What do you think now that Mueller has submitted his report?

Need to see what is in it, first. And that hasn’t been publicly released yet.

I’m worried that it won’t make a difference in the end.

I’m praying that it will @janbb. It does scare me how much shit trump keeps getting away with, though. It’s unreal.

Let’s wait & see.

Trump has final publishing rights ! The AG works for him.

i’m glad that it’s finally over…Sadly, I’m still I’m not expecting any change from the status quo!!! After working on Capitol Hill, the one thing that I can assure you is that NO matter what divided front the 2 parties are showing to the public, the 2 are working hand in hand behind the scenes!!!

I trust Mueller and will abide by his conclusions. I would like to know the extent of Russian meddling in the democratic process not just as regards Trump’s involvement or non involvement.

It was already all over for America when trump got elected. Whatever else happens, would it be enough to pull out the country from the sewer trump voters dumped it in?

I think that if there was Russian interference that they would had covered it up well BEFORE the investigation started.
And anything else that would be incriminating as well.

Censure first impeachment second.

I’m sure that when the report is released there will be something that the Dems can scream about. Maybe it will show that Trump has a boil on his ass or something equally horrible. All those that hate Trump will continue to make things up. We’ve had a Senate investigation, a House investigation and now the Mueller investigation and they all show nothing. Of course that was predictable since they all started with nothing. Let it go.

I’m waiting for the DOJ southern district of NY.

I don’t know what’s in it at this point so, well, I don’t think anything one way or the other about it.

Waiting…

I’m waiting to see what the output from Barr is before anything else. As I have said all along, though, it is unlikely that there is anything tying Trump to Russian interference in the election. None of the indictments he has on people are for that and, in fact, in the case of the Russians it specifically stated that no Americans were involved. So it is likely to be nothing for the Dems. What they want is to see if there is anything else they can try drudging up so they can keep trying to find political ammo. I guess actually working with the POTUS for the good of the country is asking too much.

Perhaps some of you should redirect your attention to how all this got started, and how we got to where we are.

Dozens of you have been counting on findings even though earlier investigations turned up nothing.

A lot of damage has been done to this country the past two years. But we are now at the turning point in unravelling the biggest political hoax/scandal I U.S. History.

@Stache The DOJ Southern District of New York is ultimately also under the authority of the new District Attorney William Barr. Its time that this mess be sorted out and charges brought to those involved in the coup attempt. I doubt the Southern District of New York will get away with starting anything new.

I think, and have thought for a while, that this will end up being a big old bland nothingburger.

Look at all the indictments, charges and guilty pleas in this investigation. A nothingburger? I think not.

How I miss the tan suit controversy.

@stache, yes, there were indictments and guilty pleas but NONE of them involved Russian collusion with Trump. None. Not a single one. And that was supposed to be the focus of the investigation. In other words, they didn’t have any real evidence of a crime having been committed and opened up a very costly and damaging (to the country) investigation to see if they could find something to charge someone with. That is called a witch hunt.

My thoughts are the same as they’ve always been. Let Mueller complete his investigation unimpeded. If no wrongdoing is found then so be it. If wrong doing is found then let the appropriate authorities prosecute it to the fullest extent.

IF the shit does hit the fan, then the shit is clearly on it’s way to impacting the fan blades. Where the shit flies and what it hits after impact is anyone’s guess and/or speculation at this point.
Please remember that I said “IF.”

What do you mean “how all this got started,” @Yellowdog? It got started when the popular vote was overturned.

I hope they prosecute if there is reason to @Darth_Algar. I don’t know how, but trump seems to escape consequences like a magician.

Maybe that’s because the hype isn’t really happening.

Well, the hype is happening. But the accusations are lies to keep you tuned in.

^^Hype my butt. Like the lock her up screamings weren’t hype. Stop hyping crap and it just might get you some credibility. lol

Ben Ghazi anyone?

