Evidentiary requirements for proving conspiracy (collusion), are very high. Even though Trump campaign lied aobut meeting Russian officials, and provided Russian officials with their campaign strategy and polling data, it just wasn't enough to make a case where a conviction could be achieved. It is like when they wetn after Al Capone, Everyone knew he was a murderer, but they just could not gather enough evidence to prove it in court, so they went after him on tax avoidance. Can't prove conspiracy? But we can prove obstruction of justice in tryign to block the investigation into the conspiracy.

The Mueller investigation was nothing more than a Democrat witch hunt. Hell they didn’t even have any sugar as they were just sore losers intent on getting rid of Trump.

So, what about the data given by Steve Bannon/Cambridge Analytica to Russia, and the data given by Paul Manafort. How does that not constitute sufficient evidence? How could the investigation be done meaningfully when it was hamstrung from collecting financial data?

Do you not see the pattern? Trump ain't goin' nowhere while the Deep State says he stays.

Suck it up. We haven't had a real country since 1947. If even then.

Fortunately for Trump, the cook didn't have even one cup of sugar..

Um.... pardon? Who's side am I supposed to take here? This is abstract.

In politics, they are exactly the same.