Breaking: Mueller Shifts Investigation--Requests DOJ Documents & Emails On Holder, Lynch And Obama

[JGalt]

If Mueller wants to retain any credibility, sooner or later he's gonna have to dip his hand deep into the Clinton/Holder/Lynch/Obama muck and pull something out. It's only a matter of time, and he's going around in circles trying to find some imaginary "Trump/Russia collusion".

JGalt, am I reading you right? Are you saying that Trump/Russia collusion are not credible in spite of the constant drip of facts that were 'forgotten' until exposed, and that only Clinton/Holder/Lynch/Obama muck straight out of the Trump smear campaign is the only credibility you accept?

What "Trump/Russia collusion facts"? Mueller hasn't come up with any yet. Any indictments he's come up with have been completely unrelated.

And you know that ...how?

Papadopoulos was indicted for "lying to the FBI". A simple thing to do if you happen to change one word in a statement.

Manafort was indicted on a tax issue.

So in your mind, those prove that Trump was working with Putin to screw Hillary out of the Presidency, right?

I have a bridge in NY I'd like to sell you. I'll let it go for really cheap, just give me a $10,000 down payment in large unmarked bills and I'll sign the title over to you.

I don't think anybody is claiming the collusion accusations are true. As for me, I'm saying they are highly credible and although the investigation is like pulling hen's teeth, little by little, bits of communications are adding to the tale. But nobody knows at this point what the investigation knows. Most of us who believe accede that the accusations can prove to be untrue. However, in contrast, you seem certain of your view and of what data the investigation has, or more accurately, what the investigation doesn't have. So I simply ask...how do you know with certainty what you say you believe?

I can say this with certainty: The idea that Russian propaganda on the internet actually convinced a single Democrat to vote for Donald J. Trump, is a little far-fetched, isn't it? It's also quite a stretch to believe that the Russians somehow "tampered" with the ballots or intimidated the electoral voters.

 

[BULLDOG]

JGalt, am I reading you right? Are you saying that Trump/Russia collusion are not credible in spite of the constant drip of facts that were 'forgotten' until exposed, and that only Clinton/Holder/Lynch/Obama muck straight out of the Trump smear campaign is the only credibility you accept?

What "Trump/Russia collusion facts"? Mueller hasn't come up with any yet. Any indictments he's come up with have been completely unrelated.

And you know that ...how?

Papadopoulos was indicted for "lying to the FBI". A simple thing to do if you happen to change one word in a statement.

Manafort was indicted on a tax issue.

So in your mind, those prove that Trump was working with Putin to screw Hillary out of the Presidency, right?

I have a bridge in NY I'd like to sell you. I'll let it go for really cheap, just give me a $10,000 down payment in large unmarked bills and I'll sign the title over to you.

I don't think anybody is claiming the collusion accusations are true. As for me, I'm saying they are highly credible and although the investigation is like pulling hen's teeth, little by little, bits of communications are adding to the tale. But nobody knows at this point what the investigation knows. Most of us who believe accede that the accusations can prove to be untrue. However, in contrast, you seem certain of your view and of what data the investigation has, or more accurately, what the investigation doesn't have. So I simply ask...how do you know with certainty what you say you believe?

I can say this with certainty: The idea that Russian propaganda on the internet actually convinced a single Democrat to vote for Donald J. Trump, is a little far-fetched, isn't it? It's also quite a stretch to believe that the Russians somehow "tampered" with the ballots or intimidated the electoral voters.

If what Russia did had no effect on the election, Why did right wingers spend millions of dollars doing the same thing?

 

[Reasonable]

If Mueller wants to retain any credibility, sooner or later he's gonna have to dip his hand deep into the Clinton/Holder/Lynch/Obama muck and pull something out. It's only a matter of time, and he's going around in circles trying to find some imaginary "Trump/Russia collusion".

Mueller NEVER lost any credibility. He was hired because he was respected by everyone in Congress.
Imaginary Trump/Russia collision?
We now have proof NINE members of the Anus’ campaign met with Russians and LIED about it. Every single one.
But somehow you don’t see anything wrong with that.

 

[Reasonable]

JGalt, am I reading you right? Are you saying that Trump/Russia collusion are not credible in spite of the constant drip of facts that were 'forgotten' until exposed, and that only Clinton/Holder/Lynch/Obama muck straight out of the Trump smear campaign is the only credibility you accept?

What "Trump/Russia collusion facts"? Mueller hasn't come up with any yet. Any indictments he's come up with have been completely unrelated.

And you know that ...how?

Papadopoulos was indicted for "lying to the FBI". A simple thing to do if you happen to change one word in a statement.

