Liar in Chief invokes Executive Privilege over citizenship question..

[The Original Tree]

You really are stupid, what I posted is the transcript of the Mueller team INTERVIEWING Papadopoulos.

I cited all of my claims.

You are really ******* stupid if you think MUELLER'S REPORT would be contradicted by THE MATERIALS OF MUELLERS OWN INVESTIGATION.

Thats like saying 2+2=1, total ******* nonsense.

Contradicted?

Are you on drugs again?

Yes dumbass, if you are arguing that that is false (my post you started refuting):

Nope, wrong again. It was Papadopolous that told TO Australian ambassador about Russians having dirt on Clinton, who then contacted FBI.

Then you are contradicting investigation's findings.


A.D.D. much?

Yes, you lied. Even your own cite of the Mueller report shows that.

{In late July 2016, soon after WikiLeaks's first release of stolen documents, a foreign
government contacted the FBI about a May 2016 encounter with Trump Campaign foreign policy
advisor George Papadopoulos. Papadopoulos had suggested to a representative of that foreign
government that the Trump Campaign had received indications from the Russian government that
it could assist the Campaign through the anonymous release of information damaging to
Democratic presidential candidate Hillary Clinton. That information prompted the FBI on July
31, 2016, to open an investigation into whether individuals associated with the Trump Campaign
were coordinating with the Russian government in its interference activities.}

Let's repeat that, you scumbag liar:

Russian government that
it could assist the Campaign through the anonymous release of information damaging to
Democratic presidential candidate Hillary Clinton.


Russian government that
it could assist the Campaign through the anonymous release of information damaging to
Democratic presidential candidate Hillary Clinton.

Russian government that
it could assist the Campaign through the anonymous release of information damaging to
Democratic presidential candidate Hillary Clinton.

You really are a shameless liar, and none too bright.

.....

Nutbag, what did I lie about and how does what you just post show it?

In April-May Papadopolous knew of Russians having Clinton emails, which he disclosed to Australian ambassador who reported it to FBI.

You said that's bullshit.

I showed you that it's fact as per Special Investigation Report.

Now how the **** does your quote about foreign government contacting FBI in JULY contradict that?

Can you post something COHERENT for once?

Yet, all you Trump-hating douchebags reject its conclusions: No collusion. No obstruction.

Moron, those aren't the findings.

The findings are

0. Special investigator can't indict or accuse a sitting President, only clear. It is up to Congress to charge and convict the President.

1. Trump campaign shared goals and was playing footsie with Russians, then lying extensively about it, but didn't provably involve itself in an all out criminal conspiracy.

2. On Obstruciton, the report details multiple episodes where President possibly commited Obstruction of Justice and therefore could not be cleared.

Possibly? Are you ******* stupid?

Read finding 0. first dummy.

It's irrelevant.

No moron, it is 100% relavant.

It explains why Mueller COULD NOT directly accuse a sitting President of the crime and why “possibly” was used.

The charge of ACTUAL Obstruction of Justice against the President was left to Congress.

Be honest, this gives you a boner, doesn't it?

 

[The Original Tree]

You are really ******* stupid if you think MUELLER'S REPORT would be contradicted by THE MATERIALS OF MUELLERS OWN INVESTIGATION.

Thats like saying 2+2=1, total ******* nonsense.

Contradicted?

Are you on drugs again?

Yes dumbass, if you are arguing that that is false (my post you started refuting):

Nope, wrong again. It was Papadopolous that told TO Australian ambassador about Russians having dirt on Clinton, who then contacted FBI.

Then you are contradicting investigation's findings.


A.D.D. much?

Yes, you lied. Even your own cite of the Mueller report shows that.

{In late July 2016, soon after WikiLeaks's first release of stolen documents, a foreign
government contacted the FBI about a May 2016 encounter with Trump Campaign foreign policy
advisor George Papadopoulos. Papadopoulos had suggested to a representative of that foreign
government that the Trump Campaign had received indications from the Russian government that
it could assist the Campaign through the anonymous release of information damaging to
Democratic presidential candidate Hillary Clinton. That information prompted the FBI on July
31, 2016, to open an investigation into whether individuals associated with the Trump Campaign
were coordinating with the Russian government in its interference activities.}

Let's repeat that, you scumbag liar:

Russian government that
it could assist the Campaign through the anonymous release of information damaging to
Democratic presidential candidate Hillary Clinton.


