Does it make it ok to start an “investigation” on false pretenses?
That didn’t happen here.
The investigation was not started on false pretenses.
No matter how many times that falsehood is repeated, it doesn’t make it true.
2 Likes
Guilty people dont say… My (insert job here) is ■■■■■■
So collusion is a crime then? Worthy of investigation? Strange. Mueller said it isn’t. Sounds like somebody’s in denial. Still.
Finding collusion was not what Mueller’s hired to investigate. Why do you keep insinuating that it was?
No it was Comey’s. Who did Mueller take over for again?
For no crime being commited alot of people went to jail for nothing
Bank fraud, cheating on taxes. All closely tied to Russia “meddling” in our elections. 
1 Like
Huh?
10huhs
Denial. Obviously. That’s all it can be at this point.
Who did Mueller take over for?
Who was investigating the Trump campaign before Mueller? Who was the special prosecutor assigned to the Clinton email scandal? Seriously? Are we just completely denying history now?
You didn’t answer my question, who did Mueller take over for?
1 Like
If one would read the report, one would find that the determination about not charging Manafort with any conspiracy for providing Kilimnik with internal polling data across for key states was because Manafort’s stonewalling worked and they couldn’t determine what happened with the data afterward because of “their limited ability to gather evidence” and they “could not assess what Kilimnik (or others he may have given it to) did with it”
So… Manafort got lucky.
This went as predicted. Libs are too distracted by 448 pages of tunnel vision and have no peripheral.
1 Like
If you are not guilty there is no need to try and fire anyone involved in the investigation
No you got it wrong. If you are not guilty then you are completely free to interfere in any investigation trying to find otherwise…or something
1 Like