@seawulf575 the purpose of Mueller’s investigstion was to deteremine the extent of Russian interference with the election, the issue for which there was absolutely no doubt. The question of the possible involvement of Americans in that interference was not only plausible, but the country was confronted with the spectacle of high level Trump associates as well as his immediate family members shuttling enmasse back & forth to Russia & Eastern Europe to hobnob with known criminals who would be arrested on the spot if they showed up here. In addition there was the added spectacle of a Presidential candidate congratulating Russia live on national television for the successful theft of Hillary’s emails and hacking of HIS opposition. The fool just would not shut up. Not only did he congratulate Russia on the job, but ended the tirade with “Keep up the good work” in other words, the fool FORCED his own investigation. There is no other sensible interpretation, and anyone with a nickle’s worth of sense would shut up and wait for the results. If Trump comes out of this cleared of any fault while his colleagues and family stew in jail, I will be beyond surprised You on the other hand, should understand that IF Trump is found guiltless, this investigation was the best thing that could happen for him. It will demonstrate without question that our government is capable of some semblance of justice even when dealing with an inveterate fool.

@stanleybmanly BEFORE Trump took office, the Dems were screaming for impeachment. No crimes, he wasn’t even in the office, and they were screaming for impeachment. This investigation is just an extension of that. As we have discussed before, I’m not convinced Russia did anything of any real value for interfering in our election. They hacked the DNC servers! Well, if that is the case, why didn’t the DNC want the appropriate authorities to check those servers to verify it was the Russians? That would have been the appropriate thing. Instead, they paid someone to “do the evaluation” to determine it was Russians and then they destroyed the servers, just to make sure there could be no one else able to dispute that claim. The DNC and Hillary are also the ones that paid for the Steele Dossier to be amassed (using foreign nationals…there is your foreign interference) and they paid Fusion GPS to make sure that Dossier became important to the FBI. Remember…2 year later and most of it still is not verified. It is hearsay at best, fiction is more probable. So let’s look at the actual facts and not what the left wants to be true. Who benefits from this investigation which isn’t really based on facts? The DNC. Who paid for all the research against Trump? The DNC and Hillary. What was the opinion of the FBI agents working on the Mueller team concerning Trump? They wanted to make sure he never got elected in the first place. So how fair and honest have they been? Not at all. The FBI under Comey and McCabe used the Steele Dossier illegally to obtain FISA warrants. Why? To smear Trump. Now, look at the facts of the indictments. NONE of them show collusion between Trump and the Russians. All of those that have plead guilty are pleading to charges that had nothing to do with collusion. They lied under oath or laundered money or failed to report their representation as a foreign lobbyist. The Russians have not plead guilty and have, in fact, protested that the indictment actually failed to identify a crime. Yes, they did thing wrong, but that does not tie Trump to Russia for interference with the election.
And I want to point out that you, for almost 2 years now, have been swearing up and down that the indictments against Trump for interfering with the election were just around the corner. So when this report comes out and says there never was any collusion or interference with the election by Trump, are you actually going to be a man and say you were wrong?

@seawulf575 We weren’t calling for his impeachment before he took office, LOL! Why would we, when we didn’t think there was a snowball’s chance in hell of getting elected?

“BEFORE Trump took office, the Dems were screaming for impeachment. No crimes, he wasn’t even in the office, and they were screaming for impeachment.”

Ditto for Obama and Bush, and Clinton, and Bush…..

And ditto for pretty much every elected office in the land. You always have malcontents screaming for impeachment before the person has taken office. It’s disingenuous to pretend that this is unique to Trump.

My thoughts are that this is all a big fuss over nothing.

General Question Answer

@seawulf575 never mind my apology when. Wait for my apology IF. IF Trump emerges from this free of any taint of collusion, the investigation will have been the best possible thing to happen to him. To insist that the Mueller probe was unwarranted is just plain ludicrous. The results alone, collusion or not, are not some nefarious example of ends justifying means, and your insistence otherwise is beyond perplexing. Take a lesson from the fool. Shut up and wait for the report.

As indicated in a previous response, my reaction is no reaction. We don’t know what is in the report and to say otherwise is foolish. If the report clears Trump, good. I absolutely dread the thought that an American President could be guilty of treason against his own country. If the report condemns Trump and others, good. I absolutely feel that justice should be served. All the partisan rhetoric aside, our country deserves the truth. But, I’ll wait for the full report to come out before I react, thank you.

