Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
"The naive is believing that it is ok for a presidential candidate who sought to benefit from the Russian interference is the victim."
Why was the clinton's contacts with Russia NOT investigated by the FB! under obama?
"Why didn't Individual 1 and his campaign contact the FBI when they were aware of the Russians interference?"
Became their "contacts" had NOTHING to do with collusion and did NOT know of Russia plan to affect the election
Right back at you. Did you watch the Barr hearing? Why DIDN'T the FBI NOTIFY the Trump campaign and WARN them about Russia trying to affect the election LIKE THEY ALWAYS DO? IT IS STANDARD PROTOCOL.
They looked into Uranium One and found nothing nefarious. Look up literally any other media story outside of Sean Hannity. It doesn't have to be a left leaning source, just any independent source. Again, in trying to be objective, Saudi Arabia's big donations to the Clinton Foundation seem suspicious, though.
The contacts had plenty to do with the election. Look at the documented emails between Cohen and Felix Sater about getting a Trump Tower built.
Don Jr saying, "I love it, especially later in the summer." Like a big dumb idiot. It turned out it was a ruse by the Russian gov't to get sanctions lifted had Trump won, but the meeting occurred because Trump Jr was trying to get info.
The FBI did warn them. It had not happened yet because Trump hadn't yet accepted the nomination by the Republican party, and even after that Trump yelled in public, Russia if you're listen get those 33,000 emails.
Manafort literally gave polling data to Kiliminik.
Papadopoulos was on the campaign and trying to get contacts with Russia to get in their good graces in the name of the Trump campaign. There are several others. I'm not going through them all. Read the report if that is within your skillset.
That was some debacle yesterday, I see that Trump finally has the right guy the question is why would he trash what was left of his reputation. The GOP went back to attacking the FBI and bringing up Clinton yet again as if that was the focus of the hearing, Pretty sad moment for the country, history isn't going to put the republicans in a positive light, it doesn't matter what this administration does they will bless it.
"Wrong from those who have read the report" right back at you.
The radical left who DON'T support the findings of NO INDICTMENT against Trump are a complete joke.
That was EASY!
Mueller didn't indict because of DOJ policy to not indict the sitting president. Seriously, that's in the report. He said they did not have sufficient evidence to exonerate the president. Then Barr said in summary, well, I haven't seen the actual evidence, but I'll exonerate him, because he's a Trump lackey at this point.
Today’s comments by Louise Mensch pretty much skewer Barr to the WH door as far as HIS involvement in obstruction of justice to prevent Trump being charged when he auditioned for the AG’s job...and that he has compromised his current position by giving the WH inside information about Mueller’s ongoing investigations....
Not a surprise to me because I knew Barr was a party hack and corrupt from his previous time cleaning up Republican dirty tricks but proof as to why he is running as far as he can from the House’s session with attorneys to follow up on his failure to keep to separation of powers between his office and the WH...
You’re moving the goalposts. You asked where the Trump campaign sought to accept help from the Russians, not whether they engaged in a criminal conspiracy to do so. There is a difference. And Muller detailed evidence of the former and explained why he couldn’t prove the latter.
This is an excellent post by someone who has clearly read the report. The website won't let me continue to give reputation points, so I figured I'd publicly commend you.
Yeah, his argument is that Barr wanted to mislead the public by making public the full 400 pages report minus the less than 10% redaction required by law.
Since the report and the Mueller summaries speak for themselves you might want to ask the necessity for Barr to put out his own version and hold a hearing prior to the release. He wanted to make sure he got his spin out there and was even able to work in spying on the campaign.
Nadler and his entire Judiciary Committee have 100% access to the Totally un-redacted version of the Report in a secure room.
All they have to do is get off their butts and go read it. So far none of the Dems have taken the time to do so.
The Dems have secure rooms of their own—
Why won’t Barr provide one?
Because he doesn’t want it out of HIS control...
He might want to edit it again...
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.
Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
