WOODWARD FOUND NO EVIDENCE OF COLLUSION, EVEN THOUGH HE ‘LOOKED FOR IT HARD’

Which is the point of the entire venture.

 

Somewhere along the way we missed each other. I wasn't referencing Woodward's book. I was referencing Mueller's proffer with Manafort. Sorry if that was on me.

 

Yes I know the tone of the book but finding collusion would have been the piece de resistance and knowing how he will use the tiniest thread on any credibility to vet what he post yet says he found nothing..........

 

There is another thread in that topic.

 

Personally, I dont believe trump colluded. I think his sons did. And I dont think it matters.

We need to move you guys on the right past this whole "omg there is one article of doubt so the entire thing is fake" phase you lot are stuck in.

You do it with climate change. You're doing it with the "trump is unfit to serve" reports.

How many people need to come out with the same stories of his unfit nature before you'll care?

 

In this thread:

 

I would say you don't understand the collusion issue and this thread is about whether during all his investigation and interviews of all the people with grudges to hold Woodward by his own admission did not find or hear of any evidence or assertions of collusion.

 

I say I didn't realize Woodward was a part of the investigation, when did he join Mueller's team.

 

Yes and there is another thread on Manafort plea deal and will be happy to discuss it there.

 

I would say you shouldn't respond to posts that you don't understand.

 

Then why the hell did you respond to the post?

 

Who said he did or was? Was he part of the FBI when he broke Watergate?

 

I don't know, was he?

 

One needn't be part of Mueller's team to be an investigator.

 

Last week he was

 

Making the point Manafort has nothing to do with this.

Now focus on the topic at hand.

 

Really, one can't get access to the information and people that Mueller's team can. Also you don't have the authority to access information that Mueller's team can.

 

The topic at hand appears to be that you're a control freak. No offense meant.

 

You are really this confused on the matter. Then don't waste my time.

 

On the other hand he is not a cop. People will tell a journalist things they won't tell a cop.

 

I would say there was nothing in your clip that shows Russian collusion with the Trump campaign and was a waste of my time.
Now this is about the fact Woodward was unequivocal in that in all his interviews with all the people in the know he found not a shred of evidence to support claims of collusion.

 

ROFL I think it was you guys who lst any hope when Woodward, our PREMIER investigative reporter as the left would present him, said in all his interviews with all the insiders including the disgruntled ones he could not find a shred of evidence of collusion in spite of his hard efforts to do so.

 

Of a certainty we know that leftists really do not care about Trump/Russia collusion since the intelligent among them know that there never was any and that there actually was between Hillary and the Russians. The less intelligent leftist? Well they BELIEVE whatever either CNN or MSNBC tell them to believe and since almost two years of 'investigation' has revealed precisely nothing in that area CNN and MSNBC are focusing on anything else that they figure could remotely damage Trump or his administration instead. Of course that mid stream propaganda switch confuses the less intelligent leftist -- since they BELIEVE in leftist propaganda -- but then again that is their normal state of mind anyway.

 

Did he need all that to break Watergate? He found bit even a hint of collusion. Does this help to further your claims of collusion? He was unequivocal that he looked HARD for ANY evidence of collusion. H didn't need subpeonas people spoke openly to him.

 

If that is the case, then why are folks claiming his book is a lie.