"No collusion......No obstruction......Completely cleared"?????

[Toddsterpatriot]

Fuck you, lying pile of shit.

This thread is about you gutter scum LYING to try and reverse the Mueller Dossier.

{For that reason, this Office?s focus in resolving the question of joint criminal liability was
on conspiracy as defined in federal law, not the commonly discussed term "collusion." The Office
considered in particular whether contacts between Trump Campaign officials and Russia-linked
individuals could trigger liability for the crime of conspiracy?either under statutes that have their
own conspiracy language 18 U.S.C. 1349, l951(a)), or under the general conspiracy
statute (l 8 U.S.C. 371). The investigation did not establish that the contacts described in Volume
1, Section IV, supra, amounted to an agreement to commit any substantive violation of federal
criminal law - including foreign-influence and campaign-finance laws, both of which are
discussed further below. The Office therefore did not charge any individual associated with the
Trump Campaign with conspiracy to commit a federal offense arising from Russia contacts, either
under a specific statute or under Section 371 ?s offenses clause.

The Office also did not charge any campaign official or associate with a conspiracy under
Section 371 ?s defraud clause. That clause criminalizes participating in an agreement to obstruct a
lawful function of the US. government or its agencies through deceitful or dishonest means. See
Dennis v. United States, 384 US. 855, 861 (1966); v. United States, 265 U.S.
182, 188 (1924); see also United States v. Consulting LLC, 347 F. Supp. 3d 38,
46 (BBC. 2018). The investigation did not establish any agreement among Campaign officials?
or between such officials and Russia-linked individuals to interfere with or obstruct a lawful
function of a government agency during the campaign or transition period. And, as discussed in
Volume 1, Section V.A, supra, the investigation did not identify evidence that any Campaign
official or associate knowingly and intentionally participated in the conspiracy to defraud that the
Office charged, namely, the active-measures conspiracy described in Volume 1, Section II, supra.
Accordingly, the Office did not charge any Campaign associate or other US. person with
conspiracy to defraud the United States based on the Russia-related contacts described in Section
IV above.}

You're just a lying little fuck, thinking that if you LIE HARDER somehow you can change the DISASTER that was the Mueller report.

Mueller's team of investigators documented the multiple abuses of power by Trump & by Trump associates.

Sorry that hurts your fragile feelings.

See, here is the thing - I've actually READ the report. I CITE the report when I make a claim. YOU just bleat what the most sleazy hate sites like DailyKOS and CNN claim.

Look at my siggy & you will see where the 10 acts of obstruction are located within the report. Pretty easy stuff

DERP

Trump called the witch hunt a "witch hunt," OBSTRUCTION

DERP

Trump fired James Comey, his subordinate who was engaged in felonies leaking classified information to the press - OBSTRUCTION.

Weissman if a petulant little fuck who could not make the case for ANY criminal acts. Anyone who reads the report sees clearly that Weissman is a butthurt little **** who failed to GET TRUMP.

Well, you said you "CITE" (sic) the report when you make a claim, then you proceed to whine that others here only "bleat sleazy hate."
Then when I pointed to the very section of the report in which the 10 acts of obstruction are contained in you come back with more of your fucking whining.
Please, just fucking go away .............

Well, you said you "CITE" (sic) the report when you make a claim,

2 : to quote by way of example, authority, or proof cites several noteworthy authors
3a : to refer to especially : to mention formally in commendation or praise She was cited for bravery.
b : to name in a citation cited by the trustees for his work in public health

Definition of CITE

DURR.

 

[nat4900]

The mantra stated in the thread's title is from Trump himself............and, of course, from his lackeys and stooges like Barr, Don Jr., Conway, Hickabee-Sanders, Hannity, et al....

So, the questions then arise as to...........

a) WHY would Trump claim "executive privilege" in keeping Mueller from testifying?

b) Why would Trump claim "attorney-client privilege" in keeping McGahn from testifying before the House committee.......bearing in mind that McGahn NOT only has already testified before Mueller.....but McGahn is also long gone from the WH ....AND was the WH attorney and NOT Trump's personal one?

c) WHY would Trump claim that Don Jr. is being "harassed" when asked by a republican-led Senate committee to testify?