@Dutchess_III Maxine Waters was calling for impeachment back in Dec of 2016. Trump wasn’t sworn in until Jan 2017. The liberal media was floating the idea of impeachment back then as well.

Oh well.

I wonder what the reaction might have been, had Obama in the midst of his campaign, invited the Russians to steal and hack his opponents’ emails.

Obama placed spies and illegal surveillance in the Trump campaign.

The DNC produced a fake dossier and presented it as genuine Intelligence, and peddled it to the American people to influence an election.

No one cared, So, what’s your point?

OMG!! LOLL!!! You guys are hilarious!

@stanleybmanly

https://www.snopes.com/fact-check/obama-more-flexibility-russia/

The reaction to Obama colluding with Russia was basically crickets from the left.

Just as it should have been, along with the other crap you dummies lobbed at the man, like the 2 year 27 million dollar Benghazi investigation that yielded not a single indictment, or the idiot’s still lingering accusation of our Nigerian President’s birth. I swear before heaven that you could not invent a more obtuse crowd of bowling pins with the fool at the front.

I think I’m in love with @stanleybmanly!

@stanleybmanly So again, as long as it is a Dem, they can collude with Russia, but if a Repub is even accused of it, it is worthy of millions of dollars of investigation to see if you can drum up evidence? I just showed you the evidence of Obama’s collusion…how he was going to be flexible with Russia…playing favorites with them. Yet when there is evidence you don’t want to investigate. And that is why you lose credibility with me…you are too hypocritical. You make excuses on one hand when you are screaming on the other and it is the exact. same. thing.

Honestly I have never come across anyone as willfully delusional as you appear. The article in your link merely claimed that Obama told Medvedev what every American with a grade school civics education should already know— that a President has more flexibility when it comes to decision making during his second term. He was giving the Russian (who has an excuse for not being aware of it) the civics lesson for which you and the rest of the simpletons at which that article is directed have no reasonable excuse for your ignorance. There isn’t even a hint of impropriety in telling the Russians the facts of American politics. The shame of the matter is that there is a crowd of American dupes so ignorant that they mistake a civics lesson for treason! Now THAT should be a crime!

Talk about delusional! Saying you will have more flexibility after the election means nothing of the sort. It means that he will cut more of a deal if he gets re-elected. A civics lesson?!? Please. Like Russians don’t know how politics work. Let me ask…why wouldn’t he be able to make whatever deal before the election? He was already POTUS. Unless it is something so horrendous that it would ruin his chances at re-election, there is no reason to wait…unless he is doing favors. But let’s dig a bit deeper into your delusion. You use the rationale that there is nothing wrong with saying something like that to a Russian diplomat. Yet the Trump team did even less than that and you were all for a massive investigation. It is not uncommon nor illegal for leading candidates for POTUS to visit with other national leaders. Here’s an example of your hero:

http://www.cnn.com/2008/POLITICS/07/18/obama.trip/index.html

Also, Trump had business dealings in Russia long before he decided to run for office so his business dealings would entail meeting with wealthy Russians over time.
So in your really warped view of things, it is okay for Obama to meet with foreign leaders AND tell the Russian ambassador that he would have more flexibility to work with them after the re-election but it is wrong for Trump to even know any Russians. And, by the way, help me out here. What law does “collusion” fall under?

You definitely can use some help. Collusion means cooperation or working together. Now while you are convinced that the Russian attempt at manipulating the election was no big deal, virtually the entire intelligence apparatus of the free world thought otherwise. In fact the extent of the Russian effort was severe enough, and the Trump entourage’s cozy relationship with Russian criminals extensive enough that our entire intelligence community UNANIMOUSLY and without a single dissent, agreed that the depth of that interference MUST be investigated. If Trump or his operation cooperated or aided in that pursuit it would be COLLUSION. Simply put for the slow witted (now pay attention) the asinine question of which particular law collusion falls under is beneath contempt. Collusion is CLEARLY ILLEGAL when utilized in pursuit of a criminal enterprise. GOT IT? Now to the point of why Obama might have a freeer hand dealing with foreign policy in his 2nd term than his first. The answer to that is so clearly obvious that I’m not going to bother to tell you. I cannot believe that you are actually this hopeless. Not only is the answer obvious, it totally explains why Obama’s revelation to the Russian is harmless. The tragedy is that THE RUSSIAN GOT IT while you poor misguided soul who believes yourself a patriot missed the point entirely.