Manafort was indicted on a tax issue.

So in your mind, those prove that Trump was working with Putin to screw Hillary out of the Presidency, right?

I have a bridge in NY I'd like to sell you. I'll let it go for really cheap, just give me a $10,000 down payment in large unmarked bills and I'll sign the title over to you.

I don't think anybody is claiming the collusion accusations are true. As for me, I'm saying they are highly credible and although the investigation is like pulling hen's teeth, little by little, bits of communications are adding to the tale. But nobody knows at this point what the investigation knows. Most of us who believe accede that the accusations can prove to be untrue. However, in contrast, you seem certain of your view and of what data the investigation has, or more accurately, what the investigation doesn't have. So I simply ask...how do you know with certainty what you say you believe?

I can say this with certainty: The idea that Russian propaganda on the internet actually convinced a single Democrat to vote for Donald J. Trump, is a little far-fetched, isn't it? It's also quite a stretch to believe that the Russians somehow "tampered" with the ballots or intimidated the electoral voters.

16 states voting centers were compromised by Russians. I see you’re not much of a reader.

 

[JGalt]

If Mueller wants to retain any credibility, sooner or later he's gonna have to dip his hand deep into the Clinton/Holder/Lynch/Obama muck and pull something out. It's only a matter of time, and he's going around in circles trying to find some imaginary "Trump/Russia collusion".

Mueller NEVER lost any credibility. He was hired because he was respected by everyone in Congress.
Imaginary Trump/Russia collision?
We now have proof NINE members of the Anus’ campaign met with Russians and LIED about it. Every single one.
But somehow you don’t see anything wrong with that.

I see no problem with having business dealings with Russia. If I had the working capital, I'd start a business importing Russian brides. Or maybe Russian-made weapons if we could ever get rid of that stupid weapons ban with them.

 

[JGalt]

What "Trump/Russia collusion facts"? Mueller hasn't come up with any yet. Any indictments he's come up with have been completely unrelated.

And you know that ...how?

Papadopoulos was indicted for "lying to the FBI". A simple thing to do if you happen to change one word in a statement.

Manafort was indicted on a tax issue.

So in your mind, those prove that Trump was working with Putin to screw Hillary out of the Presidency, right?

I have a bridge in NY I'd like to sell you. I'll let it go for really cheap, just give me a $10,000 down payment in large unmarked bills and I'll sign the title over to you.

I don't think anybody is claiming the collusion accusations are true. As for me, I'm saying they are highly credible and although the investigation is like pulling hen's teeth, little by little, bits of communications are adding to the tale. But nobody knows at this point what the investigation knows. Most of us who believe accede that the accusations can prove to be untrue. However, in contrast, you seem certain of your view and of what data the investigation has, or more accurately, what the investigation doesn't have. So I simply ask...how do you know with certainty what you say you believe?

I can say this with certainty: The idea that Russian propaganda on the internet actually convinced a single Democrat to vote for Donald J. Trump, is a little far-fetched, isn't it? It's also quite a stretch to believe that the Russians somehow "tampered" with the ballots or intimidated the electoral voters.

16 states voting centers were compromised by Russians. I see you’re not much of a reader.

Were they standing out front, intimidating voters like the Black Panthers did for Obama? Was there a big burly guy named Ivan twisting people's arms and giving them wedgies if they wouldn't vote for the Donald?

Please.

 

[jon_berzerk]

Yep, the shit these traitorous black Deep State Anti-American thugs are now going to be investigated. It was only a matter of time.

Mueller Requests Documents and Emails on Holder, Lynch, Obama from Justice Department

Another bogus web site. Lol
You just never learn your lesson do you.

More then one news source is reporting it.

Got any names? I notice one of the sidebar articles states that the 'left' hailed Charles Manson as a counterculture hero in '69. Reminds me of the old supermarket checkout stand that claimed a baby was born with a wooden leg. I'm pretty sure someone believed that one too.

of course charles was the original antifascist

 

[JGalt]

Yep, the shit these traitorous black Deep State Anti-American thugs are now going to be investigated. It was only a matter of time.

Mueller Requests Documents and Emails on Holder, Lynch, Obama from Justice Department

Another bogus web site. Lol
You just never learn your lesson do you.

More then one news source is reporting it.

Got any names? I notice one of the sidebar articles states that the 'left' hailed Charles Manson as a counterculture hero in '69. Reminds me of the old supermarket checkout stand that claimed a baby was born with a wooden leg. I'm pretty sure someone believed that one too.

of course charles was the original antifascist

Truth. He and his cult would have fit in well with today's Antifa.