WHY would Trump claim "executive privilege" in keeping Mueller from testifying?

Because...….screw you whiner.

What an immature, thoughtless, and brainless reply.

Now we know what HRC said about Trump supporters is actually true.

What an immature, thoughtless, and brainless reply.

How else should I respond to an immature, thoughtless, and brainless Nat?

Now we know what HRC said about Trump supporters is actually true.

Drunken loser said what?

Toddy EXACTLY fits what Trump called his ass kissers........LOL

 

[caddo kid]

Mueller's team of investigators documented the multiple abuses of power by Trump & by Trump associates.

Sorry that hurts your fragile feelings.

See, here is the thing - I've actually READ the report. I CITE the report when I make a claim. YOU just bleat what the most sleazy hate sites like DailyKOS and CNN claim.

Look at my siggy & you will see where the 10 acts of obstruction are located within the report. Pretty easy stuff

DERP

Trump called the witch hunt a "witch hunt," OBSTRUCTION

DERP

Trump fired James Comey, his subordinate who was engaged in felonies leaking classified information to the press - OBSTRUCTION.

Weissman if a petulant little fuck who could not make the case for ANY criminal acts. Anyone who reads the report sees clearly that Weissman is a butthurt little **** who failed to GET TRUMP.

Well, you said you "CITE" (sic) the report when you make a claim, then you proceed to whine that others here only "bleat sleazy hate."
Then when I pointed to the very section of the report in which the 10 acts of obstruction are contained in you come back with more of your fucking whining.
Please, just fucking go away .............

Well, you said you "CITE" (sic) the report when you make a claim,

2 : to quote by way of example, authority, or proof cites several noteworthy authors
3a : to refer to especially : to mention formally in commendation or praise She was cited for bravery.
b : to name in a citation cited by the trustees for his work in public health

Definition of CITE

DURR.

You left out the parts where you whine about shit you don't like, and then you whine about it again when you get what you were asking for when you were whining for it.

 

[nat4900]

LOL speaking of lies The lying scum in our WH NOW is past 10,000 lies and republicans believed them

.....but of course........that kool aid is pretty strong stuff.

 

[Toddsterpatriot]

The mantra stated in the thread's title is from Trump himself............and, of course, from his lackeys and stooges like Barr, Don Jr., Conway, Hickabee-Sanders, Hannity, et al....

So, the questions then arise as to...........

a) WHY would Trump claim "executive privilege" in keeping Mueller from testifying?

b) Why would Trump claim "attorney-client privilege" in keeping McGahn from testifying before the House committee.......bearing in mind that McGahn NOT only has already testified before Mueller.....but McGahn is also long gone from the WH ....AND was the WH attorney and NOT Trump's personal one?

c) WHY would Trump claim that Don Jr. is being "harassed" when asked by a republican-led Senate committee to testify?

WHY would Trump claim "executive privilege" in keeping Mueller from testifying?

Because...….screw you whiner.

What an immature, thoughtless, and brainless reply.

Now we know what HRC said about Trump supporters is actually true.

What an immature, thoughtless, and brainless reply.

How else should I respond to an immature, thoughtless, and brainless Nat?

Now we know what HRC said about Trump supporters is actually true.

Drunken loser said what?

Toddy EXACTLY fits what Trump called his ass kissers........LOL

 

[Toddsterpatriot]

See, here is the thing - I've actually READ the report. I CITE the report when I make a claim. YOU just bleat what the most sleazy hate sites like DailyKOS and CNN claim.

Look at my siggy & you will see where the 10 acts of obstruction are located within the report. Pretty easy stuff

DERP

Trump called the witch hunt a "witch hunt," OBSTRUCTION

DERP

Trump fired James Comey, his subordinate who was engaged in felonies leaking classified information to the press - OBSTRUCTION.