@stanleybmanly You still didn’t actually point to a law that deals with Collusion. Here’s a clue: the only place in law where it is mentioned is in some anti-trust laws.

https://www.justice.gov/atr/price-fixing-bid-rigging-and-market-allocation-schemes

It used to apply to divorces where the rules required a reason or a fault for the divorce. Since most areas (if not all) have no-fault divorce rules, this has gone away.

As for the intelligence communities…you mean the ones Obama left behind? The ones that showed gross anti-Trump attitudes from the beginning? Like the FBI that wanted to have an insurance policy if he got elected? Or that used the bogus Steele Dossier illegally to obtain FISA warrants? You mean those intelligence communities? Gee, what a surprise…they opposed Trump and wanted to come up with something to hold against him.

You claim “Collusion is CLEARLY ILLEGAL” but you cannot actually show me what law is being broken. So your entire attitude is based on a lie you have been fed from the liberal media. C’mon man! Think for yourself! Ask a few questions!

There are times when you convince me that you cannot possibly have been born or reared in this country. The word collude is just a substitute for conspiracy. I earnestly implore you once again to abandon those right wing idiot sites. When you make a statement such as “show me which law covers collusion” my heart sinks. And it’s because it is another one of those indisputable markers that we are talking at cross purposes in large part because we in effect speak different languages. When you say things that are silly, I keep pounding you for it and implying that you are slow witted, while I know full well that this in fact is not the case. Please trust me when I tell you that just because you’ve been told that there is no statute covering collusion, does not exempt the word or its meaning from legal consideration. It may sound like a fancy word, but let me put it this way. You won’t find any statutes covering crooks or bookies, bagmen torch men etc. But you should not repeat that thing about “I can’t find it in a lawbook.” It’s the sort of thing that betrays just how far you have to go before you and I can have a fair fight.

“The word collude is just a substitute for conspiracy. ” Not in legal terms. Maybe you should stop right there. You are trying to make an argument where you are right and it isn’t there. YOU are the one that said Collusion was a crime yet cannot actually point to a crime where it applies. I even pointed towards one to you, but it doesn’t apply in this case.
It is true there aren’t statutes covering crooks or bookies or bagmen or torch men. But here is where your lame attempt at semantics falls flat. Those are crimes. They are names for criminals. And in legal terms, they have other terms: Criminals, Bookmakers, Racketeers or Arsonists. Those are the actual terms though to be honest, criminal is vague at best. They would be viewed legally by whatever crime they committed. But this is all a dodge on your part. I specifically asked you to show me the law that involved collusion. You have failed miserably, though you have tap-danced better than Shirley Temple. Admit it, there never was a crime of “collusion” for Trump to beat. It was a bogus term that allows weak-minded fools to believe a conspiracy theory.

Are you truly going to insist that the word collusion is an invention of leftists out to persecute Trump?

You are telling us that had it been demonstrated that Trump colluded with the Russians he must be resolved of any responsibility because I can’t find the word collusion in a law book? Have you any idea how ridiculous that is? There comes a point in our discussions when there is no longer any entertainment in slapping you around because I arrive at the realization that I am in effect a bully. There is no honor in bludgeoning a man who lacks the tools to punch at my weight. But before the acrimony gets out of hand, I want to to tell you that I genuinely appreciate your presence here in defiance of snotty liberal arrogance. You are greatly outnumbered yet remain invulnerable to any effort to coax you toward the light. From my point of view, your presence here is invaluable. You parallel the fool himself as a walking demonstration of just what the country is up against, and I’m grateful that you’re here to prevent me from ignoring it. Once again I congratulate you on the fool’s vindication, and thank you sincerely for your constant reinforcement of the established precept that IGNORANCE IS DANGEROUS

