Mueller sends report on Trump investigation to AG Barr

originally posted by: chr0naut

originally posted by: Gothmog

originally posted by: chr0naut
a reply to: Grambler

The thread title is misleading because the implication could be drawn that the investigation was into Trump personally.

The investigation was into Russian interference in the 2016 elections.

Uh , no
Just no
It was about the left's TDS in that the Trump campaign colluded with the Russians .
That was the official statement by Mueller. At the start.
Where do you get your information ?

From his brief appointing him as Special Counsel.

As near as I can tell, the first use of the word "collusion" in regard to Mueller's investigation was Trump/Guiliani in a Tweet on February 16 2018.

As far as I have been able to determine, Mueller has not used the word "collusion" or "collude" once in regard to his investigations.

Of course, if there was no investigation into collusion, then there would be findings in that regard. Since the investigation wasn't into collusion, it is unlikely that there will be a finding of collusion.

You didn't try very hard. Took me less than 2 minutes...

Clinton campaign chief: Did Trump, Russians collude?

December 18th 2016

Tucker Carlson is really getting it spot on tonight - focusing on how the hoax came about in the first place, majoring on Obama's administration spying on Trump. Remember when the left denied that?

There really does need to be a drains up on how Hillary Clinton was able to use opposition research to initiate a soft coup to take down the Presidency.

originally posted by: burdman30ott6
a reply to: chr0naut

NARRATIVE SHIFT!!! NARRATIVE SHIFT!!!

Yes. Trump said "NO COLLUSION", when there was no investigation into "collusion" and you bought it. Pure bait and switch, but why?

Is "collusion" even a valid prosecutable charge in this case? It definitely isn't a federal crime except in some parts of antitrust law.

Nor does "collusion" actually describe a criminal charges or counterintelligence charge that the Mueller investigation is likely to have discovered. They are more likely to be charges of 'conspiracy', 'fraud' or similar.

originally posted by: Grambler

originally posted by: chr0naut
a reply to: Grambler

The thread title is misleading because the implication could be drawn that the investigation was into Trump personally.

The investigation was into Russian interference in the 2016 elections.

Really?

If thats the case, why werent hillarys team connections to russians and the kremlin agents that gave her team dirt on trum[p investigated?

Perhaps because there were already running investigations into Clinton that were either in process or concluded.

You don't need to investigate what is already under investigation or that has cleared the accused, that's redundant and costly.

a reply to: UKTruth

Tucker has been one of the few people in the msm with integrity on this.

Allow me to congratulate some of us here on ATS,; we were on the ball about this from the get go.

I have spent over two years telling people that the intial use of paid oppo research used by Obamas intel community to spy on people connected to trump was the biggest political scandal in the history of the country.

The overwhelming msm had access to more info than me, yet instead of speaking truth to power tried to silence truth to help cover for the power.

I still want to see the report.

But if their are no more indictments, this means Obamas intel community knowingly used unverified oppo research from their political ally to spy on their political opponent. And now surprise surprise, after over two years and near unlimited power and resources, even the special counsel is unable to verify the dossier.

Unless people in Obama admin are held accountable, this crap will continue, and the intel community will decide elections and stop rightfully elected people based on their whims, which is a bigger threat to our country than any foreign power is.

originally posted by: chr0naut

originally posted by: Grambler

originally posted by: chr0naut
a reply to: Grambler

The thread title is misleading because the implication could be drawn that the investigation was into Trump personally.

The investigation was into Russian interference in the 2016 elections.

Really?

If thats the case, why werent hillarys team connections to russians and the kremlin agents that gave her team dirt on trum[p investigated?

Perhaps because there were already running investigations into Clinton that were either in process or concluded.

You don't need to investigate what is already under investigation or that has cleared the accused, that's redundant and costly.

Ridiculous.

So you are telling me that the FBI was investigating Hillarys connections to steele and kremlin agents before they were looking into Trump teams russian connections?

And seeing as how we know the hillary connected podesta group was named as a cohort of manafort in not registering as a foriegn lobbyist, why werent they charged if it was just about investigating foreign interference?

originally posted by: Grambler
a reply to: UKTruth

Allow me to congratulate some of us here on ATS,; we were on the ball about this from the get go.

I have spent over two years telling people that the intial use of paid oppo research used by Obamas intel community to spy on people connected to trump was the biggest political scandal in the history of the country.

I remember well the thread following Trump's tweet that Obama spied on him... the hate against Trump was so strong, but I knew then it was true that Obama really did spy on Trump and so it proved.

As Tucker says there MUSt be some repercussions.