Russian government that
it could assist the Campaign through the anonymous release of information damaging to
Democratic presidential candidate Hillary Clinton.

Russian government that
it could assist the Campaign through the anonymous release of information damaging to
Democratic presidential candidate Hillary Clinton.

You really are a shameless liar, and none too bright.

One small problem, Papadopoulos never spoke to any Russian agents. He was approached by CIA assets, not Russian agents.

.

Stop spreading Russian horseshit.

That is directly counter to the findings of the investigation.

So according to the rules governing the appointment of a Special Counsel, a Special Counsel is appointed when there is evidence of a High Crime or Misdemeanor committed.

Can you cite The Crime The President Committed, and show us The US Code to prove he committed a crime as justification for a Special Counsel Appointment?

Even Bob Mueller could not name a crime that was committed as justification for his Phony Appointment.

He couldn't even do it after 2,500 Subpoenas, Two Asinine Pre-Dawn Raids and Illegally Confiscating Attorney Client Privilege Documents.

So how about you give it a try, sonny?

 

[Norman]

How many times have I read this same TDS fueled thread over and over and over again?

Groundhog day in the leftist land.

 

[The Original Tree]

How many times have I read this same TDS fueled thread over and over and over again?

Groundhog day in the leftist land.

It will never end. The goal is to try to generate public support for impeachment through Social Media, because after 3 years 4 investigations and $100 Million Dollars, they have failed to find anything to impeach The President on nor have they created support for it.

The secondary goal is to distract from the Felonious Activities of Clinton, Obama and the whole COUP & The Gang Criminal Cabal.

 

[bripat9643]

Yet, all you Trump-hating douchebags reject its conclusions: No collusion. No obstruction.

Moron, those aren't the findings.

The findings are

0. Special investigator can't indict or accuse a sitting President, only clear. It is up to Congress to charge and convict the President.

1. Trump campaign shared goals and was playing footsie with Russians, then lying extensively about it, but didn't provably involve itself in an all out criminal conspiracy.

2. On Obstruciton, the report details multiple episodes where President possibly commited Obstruction of Justice and therefore could not be cleared.

Possibly? Are you ******* stupid?

Read finding 0. first dummy.

It's irrelevant.

No moron, it is 100% relavant.

It explains why Mueller COULD NOT directly accuse a sitting President of the crime and why “possibly” was used.

The charge of ACTUAL Obstruction of Justice against the President was left to Congress.

Wrong. It has nothing to do with Mueller's report. He obviously can accuse the President of a crime because Ken Starr accused Bill Clinton of about a dozen crimes. What he can't do is indict Trump.

Your blow hot gas out your ass, and you know it. All you Trump douchebags are sticking to this story even though you know it's total horseshit.

 

[bripat9643]

Yet, all you Trump-hating douchebags reject its conclusions: No collusion. No obstruction.

Moron, those aren't the findings.

The findings are

0. Special investigator can't indict or accuse a sitting President, only clear. It is up to Congress to charge and convict the President.

1. Trump campaign shared goals and was playing footsie with Russians, then lying extensively about it, but didn't provably involve itself in an all out criminal conspiracy.

2. On Obstruciton, the report details multiple episodes where President possibly commited Obstruction of Justice and therefore could not be cleared.

Possibly? Are you ******* stupid?

Read finding 0. first dummy.

It's irrelevant.

No moron, it is 100% relavant.

It explains why Mueller COULD NOT directly accuse a sitting President of the crime and why “possibly” was used.

The charge of ACTUAL Obstruction of Justice against the President was left to Congress.

Wrong. It's totally irrelevant. No one asked Mueller to indict the President.

 

[OKTexas]

You are really ******* stupid if you think MUELLER'S REPORT would be contradicted by THE MATERIALS OF MUELLERS OWN INVESTIGATION.

