Sigh…
No they are not.
You said in Trumps comment wasn’t in the report. So I said Muller must not have thought it worthey, THEN you said it WAS in the report.
That’s contradiction yourself my friend. Then you said:
So you must have found it really really fast.
You are wasting my time…collusion wasnt what mueller was looking into…
When you figure that out let me know
Does the sign mean you can’t explain how you can have collusion without cooperation and coordination between the two parties?
Yes, page 180 of the report where it discusses collusion and conspiracy.
So it was the criminal conspiracy between the two that he found didn’t exist between the two parties?
He found it
Found what? Collusion?
Again, how can you collude if you are not cooperating with each other, or coordinating with each other.
I really want you to tell me HOW that is possible.
Yes, you are right, best I just log off.
Ah you are doing this on purpose…we are done here.
2 Likes
Yes . .
I am purposly trying to get you to tell me how you can have collussion between two parties without cooperation or coordination. Neither of which Mueller says he found.
So you say there is collusion – report says so. Should be pretty damn easy for you to show how it’s possible witout the two things.
There was collusion, it just didn’t rise to the level of a criminal conspiracy as far as the available evidence which is limited due to the constant lying of Trump associates and the fact that a lot of the messages between Trump associates have been erased either deliberately or through the use of messaging apps that destroy chat history.
When the government ends up indicting mob bosses and drug lords on tax evasion charges, is it because it’s not obvious that they are involved in criminal activity or is it because it is extremely hard to pin a crime to the leader of a criminal enterprise when they use several middlemen to handle their dirty work?
Trump gets lawyers, his family members and other subordinates to handle his dirty work. The only reason Mueller didn’t charge Don Jr. was because it wasn’t clear he knew what he was doing was illegal and he would have had to prove intent.
The Mueller report is filled with evidence of wrong doings by Trump and associates. That you want to focus on the fact that they are unable to bring a conspiracy case and sweep all the rest of the damning stuff stated in the report under the rug just shows that you’re towing the party line… it doesn’t mean that the corruption isn’t clear.
5 Likes
Innocent until proven guilty my friend. Not enough eveidence to bring charges, then guess what, they have not been found guilty, and will not be tried. Yes some cases have been reffered out of Muellers investigation. That means that they do not relate to collusion as he was authorized to bring any and all charges related to that.
Innocent until proven guilty doesn’t stop people from screaming “lock her up” at Trump rallies or people thinking that OJ got away with murder. There is plenty of evidence of wrong doing by Trump associates.
Mueller had to work within the restraints of a DOJ in which Trump hand picked a person on the basis of loyalty. It’s very easy to argue that if Trump was anyone other than the president of the United States, he would be in prison.
3 Likes
And some were charged (mostly for unrelated crimes Mueller found in the process), but NONE were charged with the russion collusion/conspiracy. Mueller had full authority to do so. That means he determined that his law teams would not have a chance of finding them guilty (so they are what again?).
Trump hand picked Barr. All the never Trumpers had NO issue with Rosenstien picking Mueller or Rosenstien overseeing the investigation. Barr didn’t make the determination on collusion/conspiracy MUELLER did.
On the other part, Mueller consulted with Rosenstien, talked with Mueller, consulted the office of legal something or other (I’m old can’t remember the exact name) and in all that consultation determined no charges should be filed. Did Trump hand pick everyone?
That Barr so brazenly mischaracterized what was in the report was a bit shocking… which is exactly why it went from being a “total exoneration” to having Republicans on the defensive once people started to read what was actually in it.
Mueller had to limit the scope of the investigation and work within certain constraints. If he were less constrained, he could have found out more. That was my point. I think he did a great job given the constraints.
He had FULL authority to investigation all collusion (and read his report) criminal consperacy. He was however limited to investigation ONLY things that he could bring charges for. NONE of Trumps associates have been charged with consperiacy with Russians. And it says he found NO cooperation and no coordination. Now if you look at the definition of collusion:
Cambridge online dictionary:
agreement between people to act together secretly or illegally in order to deceive or cheatsomeone:
So they would have to cooperate and have an agreement to work together. Mueller states he did NOT find that (No cooperation and no coordination).
Any other crimes he uncovered he did (and should have) sent them off to prosecutors and investigators outside his investigation. In my opinion he overreached on a couple of his charges as they were not related to the case and done so only to try and get the witnesses to sing or make stuff up.
Yeah but none the 14 criminal referrals are
The fact that Mueller’s team didn’t investigate all criminal activity unless it appeared to be directly connected to the Russian illegal activity during the election means that some of the other criminal activity could potentially also have Russian connections if they fully explored it.
You are also leaving out the fact that report states: “Third, the investigation established that several individuals affiliated with the Trump Campaign lied to the Office, and to Congress, about their interactions with Russian-affiliated individuals and related matters. Those lies materially impaired the investigation of Russian election interference. The Office charged some of those lies as violations of the federal false-statements statute.”
1 Like
Also, we need to focus on exactly what is being evaluated to be criminal conspiracy: " We understood coordination to require an agreement — tacit or express — between the Trump Campaign and the Russian government on election interference. That requires more than the two parties taking actions that were informed by or responsive to the other’s actions or interests"
In effect, “no conspiracy” does not mean that Russia didn’t help Trump win the election. “No conspiracy,” does not mean the Trump campaign didn’t reach out to the Russian government for stolen information. “No conspiracy” does not mean that Don JR and others in his circle didn’t make business arrangements with the Russian government with the promise that Trump would act favorably towards Russia if he won the election. “No conspiracy” simply means that Trump and company didn’t instruct the Russian government on how to interfere without our election.
Trump was simply being used as a tool of the Russian government. The tail and not the dog.