Weissman if a petulant little fuck who could not make the case for ANY criminal acts. Anyone who reads the report sees clearly that Weissman is a butthurt little **** who failed to GET TRUMP.

Well, you said you "CITE" (sic) the report when you make a claim, then you proceed to whine that others here only "bleat sleazy hate."
Then when I pointed to the very section of the report in which the 10 acts of obstruction are contained in you come back with more of your fucking whining.
Please, just fucking go away .............

Well, you said you "CITE" (sic) the report when you make a claim,

2 : to quote by way of example, authority, or proof cites several noteworthy authors
3a : to refer to especially : to mention formally in commendation or praise She was cited for bravery.
b : to name in a citation cited by the trustees for his work in public health

Definition of CITE

DURR.

You left out the parts where you whine about shit you don't like, and then you whine about it again when you get what you were asking for when you were whining for it.

(sic) LOL!

 

[edward37]

I don't give two flying fucks about your opinion on Obama because the thread isn't about Obama.

Go fuck up a different thread ...........

Fuck you, lying pile of shit.

This thread is about you gutter scum LYING to try and reverse the Mueller Dossier.

{For that reason, this Office?s focus in resolving the question of joint criminal liability was
on conspiracy as defined in federal law, not the commonly discussed term "collusion." The Office
considered in particular whether contacts between Trump Campaign officials and Russia-linked
individuals could trigger liability for the crime of conspiracy?either under statutes that have their
own conspiracy language 18 U.S.C. 1349, l951(a)), or under the general conspiracy
statute (l 8 U.S.C. 371). The investigation did not establish that the contacts described in Volume
1, Section IV, supra, amounted to an agreement to commit any substantive violation of federal
criminal law - including foreign-influence and campaign-finance laws, both of which are
discussed further below. The Office therefore did not charge any individual associated with the
Trump Campaign with conspiracy to commit a federal offense arising from Russia contacts, either
under a specific statute or under Section 371 ?s offenses clause.

The Office also did not charge any campaign official or associate with a conspiracy under
Section 371 ?s defraud clause. That clause criminalizes participating in an agreement to obstruct a
lawful function of the US. government or its agencies through deceitful or dishonest means. See
Dennis v. United States, 384 US. 855, 861 (1966); v. United States, 265 U.S.
182, 188 (1924); see also United States v. Consulting LLC, 347 F. Supp. 3d 38,
46 (BBC. 2018). The investigation did not establish any agreement among Campaign officials?
or between such officials and Russia-linked individuals to interfere with or obstruct a lawful
function of a government agency during the campaign or transition period. And, as discussed in
Volume 1, Section V.A, supra, the investigation did not identify evidence that any Campaign
official or associate knowingly and intentionally participated in the conspiracy to defraud that the
Office charged, namely, the active-measures conspiracy described in Volume 1, Section II, supra.
Accordingly, the Office did not charge any Campaign associate or other US. person with
conspiracy to defraud the United States based on the Russia-related contacts described in Section
IV above.}

You're just a lying little fuck, thinking that if you LIE HARDER somehow you can change the DISASTER that was the Mueller report.

Mueller's team of investigators documented the multiple abuses of power by Trump & by Trump associates.

Sorry that hurts your fragile feelings.

See, here is the thing - I've actually READ the report. I CITE the report when I make a claim. YOU just bleat what the most sleazy hate sites like DailyKOS and CNN claim.

Look at my siggy & you will see where the 10 acts of obstruction are located within the report. Pretty easy stuff

DERP

Trump called the witch hunt a "witch hunt," OBSTRUCTION

DERP

Trump fired James Comey, his subordinate who was engaged in felonies leaking classified information to the press - OBSTRUCTION.

Weissman if a petulant little fuck who could not make the case for ANY criminal acts. Anyone who reads the report sees clearly that Weissman is a butthurt little **** who failed to GET TRUMP.

