There were leaks in Oct 2016.
You need to do some research.
I take that to mean it is untrue. Thanks for the confirmation at least.
Yeah look at this one from the New York Times where they mention the Huma Abedin/Weiner e-mails and call that inesvtiagtion āongoingā and then publicly documenting that the FBI sees no clear links between Trumpās campaign and Russiaā¦and even going so far to say that it appears that Russia simply wants to disrupt the election, not help Trump.
That dastardly Deep Stateā¦taking Donald Trump out byā¦absolving him and laying an implication against Hillary Clinton?
Is this an example of eleventy-dimensional thinking, and that by helping Trump publicly, theyāre actually out to get him?
One wondersā¦
1 Like
The more that it becomes clear that there was not campaign/Russian collusion, the more it will be clear that we need to find out how we were in a position of wasting two years on this. We were trying to find the perpetrators of a crime that didnāt exist. That doesnāt mean the Russians werenāt doing what they always do, but the collusion is made up.
And if the important people in the agencies werenāt involved, how did CNN finally get their āhookā to publish about the dossier? Why all the leaks except one leaking that Trump was not the subject to the investigation?
No, itās not ānothing.ā And neither you nor I know what Mueller has in his hopper. Given the news reports, it looks like thereās quite a bit. To judge and say thereās nothing when the dust hasnāt completely settled may give some comfort, but that wonāt last forever.
Itās not my world thatās entangled in the Mueller investigations.
With all the hooks the news reports have found to Russia, it would be just imagining things to say itās all a nothing burger. Weāll know eventually. I feel there will be more. Just how much more I donāt know. But in my opinion, itāll be deeper than what weāve seen so far. And what weāve seen has nothing been zero evidence. Even if many would like to say so.
It should be noted that that story is dated Oct. 31, 2016. An awful lot has happened since then. And even the āliberal mediaā gets it wrong once in a while.
Motherjones.
Maybe you need to do more research. 
Here let me help you, this is from Wiki.
By the third quarter of 2016, many news organizations knew about the existence of the dossier, which had been described as an āopen secretā among journalists. However, they chose not to publish information that could not be confirmed.[2][46]
By October 2016, Steele had compiled 33 pages (16 memos), and he then passed on what he had discovered to David Corn, a reporter from Mother Jones magazine. On October 31, 2016, a week before the election, Mother Jones reported that a former intelligence officer, whom they did not name, had produced a report based on Russian sources and turned it over to the FBI.[39] The article disclosed some of the dossierās allegations:
And If my memory serves be correct you can thank @tnt for bringing it to our attention to it on other forum.
Because I laugh for using motherjones.
Well Iām waiting. Been over a year now and not one peep of Russian/Trump conclusion.
And you conspiracy runs wild.
Weāre you in favor of finding out how we wasted several years on the Benghazi investigation too?
Iām laughing because you used wiki. Anyone can edit wiki. Itās not a source.
Then edit it.
I even told you who brought the story it our attention in Oct 2016 on other forumā¦a lib like yourself.
No, I wonāt. Again, wiki is not a source. How would my editing make it right? Iām just a lowly guy on the internet, as is anyone else who edits wiki. It has nothing to do with ālibsā.
No. Chiefly because nobody cared because it was professional people who were in a dangerous position and most people and their families did not feel at riskā¦therefore they didnāt care what happened over Benghazi.
None of those stories had anything to do with the Trump campaign and collusion. However, the following article caught my eye. Lets hope it is correct
āA court filing Wednesday from special counsel Robert Muellerās office may be a signal that his investigation into Russian efforts to coordinate with the Trump campaign is nearing a conclusion.ā
1 Like
The court rulingā¦whhich is not included in my quote and I cannot editā¦is over Mueller wanting to sentence Papaā¦
The concludusion that this may mean the end of the investigation of collusion follows in that they wouldnāt sentence him unless there was no more use for himā¦and he was their big link to possible collusion.
1 Like
Politico updates that section daily so there is likely to be more collusion-related stories there in the future. And I think youāre putting up a wishing well in hopes that the investigation will end soon. There looks to me to be too many open ends. It wonāt end for a while, in my view.
