Perspectives; Thoughts; Comments; Opinions; Discussions

Posts tagged ‘2016 Election’

Trump Supporters Score Huge Federal Win After Being Attacked in Sanctuary City


Reported By Cillian Zeal | July 30, 2018 at 8:50am

A lawsuit by Donald Trump supporters attacked after a campaign event in San Jose, California, back in the summer of 2016 can proceed with a lawsuit against the city, under a ruling by a panel of the 9th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals.

According to the San Francisco Chronicle, the lawsuit alleges that police officers in the sanctuary city deliberately exposed the Trump backers to danger as they were filing out of the building where the June 2016 rally was held.

“After the rally at the McEnery Convention Center, police directed those in attendance to leave from a single exit. There, according to the lawsuit, they were ordered to head out onto a street where hundreds of anti-Trump protesters were waiting, even though a safer route and other exits were available,” the Chronicle reported.

“Twenty plaintiffs in the suit said they were beaten or struck by objects thrown by the protesters, and one plaintiff said an officer told her that police had been instructed not to intervene. The plaintiffs said police arrested three people for allegedly assaulting officers, but no one for attacking Trump supporters.”

The judges ruled that if what the supporters allege in the lawsuit is accurate, “the officers acted with deliberate indifference to a known and obvious danger” and “violated the Trump supporters’ constitutional rights.”

San Jose’s lawyers tried to argue that police weren’t responsible for the danger created by the protesters and that police shouldn’t be second-guessed. The judges didn’t exactly buy that the case should be dismissed based on that, as evidenced by the panel’s unanimous, 3-0 ruling.

“The attendees allege the officers shepherded them into a violent crowd of protesters and actively prevented them from reaching safety,” Judge Dorothy Nelson wrote in the decision.

“The officers continued to implement this plan even while witnessing the violence firsthand” and even though they knew about the earlier attacks outside the convention center, the Chronicle reported. She also noted that if the allegations in the lawsuit were proved, it would show police bore responsibility for the attacks.

Harmeet Dhillon, the lawyer for the plaintiffs and a Republican national committeewoman, said she was happy the 9th Circuit “agreed with us that, where police put citizens into harm’s way, they can be held liable for the consequences.”

She added that the suit “seeks to vindicate important civil rights of all Americans.” San Jose City Attorney Richard Doyle, predictably, said he would be looking into an appeal and that the city disagreed with both the court’s view on police liability and “the plaintiffs’ view of the facts.”

The rally was controversial even at the time; after his officers failed to protect the rally attendees, San Jose Police Chief Eddie Garcia praised his force “for both their effectiveness and their restraint” and posited that “additional force can incite more violence in the crowd.”

Meanwhile, San Jose Mayor Sam Liccardo decided to put the blame elsewhere, noting: “At some point Donald Trump needs to take responsibility for the irresponsible behavior of his campaign.”

While the habit of blaming Trump for everything from racism and inequality to the War of 1812 and that really awful final Creedence Clearwater Revival album may work in the media, that doesn’t quite fly in court (and indeed, the defendants didn’t exactly fall back upon it).

Neither, however, does the argument that deliberate police negligence and inaction in the face of attacks is merely a matter of discretion. Officials in San Jose need to answer some very important questions.

Congressman: Lisa Page Admits Her Texts ‘Mean Exactly What They Say’


Reported By Randy DeSoto | July 18, 2018 at 4:58am

Texas Republican Rep. John Ratcliffe told reporters this week that former FBI attorney Lisa Page testified behind closed doors that the anti-Trump text messages between herself and FBI agent Peter Strzok “mean exactly what they say.”

“In many cases she admits that the text messages mean exactly what they say as opposed to Agent Strzok, who thinks we’ve all misinterpreted his own words on any message that might be negative,” said Ratcliffe, who is a member of the House Judiciary Committee.

Ratcliffe further stated in an interview with Fox News host Maria Bartiromo on Sunday that Page gave the members of Congress attending the hearing “new information that Strzok wouldn’t or couldn’t that confirmed some of the concerns we have about these investigations and about the people running them.”

Department of Justice Inspector General Michael Horowitz’s report released last month concerning the Hillary Clinton email investigation found Strzok’s anti-Trump texts with his then-mistress Page “deeply” troubling.

“We were deeply troubled by text messages sent by Strzok and Page that potentially indicated or created the appearance that investigative decisions were impacted by bias or improper considerations,” the report stated.