Mueller made sure our $36,000,000 tax dollars were spent wisely. The Russians learned their lesson. Never again will they buy $1,157.00 worth of Facebook ads to sway U.S. elections!

AG Barr should hire Grambler to evaluate the report.

originally posted by: rickymouse
AG Barr should hire Grambler to evaluate the report.

Id work for free for sure

originally posted by: rickymouse
AG Barr should hire Grambler to evaluate the report.

Since only Mueller/Rosenstein/Barr have seen the report, how do we know President Trump and his Campaign Team is vindicated?

My big question is what about all the sealed material from mueller’s team. Could certain people already be indicted but under seal?

originally posted by: watchitburn

originally posted by: chr0naut

originally posted by: Gothmog

originally posted by: chr0naut
a reply to: Grambler

The thread title is misleading because the implication could be drawn that the investigation was into Trump personally.

The investigation was into Russian interference in the 2016 elections.

Uh , no
Just no
It was about the left's TDS in that the Trump campaign colluded with the Russians .
That was the official statement by Mueller. At the start.
Where do you get your information ?

From his brief appointing him as Special Counsel.

As near as I can tell, the first use of the word "collusion" in regard to Mueller's investigation was Trump/Guiliani in a Tweet on February 16 2018.

As far as I have been able to determine, Mueller has not used the word "collusion" or "collude" once in regard to his investigations.

Of course, if there was no investigation into collusion, then there would be findings in that regard. Since the investigation wasn't into collusion, it is unlikely that there will be a finding of collusion.

You didn't try very hard. Took me less than 2 minutes...

Clinton campaign chief: Did Trump, Russians collude?

December 18th 2016

That wasn't Mueller.

Mueller wasn't investigating into 'collusion' because he is a judge and knows that such a thing isn't even a federal offense.

originally posted by: Grambler

originally posted by: chr0naut

originally posted by: Grambler

originally posted by: chr0naut
a reply to: Grambler

The thread title is misleading because the implication could be drawn that the investigation was into Trump personally.

The investigation was into Russian interference in the 2016 elections.

Really?

If thats the case, why werent hillarys team connections to russians and the kremlin agents that gave her team dirt on trum[p investigated?

Perhaps because there were already running investigations into Clinton that were either in process or concluded.

You don't need to investigate what is already under investigation or that has cleared the accused, that's redundant and costly.

Ridiculous.

So you are telling me that the FBI was investigating Hillarys connections to steele and kremlin agents before they were looking into Trump teams russian connections?

And seeing as how we know the hillary connected podesta group was named as a cohort of manafort in not registering as a foriegn lobbyist, why werent they charged if it was just about investigating foreign interference?

FBI Records - Hillary R Clinton

Regarding the Podesta Group connections, the group had equal connection to the Trump campaign and the Podesta Group was investigated by Mueller back in 2017 and was aquitted of wrongdoing. Also, some fake news sites said that Podesta had been arrested but that was entirely untrue.

originally posted by: chr0naut

originally posted by: Grambler

originally posted by: chr0naut

originally posted by: Grambler

originally posted by: chr0naut
a reply to: Grambler

The thread title is misleading because the implication could be drawn that the investigation was into Trump personally.

The investigation was into Russian interference in the 2016 elections.

Really?

If thats the case, why werent hillarys team connections to russians and the kremlin agents that gave her team dirt on trum[p investigated?

Perhaps because there were already running investigations into Clinton that were either in process or concluded.

You don't need to investigate what is already under investigation or that has cleared the accused, that's redundant and costly.

Ridiculous.

So you are telling me that the FBI was investigating Hillarys connections to steele and kremlin agents before they were looking into Trump teams russian connections?

And seeing as how we know the hillary connected podesta group was named as a cohort of manafort in not registering as a foriegn lobbyist, why werent they charged if it was just about investigating foreign interference?

FBI Records - Hillary R Clinton

Regarding the Podesta Group connections, the group had equal connection to the Trump campaign and the Podesta Group was investigated by Mueller back in 2017 and was aquitted of wrongdoing. Also, some fake news sites said that Podesta had been arrested but that was entirely untrue.

Show me on your link where hillarys team was investigated for their connections to the kremlin agents that gave them dirt on trump.

As far as your claim that podesta groups was acquitted, thats not true at all. In the indictment of manafort the podesta group was listed as group B that worked libbbying for the same ukranian manafort was charged with.

Instead of being charged, they were allowed to retroactively file as a foriegn lobbyist.

Same crime as manafort, but like everything else in this sham investigation, people connected to hillary dont get charged for the same crimes that people connected to trump do get charged for.

originally posted by: chr0naut

originally posted by: watchitburn

originally posted by: chr0naut

originally posted by: Gothmog

originally posted by: chr0naut
a reply to: Grambler

The thread title is misleading because the implication could be drawn that the investigation was into Trump personally.

