The collusion between Hillary and Russia is so obvious Uranium 1, millions paid to Hillary $500.000 paid to bill for a twenty minuet speech. Visiting Putin many times. Where is the question that there was no collusion.
Ivanka Trump is one of several advisors to the president. Hillary Clinton was the Secretary of State, which is the equivalent to the Minister of Foreign Affairs, and a highly sensitive cabinet office. They are not equivalent offices, by any stretch of the imagination. Secondly, as far as I am aware, that issue has been dealt with, and it didn't involve Ivanka taking steps to hide or destroy information that could be used against her. I know, I know... Democrats hold that if a Republican is found to have been late for work one day and a Democrat was seen gunning ten children down at an elementary school, they should receive the same punishment, or that the one excuses the other, but neither of these are reasonable arguments. As for Trump using a scrambler while speaking with the head of a foreign government, I would say that would be an exercise in reasonable security given that there are people around him who have leaked the content of his conversations with foreign leaders in the recent past.
I think Ken Anderson did a great job of humoring you. Now maybe you can humor me by explaining why you seem think using a server in her basement was OK. Or why you think Ivanka & Hillary held the same kind of position for you to justify comparing them as equals.
Here is an explanation of what happened in the investigation into Trump from a retired FBI Special Agent and attorney. I don't know who this guy is, but he seems to be knowledgeable and fairly even in his thinking.
It is so funny that the media is always saying other things are conspiracies and they will not deal in conspiracy theories. For the last two years+ they have been pushing the conspiracy theory that POTUS colluded with Russia.
I am surprised that there is no discussion of this report. No discussion of the only reason he is not guilty of obstruction is because his aides refused to issue illegal directives and carry out illegal orders. No discussion of why this usually bellicose and self assured genius,(his own description) ,could not recall,.had no direct recollection, or may not have accurate recall in a good portion of written response to the panels questions. What does this quote from the report mean to you? "The evidence we obtained about the Presidents actions and intent presents difficult issue that would need to be resolved if we were making a traditional prosecutorial judgement,at the same time,if we had confidence after a thorough investigation of the facts that the President clearly did not commit obstruction of justice,we would so state." based on the facts and the applicable legal standards, we are unable to reach that judgement." Doesn't this tarnish the halo many think he is wearing?
I'm sorry Peter, but it's clear that you spend too much time watching the spin on CNN. There wasn't much discussion of it because there's nothing to discuss. Understandably, Trump was upset about the Mueller investigation, and when he's upset, he says things. These are not orders. Orders are not done by tweets or in answers to press queries. Democrats like to spin even his jokes as orders, so that's a bunch of nonsense. The Mueller investigation was a huge waste of money, which should have been paid for by the Democrat Party rather than by the taxpayers, given that it consisted of nothing more than opposition research, designed to investigate a person rather than a crime, and that he refused to follow leads that led to key Democrats. At that, it yielded nothing other than that Trump was upset over it. There's nothing to see here but, of course, that won't stop the Democrat media. Fortunately, the only people who are trusted less than the media is Congress.
Not a single word or thought was gathered from CNN The first paragraph is mine. The second paragraph is an exact transcription from the report. Not exactly a shining commentary on the POTUS,but that is just fine as in todays world truth honesty and upright actions have devolved to what ever it takes and anything for a buck. Many many fine folks are rolling in their grave over the depths the Republican party has sunk to' I never liked the Republican platform .but I always thought them to be the most honest of the two parties. There is no chasm deep enough that the party of trump won't sink to!
I was surprised the report wasn't redacted more than it was. It pretty much confirmed what all the investigative reporters from the major newspapers have been reporting. It was interesting about all the White House staff who refused to do illegal things Mr. Trump told them to do along the way---the "guard rails" some call them. I wonder if Don McGahn could be "Anonymous" who wrote the editorial in the New York Times. The article appeared Sept, 2018, and McGahn resigned October 2018. There may be more purging and resignations now. LOL I should restate the above. White House staff who refused to carry out illegal things they were told to do.
The entire "investigation" was conducted by anti-Trumpers, mostly from the Clinton campaign, supposedly for the purpose of investigating Russian collusion. Despite their best efforts and millions of dollars, they were unable to find evidence of Russian collusion in two years. The only evidence of Russian collusion they found was by the Clinton campaign and other Democrats, and they refused to follow any of those leads. I am not surprised that the "report" is filled with anti-Trump rhetoric because the whole thing was intended to aid the Democrats.