Further, one particular Strzok text promising Page “we’ll stop” Trump “is not only indicative of a biased state of mind but, even more seriously, implies a willingness to take official action to impact the presidential candidate’s electoral prospects,” the report stated.

In August 2016, Page texted Strzok, Trump’s “not ever going to become president, right? Right?!”

“No. No he won’t. We’ll stop it,” Strzok responded.

Strzok testified before the combined House Oversight and Judiciary committees last week that he did not remember writing the text, but he meant the “American people” would stop Trump by not voting for him.

“What I can tell you is that text in no way suggested that I or the FBI would take any action to influence the candidacy,” Strzok stated.

In texts released by the inspector general in December, Strzok described Trump during the campaign as a “loathsome human” and an “idiot,” and found the prospect of him being president “terrifying.”

Page wrote Strzok in August 2016, “There is no way (Trump) gets elected.”

RELATED: Louis Gohmert: Lisa Page Has ‘Given Us More Insights’ Than Peter Strzok

Strzok responded, “I want to believe the path you threw out for consideration in Andy’s office …that there’s no way he gets elected — but I’m afraid we can’t take that risk. It’s like an insurance policy in the unlikely event you die before you’re 40.”

Andy” apparently referred to then-Deputy FBI Director Andrew McCabe, who stepped down from the position in January to go on administrative leave. He was fired in March, two days before he was due to retire.

Scrambling Holder Pushes DOJ To Defy President’s Order To Investigate FBI


disclaimerReported By Ben Marquis | May 22, 2018 at 1:15pm

URL of the original posting site: https://www.westernjournal.com/ct/holder-pleads-doj-defy-order/

As the Donald Trump-Russia collusion narrative designed to smear and stymie the Trump presidency continues to unravel, some members of the previous administration have become even more outspoken and shrill in their condemnations of how things are being run than they already were.

The latest to do so publicly is former Obama administration Attorney General Eric Holder, who took to Twitter to express his grave concern over Trump’s demand that the Department of Justice look into whether former President Barack Obama’s FBI/DOJ investigated his 2016 campaign for “political purposes.”

However, Holder urged the DOJ to “simply say no” to what he viewed as a demand from Trump that was outside “DOJ norms.” 

Trump had tweeted Sunday, “I hereby demand, and will do so officially tomorrow, that the Department of Justice look into whether or not the FBI/DOJ infiltrated or surveilled the Trump Campaign for Political Purposes – and if any such demands or requests were made by people within the Obama Administration!”

trump

 

On Monday, Trump hosted a meeting at the White House with Deputy Attorney General Rod Rosenstein and FBI Director Christopher Wray, according to The Hill. The meeting’s goal was to no doubt discuss the specifics of the order from the president. 

Trump’s tweeted order on Sunday and subsequent White House meeting led to Holder’s Monday evening tweet.

“More DOJ norms being eroded. Trump-a SUBJECT of the investigation-wants access to material related to the inquiry,” the former attorney general tweeted.

holder

“His Congressional supporters want evidence connected to an ongoing investigation. Time for DOJ/FBI to simply say no-protect the institutions and time tested norms,” Holder added.Picture2

Holder, who served as head of the DOJ from 2009-2015, has been an especially vocal critic of Trump since the 2016 campaign season, and has even intimated that he is considering mounting a presidential challenge against Trump in 2020. 

This most recent criticism of Trump came on the heels of revelations via FBI leaks that the bureau had utilized at least one “informant” during the election season to “spy” on the Trump campaign and dig up dirt on alleged connections to and collusion with Russia.

Unfortunately for Holder and his urging of the DOJ to disobey an order from the president, White House press secretary Sarah Sanders announced following the Monday meeting that the DOJ had asked Inspector General Michael Horowitz’s office to “expand its current investigation to include any irregularities with the Federal Bureau of Investigation’s or the Department of Justice’s tactics concerning the Trump Campaign.”

Furthermore, White House Chief of Staff John Kelly was set to arrange a meeting involving top law enforcement officials and top members of Congress to “review” certain “highly classified materials” related to the FBI’s investigation of the Trump campaign that have been sought by lawmakers, Sanders said.

The question that must be asked, given the shrill tweet by Holder and others in recent days and weeks, is that if the actions of the DOJ and FBI under Obama were entirely above board and beyond reproach, as has been insisted, why are they protesting any inquiry into those actions so much? Surely they have nothing to hide, right? 

