CNN’s Jeffrey Toobin admits the truth – Collusion is not a crime

September 22, 2017 — bunkerville

 

So where are we going with this Russia, Russia, Russia thing? Alan Dershowitz been saying right along that even if the Russians were involved in some way, Collusion is not a crime. And so the actors play out their parts in this dance down at the swamp. Why is this being permitted? Meanwhile good old Clapper is out there trying to protect his butt.

 

Posted in election. Tags: , , , . 12 Comments »

12 Responses to “CNN’s Jeffrey Toobin admits the truth – Collusion is not a crime”

  1. The Weekly Headlines-for 23September – Br Andrew's Muses Says:
    October 2, 2017 at 6:48 am

    […] CNN’s Jeffrey Toobin admits the truth – Collusion is not a crime […]

    Liked by 1 person

    Reply
  2. The Weekly Headlines – My Daily Musing Says:
    September 23, 2017 at 7:31 am

    […] CNN’s Jeffrey Toobin admits the truth – Collusion is not a crime […]

    Like

    Reply
  3. Steve Dennis Says:
    September 22, 2017 at 7:24 pm

    I have to believe Tubin will not be making any more appearances any time soon! So they are investigating something which is not even a crime? The guy who put this video together is spot on: they used this as an excuse hoping to take someone in the Trump campaign down so they could discredit Trump by proxy, and it looks like it is going to work with Manafort.

    Liked by 1 person

    Reply
  4. Mustang Says:
    September 22, 2017 at 1:20 pm

    Honestly, I’m not at all sure I understand the Mueller inquiry. If it is on the basis that Russia interfered with a US election, okay … fine. The premise here being that Trump conspired with a foreign government to turn the election. All indications are that Killery lost “big time” in the electoral college, so we should assume that whether a foreign government attempted to skew the election results really is a moot point —and hardly worth the taxpayer’s money for a (very expensive) investigation. I’m still trying to figure out why Sessions recused himself (beyond the fact that he was part of the Trump Campaign), and why it was necessary to appoint a special counsel. In my mind, what should have happened (as within any court of law), is that an independent authority to have determined “no standing” in a frivolous law suit primarily brought for political purposes. The problem is that Mueller is a political hack who lacks credibility. He is not an independent agent in this inquiry. It also appears (to me) to be part of a double standard, for when Bill Clinton interfered in Russian elections, there was no congressional concern. Our political system is rife with corruption; it is dishonest to the nth degree. I am simply disgusted by the clown show.

    Liked by 1 person

    Reply
  5. hocuspocus13 Says:
    September 22, 2017 at 7:35 am

    RUSSIA RUSSIA RUSSIA

    There is only 1 reason for Mueller and his Bandits to hold on to this situation

    …big fat paychecks 💰💰💰

    Liked by 3 people

    Reply
  6. Brittius Says:
    September 22, 2017 at 6:40 am

    Reblogged this on Brittius and commented:
    Collusion? They are only sugar coating, Conspiracy:
    https://www.law.cornell.edu/uscode/text/18/371

    Liked by 1 person

    Reply
    • bunkerville Says:
      September 22, 2017 at 7:01 am

      What’s the offense? I have yet to hear. to conspire… to do what? Run ads on FB?

      Liked by 1 person

      Reply
      • Brittius Says:
        September 22, 2017 at 7:33 am

        The left has been engaging in an orchestrated attempt to wilfully cause harm to an election process that the nation depends upon. When two or more agree to cause harm by their actions, that constitutes, conspiracy. Collusion, is when people “kind of”, agree on something and go along with indication that a person is at the top of the matter and directing the actions. Conspiracy, is when two or more, engage in, an action.
        Wilfully defrauding the nation, has potential to be harmful, as actors are contrary to the good of the nation, and that is where treason, could possibly come into play.
        None of the above has meaning if federal prosecutors are reluctant to charge anyone, or if it is felt there is insufficient evidence and testimony provided by multiple persons to establish a charge and for a jury to convict.

        Liked by 2 people


Leave a comment

«

»