Russia probe: House intel Republicans end investigation, find 'no evidence' of collusion

tulc

loves "SO'S YER MOM!! posts!
May 18, 2002
49,401
18,801
68
✟271,570.00
Faith
Christian
Marital Status
Married
Russia probe: House intel Republicans end investigation, find 'no evidence' of collusion
Republicans began signaling in recent weeks that they were anxious to wrap up the investigation, saying they had explored all the key evidence.

Democrats, meanwhile, have been warning that Republicans were going to end the investigation prematurely, without calling dozens of important witnesses to testify and without forcing many of those who testified to answer crucial questions.

Schiff said Republicans declined to subpoena witnesses to compel them to answer key questions after witnesses refused to do so during their voluntary, closed-door appearances before the committee. Among the witnesses who refused to answer crucial questions: Donald Trump Jr., Attorney General Jeff Sessions, Trump Organization attorney Michael Cohen, former Trump campaign manager Corey Lewandowski, and former White House communications director Hope Hicks.

When former White House chief strategist Steve Bannon refused to answer questions even after being subpoenaed, Republicans would not take action to hold him in contempt of Congress, Democrats said.

Schiff said Republicans have also refused Democrats' requests to subpoena vital documents, including financial and communications records that could verify or refute witness testimony.

"If the Russians do have leverage over the President of the United States, the Majority has simply decided it would rather not know," Schiff said.

The committee's traditional bipartisanship began unraveling in the spring of last year, when Chairman Devin Nunes, R-Calif., took a secret trip to the White House grounds to review information gathered by unnamed sources purporting to show that President Trump was under surveillance by the Obama administration during the 2016 campaign.

At a news conference after his trip, Nunes told reporters that he had discovered evidence to support the president's claim that he was wiretapped at Trump Tower. However, the Justice Department confirmed in a court filing in September that there was no evidence that Trump Tower was targeted for surveillance.
tulc(is kind of amused that some Republicans would think this was going to end anything) :D
 
  • Agree
Reactions: Jamsie

Jamsie

Well-Known Member
Site Supporter
Aug 2, 2017
2,211
1,279
73
Vermont
✟326,124.00
Country
United States
Faith
Christian
Marital Status
Single
Upvote 0

Cuddles333

Well-Known Member
May 5, 2011
1,103
162
65
Denver
✟30,312.00
Country
United States
Faith
Christian
Marital Status
Private
I don't know if it is because the Republicans are just terrified of being assassinated by Putin, or addicted to all the money their super rich handlers give to them in exchange for deregulating everything.
Maybe both.
 
Upvote 0

Root of Jesse

Admiral of the Fleet/First Sea Lord
Site Supporter
Jun 23, 2011
18,910
3,646
Bay Area, California
Visit site
✟354,065.00
Faith
Catholic
Marital Status
Married
Politics
US-Constitution
The question is not "Whether or not Russia attempted to affect US elections." It is "Whether or not Donald Trump colluded with Russians to get elected President". There is no evidence of the latter, but lots of evidence of the former. It has also been shown that they didn't affect any votes. (At least there's no evidence that they did) Of course, it's funny how Democrats think that foreign governments can hack our elections, but Obama said there's no way that could happen, but Hillary could have a private server in her basement that nobody could possily hack, and yet they did, but when it was evident that the DNC had been hacked, they refused to hand over their servers to the FBI, but when we attempt to harden our election systems, Democrats cry foul. This is sorta like watching a donkey roast.
 
Upvote 0

MoonlessNight

Fides et Ratio
Sep 16, 2003
10,217
3,523
✟63,049.00
Country
United States
Faith
Catholic
Marital Status
Private
Politics
US-Others
The question is not "Whether or not Russia attempted to affect US elections." It is "Whether or not Donald Trump colluded with Russians to get elected President".

There isn't really a unified question being asked. The specific question asked at any moment changes to fit the data.

