Mueller enpannels grand jury

[This_person]

I don't have that belief, but the investigators may. If you were to say the trump campaign colluded I would say that's pretty apparent.

Colluded....how? As in, what action did both or either side take to accomplish what illegal goal?

 

[Midnightrider]

WE don't agree on any of the sort. What I do remember saying to that is... if DJ's email proved collusion, then we have no reason to go any further. Start with the indictments. What's holding it up? You're so convinced this proves collusion, that crimes were committed, yet no indictments.

Your desire for there to be collusion does not mean there was. Your belief is not 'fact'. Your belief that the sky is green on a sunny day isn't going to make it green. EVER!

That email proves collusion. I know your memory is short, but you stipulate that much and argued that there was no crime for a week or two. The questions remaining for mueller and team are was there an illegal act and if so who knew.

As for your continued insistence that mueller hurry up and charge somebody already, well investigators often compile their work before bringing charges. Even the police don't immediately write you a ticket when they catch you speeding. They run your tags, talk to you to make sure you aren't intoxicated and if you appear to be doing ANYTHING wrong they dig deeper, often trying to search your car. Then they decide which charges to bring.

 

[SamSpade]

That email proves collusion.

...to accomplish - what illegal end?

As I understand the word, it's to conspire to do something unlawful.
You cannot "collude" to go have lunch. You must secretly conspire to do something illegal.
What crime were they about to commit?
What crime did he *think* he might commit? Blasphemy against the anointed?

 

[This_person]

...to accomplish - what illegal end?

As I understand the word, it's to conspire to do something unlawful.
You cannot "collude" to go have lunch. You must secretly conspire to do something illegal.
What crime were they about to commit?
What crime did he *think* he might commit? Blasphemy against the anointed?

Maybe he'll answer you - he's clearly incapable of answering me.

 

[PsyOps]

That email proves collusion. I know your memory is short, but you stipulate that much and argued that there was no crime for a week or two. The questions remaining for mueller and team are was there an illegal act and if so who knew.

As for your continued insistence that mueller hurry up and charge somebody already, well investigators often compile their work before bringing charges. Even the police don't immediately write you a ticket when they catch you speeding. They run your tags, talk to you to make sure you aren't intoxicated and if you appear to be doing ANYTHING wrong they dig deeper, often trying to search your car. Then they decide which charges to bring.

I don't think you even read what you post. I said, where, that there was collusion, and that there was no crime? Explain how that even makes sense? No, don't I'm sure it makes sense in your head, and that's all that's important.

Bottom line............... YOU are absolutely certain there was collusion. What else is there? It's decided. They already ran the tags. They already did the breath-o-lizer. Trump is guilty - according to you. He colluded. Now you're saying more has to be done to make absolutely sure there was collusion?

Oh wait... you don't have that belief, but the investigators might. Wow!

 

[Midnightrider]

I don't think you even read what you post. I said, where, that there was collusion, and that there was no crime? Explain how that even makes sense? No, don't I'm sure it makes sense in your head, and that's all that's important.

Bottom line............... YOU are absolutely certain there was collusion. What else is there? It's decided. They already ran the tags. They already did the breath-o-lizer. Trump is guilty - according to you. He colluded. Now you're saying more has to be done to make absolutely sure there was collusion?

Oh wait... you don't have that belief, but the investigators might. Wow!

So the bar wasn't moved, it was massaged. Now collusion requires an illegal act?

 

[PsyOps]

So the bar wasn't moved, it was massaged. Now collusion requires an illegal act?

Ahhhh... I got you. Trump colluded, but it wasn't illegal. Gotcha.

And all this time I thought the SC was appointed because something illegal was done. He's just there for the song and dance of it.

 

[Midnightrider]

Ahhhh... I got you. Trump colluded, but it wasn't illegal. Gotcha.

And all this time I thought the SC was appointed because something illegal was done. He's just there for the song and dance of it.

Collusion does not necessarily require an illegal act. We have been over this. That does not mean that it may not have also been illegal. Collusion is the smoke and Mueller is looking for the fire. Stop being so freaking intellectually dishonest.

 

[This_person]

Now collusion requires an illegal act?

I think it always did

collusion [kuh-loo-zhuh n]
noun
1. a secret agreement, especially for fraudulent or treacherous purposes; conspiracy: Some of his employees were acting in collusion to rob him.
2. Law. a secret understanding between two or more persons to gain something illegally, to defraud another of his or her rights, or to appear as adversaries though in agreement:
collusion of husband and wife to obtain a divorce.

