It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.

Please white-list or disable AboveTopSecret.com in your ad-blocking tool.

Thank you.

 

Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.

 

Mueller Interviewed President Trump Six Days After Criminal “Obstruction” Investigation Began

page: 1
14
<<   2 >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Apr, 19 2019 @ 02:23 PM
link   
Looks like Mueller did get an "interview" with Trump afterall !!!

Actually this was known at the time way back in May of 2017.

But all was forgotten with the constant MSMmob pushing the "Collusion" BS.

Could be Mueller knew no collusion existed and the "Obstruction" crap was the real target.

Lots of Russian "interference" was apparently found, but so far, no vote stealing totals ?

interesting story with some interesting dot connections...................


Robert Mueller Interviewed President Trump Six Days After Criminal “Obstruction” Investigation Began…

Now that people are starting to absorb the intent and motivations of the Special Counsel investigation, it’s worth remembering Robert Mueller interviewed President Donald Trump six days after the FBI launched a criminal “obstruction of justice” investigation, and ten months after the FBI launched the counterintelligence investigation….

The Mueller Report shows there never was a Trump Russia-Collusion-Conspiracy case to begin with; and with the report showing how most of Mueller’s investigative time was spent gathering evidence for an ‘obstruction case’; and with new revelations from Andrew McCabe, John Dowd and Mueller officials overlayed on the previous Strzok/Page texts; we can now clearly reconcile the May 16th, 2017, meeting between President Trump, Deputy AG Rod Rosenstein and Robert Mueller.


"Just a matter of time until the real colluders get caught"




posted on Apr, 19 2019 @ 02:44 PM
link   
Democrats won't quit until they successfully impeach Trump, or discredit him enough to ruin his chances in 2020. If you view MSM, everyone and their dog are saying that there's evidence of "obstruction." So, the circus will continue right up until the election in 2020.

Personally, I'm getting sick of this drama from BOTH sides. This BS isn't helping our country, nor the American people. I thought members of Congress are supposed to reflect the will of the people. What about the needs and concerns of Americans? This partisan hatred is not only dividing this country, it's preventing both sides from getting things done. Welcome to American politics, where politicians choose sides and throw mud at each other all year long.



posted on Apr, 19 2019 @ 02:47 PM
link   
a reply to: xuenchen

So, the meeting with Trump in the Oval Office was May 16th, 2017, right? Mueller was appointed on May 17th, 2017.

According to President Trump, at the time, interviewed Mueller to replace Comey. thehill.com...

Perhaps, Trump divulged too much during that meeting, and that's why Trump thought he was f#ed when he found out Rosenstein appointed Mueller.

At any rate, there's no way Mueller interviewed Trump in regards to Russian collusion or obstruction of justice during that meeting.
edit on 19-4-2019 by Sookiechacha because: (no reason given)



posted on Apr, 19 2019 @ 02:59 PM
link   
a reply to: Sookiechacha

You "know" all this how ? 😎

Democrat speculation has been wrong 100% so far 😎

And, The Hill article backtracks to an NPR "Zecret Zourze" known as ............ wait for it ...

""" two sources familiar with the process told NPR """ 😆😆

edit on Apr-19-2019 by xuenchen because: banana democrats🍌



posted on Apr, 19 2019 @ 03:07 PM
link   



posted on Apr, 19 2019 @ 03:55 PM
link   
a reply to: Sookiechacha

😆😆



posted on Apr, 19 2019 @ 05:01 PM
link   

originally posted by: Sookiechacha
a reply to: xuenchen

So, the meeting with Trump in the Oval Office was May 16th, 2017, right? Mueller was appointed on May 17th, 2017.

According to President Trump, at the time, interviewed Mueller to replace Comey. thehill.com...

Perhaps, Trump divulged too much during that meeting, and that's why Trump thought he was f#ed when he found out Rosenstein appointed Mueller.

At any rate, there's no way Mueller interviewed Trump in regards to Russian collusion or obstruction of justice during that meeting.


No.




The president returned to the consequences of the appoinment and said, "Everyone tells me if you get one of these independent councils it ruins your presidency. It takes years and I won't be able to do anything. This is the worst thing that ever happened to me."


Not far behind "I'm f***** ".



posted on Apr, 19 2019 @ 05:10 PM
link   
a reply to: Wardaddy454

And, not far behind that:


[T]he President repeatedly told advisors, including Priebus, Bannon, and McGahn, that Special Counsel Mueller had conflicts of interest. The President cited as conflicts that Mueller had interviewed for the FBI director position shortly before being appointed as Special Counsel . . . (page 80)
thebulwark.com...

Perhaps Trump required the same loyalty oath from Mueller that he asked of Comey.


edit on 19-4-2019 by Sookiechacha because: (no reason given)



posted on Apr, 19 2019 @ 05:16 PM
link   

originally posted by: Sookiechacha
a reply to: Wardaddy454

And, not far behind that:


[T]he President repeatedly told advisors, including Priebus, Bannon, and McGahn, that Special Counsel Mueller had conflicts of interest. The President cited as conflicts that Mueller had interviewed for the FBI director position shortly before being appointed as Special Counsel . . . (page 80)
thebulwark.com...


Uh-huh? Wheres the impeachable offense?



posted on Apr, 19 2019 @ 05:20 PM
link   
a reply to: Wardaddy454

Is this a thread about impeachment? I thought it was thread saying that Mueller interviewed Trump in May of 2017, even though people are complaining because Trump wouldn't submit to an interview with Mueller, and that because of that interview, he already knew that there was no Russian Collusion. Witch hunt! Hoax! LOL



posted on Apr, 19 2019 @ 05:35 PM
link   

originally posted by: Sookiechacha
a reply to: Wardaddy454

Is this a thread about impeachment? I thought it was thread saying that Mueller interviewed Trump in May of 2017, even though people are complaining because Trump wouldn't submit to an interview with Mueller, and that because of that interview, he already knew that there was no Russian Collusion. Witch hunt! Hoax! LOL



Oh well, I figured you had received your marching orders to try and push the obstruction should lead to impeachment angle.



posted on Apr, 19 2019 @ 06:59 PM
link   

originally posted by: xuenchen
a reply to: Sookiechacha

You "know" all this how ? 😎

Democrat speculation has been wrong 100% so far 😎

And, The Hill article backtracks to an NPR "Zecret Zourze" known as ............ wait for it ...

""" two sources familiar with the process told NPR """ 😆😆

Those "sources" were most likely Jack and Jill , who work as bartenders at the local hangout , that are very familiar with the process of making martinis "shaken , not stirred"



posted on Apr, 19 2019 @ 07:48 PM
link   
a reply to: Gothmog

The source was the OPs citation.



posted on Apr, 19 2019 @ 07:49 PM
link   

originally posted by: Sookiechacha
a reply to: Gothmog

The source was the OPs citation.

What I saw was one news media linking to NPR where it was stated "sources say"
And ?
Second line.

edit on 4/19/19 by Gothmog because: (no reason given)



posted on Apr, 19 2019 @ 07:56 PM
link   
a reply to: Gothmog

Sources say what? Are you questioning the date of meeting, the date that Mueller was hired, or the fact that Trump tweeted that he interviewed Mueller for Comey's job?

What sources do you need verified?



posted on Apr, 19 2019 @ 08:17 PM
link   

originally posted by: Sookiechacha
a reply to: Gothmog

The source was the OPs citation.


... from your link to The Hill article that linked to the NPR article that used:

""" two sources familiar with the process told NPR """

to draw conclusions from 🤓



posted on Apr, 19 2019 @ 08:49 PM
link   
a reply to: xuenchen

The only reason I used The Hill was to source the date of Mueller's hiring, May 17th. Do you have a problem with that date? Because, if you do you can verify it by checking Donald Trump's tweet, in which he says he interviewed Mueller for the FBI position, and the next day Rod Rosenstein appointed Mueller as the Special Counsel.

Then, according to the Mueller report, Trump wanted Mueller fired for conflict of interest, citing the interview with Mueller for the FBI post as a reason. Trump was very vocal about Mueller's supposed "conflicts of interest".



posted on Apr, 19 2019 @ 09:03 PM
link   
a reply to: Sookiechacha

Deflection fail on your part again.

You also cited this:

"" According to President Trump, at the time, interviewed Mueller to replace Comey. ""

🗯🤧



posted on Apr, 20 2019 @ 03:29 AM
link   
"Mueller Interviewed President Trump Six Days After Criminal “Obstruction” Investigation Began""

Typical clickerbating, misleading thread for stars 'n' flags from another Fox shill ...
Trump did indeed have talks with Mueller > about replacing Comey <

This has nothing what-so-ever to do with the investigation that led to
The conclusion that Congress may apply the obstruction laws to the President’s corrupt exercise of the powers of office accords with our constitutional system of checks and balances and the principle that no person is above the law.


Why do mods never intervene to correct these crappy misleading threads ?
Even Carewemust got it rightish
Ats Thread



posted on Apr, 20 2019 @ 05:25 AM
link   
The big elephant in the room is the report blaming Russia for the DNC/Podesta hack then attributing Wikileaks to receiving the stolen intel from Russia, then publishing it!

I'm still of the firm belief Seth Rich copied that data internally, delivered it to Kim.Com whom passed it onto Assange/Wikileaks.

2 reasons,
1, Researchers believe the data rate that the copy of Podesta emails occured at was 180 megabits per second approx.
That is not possible with WAN speeds, especially if it was over to Russia.

2nd, the Snowden Leaks showed us that the CIA/NSA had long had the ability to leave finger printers that would identify other countries intelligence agencies, for Hacks!

Personally, Assange stated many times it wasnt Russia who gave him the intel, he's yet to lie or reveal any sources so I still take his word for it.




top topics



 
14
<<   2 >>

log in

join