It's much the same as how if you are able to prove to a 9/11 truther that the plane crashes could have brought down the tower, they will suddenly shift to talking about how there still might have been controlled demolitions to hasten the process, or that President Bush might have had foreknowledge of the event, etc. Whatever you disprove instantly becomes nonessential to the conspiracy as a whole and something else takes it place as the topic of interest. Since the theory is never expressed as a whole or in a simple manner, it can always be claimed that the theory as a whole is still likely, even if any arbitrary part of it is shown to be false.

In the specific case of the Russia allegations relating to the election, you can bet that in a few weeks people will be loudly proclaiming that they never seriously believed that President Trump actively colluded with Russia, but that they merely thought that Russia aided him through meddling, and that that is enough of a problem to cast doubt on the presidency. Or at least, they will say that until facts on the ground allow them to once again accuse President Trump of collusion, at which point they will take up those allegations once again and insist that they've been consistent the whole time.
 
Upvote 0

pat34lee

Messianic
Sep 13, 2011
11,293
2,637
59
Florida, USA
✟89,330.00
Faith
Messianic
Marital Status
Single
In the specific case of the Russia allegations relating to the election, you can bet that in a few weeks people will be loudly proclaiming that they never seriously believed that President Trump actively colluded with Russia, but that they merely thought that Russia aided him through meddling, and that that is enough of a problem to cast doubt on the presidency. Or at least, they will say that until facts on the ground allow them to once again accuse President Trump of collusion, at which point they will take up those allegations once again and insist that they've been consistent the whole time.

Maxine Waters isn't that smart. She'll be out
later today, still calling "Impeach 45".
 
Upvote 0

pat34lee

Messianic
Sep 13, 2011
11,293
2,637
59
Florida, USA
✟89,330.00
Faith
Messianic
Marital Status
Single
Facts mean something to this Democrat, as for this group of Republicans I have no doubt "getting to the facts" was the very LAST thing they had any interest in. In fact (see what I did there? :D ) They didn't seem interested in facts when they insisted on investigating Sec Clinton 8 or so times and came to the exact same conclusion every time.

And what conclusion was that? As far as I know,
they never reached conclusions. The investigations
were never finished and they never even put any
of the people questioned under oath or offered
immunity to force any to testify against her. Comey
and AG Lynch botched their investigation so badly,
and so purposefully, that it must be redone by an
independent prosecutor. She may not get prison
time, but she deserves a guilty verdict on her record.
The dead of Benghazi deserve that much.
 
  • Winner
Reactions: Root of Jesse
Upvote 0

tulc

loves "SO'S YER MOM!! posts!
May 18, 2002
49,401
18,801
68
✟271,570.00
Faith
Christian
Marital Status
Married
And what conclusion was that? As far as I know,
they never reached conclusions. The investigations
were never finished and they never even put any
of the people questioned under oath or offered
immunity to force any to testify against her. Comey
and AG Lynch botched their investigation so badly,
and so purposefully, that it must be redone by an
independent prosecutor. She may not get prison
time, but she deserves a guilty verdict on her record.

The dead of Benghazi deserve that much. (emph. added)
...you mean even if there's nothing she was guilty of she should STILL be found guilty of something? :scratch:
tulc(doesn't actually think that's how it works) :sorry:
 
Upvote 0

miamited

Ted
Site Supporter
Oct 4, 2010
13,243
6,313
Seneca SC
✟705,807.00
Country
United States
Faith
Christian
Marital Status
Married
As we know, facts don't mean
anything to Democrat Party leaders these days...

Hi pat,

I gotta say, I find that such an ironic statement when I read all the untruths and misrepresented facts that the President puts out there.

I offer this up as evidence:

Analysis | President Trump has made more than 2,000 false or misleading claims over 355 days

Opinion | President Trump’s Lies, the Definitive List

President Trump Made 1,950 Untrue Claims in 2017

All False statements involving Donald Trump | PolitiFact

How the Quantity of Trump's Lies Compares to Obama's

I know, I know. It's all fake news and everybody's telling lies about President Trump. I get it!