No, what I am telling you is that the Collusion was being misrepresented as an actual crime by the leftists. For there to be a crime, you have to have a law that is being broken. I have repeatedly challenged you to show me what law states that Collusion is a crime. You cannot do it, nor can you admit that the entire thing was built up entirely by the leftist media and the Dems. But reality says you can’t have it both ways. Either it is a crime or it isn’t and you cannot show me a law that was being violated…so it isn’t. But in typical lefty fashion, you throw out a brand against someone without a shred of proof and then repeat it over and over and over. Let me give you a few quotes:

“If you tell a lie big enough and keep repeating it, people will eventually come to believe it. The lie can be maintained only for such time as the State can shield the people from the political, economic and/or military consequences of the lie. It thus becomes vitally important for the State to use all of its powers to repress dissent, for the truth is the mortal enemy of the lie, and thus by extension, the truth is the greatest enemy of the State.”

“The most brilliant propagandist technique will yield no success unless one fundamental principle is borne in mind constantly – it must confine itself to a few points and repeat them over and over”

“Think of the press as a great keyboard on which the government can play.”

And one more:

“Make the lie big, make it simple, keep saying it, and eventually they will believe it”

The first three were from Joseph Goebbels. The last was from Adolph Hitler. And this Nazi tactic has been adopted by the leftists in spades.

@seawulf575 What most of us wanted was the truth and that’s why we wanted an investigation. The “big lie” quote was never said by Hitler. He always claimed his propaganda was truthful.

@seawulf575 See? This is what I mean about the 2 of us being mismatched for debate. Out of the blue, you decide to villify the left and exonerate DONALD TRUMP through quoting NAZIS on the big lie. I want you to stop and think about just what I should do to you when you introduce Trump, Nazis and “the big lie” into a conversation. What am I supposed to do when some diummy serves up a pitch like that?

I suppose the salvation for our country is that Goebbels and the boys didn’t write the primer on “the big STUPID lie”. How many times do you suppose some stable genius should repeat the mantra “Nigerian muslim”?

And I’m going to try one last time to dissuade you from this embarrassing insistence of yours that since I can’t point to a staute on collusion, Trump cannot be prosecuted for it. When you say things like that—you are only telling us that you don’t understand the nuance of the word. What would you think if I told you that Trump could be prosecuted for participation in a crime? Would ask me for a statute on participation? It’s stuff like this that forces me to understand that I should leave you in peace. But like our President you just insist on sporting that “Kick Me” sign.

What I find odd about the entire debacle was, even though there were house, congressional, and nine months of FBI investigations finding no evidence of collusion even before Mueller,, so many people (most people in fact) really expected the Mueller report to be different.

It also surprises me how many fake stories and outright lies were told by our news media on a daily basis for many months—all claiming the shoe was about to drop. Why didn’t anyone investigate on their own? Why were so many deceptive fabrications out there? Didn’t the Fake News know that eventually it would be exposed that there was nothing there?

@stanleybmanly let’s review our past couple years. The media and the Dems created an entire narrative that was based on lies. They even chose “Collusion” as the term for a crime which it never was. They continued to spout these lies over and over and over again until people like you actually forgot (if you ever knew) that it was all lies. Now, how does that differ from what Goebbels was saying? Tell a lie and keep repeating it over and over until it is seen as the truth. I understand you don’t want to recognize the Nazi in the Dems and the liberal media, but the truth is right there in front of you. And yes, that is partly why we are mismatched for debates. I see things you refuse to admit can be possible. How many times did you tell me how foolish I was for saying there was no collusion between Trump and the Russians? How many times did you try “dissuading” me from making a bigger fool of myself on this topic? How many times was your sole viewpoint based on the lies of the media? And now the entire thing is done and…what? I was right all along and you were wrong. So who was the fool here? Now I am pointing out something else that is painfully obvious and you STILL cannot admit I might be right. The Dems and the media DID put together a whole narrative…that has now been proven. They DID spew that lie 24/7/365 since before Trump took office. And people like you have gobbled it up. Those are all facts. There is no gray area there. And STILL you cannot admit it might be true. THAT is the real reason you and I are mismatched for debates. You come into the debate lacking facts.

Yeah, that’s the problem.