NO COLLUSION - Special Counsel Mueller has submitted report to AG Barr...it's over folks

a reply to: dawnstar

Your just digging a hole all by yourself and you seem to be proud of your delusion.

Just stick with the talking point and hoping in desperation something .. anything. I'd guess most people on the left would relish in the idea some harm would Come to Trump. Its gotten to a point its frightening how some people think.

originally posted by: Dfairlite
a reply to: chr0naut

The courts never made a determination on any of that, so that's completely irrelevant.

I don't believe that is correct.

a reply to: chr0naut

You are wrong. They never charged Clinton therefore the courts never made any determination.

They exonerated her before they even investigated. They exonerated her despite her destroying subpeonad evidence. They gave her a million breaks despite blatant criminal behavior and said, "well, there was no intent so we wont prosecute".

No, courts didn't get the chance to determine anything.

originally posted by: toolgal462
a reply to: chr0naut

You are wrong. They never charged Clinton therefore the courts never made any determination.

They exonerated her before they even investigated. They exonerated her despite her destroying subpeonad evidence. They gave her a million breaks despite blatant criminal behavior and said, "well, there was no intent so we wont prosecute".

No, courts didn't get the chance to determine anything.

Judicial Watch filed for discovery.

Some evidence was destroyed, but not by anyone involved in the investigation, and prior to subpoena.

a reply to: chr0naut

What court made what determination?

a reply to: chr0naut

You are mistaken

Comey took the unprecedented step of making a prosecution decision for Clinton (normally it is given to the DOJ who empanels a grand jury for serious felonies) on the basis that while she "Grossly mishandled classified national defense information" (a felony in itself) she lacked any specific "intent" for the crime - however, the devil is in the details as Intent is not an element of that offense!

He point blank admitted to violating the law by letting her skate when her conduct was a textbook fit as evinced by his own statements

Further, the handling of the investigation was HIGHLY irregular as Clinton was not only notified In advance! of a Federal Search Warrant against her private server illegally holding SCI material (illegal=SCI outside of a SCIF) but she then DELETED 30,000 emails that were subject to that same Federal Search Warrant! Absolutely unheard of!

Roger Stone, Manafort, etc had their doors kicked in at 4am. Clinton? She gets notified in advance and a chance to delete the emails scott-free while her Husband (the important Clinton) meets with AG Lynch on the Phoenix tarmac. Give me a break.

Further, her corrupt aides were given immunity after immunity despite their own potential violations (including Hooomi and Weiner)

Lock that POS up already. And throw away the damn key. Good riddance.

I despise Hillary and everything she stands for. The sight of her makes me nauseated. But none of that changes the fact that she broke the law. She mishandled classified national defense information by the boat load and put American lives at risk. She deserves to live in Gen Pop at any USP for the rest of her miserable, subversive, corrupt life.

a reply to: chr0naut

The court ordered discovery for Judicial Watch has zero to do with criminal culpability by Hillary and her associates. It is for a civil FOIA case because the State Department failed to turn over requested documentation within the time allotted under the law.

Paul Combetta, at Cheryl Mills instruction, attempted to modify an archive of email addresses to remove or insert a placeholder email address for a VVIP person after said emails had been subpoenaed. When he was unable to modify the email archive, he deleted and bleachbitted the hard drive instead.

The FBI report says that Cheryl Mills, a longtime Clinton aide and attorney, requested in December 2014 that the email retention policy be shortened to 60 days. The FBI report says Mills "instructed [redacted] to modify the email retention policy on Clinton's clintonemail.com e-mail account" but that "according to [redacted] he did not make these changes to Clinton's clintonemail.com account until March 2015."

The report says the person, essentially identified as Combetta by The New York Times, realized in late March 2015 -- after Clinton's use of a private email account was first reported that month by the Times -- that he had not made the retention change and "had an 'oh sh--' moment and sometime between March 25-31, 2015, deleted the Clinton archive mailbox from the [Platte River Networks] server and used BleachBit to delete the exported .PST files he had created on the server system containing Clinton's emails."

Computer Specialist Who Deleted Clinton Emails May Have Asked Reddit for Tips

originally posted by: chr0naut

originally posted by: toolgal462
a reply to: chr0naut

You are wrong. They never charged Clinton therefore the courts never made any determination.

They exonerated her before they even investigated. They exonerated her despite her destroying subpeonad evidence. They gave her a million breaks despite blatant criminal behavior and said, "well, there was no intent so we wont prosecute".

No, courts didn't get the chance to determine anything.

Judicial Watch filed for discovery.

Some evidence was destroyed, but not by anyone involved in the investigation, and prior to subpoena.

I see others have already answered this. What you are talking about with JW has nothing to do with what the rest of us are talking about. When Obama was President and Loretta Lynch was AG and Comey was head of the FBI and they all colluded to let Hillary skate on her many crimes she committed while Secretary of State.

There was never any charges brought against her, therefore no "court" to determine her guilt or innocence.

Rudy Giuliani on FoxNews w/Laura Ingraham.

They're going through some of the Democrat BS and laughing their asses off.

Giuliani talking about some of the conversations with Mueller's people during the "investigation" 😎

a reply to: xuenchen

Yeah good stuff...LOL

Nancy Pelosi said today that Barr's summary of Mueller's findings are "condescending".

Poor thing: www.foxnews.com...

Maybe Nancy's opinion of herself is higher than is warranted.

Link

So true MR President....

a reply to: matafuchs

I'm getting a "404 Page Not Found" at your The Hill link.

originally posted by: carewemust
Nancy Pelosi said today that Barr's summary of Mueller's findings are "condescending".

Poor thing: www.foxnews.com...

Maybe Nancy's opinion of herself is higher than is warranted.

Nancy must have forgotten to give Mueller all the evidence she had 😆

a reply to: carewemust

She has some nerve eh? Also said his report was "arrogant"!?
If there was ever an arrogant politician, she is the epitome poobah.

And she might find herself looking over her shoulder from here on out,
those skeletons in her closet and all.

a reply to: carewemust

They took down his 'bull#' comment from last night...LOL

a reply to: chr0naut

We get it, you asked for Mueller con carne and got soy toast instead. I would be angry too

Don't take it out on the rest of us by making us hear this ridiculous theories as if *somehow* a magical piece of information that 2 congressional investigations, and FBI investigation, a 2 year long special council probe and thousands of breathless Internet search-artists missed is going to somehow come along and prove collusion, prove obstruction and remove Trump from office all in one swoop.

Give it a rest. This kind of BS has divided this country to no end and continues to despite the probe Dems demanded/touted/compare to Christ's second coming coming up empty

originally posted by: matafuchs
a reply to: carewemust

They took down his 'bull#' comment from last night...LOL

Only Disney movies are allowed to use that kind of language now.

originally posted by: JBurns
a reply to: chr0naut

We get it, you asked for Mueller con carne and got soy toast instead. I would be angry too

Don't take it out on the rest of us by making us hear this ridiculous theories as if *somehow* a magical piece of information that 2 congressional investigations, and FBI investigation, a 2 year long special council probe and thousands of breathless Internet search-artists missed is going to somehow come along and prove collusion, prove obstruction and remove Trump from office all in one swoop.

Give it a rest. This kind of BS has divided this country to no end and continues to despite the probe Dems demanded/touted/compare to Christ's second coming coming up empty

No, look at the title of this thread. It talks about collusion. There never was such a charge. It is a popular press deflection from what Mueller was investigating and prosecuting, which was Russian interference in the 2016 elections.

They weren't prosecuting Trump for jay walking, either.

a reply to: chr0naut

When did they prosecute Trump? You seem to have many of these legal words mixed up