If there is not enough evidence to indict, after two years, there must be no case at all.
There never was a case
Its over
Exactly..and Ive heard those BS rumors about Barr telling Mueller not to indict Trump Jr, etc..that is total BS..if Mueller wanted to indict, he would indict ANYONE he wanted to if he had ANY evidence of anything..the fact that there are NO sealed indictments, no indictments of any kind means this BS is over..but Dems will NEVER admit that they LOST in 2016 FAIR and SQUARE
“If there is not enough evidence to indict, after two years, there must be no case at all.”
Not on Russian collusion. The potential dangers will be from other investigations, especially from the U.S. Attorney for the Southern District of New York, and from the state of New York’s Attorney General.
Well..there’s always a recount and late absentee ballots to count to revise an obvious win for the good guys.
As we have seen in this case. Mueller hired rank partisan democrats to go after people with all the force of the Gestapo. If they could not find anything against the president in nearly two years with unfettered access and resources, I suggest there was nothing to find. And remember, there was nothing to suggest there would be anything to find from the very beginning. The original source of this investigation was fraudulent to begin with. So there should be no expectation that there would be something to find. That Russia and several other countries were playing with our internet even at the time of our elections, is very old news. We always new that. Its true of Israel and China as well as Russia. It is likely true of the EU as well. And of course the faulty evidence suggested that the Russians and Trump were in cahoots for over 5 years while the wiki-leaks emails were only written in April of 2016, before either Hillary or Trump one their nominations. The whole thing makes no sense.