Mueller Lets The Rat Out Of The Bag

Loading


 
Mueller slipped up and revealed the true nature of his “investigation” and report. Mueller, in his final clarification of a remark made to Democrat Lieu, said the conclusion of the report was “they could not exonerate the President” and “they could not establish a crime had been committed.”

Think about that.

As suspected all along, this investigation was an attempt to FIND a crime. Sure, they had collusion, based on what they all knew were lies (if they didn’t, they would have done some research to validate their “evidence” derived from the Steele dossier), and they worked and worked and worked to try and get Trump to stumble into a perjury or obstruction trap. But what they were trying to do most earnestly was to find something… ANYTHING that could be turned against Trump.

Usually, investigations are of a crime to find out who committed the crime. Their goal is not to “exonerate” someone (thus the name “prosecutor” as opposed to “savior”) but to CONVICT someone of a crime. Collusion, they admitted, was not technically a crime (though the report did make it synonymous to conspiracy, both of which Trump and his team were ultimately cleared) and obstruction can only occur as the investigation of a CRIME commences. By the way, the time to “obstruct” would be before the investigation gets too far along, not after it has gone on for over a year.

This was an investigation of Trump’s campaign colluding/conspiring with Russians. How was that exhibited? Aside from the false salacious information in the Steele dossier, later determined to have originated with three Putin associates (not a concern of the Mueller investigation, apparently… not in his “purview”), it rests on the circumstances around a Mr. Papadopolis telling someone that the Russians had the DNC’s emails. Further investigation (again, not the part that was Mueller’s “purview”) revealed that the person relating that information to Papadopolis was a person named Misfud, characterized by Mueller as a Russian asset. Turns out, he was a WESTERN asset, more specifically, working with the FBI. So, an FBI asset was directed to seek Papadopolis out at a seminar in London, passed the rumor of the Russians along to him, and then later Papadopolis related in conversation with an Australian that he heard the Russians had the DNC’s emails. THAT’S what led the FBI and this investigation to presume Trump’s campaign colluded with Russians. Get it?

By the way, there is NO evidence the DNC was ever hacked. The DNC never allowed the FBI to inspect their server themselves (why?). Instead, they had Crowdstrike (funded by Google, a Hillary supporter) “examine” the server and tell the FBI what they found. Hey, if you can’t trust the DNC, who railroaded Hillary into the Presidential candidacy and lied to all their supporters to tell the truth, who CAN you trust?

So, “cannot exonerate” and “cannot verify a crime was committed” is significant and revealing. To the surprise of a limited few, this was indeed a witch hunt seeking a crime, not a necessary investigation OF a crime.

And the Democrats want to follow the same police state logic regarding Trump’s income taxes. These people are trying to take us down a very dangerous road.

0 0 votes
Article Rating
Subscribe
Notify of
88 Comments
Inline Feedbacks
View all comments

What Trump tweeted:

“Really bad news!” “The Baltimore house of Elijah Cummings was robbed. Too bad!”

Apparently Mitch Agee feels he needs to change what Trump really tweeted in order to justify his criticism of Trump.

@Nan G:

Like wear a white hood, turn away black customers with a club, burn a cross into someone’s yard.

Heck, Democrats parlayed that into being the one sole arbiter of what and who (other than themselves) is racist.

@Richard Wheeler:

Dep—I’ll side with the 67% of Dems and give him the benefit of the doubt on that specific statement

There is no doubt to benefit him with.
The only racism is found on the left where there are those who try to silence any discussion by claiming the opposing view is racist. Good you have the intellect to see it, but you still seem to tolerate it.

How bout providing Greg’s request issued again in #49—

Greg can refer back to the article and the numerous times I myself have provided the quotes.

How bout Agee’s KISS statement below.

Well, it’s a lie, plain and simple. I would ask him to provide his evidence, but he appears to be a simpleton.

@Greg:

Such direct quotes of Robert Mueller HAVE NOT been provided, because Robert Mueller never made any such statements, either in the official report or in his oral testimony.

Yes, he did. They have all been provide, numerous times. Stop being silly and stupid.

