Anonymous asked in Politics & GovernmentPolitics · 2 months ago

Three yrs, millions spent on a bogus investigation and ZERO evidence of conspiring with Russia. One crime: "obstruction" in that he was...?

...justifiably disdainful of the entire charade and refused to play along. 

 . Clearly, he should have respected the power of the congress even if the people in it were subhuman. 

 . And Dems are screaming for "evidence", now? 


Manafort "shared" polling data with someone. That's hardly conspiring. 

10 Answers

  • Jeff S
    Lv 7
    2 months ago

    Mueller's investigation was only about 22 months plus Manafort's fines actually brought in about the cost of it!

    Just more misdirection from the truth!

    Btw- Barr should be investigated for abuse of power and obstruction of justice for hiding the Mueller report from Congress!

  • 2 months ago

    And what about the 37 other people indicted for meddling in the 2016 election? That was the real focus of the investigation and Mueller did a hell of good job uncovering it. Look at John Durham, he spent the same time and money and has uncovered ZILCH. Just that ONE guy and the same old FISA warrant thing that everyone knew about anyway.

  • 2 months ago

    There was plenty of evidence but Trump's men in government refused to act on it. 

  • 2 months ago

    First, it was not a bogus investigation.  Several people were indicted as a result of it.  Second, it was hampered because the Senate Republicans refused to allow key first-hand witnesses to testify at the hearings.

    But most importantly, it gave due notice to your leader that he could not just use his POTUS office and taxpayer money to force others to do personal things for him.

    As to the "evidence" you're harping about.  The Democrats are not asking for that evidence.  The courts are asking for that evidence before they can take any Republican complaint to trial.  And thus far, over thirty complaints, you Trumpets have not been able to gin up any legal standing evidence of voter fraud etc.

  • What do you think of the answers? You can sign in to give your opinion on the answer.
  • 2 months ago

    Depends on who the "he" is in your question.

  • 2 months ago

    Well let's see, the Mueller inversstigation resulted in the convictions or guilty pleas from 34 people and e companies. These convictions were based on "evidence". trump was named an an unidicted co-conspirator, so it remains to be seen if he will be charged.   

    Now, if republicans can come up with "evidence" indicating election fraud, they need to present it.  Allegations and claims aren't evidence.  

  • Anonymous
    2 months ago

    It’s already been proven there was no collusion. Libtards don’t care 

  • 2 months ago

    They have no sense of Irony.  It is all just rationalizing their own prejudices.  

  • Anonymous
    2 months ago

    There was evidence of conspiring with Russia.  Trump's campaign manager gave confidential polling data to Russian Agents who used them to buy illegal facebook ads in such a way that they fit with Trump's campaign strategy.  He testified to that under oath.   That's collusion AND conspiracy.

    If you have evidence like that, WHERE IS IT?

  • Anonymous
    2 months ago

    Pencil Neck Adam Schiff proclaimed during the impeachment hearing that "hearsay" is all the evidence they have and needed. LOL

    The Mueller report indicted no one, not one person on collusion LOL Democrats love being idiots.

Still have questions? Get answers by asking now.