To paraphrase a line from Shakespeare’s “Hamlet” that seems particularly relevant at this point, the former attorney general doth protest too much, methinks.please likeand share and leave a comment

Ex-US Attorney: Obama CIA Chief Led Operation To Frame Trump


disclaimerReported By Ben Marquis | May 16, 2018 at 2:16pm

URL of the original posting site: https://www.westernjournal.com/ct/obama-cia-chief-led-frame-trump/

 

The Trump campaign/Russian collusion narrative — which led to special counsel Robert Mueller’s investigation — has been steadily unraveling in recent weeks. Despite a year long investigation into allegations of Russian interference in the 2016 election, no credible evidence of collusion with the Trump campaign has been found, and the “evidence” and intelligence that has been offered up appears to be false and manufactured.

Former U.S. Attorney Joe DiGenova spoke about that and other recent developments during an appearance on Fox News with Laura Ingraham on Tuesday night, and cast the blame on the operation, which he viewed as a set up to frame President Donald Trump, on former Obama administration CIA Director John Brennan. 

“It was abundantly clear that there was no legitimate basis even for a counter intelligence investigation, let alone a criminal investigation,” DiGenova said.

“It is quite obvious that John Brennan was at the head of the group of people who were going to create a counter intelligence investigation against Trump by creating false information that was going to be fed through Carter Page, and fed through George Papadopoulos so that it would be picked up, reported back to Washington and provide the basis for a counter, a fake, counter intelligence investigation,” he continued.

“And it was all Brennan’s doing,” DiGenova stated emphatically. 

“And that is why the Justice Department is viciously fighting revealing everything they can about the source in London, who everybody knows the identity of.”

Ingraham asked the former U.S. attorney to further explain recent reports about an unnamed “source in London who allegedly provided information that was used as a basis for the FBI investigation into the Trump campaign.

“The source in London was another person who was feeding false information to George Papadopoulos and others about collusion which did not exist,” DiGenova replied.

Another guest on the program, former federal prosecutor Sidney Powell, spoke about another aspect of the creation of the Trump/Russia collusion narrative and the anti-Trump dossier compiled by former British intelligence agent Christopher Steele on behalf of Democrat-funded political opposition research firm Fusion GPS.

She noted how the FBI had granted access to a handful of private contractors, likely to include Fusion GPS, to sift through raw intelligence gathered under the Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Act. This was then passed on to Steele and others and recycled back to the U.S. intelligence community with a false air of legitimacy to help form the narrative used as the basis for the investigation into Trump. 

DiGenova picked up on what Powell had mentioned and pointed out that there had been two opinions issued by the FISA court in opposition to that illegal practice of allowing private contractors access to the sensitive raw intelligence data.

“All of that was designed for the unmasking and the leaking of the names, and that was all done by private contractors,” DiGenova said. “The FISA court objected to it and it never stopped.”

The supposition that Brennan was the ringleader of an attempt to “frame” Trump is little more than DiGenova’s opinion, informed however well it might be by experience and information obtained through public and private sources.

That said, it increasingly appears as though the entire Trump/Russia collusion narrative was indeed created wholly out of false, manufactured or misconstrued information in order to provide justification for the investigation that was likely intended to prevent Trump from winning the election, or at least hamstring his agenda and lead to his impeachment once he took office. 

On top of that, Brennan has made it blatantly obvious that he loathes Trump, so it isn’t too much of a stretch to think he may have used the powerful intelligence tools at his disposal in order to “frame” an innocent man and destroy him politically. Hopefully we will find out the truth soon when the DOJ inspector general’s report is released.

please likeand share and leave a comment

Bombshell: 2nd Russia Dossier Exists, Author’s ID Changes Everything


Reported By Chuck Ross | May 2, 2018 at 6:51am

URL of the original posting site: https://www.westernjournal.com/bombshell-2nd-russia-dossier-exists-authors-id-changes-everything/

Clinton operatives pushed a dossier during the 2016 presidential campaign that appeared to be a classic “rope-a-dope” scheme being peddled by purported Russian spies, according to a person who was briefed on the documents by one of the Clinton insiders during the campaign. The dossier in question was written by Cody Shearer, a notorious Clinton fixer. It was passed to the Department of State by Sidney Blumenthal, a friend of Shearer’s and another Clinton operative.