Mueller corrected his incorrect statement made to satisfy Lieu by stating no evidence of a crime having been committed could be found. When asked by Collins if Trump had “stopped, curtailed or hindered” the investigation, his direct quote was “No”. The verbiage of the report, written by those determined to persecute Trump, was intentionally vague and obscured because the LAST thing they wanted to do was confirm they had failed at their mission of finding SOMETHING to prosecute Trump with.

No collusion. No obstruction. No crime to be found.

It took a while, but what Trump accomplished with the Barr appointment is now widely understood. This time it was far too obvious, as was the threat to national security that it represented. Resistance was immediate and effective.

August 2, 2019 – Trump Drops Plans to Nominate John Ratcliffe as Director of National Intelligence

@Deplorable Me, #52:

No collusion. No obstruction. No crime to be found.

Maybe you should consider a tattoo of that, done in the same script as the original copy of the U.S. Constitution. It is a bit too long to fit on a hat.

Yes, he did. They have all been provide, numerous times. Stop being silly and stupid.

Show me one and prove it. That should be simple enough—unless, of course, there are none.

@Richard Wheeler: Damn. You should get a job as a fortune teller. You knew an entire hour in advance that Mitch Agee was going to post below you and what he was going to say.

@Greg:

Maybe you should consider a tattoo of that, done in the same script as the original copy of the U.S. Constitution. It is a bit too long to fit on a hat.

Much easier to simply cut and paste it here for you since it seems you can recite lie after only hearing it once but repeated presentation of the truth doesn’t seem to have an impact.

No collusion. No obstruction. No crime to be found.

Show me one and prove it. That should be simple enough—unless, of course, there are none.

For instance, though the same information has been provided numerous times, I provided it again for you, yet you failed to take notice. You simply cannot FACE the truth.

No collusion. No obstruction. No crime to be found.

@another vet: As you know I am a fortune teller–alas not always a very good one.
BTW Point taken on Tulsi and the Russians—why do you think DT laughs them off?

Are you good with the tariff wars accelerating?

What do you think of my prediction of NIKKI VS TULSI for first female Prez?

@Deplorable Me, #56:

But you’re not posting the direct quotes or links to the same, are you? And you never will, because there are none to be found.

There was likely collusion, but no crime could be found because no relevant testimony from the chief suspect on that particular topic could be obtained. There was almost certainly obstruction, with 10 specific instances cited. Outside the context of the Mueller topics, federal laws have been openly broken to deny Congress access to both testimony from subpoenaed witnesses and financial evidence relevant to their investigations, which by definition is a crime.

@Greg: Maybe you should have watched the hearings like I did, I guess. Regardless, your argument is hollow, wrong and based solely on lies. Mueller said they could not find a crime and he answered “NO” to Collins’ question as to if Trump had “curtailed, stopped or hindered” his investigation, which clearly means (to those that can understand words) NO COLLUSION.

No collusion. No obstruction. No crime to be found.

@Deplorable Me:

Greggie Goebbels is not going to be convinced, even if you tattoo Mueller’s testimony on his arm. Greggie Goebbels is a fan of Vox, a left wing internet rag that hates Donald Trump. Often, Greggie Goebbels’ responses are almost word for word what you can read on Vox.

Poor Greggie Goebbels; he’s a pig who enjoys rolling around in his own feces.

@Deplorable Me: Don’t forget your “clean as a whistle”
What kind of a fool would actually believe that?

We know Republicans are not as highly educated as Dems but to follow a man likeTrump— blindly??
Why are so many Repub.reps not seeking re-election? To allow The Grand Old Party to become the Party of Trump===I believe there are still many Repubs that will stand against that trend continuing.

@Richard Wheeler:

@Deplorable Me: Don’t forget your “clean as a whistle”
What kind of a fool would actually believe that?