 

[This_person]

Collusion does not necessarily require an illegal act. We have been over this. That does not mean that it may not have also been illegal. Collusion is the smoke and Mueller is looking for the fire. Stop being so freaking intellectually dishonest.

Some guy named "Midnightrider" (maybe a music fan?) actually provided "illegal" as a requirement for collusion some time ago

As for your selective reading. Here let me bold the pertinent parts of the definition.

noun
noun: collusion

secret or illegal cooperation or conspiracy, especially in order to cheat or deceive others.
"the armed forces were working in collusion with drug traffickers"




:shrug:

 

[Hijinx]

Some guy named "Midnightrider" (maybe a music fan?) actually provided "illegal" as a requirement for collusion some time ago

So what Midnight is saying is that we are paying Democrat attorney's that Mueller picked up to prove Collusion, but if it wasn't illegal nothing can be done about it except demmies can cry louder. Money tossed in the toilet and it may go on forever. or until a democrat gets elected to the WH.

 

[This_person]

So what Midnight is saying is that we are paying Democrat attorney's that Mueller picked up to prove Collusion, but if it wasn't illegal nothing can be done about it except demmies can cry louder. Money tossed in the toilet and it may go on forever. or until a democrat gets elected to the WH.

That would appear to be MR's contention. Either that, or surely he can come up with the actual law potentially violated. MR?

 

[Midnightrider]

Some guy named "Midnightrider" (maybe a music fan?) actually provided "illegal" as a requirement for collusion some time ago

And this is why I generally ignore your posts. Do you see that word between secret and illegal? It's 'or'. You should look it up and then reread that definition.

 

[Gilligan]

And this is why I generally ignore your posts. Do you see that word between secret and illegal? It's 'or'. You should look it up and then reread that definition.

you could list all the Fed statutes defining illegal collusion and dig your sorry arse out of the hole you dug. We'll happily wait.

 

[PsyOps]

Collusion does not necessarily require an illegal act. We have been over this. That does not mean that it may not have also been illegal. Collusion is the smoke and Mueller is looking for the fire. Stop being so freaking intellectually dishonest.

If collusion doesn't require an illegal act, then why does Mueller need to find fire. Collusion IS the fire. What's intellectually dishonest is believing something happened simply because you don't like the person you believe did it. You want a crime with any evidence of it. You are already on record saying you know collusion happened; and this based on some lies from DTjr. You have some pretty nifty skills that Mueller apparently doesn't have; BECAUSE MUELLER HASN'T COME TO ANY CONCLUSION ABOUT COLLUSION; YET YOU HAVE.

 

[Midnightrider]

If collusion doesn't require an illegal act, then why does Mueller need to find fire. Collusion IS the fire. What's intellectually dishonest is believing something happened simply because you don't like the person you believe did it. You want a crime with any evidence of it. You are already on record saying you know collusion happened; and this based on some lies from DTjr. You have some pretty nifty skills that Mueller apparently doesn't have; BECAUSE MUELLER HASN'T COME TO ANY CONCLUSION ABOUT COLLUSION; YET YOU HAVE.

Mueller hasn't released any statements as far as I have seen. Neither of us know what conclusions he has made at this point.

But DJs email clearly describes the working together towards a means part of collusion, and the lying about it fits the secret part. That's collusion, like it or not.

 

[PsyOps]

Mueller hasn't released any statements as far as I have seen. Neither of us know what conclusions he has made at this point.

But DJs email clearly describes the working together towards a means part of collusion, and the lying about it fits the secret part. That's collusion, like it or not.

Again... since you (who isn't doing the investigation) have made up your mind about it, and Mueller - THE GUY WHO IS DOING THE INVESTIGATION - hasn't, perhaps you need to inform Mueller that he's lagging behind in his duties.

 

[littlelady]

Again... since you (who isn't doing the investigation) have made up your mind about it, and Mueller - THE GUY WHO IS DOING THE INVESTIGATION - hasn't, perhaps you need to inform Mueller that he's lagging behind in his duties.

 

[littlelady]

So what Midnight is saying is that we are paying Democrat attorney's that Mueller picked up to prove Collusion, but if it wasn't illegal nothing can be done about it except demmies can cry louder. Money tossed in the toilet and it may go on forever. or until a democrat gets elected to the WH.

Yep.

 

[This_person]

That's collusion, like it or not.

Ok, for the sake of hypothetical argument, that's collusion.

Now what? Where's the "so what?" to this?