God bless,
In Christ, ted
 
Upvote 0
This site stays free and accessible to all because of donations from people like you.
Consider making a one-time or monthly donation. We appreciate your support!
- Dan Doughty and Team Christian Forums

pat34lee

Messianic
Sep 13, 2011
11,293
2,637
59
Florida, USA
✟89,330.00
Faith
Messianic
Marital Status
Single
...you mean even if there's nothing she was guilty of she should STILL be found guilty of something? :scratch:
tulc(doesn't actually think that's how it works) :sorry:

Close. She is as guilty as hell is real. The only
thing missing is a judge pronouncing the verdict.
 
  • Winner
Reactions: Root of Jesse
Upvote 0

tulc

loves "SO'S YER MOM!! posts!
May 18, 2002
49,401
18,801
68
✟271,570.00
Faith
Christian
Marital Status
Married
Close. She is as guilty as hell is real. The only
thing missing is a judge pronouncing the verdict.
...and proof of course. Because if there WAS some they would have found it. But then I guess facts just tend to not be that important to Republican Party leaders, right? :D
tulc(wonders if pat34lee see's what he did there?) ;)
 
Upvote 0

Yarddog

Senior Contributor
Site Supporter
Jun 25, 2008
15,280
3,554
Louisville, Ky
✟820,478.00
Faith
Catholic
Marital Status
Married
Upvote 0

Root of Jesse

Admiral of the Fleet/First Sea Lord
Site Supporter
Jun 23, 2011
18,910
3,646
Bay Area, California
Visit site
✟354,065.00
Faith
Catholic
Marital Status
Married
Politics
US-Constitution
...and proof of course. Because if there WAS some they would have found it. But then I guess facts just tend to not be that important to Republican Party leaders, right? :D
tulc(wonders if pat34lee see's what he did there?) ;)
WE have the proof, what's lacking is the guts to proceed against her. And President Obama.
 
  • Winner
Reactions: brinny
Upvote 0
This site stays free and accessible to all because of donations from people like you.
Consider making a one-time or monthly donation. We appreciate your support!
- Dan Doughty and Team Christian Forums

tulc

loves "SO'S YER MOM!! posts!
May 18, 2002
49,401
18,801
68
✟271,570.00
Faith
Christian
Marital Status
Married
WE have the proof, what's lacking is the guts to proceed against her. And President Obama.
OH! Because Republicans have been so reticent about attacking those two over the years? :scratch:
tulc(isn't sure that argument is even sort of real) :sorry:
 
Upvote 0

Root of Jesse

Admiral of the Fleet/First Sea Lord
Site Supporter
Jun 23, 2011
18,910
3,646
Bay Area, California
Visit site
✟354,065.00
Faith
Catholic
Marital Status
Married
Politics
US-Constitution
OH! Because Republicans have been so reticent about attacking those two over the years? :scratch:
tulc(isn't sure that argument is even sort of real) :sorry:
A lot of talk, not enough action.
 
Upvote 0

Yarddog

Senior Contributor
Site Supporter
Jun 25, 2008
15,280
3,554
Louisville, Ky
✟820,478.00
Faith
Catholic
Marital Status
Married
Well, the FACT is that it WAS the CLINTON campaign that colluded with Russia. Problem is, there's nothing illegal about colluding with someone.
That depends on what type of collusion that you refer to. The illegal form or the secretive form which doesn't rise to breaking a law.
 
Upvote 0
This site stays free and accessible to all because of donations from people like you.
Consider making a one-time or monthly donation. We appreciate your support!
- Dan Doughty and Team Christian Forums

Root of Jesse

Admiral of the Fleet/First Sea Lord
Site Supporter
Jun 23, 2011
18,910
3,646
Bay Area, California
Visit site
✟354,065.00
Faith
Catholic
Marital Status
Married
Politics
US-Constitution
That depends on what type of collusion that you refer to. The illegal form or the secretive form which doesn't rise to breaking a law.
I don't believe it has been said what kind of collusion they're investigating. Mueller, especially, doesn't have any actual law having been broken that he's investigating. But we know that the Clintons colluded with Russia, we also know Obama did (remember that Medvedev open mike incident). Was it illegal? Probably not. But there were other things the Clintons did that were very illegal, which others have been put in prison for.
 
Upvote 0