Cause spying is a loaded term that law enforcement officials don't typically use to describe informants or other techniques to gather information.

Individuals in the campaign were investigated, which we didn't know until after the election. Unless you believe the Papa conspiracy theories, the FBI had a firm basis to open an investigation.



Yeah... this is a debate that should've ended the day the NYT reported on how the investigation started. But here we are.

Ignoring that the Trump tower meeting was a set-up, accepting dirt on a political opponent is not collusion.

Did the Trump campaign coordinate or conspire with Russia to meddle in the US election or otherwise commit criminal acts? --> Mueller says no.

It's 2019, you really need to stop reading the NYT.

Well, first off... I always read the entire article before posting it. Secondly, the Dems have zero proof of anything they have accused Barr of, they are grabbing at straws.
Hell, they are now making shyt up as they go along.

For your perusal here is the last paragraph of the article...




Which part is too difficult to understand?


The MOST hilarious part is that while Dems are erroneously trying to accuse Trump of attempting to make Congress totally useless, aka, attack the constitution, they themselves are trying to do the same to the DOJ.

Further, the Dems are pulling rules and laws out of their asses in their attempt to hang anything on Trump. I would think the Dems are getting mighty hungry after gnawing on this nothing burger for the past 2 years.

Mueller says no such thing, and the legal framework he operated under wouldnt have allowed him to say yes regardless of the findings.

Whether or not it was collusion, which is just more hackery since thats not a legal term or standard, it definitely warrants an investigation.

Youve really gone downhill in the last few years...

This post was edited by Thor123422 on May 2 2019 03:32pm

In sufficient evidence, is just that... insufficient evidence.

"There is insufficient evidence to say it happened"

is a far cry from

"It didn't happen"


One allows for future evidence to overturn, and the second is a statement of fact that leaves no wiggle room for what may come out later.

This post was edited by Thor123422 on May 2 2019 03:36pm

Keep your hopes up. This issue is done. If this was a court case, it would have been tossed long ago. The Dems are just grabbing at straws. :/

I'm not keeping my hopes up for anything. I'm satisfied with the investigation and don't think there's any reason to think it was ever undertaken in bad faith. Based on the investigation I don't think a conspiracy happened, but to imply Mueller made an outright declaration that criminal conspiracy didn't happen is dishonest.

I'm gonna have to disagree with the bold part.