Trump fired Comey because he wouldn't kiss trumps ass and give up the russia attacks on our elections

 

[nat4900]

Oh, lies..

Let's look at some of the things the little Goebbels of the fascist press have dubbed "lies" by Donald Trump.

Here's a few........(LOL)

Trump: Repealing And Replacing Obamacare Is Going To Be "So Easy"

Trump: Mexico 'to pay for wall indirectly via trade deal' - BBC News

Trump administration won't brand China currency manipulator

 

[caddo kid]

Fuck you, lying pile of shit.

This thread is about you gutter scum LYING to try and reverse the Mueller Dossier.

{For that reason, this Office?s focus in resolving the question of joint criminal liability was
on conspiracy as defined in federal law, not the commonly discussed term "collusion." The Office
considered in particular whether contacts between Trump Campaign officials and Russia-linked
individuals could trigger liability for the crime of conspiracy?either under statutes that have their
own conspiracy language 18 U.S.C. 1349, l951(a)), or under the general conspiracy
statute (l 8 U.S.C. 371). The investigation did not establish that the contacts described in Volume
1, Section IV, supra, amounted to an agreement to commit any substantive violation of federal
criminal law - including foreign-influence and campaign-finance laws, both of which are
discussed further below. The Office therefore did not charge any individual associated with the
Trump Campaign with conspiracy to commit a federal offense arising from Russia contacts, either
under a specific statute or under Section 371 ?s offenses clause.

The Office also did not charge any campaign official or associate with a conspiracy under
Section 371 ?s defraud clause. That clause criminalizes participating in an agreement to obstruct a
lawful function of the US. government or its agencies through deceitful or dishonest means. See
Dennis v. United States, 384 US. 855, 861 (1966); v. United States, 265 U.S.
182, 188 (1924); see also United States v. Consulting LLC, 347 F. Supp. 3d 38,
46 (BBC. 2018). The investigation did not establish any agreement among Campaign officials?
or between such officials and Russia-linked individuals to interfere with or obstruct a lawful
function of a government agency during the campaign or transition period. And, as discussed in
Volume 1, Section V.A, supra, the investigation did not identify evidence that any Campaign
official or associate knowingly and intentionally participated in the conspiracy to defraud that the
Office charged, namely, the active-measures conspiracy described in Volume 1, Section II, supra.
Accordingly, the Office did not charge any Campaign associate or other US. person with
conspiracy to defraud the United States based on the Russia-related contacts described in Section
IV above.}

You're just a lying little fuck, thinking that if you LIE HARDER somehow you can change the DISASTER that was the Mueller report.

Mueller's team of investigators documented the multiple abuses of power by Trump & by Trump associates.

Sorry that hurts your fragile feelings.

See, here is the thing - I've actually READ the report. I CITE the report when I make a claim. YOU just bleat what the most sleazy hate sites like DailyKOS and CNN claim.

Look at my siggy & you will see where the 10 acts of obstruction are located within the report. Pretty easy stuff

DERP

Trump called the witch hunt a "witch hunt," OBSTRUCTION

DERP

Trump fired James Comey, his subordinate who was engaged in felonies leaking classified information to the press - OBSTRUCTION.

Weissman if a petulant little fuck who could not make the case for ANY criminal acts. Anyone who reads the report sees clearly that Weissman is a butthurt little **** who failed to GET TRUMP.

Trump fired Comey because he wouldn't kiss trumps ass and give up the russia attacks on our elections

Trump clearly stated in a news piece, "I fired Comey because of this Russia thing."

Only a fucking moron would say such a thing to a news crew.

 

[nat4900]

Judges can't bring charges against people.

Hey, dimwit......exactly WHERE did I state that judges can bring charges against people??

What the judge IS doing is telling the DOJ that they MUST reveal manuscripts from the Flynn testimony....for EVERYONE to read.

Now let STOOGE Barr begin defying judges' rulings......Let's see WHERE that leads.

 

[Defiant1]

Judges can't bring charges against people.

