6 ms·

It's not just that - some people will still, today, insist that Trump was working with Russia. When you point out that investigations found nothing, they point

by twic 5y ago

It's not just that - some people will still, today, insist that Trump was working with Russia. When you point out that investigations found nothing, they point to some random minor finding as if that vindicates them. It's genuinely concerning.

penultimatename 5y ago
I find it more odd that people hand-wave a political campaign meeting with a foreign government for political dirt on an opponent. That is truly genuinely concerning.
- sthnblllII 5y ago
  You mean like how the Clinton campaign paid a foreign intelligence broker in the UK to dig up dirt about her opponent? https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Steele_dossier https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Steele_dossier I find that "truly genuinely concerning" and totally expected given who the Clintons are. Trump has so much dirty on him but this isnt it. Feigning outrage over one if these corrupt politicians but not the other is purely political partisanship and not productive.
  - penultimatename 5y ago
    I think your failure to acknowledge the difference between a private company paid for services and a foreign government offering their services for free says who is the partisan one here.
    - sthnblllII 5y ago
      The Clintons and Trump (and the Bidens and the Kushners) are corrupt. Saying one is more corrupt as a defense of another is just playing into the idea that you have to support one of them. You don't. Edit: going around flagging my comments with your main account doesnt make you right.
anoonmoose 5y ago
I'm sorry but as far as I'm concerned "If it is what you say it is, I love it", which they admitted was a true thing written in email and meant what it obviously meant, completely justified the entire Mueller investigation.
gebruikersnaam 5y ago
The Mueller investigation didn't find hard proof that Trump et al. conspired with Russia because there was plenty of perjury and obstruction. When a investigation is limited by politics and vague policies, you can't blame the investigator. Mueller declared in his public hearing that he would have indicted Trump, if he wasn't president. The fact that the Senate committee (led by the Republicans) also found plenty of connections between the Russia government and the Trump campaign says enough.
- sthnblllII 5y ago
  >Mueller declared in his public hearing that he would have indicted Trump, if he wasn't president. Is that true though? He didn't present any evidence of a crime. Congress could have impeached Trump successfully with some hard evidence, so was Muller protecting Trump by only insinuating there was evidence but not presenting any? I don't think vague connections "says enough". If the president really was conspiring with Russia I would want the FBI to present its findings instead of giving more vague insinuation.
  - gebruikersnaam 5y ago
    "Mueller: A president can be charged with obstruction of justice after leaving office" [1] Statements that Congress could have impeached Trump can only be viewed as stated in bad faith. Congress did impeach Trump, but for political reasons the Senate refused to remove him. [1] https://eu.usatoday.com/story/news/politics/2019/07/24/robert-mueller-donald-trump-can-charged-after-leaving-office/1814190001/ https://eu.usatoday.com/story/news/politics/2019/07/24/rober...
pessimizer 5y ago
People will still insist that Saddam Hussain did 9/11.

by twic 5y ago

penultimatename 5y ago

I find it more odd that people hand-wave a political campaign meeting with a foreign government for political dirt on an opponent. That is truly genuinely concerning.

sthnblllII 5y ago
You mean like how the Clinton campaign paid a foreign intelligence broker in the UK to dig up dirt about her opponent? https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Steele_dossier https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Steele_dossier I find that "truly genuinely concerning" and totally expected given who the Clintons are. Trump has so much dirty on him but this isnt it. Feigning outrage over one if these corrupt politicians but not the other is purely political partisanship and not productive.
- penultimatename 5y ago
  I think your failure to acknowledge the difference between a private company paid for services and a foreign government offering their services for free says who is the partisan one here.
  - sthnblllII 5y ago
    The Clintons and Trump (and the Bidens and the Kushners) are corrupt. Saying one is more corrupt as a defense of another is just playing into the idea that you have to support one of them. You don't. Edit: going around flagging my comments with your main account doesnt make you right.

anoonmoose 5y ago

I'm sorry but as far as I'm concerned "If it is what you say it is, I love it", which they admitted was a true thing written in email and meant what it obviously meant, completely justified the entire Mueller investigation.

gebruikersnaam 5y ago

The Mueller investigation didn't find hard proof that Trump et al. conspired with Russia because there was plenty of perjury and obstruction. When a investigation is limited by politics and vague policies, you can't blame the investigator. Mueller declared in his public hearing that he would have indicted Trump, if he wasn't president. The fact that the Senate committee (led by the Republicans) also found plenty of connections between the Russia government and the Trump campaign says enough.

sthnblllII 5y ago
>Mueller declared in his public hearing that he would have indicted Trump, if he wasn't president. Is that true though? He didn't present any evidence of a crime. Congress could have impeached Trump successfully with some hard evidence, so was Muller protecting Trump by only insinuating there was evidence but not presenting any? I don't think vague connections "says enough". If the president really was conspiring with Russia I would want the FBI to present its findings instead of giving more vague insinuation.
- gebruikersnaam 5y ago
  "Mueller: A president can be charged with obstruction of justice after leaving office" [1] Statements that Congress could have impeached Trump can only be viewed as stated in bad faith. Congress did impeach Trump, but for political reasons the Senate refused to remove him. [1] https://eu.usatoday.com/story/news/politics/2019/07/24/robert-mueller-donald-trump-can-charged-after-leaving-office/1814190001/ https://eu.usatoday.com/story/news/politics/2019/07/24/rober...

pessimizer 5y ago

People will still insist that Saddam Hussain did 9/11.