be apprehended for his crimes, and the Justice Department had formally exonerated Hatfill – and paid him $5.82 million in a legal settlement – Mueller could not be bothered to walk across the street to attend the press conference announcing the case's resolution. When reporters did ask him about it, Mueller was graceless. "I do not apologize for any aspect of the investigation," he said, adding that it would be erroneous "to say there were mistakes."


www.americanthinker.com...

in 2017 960thepatriot.com...

House Republicans introduced a resolution on Friday, calling on Robert Mueller to step down from his position as special counsel on the probe into Russian interference.

Rep. Matt Gaetz (R-FL) said in a statement introducing the resolution that new evidence has emerged that the FBI withheld information from Congress about Russian corruption of American uranium companies and silenced a key FBI witness from contacting Congress while Mueller was the Director of the FBI.

Gaetz said by doing that, “Mueller’s FBI knowingly kept Congress in the dark about Russia’s significant and illegal involvement with American uranium companies.”

Co-sponsors of the resolution include Reps. Louis Gohmert (R-TX) and Andy Biggs (R-AZ).

Corrie O'Connor

Mueller...

His name alone screams jackass!!!

originally posted by: chr0naut

originally posted by: Rewey

originally posted by: chr0naut

At that point, this whole thread topic is debunked.

What utter nonsense. See my post above.

Mueller didn't claim it. Mueller didn't prosecute the case. Robert Khuzami prosecuted the case which was unrelated to the Russian collusion probe of Mueller. During the court case, Cohen revealed that he had lied about dealings with the Russians during Trump's campaign.

The report being tabled was not Muellers, it was Cohen's confession.

So Mueller made none of those statements.

So Mueller cannot have "lied in court" making statements he didn't make. End of speculative thread.

Again you were worng in bthis thread, the second one you made these claims.

Notice how the OP mentions specifically page 7 of the document?

On page 7 of the statement of criminal information filed against Cohen, Mueller mentions that Cohen tried to email Putin’s office two times in 2016. But Mueller omitted the fact that Cohen did not have any direct points of contact at the Kremlin

Here is the document

www.justice.gov...

Page sevenm says exactl;y what the OP says it does.

Now who signed that document as the one presenting it?

Robert Mueller.

End of your speculative comments.

a reply to: Sillyolme

If Trump had a direct line to Putin and they are oh-so close, why would a meeting be necessary to get Hillary's deleted emails ?

Putin would have sent them along right?

😆

originally posted by: chr0naut

originally posted by: Aallanon
a reply to: chr0naut

Sorry , you are wrong

A 9-page charging document filed with the plea deal shows Mueller is using the Moscow tower talks to connect Trump to Russia. But congressional investigators with House & Senate committees involved say Mueller withheld from the court details that would exonerate the president...

Michael Cohen Charging Document.

Presiding judge: William H. Pauley III, Senior United States District Judge of the US District Court for the Southern District of New York.
Prosecutor: Robert Khuzami US Attourney.

Not Mueller.

Incorrect.

You site a filing from August.

This was well before Cohen recent plea dealing with the trump tower in moscow arrangement.

I linked that document above and here again www.justice.gov...

was filed and signed by Mueller himself.

I assume this was an honest mistake on your part, and you will now admit that this OP and the other are not in fact debunked at all.

originally posted by: Grambler

originally posted by: chr0naut

originally posted by: Aallanon
a reply to: chr0naut

Sorry , you are wrong

A 9-page charging document filed with the plea deal shows Mueller is using the Moscow tower talks to connect Trump to Russia. But congressional investigators with House & Senate committees involved say Mueller withheld from the court details that would exonerate the president...

Michael Cohen Charging Document.

Presiding judge: William H. Pauley III, Senior United States District Judge of the US District Court for the Southern District of New York.
Prosecutor: Robert Khuzami US Attourney.

Not Mueller.

Incorrect.

You site a filing from August.

This was well before Cohen recent plea dealing with the trump tower in moscow arrangement.

I linked that document above and here again www.justice.gov...

was filed and signed by Mueller himself.

I assume this was an honest mistake on your part, and you will now admit that this OP and the other are not in fact debunked at all.

Yes, I am wrong. I didn't realize that Mueller had moved on Cohen and I was quoting the previous case and charges.