The eight-page document eventually made its way to the FBI through Christopher Steele, the former British spy who wrote a dossier of his own. While the FBI is reportedly investigating the claims made in the Shearer memos, one person who discussed the document with Shearer during the campaign says it appeared at the time to be a ruse.

According to the source, who spoke to The Daily Caller News Foundation on condition of anonymity, Shearer claimed that members of Russia’s spy service, the FSB, had video tape of Trump engaged in sexually compromising acts. That allegation was similar to the one contained in Steele’s dossier, which was funded by the Clinton campaign and Democratic National Committee. Steele, a former MI6 officer, cited a source who said that the Kremlin has video of Trump in a Moscow hotel room in 2013 with prostitutes. The Russian government was blackmailing Trump with the footage, Steele alleged.

Shearer said he did not have the supposed tapes, TheDCNF’s source said, adding that Shearer’s situation sounded like a “rope-a-dope story where the FSB throws this stuff out there, sucks people in, tries to get money.”

A U.S. government official who was briefed on the Shearer memos in Aug. 2016 — though not by Shearer — told TheDCNF that the allegations were not taken seriously because Shearer was “not a guy with a whole lot of credibility.”

“The whole thing stinks,” recalled the official, who spoke on the condition of anonymity because of the sensitivity of the Russia investigation.

The official said that Shearer’s effort showed that Clinton loyalists were “doing their best to get this stuff out into the mainstream media before the election.”

Shearer’s memos have received little media attention since their existence was revealed in January. The Guardian broke the story that the documents had been passed to the FBI through Steele and that the bureau was attempting to ascertain their accuracy. Steele reportedly told the FBI that the information came ultimately from Shearer.

Shearer first gained notoriety in 1991 when he was involved in spreading the false claim that then-Vice President Dan Quayle purchased drugs from Brett Kimberlin, a drug dealer who was the culprit behind the Speedway bombings. It turned out that Kimberlin made up the story about Quayle. He is now a left-wing political activist.

Shearer, whose brother-in-law is Brookings Institutions President Strobe Talbott, was also reportedly investigated by the State Department’s inspector general in the late 1990s for allegedly misrepresenting himself as State Department official during negotiations with associates of a Bosnian warlord. Shearer was reportedly paid at least $25,000 in exchange for helping the warlord.

New details of Shearer’s memos emerged on Thursday with a report from Real Clear Investigations.

Journalist Lee Smith reported that Shearer created two four-page reports entitled “Donald Trump — Background Notes — The Compromised Candidate” and “FSB Interview,” a reference to the Russian spy agency.

Shearer wrote that he relied on information from an unnamed Turkish businessman who claimed to have “excellent contacts within the FSB.” The businessman said the FSB source knew of a “cut out” between the Trump campaign and Russian President Vladimir Putin. The Trump campaign was “also involved hacking his opponents and trying to alter votes on election day,” Shearer’s source claimed.

Shearer wrote that his FSB source said that the spy agency knew of Trump’s predilection for women and used it against him.

“From observing Trump for years in previous visits to Moscow, the FSB knew he had a weakness for women,” reads the Shearer memo, according to Real Clear Investigations.

Trump was also aware that the Kremlin had compromising material on him.

Copies of the video were in Bulgaria, Israel and in vaults in Moscow, Shearer’s source said.

Shearer’s memos wove a twisted path to the FBI, with Blumenthal being the initial conduit.

In summer 2016, Blumenthal shared Shearer’s documents with a friend, a State Department official named Jonathan Winer. At the time, he was serving as special envoy to Libya, provided the Shearer reports to Steele, who he had known since 2009. Steele gave the Shearer reports to the FBI. The London-based Steele first contacted the bureau in July 2016 to share his information on Trump. He continued meeting with investigators through that October. Steele provided information from his own dossier to Winer. Winer wrote a two-page memo summarizing Steele’s allegations and passed them up the chain of command at the State Department. Sec. of State John Kerry ultimately decided that the dossier information should be shared with the FBI.