The investigation was into Russian interference in the 2016 elections.

Uh , no
Just no
It was about the left's TDS in that the Trump campaign colluded with the Russians .
That was the official statement by Mueller. At the start.
Where do you get your information ?

From his brief appointing him as Special Counsel.

As near as I can tell, the first use of the word "collusion" in regard to Mueller's investigation was Trump/Guiliani in a Tweet on February 16 2018.

As far as I have been able to determine, Mueller has not used the word "collusion" or "collude" once in regard to his investigations.

Of course, if there was no investigation into collusion, then there would be findings in that regard. Since the investigation wasn't into collusion, it is unlikely that there will be a finding of collusion.

You didn't try very hard. Took me less than 2 minutes...

Clinton campaign chief: Did Trump, Russians collude?

December 18th 2016

That wasn't Mueller.

Mueller wasn't investigating into 'collusion' because he is a judge and knows that such a thing isn't even a federal offense.

You said charges issued by the mueller team showed there was people in trump circle conspiring with russians.

I and many others have asked you to prove that.

You were lying, so you ignore our requests.

You ought to be ashamed.

a reply to: Grambler

When did mueller become a judge?

originally posted by: Grambler

originally posted by: chr0naut

originally posted by: watchitburn

originally posted by: chr0naut

originally posted by: Gothmog

originally posted by: chr0naut
a reply to: Grambler

The thread title is misleading because the implication could be drawn that the investigation was into Trump personally.

The investigation was into Russian interference in the 2016 elections.

Uh , no
Just no
It was about the left's TDS in that the Trump campaign colluded with the Russians .
That was the official statement by Mueller. At the start.
Where do you get your information ?

From his brief appointing him as Special Counsel.

As near as I can tell, the first use of the word "collusion" in regard to Mueller's investigation was Trump/Guiliani in a Tweet on February 16 2018.

As far as I have been able to determine, Mueller has not used the word "collusion" or "collude" once in regard to his investigations.

Of course, if there was no investigation into collusion, then there would be findings in that regard. Since the investigation wasn't into collusion, it is unlikely that there will be a finding of collusion.

You didn't try very hard. Took me less than 2 minutes...

Clinton campaign chief: Did Trump, Russians collude?

December 18th 2016

That wasn't Mueller.

Mueller wasn't investigating into 'collusion' because he is a judge and knows that such a thing isn't even a federal offense.

You said charges issued by the mueller team showed there was people in trump circle conspiring with russians.

I and many others have asked you to prove that.

You were lying, so you ignore our requests.

You ought to be ashamed.

No, you have changed the wording of your request.

I did answer what you previously asked.

originally posted by: chr0naut

originally posted by: Grambler

originally posted by: chr0naut

originally posted by: watchitburn

originally posted by: chr0naut

originally posted by: Gothmog

originally posted by: chr0naut
a reply to: Grambler

The thread title is misleading because the implication could be drawn that the investigation was into Trump personally.

The investigation was into Russian interference in the 2016 elections.

Uh , no
Just no
It was about the left's TDS in that the Trump campaign colluded with the Russians .
That was the official statement by Mueller. At the start.
Where do you get your information ?

From his brief appointing him as Special Counsel.

As near as I can tell, the first use of the word "collusion" in regard to Mueller's investigation was Trump/Guiliani in a Tweet on February 16 2018.

As far as I have been able to determine, Mueller has not used the word "collusion" or "collude" once in regard to his investigations.

Of course, if there was no investigation into collusion, then there would be findings in that regard. Since the investigation wasn't into collusion, it is unlikely that there will be a finding of collusion.

You didn't try very hard. Took me less than 2 minutes...

Clinton campaign chief: Did Trump, Russians collude?

December 18th 2016

That wasn't Mueller.

Mueller wasn't investigating into 'collusion' because he is a judge and knows that such a thing isn't even a federal offense.

You said charges issued by the mueller team showed there was people in trump circle conspiring with russians.

I and many others have asked you to prove that.

You were lying, so you ignore our requests.

You ought to be ashamed.

No, you have changed the wording of your request.

I did answer what you previously asked.

I will quote the exact conversation.

You:

It was alleged that individuals from the Trump campaign had conspired with the Russians. There were many indictments and convictions to that effect as a result of the investigation.

Me: "Show me one indictment that shows anyone connected to trump conspiring with russians in the 2016 election. "

I did not change the wording, and you did not answer that.

Its beacuse it is a lie, as you know.