Thats like saying 2+2=1, total ******* nonsense.

Contradicted?

Are you on drugs again?

Yes dumbass, if you are arguing that that is false (my post you started refuting):

Nope, wrong again. It was Papadopolous that told TO Australian ambassador about Russians having dirt on Clinton, who then contacted FBI.

Then you are contradicting investigation's findings.


A.D.D. much?

Yes, you lied. Even your own cite of the Mueller report shows that.

{In late July 2016, soon after WikiLeaks's first release of stolen documents, a foreign
government contacted the FBI about a May 2016 encounter with Trump Campaign foreign policy
advisor George Papadopoulos. Papadopoulos had suggested to a representative of that foreign
government that the Trump Campaign had received indications from the Russian government that
it could assist the Campaign through the anonymous release of information damaging to
Democratic presidential candidate Hillary Clinton. That information prompted the FBI on July
31, 2016, to open an investigation into whether individuals associated with the Trump Campaign
were coordinating with the Russian government in its interference activities.}

Let's repeat that, you scumbag liar:

Russian government that
it could assist the Campaign through the anonymous release of information damaging to
Democratic presidential candidate Hillary Clinton.


Russian government that
it could assist the Campaign through the anonymous release of information damaging to
Democratic presidential candidate Hillary Clinton.

Russian government that
it could assist the Campaign through the anonymous release of information damaging to
Democratic presidential candidate Hillary Clinton.

You really are a shameless liar, and none too bright.

One small problem, Papadopoulos never spoke to any Russian agents. He was approached by CIA assets, not Russian agents.

.

Stop spreading Russian horseshit.

That is directly counter to the findings of the investigation.

Name the Russian Agents he supposedly talked to. Come on commie, time to put up or shut up.

.

 

[OKTexas]

Yet, all you Trump-hating douchebags reject its conclusions: No collusion. No obstruction.

Moron, those aren't the findings.

The findings are

0. Special investigator can't indict or accuse a sitting President, only clear. It is up to Congress to charge and convict the President.

1. Trump campaign shared goals and was playing footsie with Russians, then lying extensively about it, but didn't provably involve itself in an all out criminal conspiracy.

2. On Obstruciton, the report details multiple episodes where President possibly commited Obstruction of Justice and therefore could not be cleared.

Possibly? Are you ******* stupid?

Read finding 0. first dummy.

It's irrelevant.

No moron, it is 100% relavant.

It explains why Mueller COULD NOT directly accuse a sitting President of the crime and why “possibly” was used.

The charge of ACTUAL Obstruction of Justice against the President was left to Congress.

NO, it was left to the AG, and in consultation with the AAG and the DOJ's counsels office they decided no actionable obstruction occurred, the DOJ policy on charging a sitting president not withstanding. As usual you commies reject the facts because of your TDS.

.

 

[JimH52]

Norman....you realize your tongue is orange....right?

 

[Camp]

Moron, those aren't the findings.

The findings are

0. Special investigator can't indict or accuse a sitting President, only clear. It is up to Congress to charge and convict the President.

1. Trump campaign shared goals and was playing footsie with Russians, then lying extensively about it, but didn't provably involve itself in an all out criminal conspiracy.

2. On Obstruciton, the report details multiple episodes where President possibly commited Obstruction of Justice and therefore could not be cleared.

Possibly? Are you ******* stupid?

Read finding 0. first dummy.

It's irrelevant.

No moron, it is 100% relavant.

It explains why Mueller COULD NOT directly accuse a sitting President of the crime and why “possibly” was used.

The charge of ACTUAL Obstruction of Justice against the President was left to Congress.

NO, it was left to the AG, and in consultation with the AAG and the DOJ's counsels office they decided no actionable obstruction occurred, the DOJ policy on charging a sitting president not withstanding. As usual you commies reject the facts because of your TDS.

.

Not true. Inaccurate spin.

 

[WEATHER53]

Are you a citizen?
Only one group of people don’t want to answer that.

 

[WEATHER53]

Yet, all you Trump-hating douchebags reject its conclusions: No collusion. No obstruction.

Moron, those aren't the findings.