Care to provide the crimes found during almost 4 years of investigations, 4 investigations, illegal surveillance, wire tapping and spying? What kind of fool clings to the “collusion” or “obstruction” meme when both have been dispelled? What kind of fool keeps accusing Trump of being a Russian agent when Trump has been tougher on Putin than Obama ever even thought about? What kind of fool keeps believing the same people that have lied to them repeatedly? Remember that question you’ve all dodged about what happened to all that “mountain” of evidence you’ve been told Democrats and the media has that PROVES Trump colluded with Russians? Indeed, what kind of fools are we actually talking about?

I don’t know if you’ll answer the question, but I’ll give my answer: delusional, prejudiced, biased liberal fools.

Why are so many Repub.reps not seeking re-election?

Many don’t like the Republican party. They were not true conservatives. Hurd, for example, should be replaced with someone that will represent Americans instead of illegal immigrants. Some others, because of their opposition to Trump’s agenda of helping America and Americans don’t face good prospects in reelection.

Why can’t anyone but a far left socialist have a chance at the nomination for Democrat candidate? Why do Democrats rely so heavily on denouncing any opponent as a racist instead of facing the failures of their own agenda?

@Richard Wheeler:

BTW Point taken on Tulsi and the Russians

Here is an article from a conservative (actually Ron Paul type conservative/Libertarian) site you may find interesting.

https://www.zerohedge.com/news/2019-08-02/empire-coming-tulsi-gabbard

@Richard Wheeler: I take back the “flaming turd-bomb” part of my comment. This is actually a fairly informed group of folks. I was present at the Brigade Boxing Championships when (lefty) Ollie North defeated Jim Webb: BOTH good men and if Webb had gained traction enough to become the Dem nominee I world have voted for him. Unfortunately he was too much the classical liberal (in the Kennedy sense) at a time when Progressivism was in the ascendency. I’m TOO old to get TOO worked up about this current brouhaha…but cannot but marvel when all (i20 is it?) Dem Dwarves agree that illegals deserve health care. It has been a LONG and winding road from those heady days when I used to drop bombs on North Vietnam for a livng….in defense of truth, justice, and the American way. ELK

@Richard Wheeler:

We know Republicans are not as highly educated as Dems

Considering the sorry state of higher education these days, I view that as a blessing. Although I would be interested in where you gleaned that information.

And you seem to confuse education with intelligence. They are not one and the same and if you ever saw some of the interviews with college students when asked simple questions like “Who was President during the Civil War” only to see the students’ deer in the headlight look, you would know that.

@retire05:

Although I would be interested in where you gleaned that information.

A liberal said it, so it must be true. Or, at least, reinforcing.

I used to see lots of posts on Facebook of liberals touting Ruth Bader Ginsburg, hoping she hangs on until Trump is replaced with another liberal that will put ideologues on the bench instead of justices. Haven’t seen any since she praised Kavanaugh and Gorsuch as good people.

Smart people.

@elkusna68:

It has been a LONG and winding road from those heady days when I used to drop bombs on North Vietnam for a livng….in defense of truth, justice, and the American way. ELK

But Rich told us here more than once that no VN Vets support PT. Thanks for busting him out and thanks for your service!

@another vet: I never said NO V.N vets support Trump of course they do–it’s beneath you A.V to CONTINUE to lie about that.
That’s like saying NO V.N Vets supported HRC

@elkusna68: I watched those arc lights from places like Con Thien and Khe Sanh and thanked you guys profusely. Nov67-Nov68
Ollie a great boxer and Marine Officer—not much of a politician losing to fellow Marine Chuck Robb in Va. Top Marine Officers were often USNA grads–I know quite a few.
Semper Fi and thanks

Still got Webb 2016 on my bumper to affirm I didn’t vote for either terrible candidate.

AV#70—-” Richard more than once told us no Viet Nam vets support Trump.” NEVER said that. Sorry if you extrapolated what I did not mean. I apologize for saying you lied

@Richard Wheeler: You know damn well you said VN Vets don’t support him. Not some. Not a few. Not most. By omission that only leaves ‘NO’.

@retire05, #60:

Maybe you should give some of the insulting posts you’re making the sniff test. That last one could draw flies.

@Greg:

And the pig (Greggie Goebbels) goes “Oink, oink, oink.”

Mueller’s team began fishing for obstruction back in June, 2017

EXCLUSIVE: Rep. Nunes was Right! In Their First Month Mueller Gang Was Already Working on Obstruction Trap!

Collusion was a premise. This explains why NO ONE ever bothered with whether or not the “evidence” was true. They KNEW it wasn’t. They spent $32 million trying to get Trump to commit obstruction to have SOMETHING to prosecute.

Failure. Total failure. No collusion. No obstruction. No crime to be found.

@Richard Wheeler:

We know Republicans are not as highly educated as Dems but to follow a man likeTrump— blindly??

Rich, do you really believe that? I’m asking objectively.

Hope all is well in your world.

@Nathan Blue: Nathan I find Trump personally repulsive ===didn’t think much of Hillary either and I know most felt they had to vote for one or the other—I didn’t
I know you see the difference in the personal qualities of Tulsi Gabbard
The economy has improved and we are not at war—KUDOS TO DT—-But his brash bullying and treatment of people in general for me hard to stomach—-I’m a New Yorker who grew up with kids like him
It’s not political—disliked him as a Dem or Reform or Indie–he’s Repub currently simply because the slot was open. He has no loyalties–a salesman/negotiator.
Of course his ducking service and treatment of Mac creates piling on.

Our great country deserves better from our leaders—We’ve had em JFK–RR—FDR and Teddy Roosevelt come to mind–we’ll have em again..

All is well and I hope you are enjoying a great summer in the Rockies

Did you see my conversation with USNA 68—another proud member of my sister service

@Richard Wheeler: So, when Gabbard openly accuses the President of the United States of supporting al Qaeda, that seems to be an honest, reputable candidate to you? That insults the entire nation, especially anyone that fell victim to al Qaeda and those who fought against them. She has also insulted the nation by lying about the border situation and our law enforcement working to deal with the crisis created by Democrat incompetence.

You found Trump “repulsive” for nothing but personal reasons (totally within your right) but “did not think much of” Hillary, who, along with her husband, expressed hatred for the military, sold political influence which went against US interests and exposed US State Department classified information, including the names of intelligence assets, to our adversaries? You judgement system needs adjustment.

@Deplorable Me: As pointed out by Nathan DT and Tulsi find agreement in some areas—she has complemented DT in some efforts against AQ
The comment in question relates to DT’S massive support of the Saudis who ally with AQ in Yemen, which with bi-lateral Congressional support, she opposes. She also reminds us The Saudis spread the most extreme and intolerant form of Islam around the world
re–immigration calls for a massive restructuring of the current system——she’s against open borders and decriminalization–for path to cit, for dreamers.
Her calm demeanor and stature as an Army major the opposite of Trump.

@Richard Wheeler: She said, explicitly, that Trump was supporting al Qaeda. The Saudis may be fighting the same people al Qaeda is, but they are not allies; al Qaeda wants to destroy the Saudi leadership as well.

I don’t remember Gabbard accusing Obama of supporting ISIS when he was actually providing weapons directly to ISIS terrorists that happen to be fighting Assad. Do you?

Does Gabbard denounce the squatting squad that share many of the same views as the Saudis? No, her outrage, like most liberals, is selective and self-serving.

Whatever else she may be, she is a liar that will say ANYTHING, even if it damages the US, to attain personal power.

@Deplorable Me: With recent Admin professed goal for regime change in Damascus, and situation in Yemen it would appear US stance towards AQ can shift from enemy to ally depending on political expediency and Washington’s geopolitical goals

Trump has out lied Tulsi 100-1—of course he’s double her age—he’s got no moral center–only Repub this time around cause slot was open for a run at POTUS.

@Richard Wheeler: While it is almost impossible to determine WHAT the recent administration was trying to do, what they DID was feed weapons directly to ISIS. That administration also handed the terrorist-supporting government that was in the killing Americans business $150 billion dollars, and not a peep from Gabbard or any other liberal.

Nothing like that is underway between the US and Saudi Arabia, but is makes really good liberal press to accuse the President of the United States of supporting the second most vicious (after the ISIS Obama created) terrorist organization in the world.

Given Gabbard’s time in the public eye, her lying time amounts to almost 100% of her face time. But, if you don’t like liars, why would you want to replace one with another? Because a liberal liar is better? It wasn’t last time, was it?

@Deplorable Me:Yeah If we can reduce the lies coming from the oval office by 99% I’d consider that a major achievement.
Ain’t nobody perfect–not even you Bill.

I want to thank Curt for still having Word onboard as an author Truly a treasure and voice of reason in these troubled times

@Richard Wheeler: I certainly don’t pretend to be perfect, like some. However, I take it very hard when people lie about this country and lately that is all the Democrats have been doing. They will say ANYTHING to try to make Trump, who is doing a GREAT job under the circumstances, look bad, even when it makes the entire nation look bad.

NO ONE had done that before. Republicans didn’t go to foreign countries and smear Obama. Bush didn’t smear Obama. Republicans didn’t call Obama a traitor and criminal on the Senate floor.

I completely support Trump getting another term to try and fulfill all his promises (and keep ALL these losers out of the White House) but I see it as very difficult to EVER support anyone from this pathetic, America-hating Democrat party.

@Deplorable Me:

I see it as very difficult to EVER support anyone from this pathetic, America-hating Democrat party

Let’s be very clear; the Democrats do not like their own nation. Nor do they like the people in it. No matter what they say, the situation in the U.S. is always in dire straits and they are here to save us all from ourselves, and the Republicans.

Just some examples:
No on school choice. You are too stupid to know what is best for your own child.
No on guns because you are too stupid to learn how to use a gun properly and teach your children how to use a gun properly.
No on voter I.D. because…………………………RACISM

You see, Democrats have all the answers, until they don’t and then they just blame the Republicans.

Of course, then there is the double standard:
Trump calls out Cummings because of the sorry state of Baltimore and that’s…………RACIST
Cory Booker, who led a very, VERY privileged life, calls out Trump and that is NOT racist.

Christians can say they support traditional marriage and that is homophobic.
Mayor Pete can slam Christians (although he claims to be one) and that is not anti-Christian.

The difference in the Parties?
Republicans believe people are smart enough to run their own lives.
Democrats believe people are too stupid to run their own lives and need them to do it for them.

@retire05: Trump called Cummings out because Cummings little theater of slandering DHS and CBP for the benefit of his following that hates this country pissed him off. So Trump dropped a massive truth bomb on that frog-looking mofo.

Currently, if it’s bad for the nation, the Democrats want it to be policy and they want it really badly. There is only one explanation for that desire.

@Deplorable Me: You gotta be kidding or blind Bill.
Obama was called every derogatory name that certain FA’ers could conjure up– also called a traitor—-where were you?

Con Don treated relatively easy SEEMS TO ENJOY IT.
Wrestle in the mud with a pig you both get muddy—but the pig enjoys it.

@Richard Wheeler:

Obama was called every derogatory name that certain FA’ers could conjure up– also called a traitor—-where were you?

Whoa, Wheeler. Where are you getting that crap? Who was calling Obama any names that were even remotely close to what the members of your Party call Trump?

@retire05: You looking the other way as well? Not accusing you or Kitt.
Our more extreme posters like Spurwing., MOS and a couple that are thankfully gone–stuff that’s not repeatable in mixed company. You had to have read it.
Even our buddy RT—who brought Michelle in as well.

@Richard Wheeler:

Obama was called every derogatory name that certain FA’ers could

As I said, I don’t recall anyone from FA going on television and calling Obama a criminal, traitor, racist or con man. Likewise, I don’t think any of us got to speak on the floors of Congress and accuse Obama of treason. Popular rhetoric goes on and on; that’s not the point. The POINT is the official government and media working to openly ruin the reputation of the United States, including denouncing law enforcement and military, merely because they can’t accept the outcome of a legal election.

Con Don treated relatively easy SEEMS TO ENJOY IT.

Really. Is reality completely gone in California? Apparently so.