Hey, dimwit......exactly WHERE did I state that judges can bring charges against people??

What the judge IS doing is telling the DOJ that they MUST reveal manuscripts from the Flynn testimony....for EVERYONE to read.

Now let STOOGE Barr begin defying judges' rulings......Let's see WHERE that leads.

So everyone reads. Big deal.

Who is going to bring charges?

 

[Hale]

Because the form of the Mueller report coupled with the appointment of Barr have allowed the tRumpkins to minimize what has been called the most damning document of all time and they want to keep it that way.

By who?

 

[nat4900]

but most sane voters have had enough of the clown.

Voter disillusionment with Trump spreads: poll

Voter disillusionment with Trump spreads: Poll, United States News ...

Here's what Trump voters who've lost faith in him look like

 

[JimH52]

The mantra stated in the thread's title is from Trump himself............and, of course, from his lackeys and stooges like Barr, Don Jr., Conway, Hickabee-Sanders, Hannity, et al....

So, the questions then arise as to...........

a) WHY would Trump claim "executive privilege" in keeping Mueller from testifying?

b) Why would Trump claim "attorney-client privilege" in keeping McGahn from testifying before the House committee.......bearing in mind that McGahn NOT only has already testified before Mueller.....but McGahn is also long gone from the WH ....AND was the WH attorney and NOT Trump's personal one?

c) WHY would Trump claim that Don Jr. is being "harassed" when asked by a republican-led Senate committee to testify?

WHY would Trump claim "executive privilege" in keeping Mueller from testifying?

Because...….screw you whiner.

What an immature, thoughtless, and brainless reply.

Now we know what HRC said about Trump supporters is actually true.

If course....he loves the gullible and uneducated. The more clueless they are...the more he can count on their vote.

This Barr thing is scary as Hell. trumpism...with its lies and manipulations has infiltrated the DOJ. trump can now...with a single phone call to Barr...his stooge....shut down all of the investigations now being launched against him.

We now have an Imperial President!

 

[nat4900]

So everyone reads. Big deal.

Who is going to bring charges?

Trump will not be charged until he is out of office......

In January 2021, Trump should ask Putin for a Trump dacha outside of Moscow.

 

[caddo kid]

The mantra stated in the thread's title is from Trump himself............and, of course, from his lackeys and stooges like Barr, Don Jr., Conway, Hickabee-Sanders, Hannity, et al....

So, the questions then arise as to...........

a) WHY would Trump claim "executive privilege" in keeping Mueller from testifying?

b) Why would Trump claim "attorney-client privilege" in keeping McGahn from testifying before the House committee.......bearing in mind that McGahn NOT only has already testified before Mueller.....but McGahn is also long gone from the WH ....AND was the WH attorney and NOT Trump's personal one?

c) WHY would Trump claim that Don Jr. is being "harassed" when asked by a republican-led Senate committee to testify?

WHY would Trump claim "executive privilege" in keeping Mueller from testifying?

Because...….screw you whiner.

What an immature, thoughtless, and brainless reply.

Now we know what HRC said about Trump supporters is actually true.

If course....he loves the gullible and uneducated. The more clueless they are...the more he can count on their vote.

This Barr thing is scary as Hell. trumpism...with its lies and manipulations has infiltrated the DOJ. trump can now...with a single phone call to Barr...his stooge....shut down all of the investigations now being launched against him.

We now have an Imperial President!

Der Fuhrer Trump

 

[nat4900]

This Barr thing is scary as Hell. trumpism...with its lies and manipulations has infiltrated the DOJ. trump can now...with a single phone call to Barr...his stooge....shut down all of the investigations now being launched against him.

We now have an Imperial President!

However, my friend, NOT EVEN Barr can put a stop on states' investigations and charges and indictments..........Trump made a HUGE mistake in pissing the law in places such as NY and Washington DC.

 

[Uncensored2008]

Fuck you, lying pile of shit.

This thread is about you gutter scum LYING to try and reverse the Mueller Dossier.