The findings are

0. Special investigator can't indict or accuse a sitting President, only clear. It is up to Congress to charge and convict the President.

1. Trump campaign shared goals and was playing footsie with Russians, then lying extensively about it, but didn't provably involve itself in an all out criminal conspiracy.

2. On Obstruciton, the report details multiple episodes where President possibly commited Obstruction of Justice and therefore could not be cleared.

Possibly? Are you ******* stupid?

Read finding 0. first dummy.

It's irrelevant.

No moron, it is 100% relavant.

It explains why Mueller COULD NOT directly accuse a sitting President of the crime and why “possibly” was used.

The charge of ACTUAL Obstruction of Justice against the President was left to Congress.

There was no conclusion nor referral regarding obstruction

 

[bripat9643]

Moron, those aren't the findings.

The findings are

0. Special investigator can't indict or accuse a sitting President, only clear. It is up to Congress to charge and convict the President.

1. Trump campaign shared goals and was playing footsie with Russians, then lying extensively about it, but didn't provably involve itself in an all out criminal conspiracy.

2. On Obstruciton, the report details multiple episodes where President possibly commited Obstruction of Justice and therefore could not be cleared.

Possibly? Are you ******* stupid?

Read finding 0. first dummy.

It's irrelevant.

No moron, it is 100% relavant.

It explains why Mueller COULD NOT directly accuse a sitting President of the crime and why “possibly” was used.

The charge of ACTUAL Obstruction of Justice against the President was left to Congress.

There was no conclusion nor referral regarding obstruction

In other words, no basis for an indictment.

 

[bripat9643]

Possibly? Are you ******* stupid?

Read finding 0. first dummy.

It's irrelevant.

No moron, it is 100% relavant.

It explains why Mueller COULD NOT directly accuse a sitting President of the crime and why “possibly” was used.

The charge of ACTUAL Obstruction of Justice against the President was left to Congress.

NO, it was left to the AG, and in consultation with the AAG and the DOJ's counsels office they decided no actionable obstruction occurred, the DOJ policy on charging a sitting president not withstanding. As usual you commies reject the facts because of your TDS.

.

Not true. Inaccurate spin.

It's not "spin," shit for brains. Those are facts.

 

[hadit]

Yet, all you Trump-hating douchebags reject its conclusions: No collusion. No obstruction.

Moron, those aren't the findings.

The findings are

0. Special investigator can't indict or accuse a sitting President, only clear. It is up to Congress to charge and convict the President.

1. Trump campaign shared goals and was playing footsie with Russians, then lying extensively about it, but didn't provably involve itself in an all out criminal conspiracy.

2. On Obstruciton, the report details multiple episodes where President possibly commited Obstruction of Justice and therefore could not be cleared.

Possibly? Are you ******* stupid?

Read finding 0. first dummy.

It's irrelevant.

No moron, it is 100% relavant.

It explains why Mueller COULD NOT directly accuse a sitting President of the crime and why “possibly” was used.

The charge of ACTUAL Obstruction of Justice against the President was left to Congress.

The Starr report started definitively that Bubba had broken specific laws on specific occasions. Mueller could certainly state that the president broke the law if he thought that he did. He may not be able to formally indict, but he can certainly state if the president broke the law. Saying "possibly" means he couldn't state definitively the president broke the law.

 

[AntonToo]

Moron, those aren't the findings.

The findings are

0. Special investigator can't indict or accuse a sitting President, only clear. It is up to Congress to charge and convict the President.

1. Trump campaign shared goals and was playing footsie with Russians, then lying extensively about it, but didn't provably involve itself in an all out criminal conspiracy.

2. On Obstruciton, the report details multiple episodes where President possibly commited Obstruction of Justice and therefore could not be cleared.

Possibly? Are you ******* stupid?

Read finding 0. first dummy.

It's irrelevant.

No moron, it is 100% relavant.

It explains why Mueller COULD NOT directly accuse a sitting President of the crime and why “possibly” was used.

The charge of ACTUAL Obstruction of Justice against the President was left to Congress.

There was no conclusion nor referral regarding obstruction

wrong. Evidence of Obstruction was absolutely referred to Congress for consideration.