According to Lee Smith, the Real Clear Investigations reporter, Shearer’s memos also detail conversations he had with two journalists who heard rumors about Trump’s activities in Moscow. Both of the journalists, ABC News’ Brian Ross and The Wall Street Journal’s Alan Cullison, had been in contact with Fusion GPS, the opposition research firm that hired Steele. According to Shearer, Ross said that he would report on the story if he would “fly to Moscow to tape and air for broadcast,” which he would do if he could find a “talking head source” to back up Shearer’s claims. While Ross did not secure the explosive interview he sought, he did interview Sergei Millian, a Belarus-born businessman who is alleged to be “Source D,” the dossier’s main source for the Moscow hotel room allegation.

The recent book “Russian Roulette” suggests that Ross learned about Millian from Fusion GPS co-founder Glenn Simpson. Simpson hired Steele in June 2016 to investigate Trump’s activities in Russia.

“For Simpson, Millian was now an investigative target. He tipped off ABC News, which conducted an on-air interview with Millian, in which he said Trump ‘likes Russia, because he likes beautiful ladies — talking to them, of course,’” write Michael Isikoff and David Corn, the authors of “Russian Roulette.” Corn is the Washington bureau chief of the left-wing Mother Jones magazine.

Millian’s alleged involvement as a source for the dossier has raised questions about the veracity of the document. Former business associates of Millian have claimed that he has embellished his business achievements and connections. According to “Russian Roulette,” Fusion GPS’s Simpson was concerned that Millian was a source for Steele.

“Simpson had his doubts. He considered Millian a big talker,” the book reads.

Cullison, a former Moscow correspondent for The Wall Street Journal, was one of the three reporters who broke the Jan. 11, 2017 story revealing that Steele was the author of the dossier. According to Real Clear Investigations, Shearer claimed in his memo that Cullison told him that the DNC was paying Fusion GPS to corroborate the story about Trump’s Moscow visit. The Wall Street Journal has denied that Cullison knew who hired Fusion GPS. But as Lee Smith notes in his report at Real Clear Investigations, even if Cullison did not know that the DNC had hired Fusion GPS, Shearer clearly had that information.

It remains unclear how Shearer knew that the DNC was involved with Fusion GPS and how he happened to speak with two reporters who were in contact with the opposition research firm.

Shearer’s memos show he also spoke to Robert Baer, a former CIA operative who currently works for CNN. Shearer said that Baer claimed that “the Russians had established an encrypted communication system” between the Trump campaign and Russian president Vladimir Putin.

Baer told Real Clear Investigations that he picked up that story “from acquaintances at The New York Times who were trying to run the story down.” He recalled speaking with Shearer in March or April 2016. As Smith notes, if that timeline is accurate, Shearer was investigating the salacious Trump claims at around the time that Fusion GPS was hired by the Clinton campaign and DNC.

Shearer has refused to provide comment to TheDCNF.

A version of this article previously appeared on The Daily Caller News Foundation website.

Bombshell: Memo Okaying Mueller’s Raid on Manafort Written 7 Days After Raid Happened


Reported By Chris Agee | April 4, 2018 at 10:43am

URL of the original posting site: https://www.westernjournal.com/bombshell-memo-okaying-muellers-raid-on-manafort-written-7-days-after-raid-happened/

Department of Justice special counsel Robert Mueller’s justification for indicting Robert Manafort hit an apparent snag this week with news that a secret memo authorizing the investigation was written days after the former Trump campaign chairman’s home was raided.

As Law & Crime reported, Manafort’s attorneys are arguing the special counsel was not granted the authority to indict their client since his alleged crimes were not directly connected to Russian interference in the 2016 election.

In a statement this week, Mueller insisted that the move fell squarely within the scope of his investigation, providing both documentation from his initial appointment and a subsequent memo by Deputy Attorney General Rod Rosenstein as evidence.

The second document sought to clarify that Mueller did meet the requirement that he “will be provided with a specific factual statement of the matter to be investigated.” Closer inspection of that memo, however, led to accusations that its date did not seem to line up with the trajectory of Mueller’s investigation.

Rosenstein’s memo was dated August 2, but Manafort’s home was raided seven days prior on July 26 (Law & Crime reported a difference of six days, but The Western Journal believes seven to be more accurate). This has led some analysts to accuse the Justice Department of attempting to justify the investigation after the fact.

In a Fox News Channel interview on Tuesday, one prominent attorney who has frequently criticized Mueller’s investigation said the latest development is disconcerting.

“There is something very wrong about that,” said Harvard Law professor Alan Dershowitz. “This special prosecutor is looking at everything. Where does it stop?”

