Thread Tools
Jul 12, 2019, 04:41 PM
Registered User
Quote:
Originally Posted by AA5BY
Now your changing your story... previously you quoted the investigation as saying,


"Did not find" in part due to lies and obstruction of the investigation is not the same as your claim that he said, "no one from the Trump campaign conspired or coordinated with Russia."

Thus... Mueller did not say what you claimed above. You bore false witness. Why?
You and Sherlock are both mistaking part 2 for part 1. Mueller never said anyone lying impeded his investigation or findings in part 1. That is the collusion part where Mueller didnt findvanyone from the Trump campaign colluded with Russia.

What you are Sherlock are referring to is a statement in regards to the information in part 2.

It seems the only one bearing false witness is you.
Jul 12, 2019, 05:08 PM
Registered User
AA5BY's Avatar
Quote:
Originally Posted by RumRunner_1492
You and Sherlock are both mistaking part 2 for part 1. Mueller never said anyone lying impeded his investigation or findings in part 1. That is the collusion part where Mueller didnt findvanyone from the Trump campaign colluded with Russia.

What you are Sherlock are referring to is a statement in regards to the information in part 2.

It seems the only one bearing false witness is you.
Once again... a wrongheaded conclusion by you.

Quote:
“those lies materially impaired the investigation of Russian election interference.”


What part of these words is not clear? The investigation of Russian election interference was the Part I section.
Jul 12, 2019, 06:29 PM
Registered User
Sherlock's Avatar
From fox “news”:

Quote:
Fox News host Shep Smith: Trump often says Mueller found ‘no collusion’ – but that’s not true
Quote:
On collusion, as analyzed by a group at the NYU law school and available online and detailed in the Mueller report itself, the redacted Mueller report documents 14 separate activities that shows strong evidence of collusion — or more precisely, it provides significant evidence that Trump campaign associates coordinated with, cooperated with, encouraged or gave support to the Russia WikiLeaks election interference activities.”
https://www.rawstory.com/2019/07/fox...hats-not-true/
Jul 12, 2019, 06:31 PM
Registered User
Sherlock's Avatar
Quote:
Originally Posted by Libelle201B
Weren't you claiming that this would all be exposed in a few weeks or so, you were going to give it a month?
Oh very soon now. Any day really. In perpetuity.
Jul 12, 2019, 06:56 PM
Registered User
Quote:
Originally Posted by Sherlock
So now you take Rawstory over the Mueller report? That's great.
Jul 12, 2019, 06:58 PM
Registered User
Quote:
Originally Posted by AA5BY
Once again... a wrongheaded conclusion by you.

[/B]

What part of these words is not clear? The investigation of Russian election interference was the Part I section.
Read the quote. It specifically discusses part 2. Why make up things when it's in writing? He did not say it applied to part 1. He specifically was talking about part 2.
Jul 12, 2019, 07:12 PM
Registered User
AA5BY's Avatar
Quote:
Originally Posted by RumRunner_1492
Read the quote. It specifically discusses part 2. Why make up things when it's in writing? He did not say it applied to part 1. He specifically was talking about part 2.
Mueller is very precise in his language throughout and those words are specific to the Russian Interference Investigation.
Jul 12, 2019, 08:04 PM
Registered User
Sherlock's Avatar
Quote:
Originally Posted by RumRunner_1492
So now you take Rawstory over the Mueller report? That's great.
LMAO, it’s a Fox News quote. And that is an attack the source fallacy as usual.
Jul 12, 2019, 08:17 PM
Misfit Multirotor Monkey
Cyberdactyl's Avatar
That's the hysterical hypocrisy of the far left. FOX NEWS is Faux News until they find something interesting.

But alas, it's Shepard Smith. The Fox News resident lefty anchor pointing at an opinion piece. However, just enough TDS pasta to fling at the Trump hate wall.

Will it stick? Buhaha. . . only the TDS infected believe so.

What also goes completely over the head of the far left is their complete cognizant dissonance of using a news source, yet positive that source constantly lies. It's awesome!

Thanks for proving, yet again, Fox News is far and away the most balanced major news network.
Jul 12, 2019, 08:18 PM
Registered User
Quote:
Originally Posted by Sherlock
LMAO, it’s a Fox News quote. And that is an attack the source fallacy as usual.
Attacking the source? You said you believed the Mueller report. The Mueller report clearly stated they did not find any member of the Trump campaign colluded with Russia. So now you claim the report wasnt accurate and collusion existed even though Mueller said they didnt find any.

You've spun yourself into a ditch on this one.
Jul 12, 2019, 08:22 PM
Registered User
Quote:
Originally Posted by AA5BY
Mueller is very precise in his language throughout and those words are specific to the Russian Interference Investigation.
The entire investigation was about Russian interference. He was very precise about making that statement in part 2 of the investigation. If it applied to part 1 he would've put it there. If it applied to both he would've put it at the beginning. He did not.

It's clear what he said and that it applied to part 2.