 

[AntonToo]

Moron, those aren't the findings.

The findings are

0. Special investigator can't indict or accuse a sitting President, only clear. It is up to Congress to charge and convict the President.

1. Trump campaign shared goals and was playing footsie with Russians, then lying extensively about it, but didn't provably involve itself in an all out criminal conspiracy.

2. On Obstruciton, the report details multiple episodes where President possibly commited Obstruction of Justice and therefore could not be cleared.

Possibly? Are you ******* stupid?

Read finding 0. first dummy.

It's irrelevant.

No moron, it is 100% relavant.

It explains why Mueller COULD NOT directly accuse a sitting President of the crime and why “possibly” was used.

The charge of ACTUAL Obstruction of Justice against the President was left to Congress.

The Starr report started definitively that Bubba had broken specific laws on specific occasions. Mueller could certainly state that the president broke the law if he thought that he did. He may not be able to formally indict, but he can certainly state if the president broke the law. Saying "possibly" means he couldn't state definitively the president broke the law.

Starr was an INDEPENDENT investigator, not a special investigator Mueller was.

in a away the rules of Mueller’s investigation were shaped by the very excesses of the Starr investigation.

 

[bripat9643]

Possibly? Are you ******* stupid?

Read finding 0. first dummy.

It's irrelevant.

No moron, it is 100% relavant.

It explains why Mueller COULD NOT directly accuse a sitting President of the crime and why “possibly” was used.

The charge of ACTUAL Obstruction of Justice against the President was left to Congress.

There was no conclusion nor referral regarding obstruction

wrong. Evidence of Obstruction was absolutely referred to Congress for consideration.

Wrong.

 

[AntonToo]

Moron, those aren't the findings.

The findings are

0. Special investigator can't indict or accuse a sitting President, only clear. It is up to Congress to charge and convict the President.

1. Trump campaign shared goals and was playing footsie with Russians, then lying extensively about it, but didn't provably involve itself in an all out criminal conspiracy.

2. On Obstruciton, the report details multiple episodes where President possibly commited Obstruction of Justice and therefore could not be cleared.

Possibly? Are you ******* stupid?

Read finding 0. first dummy.

It's irrelevant.

No moron, it is 100% relavant.

It explains why Mueller COULD NOT directly accuse a sitting President of the crime and why “possibly” was used.

The charge of ACTUAL Obstruction of Justice against the President was left to Congress.

Wrong. It has nothing to do with Mueller's report. He obviously can accuse the President of a crime because Ken Starr accused Bill Clinton of about a dozen crimes. What he can't do is indict Trump.

Your blow hot gas out your ass, and you know it. All you Trump douchebags are sticking to this story even though you know it's total horseshit.

Please, If he would accuse the president you rightwingers would be screaming about overthrow by un-elected beurocrat.

Mueller sees the Congress as the Constitutional check on Presidential abuse of office.

Personally I could see it both ways - Mueller being a giant ***** for not stating the obvious conclusion that Trump is a corrupt POS....AND a wise man looking out for America’s long term political stability.

 

[AntonToo]

Moron, those aren't the findings.

The findings are

0. Special investigator can't indict or accuse a sitting President, only clear. It is up to Congress to charge and convict the President.

1. Trump campaign shared goals and was playing footsie with Russians, then lying extensively about it, but didn't provably involve itself in an all out criminal conspiracy.

2. On Obstruciton, the report details multiple episodes where President possibly commited Obstruction of Justice and therefore could not be cleared.

Possibly? Are you ******* stupid?

Read finding 0. first dummy.

It's irrelevant.

No moron, it is 100% relavant.

It explains why Mueller COULD NOT directly accuse a sitting President of the crime and why “possibly” was used.

The charge of ACTUAL Obstruction of Justice against the President was left to Congress.

NO, it was left to the AG, and in consultation with the AAG and the DOJ's counsels office they decided no actionable obstruction occurred, the DOJ policy on charging a sitting president not withstanding. As usual you commies reject the facts because of your TDS.

.

Horseshit. Mueller’s report is very clear on Congressional Job to hold the President accountable.