special counsel Robert Mueller's team has interviewed White House press secretary Sarah Sanders,.. I wonder if she was willing to lie to the FBI
The 12 Russians who were indicted by the Mueller Investigation. Guccifer 2.0, the known hacking division of the Russian government. https://www.zerohedge.com/news/2018...makes-mysterious-law-enforcement-announcement https://www.pbs.org/newshour/nation...12-russian-officers-for-election-interference
Or maybe that's just what you like to tell yourself. Mueller's investigation has been very tight lipped with the exception of their court filings. Hard to say that their court filings are just "airing dirty laundry." Bull Shit. Mueller's Investigation has said no such thing. The media exposed all of Trump's lying about his sexual escapades. The SDNY, with the cooperation of Micheal Cohen and other witnesses, not to mention material evidence found in the raid of Cohen's office, are the one's who included Trump as an unindicted co-conspirator in the payoffs of those two women. Stop trying to change the subject here. There are plenty of indictments to go around.
Then where is it and why hasn't it come to light in the thousands of investigations that Republicans have placed the Clinton's under?
You keep saying this yet keep speculating. Pick your poison. You can speculate and I cant? Yes, the porn stuff came out of leaks.
What have I speculated about? Court filings are not speculation and other than his court filings the Mueller probe has been especially tight-lipped. The porn stuff was out during the campaign, long before Mueller was ever on the case.
Example 1. The investigation started during the campaign lol. FBI admitted as much. FISA court documents have dates I have posted.
I'm not speculating when I can post evidence of my position with a link. https://www.vanityfair.com/news/2019/02/donald-trump-matthew-whitaker-geoffrey-berman Speculation is when I propose something without evidence to support it. Kind of like when you said that the Mueller Investigation is only to air Trump's dirty laundry. That's speculation because you have absolutely no evidence to support that claim. You do understand that there are numerous investigations into Trump, his campaign and his business dealings right now, right? Mueller is just one of them. The FBI was investigating Trump's connections to Russia during the campaign.
SO can you cite evidence of him being guilty? Or is that claim not speculation? Yes and can you point to any of them that have evidence of a crime?
No, that's not my job. However, I would imagine that congress will be investigating it soon enough. That's the way things work in this country. The press blows the lid on something like this and then lawmakers follow up accordingly. I would also imagine that Mueller found the article very interesting and will follow up as well. It's as easy as calling Whittaker back before congress and grilling him about it. I would also think that congress will want to speak to Whittaker anyway because it appears that if this story is true that he perjured himself before congress the other day. Again, you keep asking me for information that I have no way of accessing. It's rhetorical. Can you deny all of the indictments and convictions that Mueller has already secured?