Why do you continue to try to change his words and intent?
Last edited by RumRunner_1492; Jul 12, 2019 at 08:47 PM.
Jul 12, 2019, 11:25 PM
Registered User
AA5BY's Avatar
Quote:
Originally Posted by AA5BY
Now your changing your story... previously you quoted the investigation as saying,


"Did not find" in part due to lies and obstruction of the investigation is not the same as your claim that he said, "no one from the Trump campaign conspired or coordinated with Russia."

Thus... Mueller did not say what you claimed above. You bore false witness. Why?
Quote:
Originally Posted by RumRunner_1492
The entire investigation was about Russian interference. He was very precise about making that statement in part 2 of the investigation. If it applied to part 1 he would've put it there. If it applied to both he would've put it at the beginning. He did not.

It's clear what he said and that it applied to part 2.

Why do you continue to try to change his words and intent?
I concede that the words I quoted are from section II, but don't know that they don't also apply to the whole. Section I has the report detailing seven persons who were not truthful to the investigation, some of them being charged and one of them unknown because the name and material is redacted.

Perhaps Mueller will clarify when he testifies.

Beyond that, the words from the report "The investigation did not establish that the Trump campaign coordinated with the Russian government in the election interference activities" have a slightly different meaning from the words you quoted, "no one from the Trump campaign conspired or coordinated with Russia."

In your quote... you are leaving out the affirmation that Russia conducted election interference activities as well as inferring that Mueller ruled that none took place, and that is not what Mueller said... is it? He said the investigation did not not establish coordination [to the bar that he had previously outlined], which is a bit different from saying none too place.
Jul 13, 2019, 05:06 AM
Registered User
Quote:
Originally Posted by AA5BY
I concede that the words I quoted are from section II, but don't know that they don't also apply to the whole. Section I has the report detailing seven persons who were not truthful to the investigation, some of them being charged and one of them unknown because the name and material is redacted.

Perhaps Mueller will clarify when he testifies.

Beyond that, the words from the report "The investigation did not establish that the Trump campaign coordinated with the Russian government in the election interference activities" have a slightly different meaning from the words you quoted, "no one from the Trump campaign conspired or coordinated with Russia."

In your quote... you are leaving out the affirmation that Russia conducted election interference activities as well as inferring that Mueller ruled that none took place, and that is not what Mueller said... is it? He said the investigation did not not establish coordination [to the bar that he had previously outlined], which is a bit different from saying none too place.
If the words applied to the entire report he would've said them before getting into either section or at the beginning of each. He did not do that. He only included those words in section 2 because that's where they applied.

He came to a clear conclusion in part 1. The conclusion was they could not find that anyone from the Trump campaign colluded with Russia. He did not cite possible cases of collusion that he could not prove nor did he say they thought it happened but people lied to them so it couldn't be proven.

The Mueller report was very, very clear. They could not find Russia collusion.

This should not be a shock. Top Republican and Democrat politicians had been saying for 2 years there was no evidence of collusion and that is also what key members of the FBI said before the Mueller investigation started.
Jul 13, 2019, 07:30 AM
Registered User
RMSlinkers's Avatar
Will the hearing even happen now that the Dems are seeing the damage it will do to them. Moved the date up a week to July 24th now.
Jul 13, 2019, 07:56 AM
Registered User
AA5BY's Avatar
Quote:
Originally Posted by RumRunner_1492
If the words applied to the entire report he would've said them before getting into either section or at the beginning of each. He did not do that. He only included those words in section 2 because that's where they applied.

He came to a clear conclusion in part 1. The conclusion was they could not find that anyone from the Trump campaign colluded with Russia. He did not cite possible cases of collusion that he could not prove nor did he say they thought it happened but people lied to them so it couldn't be proven.

The Mueller report was very, very clear. They could not find Russia collusion.

This should not be a shock. Top Republican and Democrat politicians had been saying for 2 years there was no evidence of collusion and that is also what key members of the FBI said before the Mueller investigation started.
You are hopeless to communicate with. NO NO NO NO... He did not do what you claim he did.

Mueller mentions the word collusion but only to say that it is a word used by the media and by politicians but is not a word the law uses and thus it is not something that he applies to his investigation and now we see that you are using it to put words into Muellers mouth that he didn't say. Mueller never said Trump did not collude as you have claimed.

Why do you do that? I'm reminded again of the constant spin from you and why I've been so hesitant to waste good time and energy communicating.


Quick Reply
Message:

Thread Tools

Similar Threads
Category Thread Thread Starter Forum Replies Last Post
Discussion John Brennan endorsed anti-Trump Steele dossier Dave Barrow Life, The Universe, and Politics 37 Dec 27, 2018 07:56 PM
Discussion Judge Praised by Trump for Questioning Muellers Authority Rules Mueller has authority T.D. Life, The Universe, and Politics 0 Jun 27, 2018 11:12 AM
Discussion DOJ watchdog finds James Comey defied authority as FBI director, sources say kenpoprofessor Life, The Universe, and Politics 1 Jun 06, 2018 05:45 PM
Discussion More revelations of top DOJ inner connections behind Trump dossier. WBFAir Life, The Universe, and Politics 5 Dec 12, 2017 04:20 PM
Careful! Trump dossier........RELEASE THE DOSSIER!!!!! Broken Wings Life, The Universe, and Politics 45 Aug 25, 2017 10:01 PM