Though Dershowitz argued for stricter parameters on the range of Mueller’s investigation, other experts predict the facts of the case will prove Manafort’s indictment was valid.

According to former federal prosecutor Daniel Goldman, Mueller “persuasively” made his case that his probe into Manafort’s actions was proper given his mandate to investigate Russia’s meddling in the U.S. presidential election.

“Regardless, given that Manafort was the campaign manager from May 2016 to August 2016 — during the time of the Trump Tower meeting, which he attended, the Republican National Convention, for which the Russia platform was changed, and the leaked hacked DNC emails — we know of ample evidence related to collusion and Manafort to support this search warrant,” he said. 

As for the memo released after Manafort’s home was raided, Goldman described it as a legally unnecessary effort on Rosenstein’s part to provide “more explicit detail” regarding the Mueller probe. The document referenced specific claims included in the indictment for an array of financial crimes. Rosenstein wrote that Manafort could be investigated for “crimes arising out of payments he received from the Ukrainian government before and after the tenure of President Viktor Yanukovych.”

The memo further indicated that the “allegations were within the scope of the investigation” as defined upon Mueller’s appointment and are “within the scope of the order.” 

As CNBC reported, Manafort’s legal team will be arguing in court this week that his indictment should be dismissed.

Wednesday’s court appearance came just over three months after Manafort sued Mueller and Rosenstein in an attempt to define the extent of the special counsel’s investigation into Russian meddling.

While Mueller Pursues Investigation, Trump Drops A Bombshell Question Of His Own


Reported By Jason Hopkins | January 1, 2018 at 9:57am

URL of the original posting site: https://www.westernjournalism.com/mueller-pursues-russia-investigation-trump-question/

As special counsel Robert Mueller’s investigation into alleged Russian collusion of the 2016 election continues on, President Donald Trump has one big question on his mind.

“Whatever happened to Podesta?” “They closed their firm, they left in disgrace, the whole thing, and now you never heard of anything,” the president said during a wide-ranging New York Times interview.

Trump was referring to Tony Podesta, the founder of The Podesta Group and brother of former Clinton campaign chairman John Podesta. Like members of Trump’s presidential campaign, Podesta has also found himself at the center of Mueller’s growing FBI inquiry.

During The Times interview, the president said he believed Muller would treat him fairly, but he also expressed frustration that Podesta has seemingly escaped scrutiny since stepping down from the firm he founded in October.

The long-time Democrat is under investigation for activities similar to those of former Trump campaign manager Paul Manafort. Manafort, having a long history of lobbying for foreign entities, led a public relations campaign for a nonprofit called the European Centre for a Modern Ukraine. Podesta Group also took part in promoting Ukraine in the United States, being one of several firms that were paid to do public relations work, according to Politico.

His group filed paperwork with the Justice Department indicating that it had worked on behalf of the European Centre for a Modern Ukraine, benefiting the same Ukrainian political party that Manafort advised. In late October, Manafort was indicted on an array of charges that included money laundering, failing to disclose overseas bank accounts, operating as an agent of the Ukrainian government and making false statements to federal authorities.

Trump severed ties with Manafort during the election as it became apparent law enforcement was looking into him. The president has since tried to put distance between himself and the beleaguered lobbyist.

“Paul only worked for me for a few months,” he explained.

“Paul worked for Ronald Reagan. His firm worked for John McCain, worked for Bob Dole, worked for many Republicans for far longer than he worked for me. And you’re talking about what Paul was many years ago before I ever heard of him. He worked for me for — what was it, three and a half months?”

Podesta, for his part, has not endured much public scrutiny since stepping down from his firm a couple months ago and it’s not exactly known what action federal authorities will take regarding his investigation. Along with believing that more attention should be placed on Podesta’s past lobbying activities, the Republican president spoke at length about the FBI investigation that has haunted his first year in the White House.

Pushing back against their allegations, the president said that Democrats concocted claims of Russian collusion “as a hoax, as a ruse, as an excuse for losing an election.” Trump also asserted that “everybody knows” his 2016 campaign staff did not collude with any Russian officials and even reversed the accusations by suggesting Democrats were the ones who worked with Russians during the presidential election.

Around seven months have passed since Muller was appointed to lead an investigation, but no charges have yet been brought forward against the president.

“There’s been no collusion. But I think he’s going to be fair,” Trump said of Mueller.

Tag Cloud

%d bloggers like this: