JEFF SESSIONS Says the Mueller Probe into President Trump Needs to End Now.

originally posted by: carewemust

originally posted by: luthier
a reply to: carewemust

These subpoenas are for a trial.

OK..so it's not another leak from the Mueller team. Cool.

There has never been a leak from the Mueller investigation. The questions leaked to the NYT came from Trump's defense team.

Wait, Sessions is still relevant !?!

I thought he'd been pushed out into the rose garden in his Rotin bath chair

a reply to: DJW001

The questions leaked to the NYT came from Trump's defense team.

Your bias is showing. You cannot prove that in any way.

originally posted by: thepixelpusher
a reply to: DJW001

The questions leaked to the NYT came from Trump's defense team.

Your bias is showing. You cannot prove that in any way.

lmgtfy.com...

originally posted by: DJW001

originally posted by: thepixelpusher
a reply to: DJW001

The questions leaked to the NYT came from Trump's defense team.

Your bias is showing. You cannot prove that in any way.

lmgtfy.com...

Your search term provides no proof.
Do you have something else? You made a clear statement so assume you have proof beyond left wing media sources...right?

a reply to: thepixelpusher

I think being investigated by the FBI is a legal issue that trump and company are looking squarely in the face.
I don't know how you can think this isn't a legal issue for them. Those are some rosey glasses you looking at the world through.

a reply to: thepixelpusher

It's common knowledge. Try catching up before you argue a point.
The questions were compiled from the notes trumps lawyers took while talking terms over with Mueller. These are the points that Mueller wants to cover. His line of inquiry but those questions were written by trumps lawyers.

There was some initial speculation as to which side leaked them, but an accompanying Times piece explains the questions were “read by the special counsel investigators to the president’s lawyers, who compiled them into a list. That document was provided to the Times by a person outside Mr. Trump’s legal team.

nymag.com...

a reply to: UKTruth

Put your fingers in your ears and sing la la la then say...I never heard that.

originally posted by: Sillyolme
a reply to: UKTruth

Put your fingers in your ears and sing la la la then say...I never heard that.

No need. I watched the interview and read the full transcript. reality is on my side.
At no point did Trump say he fired Comey because of the Russia investigation.
No matter how many times you repeat the lie, it won't make it true, though you certainly are persistent at trying to push lies.

Here is a link to the full interview and transcript, of which liars take two sentences without context to push their lies.

Trump , Holt interview

People who actually want to know the truth and do the work to research spot the liars who keep pushing the already dead obstruction fantasy. Your audience are those that will not bother to look into it - the people liars feed upon. Unfortunately for you, this forum is full of people who do research and the only place your lies land are with other liars trying to push the same thing.

a reply to: UKTruth

You watched what interview? I don't think we're talking about the same thing lol.
I'm talking about where the questions came from.
What are you talking about?

a reply to: UKTruth

At no point did Trump say he fired Comey because of the Russia investigation

Lol except where he said when I did it I said to myself... this Rusher thing with trump and Russia was a made up story.
You may not see it but most people do.

a reply to: Sillyolme

At which point he had already said why he fired Comey. His 'thinking to himself' was about the optics of doing it whilst the Russian investigation was ongoing, which I know because that is what he said and becomes clear when you watch the full interview instead of taking snippets and blatantly lying to people. He also makes it clear in the interview that he was aware it might confuse people and that he knew the investigation might be lengthened (not stopped) because of his decision. Like I said, your lies only work on people who don;t research, but I guess that is the aim of liars.

I didn't expect you to stop lying. I just wanted to post the full video and transcript for those that like to know the truth and are not prepared to be fed lies.

Besides the obstruction nonsense is dead. Only the desperate keep lying about it. The ones who haven't fully moved on to the next desperate hope about a whore.

originally posted by: Sillyolme
a reply to: thepixelpusher

It's common knowledge. Try catching up before you argue a point.
The questions were compiled from the notes trumps lawyers took while talking terms over with Mueller. These are the points that Mueller wants to cover. His line of inquiry but those questions were written by trumps lawyers.

There was some initial speculation as to which side leaked them, but an accompanying Times piece explains the questions were “read by the special counsel investigators to the president’s lawyers, who compiled them into a list. That document was provided to the Times by a person outside Mr. Trump’s legal team.

nymag.com...

Bullcrap, you have no proof to support this other than NYRag opinion article. Har har!

originally posted by: Sillyolme
a reply to: thepixelpusher

I think being investigated by the FBI is a legal issue that trump and company are looking squarely in the face.
I don't know how you can think this isn't a legal issue for them. Those are some rosey glasses you looking at the world through.

In the real world, which I'd invite you to join me in, there are no charges or evidence of Russian Collusion at all. So your makeup pretend world where Trump is guilty is delusional.

originally posted by: UKTruth

originally posted by: DJW001

originally posted by: thepixelpusher
a reply to: DJW001

The questions leaked to the NYT came from Trump's defense team.

Your bias is showing. You cannot prove that in any way.

lmgtfy.com...

Your search term provides no proof.
Do you have something else? You made a clear statement so assume you have proof beyond left wing media sources...right?

Yup, that link was useless!

originally posted by: DJW001

originally posted by: carewemust

originally posted by: luthier
a reply to: carewemust

These subpoenas are for a trial.

OK..so it's not another leak from the Mueller team. Cool.

There has never been a leak from the Mueller investigation.

How do you know this?

originally posted by: carewemust

originally posted by: DJW001

originally posted by: carewemust

originally posted by: luthier
a reply to: carewemust

These subpoenas are for a trial.

OK..so it's not another leak from the Mueller team. Cool.

There has never been a leak from the Mueller investigation.

How do you know this?

Because I have never seen a news story that could possibly have originated there. Since a negative is difficult to prove, why don't you prove that there have been leaks by providing a few examples?