President Trump Says He Interviewed Bob Mueller for FBI Director - That Could Be a Ruse.

www.politico.com...

There was not a counterintelligence investigation of Mr. Trump, and I decided in the moment to say it, given the nature of our conversation.

RUBIO: His specific ask was you'd tell the American people what you'd told him, told the leaders of Congress, Democrats and Republicans, he was not personally under investigation?
COMEY: Yes, sir.

lol revisionist history and all
Comey testified that he told trump there was no investigation of him personally.
People can spin it all they like; comeys testimony under oath supersedes any bs spin.

originally posted by: shooterbrody
www.politico.com...

There was not a counterintelligence investigation of Mr. Trump, and I decided in the moment to say it, given the nature of our conversation.

RUBIO: His specific ask was you'd tell the American people what you'd told him, told the leaders of Congress, Democrats and Republicans, he was not personally under investigation?
COMEY: Yes, sir.

lol revisionist history and all
Comey testified that he told trump there was no investigation of him personally.
People can spin it all they like; comeys testimony under oath supersedes any bs spin.

And we know that after Comey was fired, Trump became part of the investigation.

a reply to: introvert

Perhaps for "obstruction"(which many legal scholars have said is not possible as it is a duty of the executive branch) but not for anything russia.
Unless you have a source for something I have missed; if you do by all means please provide it.

originally posted by: shooterbrody
a reply to: introvert

Perhaps for "obstruction"(which many legal scholars have said is not possible as it is a duty of the executive branch) but not for anything russia.
Unless you have a source for something I have missed; if you do by all means please provide it.

Perhaps for "obstruction"(which many legal scholars have said is not possible as it is a duty of the executive branch) but not for anything russia. Unless you have a source for something I have missed; if you do by all means please provide it.

The "obstruction" itself pertains to the Russia investigation.

Regardless, he was/is being investigated and that is why your comment about "revisionist history" does not make much sense.

originally posted by: odzeandennz
a reply to: carewemust

I predict trump will redact this tweet once his keepers tell him to say what he really meant to say.

at this point, its safer to believe in trump's action rather than his words

he needs to stfu on this topic and do what he is seemingly doing very well for the country; try to fix the last 16 years of economical debauchery.

Wow, sorry, you don't get a pass. When Obama took office, unemployment was almost 12% and people were losing there homes. A far cry from what trump walked into, the economy was already doing GREAT! The economy RIGHT NOW, is growing at the same pace as in 2014!

a reply to: carewemust

Why would President Trump interview Bob Mueller for the position of FBI Director, to replace the terminated James Comey? Bob Mueller was NOT eligible to be FBI Director again, as he had already served the maximum allowed 10 years

Maybe he is just making stuff up to further divide us?

a reply to: neo96

Why shouldn't Mueller be anywhere in the picture? What's the issue?
When he was appointed everybody thought it was great. Now he's doing his job and some want him fired for it. Lol.

a reply to: introvert

Whatever you say pal.
Comey himself testified under oath to congress otherwise.
Funny you did not provide a source just your opinion. Perhaps because there is no actual source for your bs speculation?

originally posted by: kurthall

originally posted by: odzeandennz
a reply to: carewemust

I predict trump will redact this tweet once his keepers tell him to say what he really meant to say.

at this point, its safer to believe in trump's action rather than his words

he needs to stfu on this topic and do what he is seemingly doing very well for the country; try to fix the last 16 years of economical debauchery.

Wow, sorry, you don't get a pass. When Obama took office, unemployment was almost 12% and people were losing there homes. A far cry from what trump walked into, the economy was already doing GREAT! The economy RIGHT NOW, is growing at the same pace as in 2014!

Yeah keep dreaming buddy..

Everyone was broke under Obama.

You guys should just shutup and enjoy TRUMPS economy.