{For that reason, this Office?s focus in resolving the question of joint criminal liability was
on conspiracy as defined in federal law, not the commonly discussed term "collusion." The Office
considered in particular whether contacts between Trump Campaign officials and Russia-linked
individuals could trigger liability for the crime of conspiracy?either under statutes that have their
own conspiracy language 18 U.S.C. 1349, l951(a)), or under the general conspiracy
statute (l 8 U.S.C. 371). The investigation did not establish that the contacts described in Volume
1, Section IV, supra, amounted to an agreement to commit any substantive violation of federal
criminal law - including foreign-influence and campaign-finance laws, both of which are
discussed further below. The Office therefore did not charge any individual associated with the
Trump Campaign with conspiracy to commit a federal offense arising from Russia contacts, either
under a specific statute or under Section 371 ?s offenses clause.

The Office also did not charge any campaign official or associate with a conspiracy under
Section 371 ?s defraud clause. That clause criminalizes participating in an agreement to obstruct a
lawful function of the US. government or its agencies through deceitful or dishonest means. See
Dennis v. United States, 384 US. 855, 861 (1966); v. United States, 265 U.S.
182, 188 (1924); see also United States v. Consulting LLC, 347 F. Supp. 3d 38,
46 (BBC. 2018). The investigation did not establish any agreement among Campaign officials?
or between such officials and Russia-linked individuals to interfere with or obstruct a lawful
function of a government agency during the campaign or transition period. And, as discussed in
Volume 1, Section V.A, supra, the investigation did not identify evidence that any Campaign
official or associate knowingly and intentionally participated in the conspiracy to defraud that the
Office charged, namely, the active-measures conspiracy described in Volume 1, Section II, supra.
Accordingly, the Office did not charge any Campaign associate or other US. person with
conspiracy to defraud the United States based on the Russia-related contacts described in Section
IV above.}

You're just a lying little fuck, thinking that if you LIE HARDER somehow you can change the DISASTER that was the Mueller report.

Mueller's team of investigators documented the multiple abuses of power by Trump & by Trump associates.

Sorry that hurts your fragile feelings.

See, here is the thing - I've actually READ the report. I CITE the report when I make a claim. YOU just bleat what the most sleazy hate sites like DailyKOS and CNN claim.

Look at my siggy & you will see where the 10 acts of obstruction are located within the report. Pretty easy stuff

DERP

Trump called the witch hunt a "witch hunt," OBSTRUCTION

DERP

Trump fired James Comey, his subordinate who was engaged in felonies leaking classified information to the press - OBSTRUCTION.

Weissman if a petulant little fuck who could not make the case for ANY criminal acts. Anyone who reads the report sees clearly that Weissman is a butthurt little **** who failed to GET TRUMP.

Well, you said you "CITE" (sic) the report when you make a claim, then you proceed to whine that others here only "bleat sleazy hate."
Then when I pointed to the very section of the report in which the 10 acts of obstruction are contained in you come back with more of your fucking whining.
Please, just fucking go away .............

Ah, you didn't quite make it to 3rd grade...

"Cite," a "citation" of source material. You ignorant dolt.

{
A citation is a reference to a published or unpublished source.[2] More precisely, a citation is an abbreviated alphanumeric expression embedded in the body of an intellectual work that denotes an entry in the bibliographic references section of the work for the purpose of acknowledging the relevance of the works of others to the topic of discussion at the spot where the citation appears.

Generally the combination of both the in-body citation and the bibliographic entry constitutes what is commonly thought of as a citation (whereas bibliographic entries by themselves are not). References to single, machine-readable assertions in electronic scientific articles are known as nanopublications, a form of microattribution.

Citations have several important purposes: to uphold intellectual honesty (or avoiding plagiarism),[3] to attribute prior or unoriginal work and ideas to the correct sources, to allow the reader to determine independently whether the referenced material supports the author's argument in the claimed way, and to help the reader gauge the strength and validity of the material the author has used.[4]}

Citation - Wikipedia

You pointed to Weissman's absurdity where he whined that Trump called the witch hunt a "witch hunt." His level of "10 instances of obstruction" is the stuff of 6 year olds, those who don't know what it is to cite references.