Obamas economy lmao. If this is Obamas then Obamas was Bushes lol..

man you guys say dumb stuff.

a reply to: shooterbrody

Yeah before. Not now.

a reply to: introvert

Yes he did.

a reply to: scraedtosleep

He doesn't even care about that. He's making stuff up to discredit Mueller so when he makes his report trump can say he's biased.

thehill.com...

It’s time to stop the nonsense. Stretching and contorting obstruction law in a desperate attempt to justify impeachment is a political ploy, not a serious legal argument.

There is still the midterms.....if the people have the stomach for the Democratic Socialists of America.

a reply to: shooterbrody

He was talking about the time frame prior to his being fired and you know that.

a reply to: odzeandennz

I agree. He needs to fire Mueller/Rosenstein/probably Sessions (for being a spineless tool of traitors through his nonsense recusal) Just get it over with and move on. The intelligence community is perfectly capable of investigating/taking defensive action against foreign intelligence service operations (that is the job we pay them to do, BTW)

a reply to: Sillyolme

Exactly
Comey told trump that trump WAS NOT UNDER INVESTIGATION, tho you post otherwise.
Trump is not under investigtion now as Mueller has to follow the actual law. There is no part of the obstrucion law that trump has broken. Mueller is at least smart enough to read the law before initiation an investigation. Trump in no way obstructed justice by firing comey.
Unless you are admitting muellers investigation is purely political?

a reply to: Sillyolme

No. No. No.

You're spreading your opinion around like it is a fact, again. You always do precisely that. Remember when you argued with myself and several others, stating in such a matter-of-fact way that Manafort was "flipping on Trump" any time?

We'll his trial just began today. No "flipping" involved or anywhere near Manafort. Why? Because, unlike another alt-fact you tried to argue/muddy the waters with, Manafort had nothing to be "flipped" over. His crimes spanned decades, and had nothing to do with the Trump campaign

You were wrong. Your opinion (which again you attempted to masquerade as fact) was also wrong. I can link the OP, if you need to see it.

Stop peddling your opinions and alt-fact democrat talking points like they were facts. They are NOT facts. You complain about fake news/Russian propaganda but you're one of the worst purveyors of propaganda/talking points/alt-facts on this site.

originally posted by: shooterbrody
a reply to: introvert

Whatever you say pal.
Comey himself testified under oath to congress otherwise.
Funny you did not provide a source just your opinion. Perhaps because there is no actual source for your bs speculation?

I did not provide a source because you are arguing against something that is quite well known and Comey only talked about what he knew when he was director.

Things changed significantly after he was fired.

www.npr.org...

Here is a source. I can provide many more if you need more.

a reply to: introvert

He is not a "target" because he broke no law.
Perhaps it is just a "matter" or a "probe"?
from your link...

Special counsel Robert Mueller notified President Trump's lawyers last month that the president is being investigated as part of the Russia probe, but a source familiar with the situation says they were told Trump was not a criminal target at that time.

as he is not a "criminal" target then what is he? a political target?
is npr admitting mueller is running a non criminal investigation?
or are muellers team just fishing for an clintonesque process crime? as trump is not a "criminal" target?

oh and I presented testimony under oath to congress...this is

but a source familiar with the situation

you go right ahead and run with that sport.

originally posted by: shooterbrody
a reply to: introvert

He is not a "target" because he broke no law.
Perhaps it is just a "matter" or a "probe"?
from your link...

Special counsel Robert Mueller notified President Trump's lawyers last month that the president is being investigated as part of the Russia probe, but a source familiar with the situation says they were told Trump was not a criminal target at that time.

as he is not a "criminal" target then what is he? a political target?
is npr admitting mueller is running a non criminal investigation?
or are muellers team just fishing for an clintonesque process crime? as trump is not a "criminal" target?

oh and I presented testimony under oath to congress...this is

but a source familiar with the situation

you go right ahead and run with that sport.

Regardless, he was being investigated, in whatever capacity, and that contradicts what you were saying.

Your moving of goalposts is not my concern.