 

[Uncensored2008]

Okay, so the dossier refutes you and the lies you've told for the last two years, that just means you need to LIE HARDER....

Dimwit.....I know you feel all "cosmopolitan" when using the term "dossier"......but you're still a fucking idiot.......Your orange turd can't last too long from the barrage of reality that is about to hit him in the next months.

You may choose to believe his constant LIES (after all, you are an idiot).....but most sane voters have had enough of the clown.

Keep drinking that kool aid.

So, you LYING FUCK;

{For that reason, this Office's focus in resolving the question of joint criminal liability was
on conspiracy as defined in federal law, not the commonly discussed term "collusion." The Office
considered in particular whether contacts between Trump Campaign officials and Russia-linked
individuals could trigger liability for the crime of conspiracy?either under statutes that have their
own conspiracy language 18 U.S.C. 1349, l951(a)), or under the general conspiracy
statute (l 8 U.S.C. 371). The investigation did not establish that the contacts described in Volume
1, Section IV, supra, amounted to an agreement to commit any substantive violation of federal
criminal law - including foreign-influence and campaign-finance laws, both of which are
discussed further below. The Office therefore did not charge any individual associated with the
Trump Campaign with conspiracy to commit a federal offense arising from Russia contacts, either
under a specific statute or under Section 371 ?s offenses clause.

The Office also did not charge any campaign official or associate with a conspiracy under
Section 371's defraud clause. That clause criminalizes participating in an agreement to obstruct a
lawful function of the US. government or its agencies through deceitful or dishonest means. See
Dennis v. United States, 384 US. 855, 861 (1966); v. United States, 265 U.S.
182, 188 (1924); see also United States v. Consulting LLC, 347 F. Supp. 3d 38,
46 (BBC. 2018). The investigation did not establish any agreement among Campaign officials?
or between such officials and Russia-linked individuals to interfere with or obstruct a lawful
function of a government agency during the campaign or transition period. And, as discussed in
Volume 1, Section V.A, supra, the investigation did not identify evidence that any Campaign
official or associate knowingly and intentionally participated in the conspiracy to defraud that the
Office charged, namely, the active-measures conspiracy described in Volume 1, Section II, supra.
Accordingly, the Office did not charge any Campaign associate or other US. person with
conspiracy to defraud the United States based on the Russia-related contacts described in Section
IV above.}

You really are quite stupid.

 

[Toddsterpatriot]

The mantra stated in the thread's title is from Trump himself............and, of course, from his lackeys and stooges like Barr, Don Jr., Conway, Hickabee-Sanders, Hannity, et al....

So, the questions then arise as to...........

a) WHY would Trump claim "executive privilege" in keeping Mueller from testifying?

b) Why would Trump claim "attorney-client privilege" in keeping McGahn from testifying before the House committee.......bearing in mind that McGahn NOT only has already testified before Mueller.....but McGahn is also long gone from the WH ....AND was the WH attorney and NOT Trump's personal one?

c) WHY would Trump claim that Don Jr. is being "harassed" when asked by a republican-led Senate committee to testify?

WHY would Trump claim "executive privilege" in keeping Mueller from testifying?

Because...….screw you whiner.

What an immature, thoughtless, and brainless reply.

Now we know what HRC said about Trump supporters is actually true.

If course....he loves the gullible and uneducated. The more clueless they are...the more he can count on their vote.

This Barr thing is scary as Hell. trumpism...with its lies and manipulations has infiltrated the DOJ. trump can now...with a single phone call to Barr...his stooge....shut down all of the investigations now being launched against him.

We now have an Imperial President!

If course....he loves the gullible and uneducated. The more clueless they are...the more he can count on their vote.

Hope & Change.....LOL!