Chris Christie says Russia probe 'was not a hoax'

He added that the report contained information that necessitated a counterintelligence investigation into Russian election interference, saying, “The depth and breadth of the Russian efforts to me was really chilling.”

Christie added that his advice to Trump in the wake of the report’s release is to take a hard stance against Russian interference.

“I would shift the focus to that quite frankly to bring his intelligence leaders in,” Christie said. “Say, ‘Listen we now have a roadmap for what the Russians did. What are we doing to prepare for the 2020 election? I authorize you to do everything it is you need to do to protect the integrity of that election.’”

I wonder what Trump's latest position will be (re: whether the Russians did indeed meddle with our election)?

Will he say they did indeed meddle-- but that he wasn't involved?

Or will he continue to say that there's no evidence that they were involved?

Or will he continue to say that there's no evidence that they were involved?

There is not a bit of evidence that anything the Russians may, or may not have done, affected the outcome of the election. It will be interesting to find out what influence the Obama administration might have had concerning the outcome of the election, and what was the extent of their contacts with the Russians.

There is not a bit of evidence that anything the Russians may, or may not have done, affected the outcome of the election. It will be interesting to find out what influence the Obama administration might have had concerning the outcome of the election, and what was the extent of their contacts with the Russians.

How do you propose to get that 'evidence'?

Should we interview everyone who voted and ask them if specific Russian bot misinformation effected their vote? 

As ridiculous as that sounds, why would you think that it would be any more fruitful to try to get evidence that the Obama administration's influence? 

As I have said before, Facebook and other social media gauge the 'influence' of a post based on likes and shares. There IS a plethora of evidence that Russian bot advertisements and posts were widely disseminated by social media users. Whether that changed a vote is IMPOSSIBLE to nail down with empirical evidence. 

IMHO, judging from what I have seen right here on NT, articles filled with bullshit have an outsized influence in target groups and are disseminated far too widely. Perhaps they're just bolstering their echo chamber though there is no way of knowing how many uninformed viewers will be influenced by the bullshit. 

Nice cherry picking of what he said; but how about this part.

“It is a good day for the president because whenever you're investigated for a crime and you're not charged, it's a good day,” Christie continued. “There are still many challenges that this report is going to present for the president going forward, from Congress and from the other 14 investigations that are going on at U.S. attorney's offices around the country."

While Special Counsel Robert Mueller and his team ultimately did not establish that members of the Trump campaign coordinated with the Russian government’s attempts to meddle in the 2016 election, Christie disagreed with President Trump’s often repeated claim that the probe was a “witch hunt.”

He added that the report contained information that necessitated a counterintelligence investigation into Russian election interference, saying, “The depth and breadth of the Russian efforts to me was really chilling.”

So Christie can't even get what Trump was claiming right either. Trump stated he did not collude with the Russians, period. Mueller couldn't find evidence to bring a case (and with the Obama and Hillary sycophants he was employing he was trying really damn hard). 

Despite finding that there was not sufficient evidence to charge any Trump campaign official of acting as an unregistered agent of Russia, the report asserts that Mueller’s investigation identified “numerous links” between individuals with ties to Russia and people orbiting Trump during the lead up to the election.

Yet not one charge of conspiracy or collusion. The best team get Trump at all costs could come up with is the FBI getting Flynn for lying (of course Hillary lied to them, but her FBI sycophant fixed it); and tax evasion. Wow, that is some great use of tax payer money. 

Of course the Russians meddled in our elections- we meddle in their's, Israel's, Ukraine's, and any other damn country we feel like. Now everyone is acting like the Russians- using simple social media; financing radical groups on the right and left; and releasing potentially hacked information from Hillary Clinton's private server and the DNC (seems that it was an inside job in both cases- but Trump!!!), swayed the election in favor of Trump.

Can't stand Trump; but the BS is getting pretty damn thick. We will have competing investigations in the House and Senate. The House will investigate Trump for anything and everything (now that Mueller failed miserably); and the Senate will investigate Obama, Hillary, the Hillary sycophants in the FBI, the validity of the FISA warrants, the Obama administration's outing of Trump campaign officials, and why Carter Page was never charged with any crimes, or even questioned- after being listed as the main reason behind the FISA warrants.

So Christie can't even get what Trump was claiming right either. Trump stated he did not collude with the Russians, period.

Are you actually trying to claim that Trump never insisted that the Mueller investigation was a witch hunt? 

and releasing potentially hacked information from Hillary Clinton's private server and the DNC

There is NO evidence that Clinton's server was EVER hacked.

The DNC WAS hacked by the Russians, PERIOD, full stop. 

now that Mueller failed miserably

I note that you glossed over the plethora of evidence of Russian interference. Guess we shouldn't worry about that...

Are you actually trying to claim that Trump never insisted that the Mueller investigation was a witch hunt? 

How the Fuck did you get that out of this statement:

"So Christie can't even get what Trump was claiming right either. Trump stated he did not collude with the Russians, period."

You just "Chuck Shit" out there for folks to read....don't ya !

You just "Chuck Shit" out there for folks to read....don't ya !

I normally don't read their shit. I don't want my IQ dropping.

The report had nothing to do with Russian interference . That's been known for a decade or so. Hell, Romney Brought it up in a debate when he was running for President, and Obama laughed in his face (Liberals applauded Obama) . They only put in jail a few folks that Fibbed (said the wrong thing that the powers that be already knew), or did something money wrong, waaaaay before Trump.

The "Investigation" was supposed to be about  "Trump" ……….. and TRUMP alone (So said Schiff and other Libtards)...…. and it FAILED …….. miserably !

Now some are saying, we MUST now look into Actual Russian intervention into our elections. WTF ?

Interesting …. I disagreed with Trump when he said that the Mueller investigation was a 'witch hunt' because I thought that it was more of a fishing expedition .. perhaps a prosecutor leading an investigation in search of a crime .. not investigating an actual crime (?)

I was naïve, I felt that the Mueller report would be conclusive .. not a document written with the intent of being interpreted .. he shrugged off his responsibility .. Mueller followed 'the code' of not indicting a seated president, yet also found that charges of obstruction would not impede Trump's Constitution duties as president... yet still kicked the can down the road.. or across the aisle and never filed a charge, but claims the report does not 'exonerate' the president ..?

I am disappointed, I actually thought Mueller's report would put things to rest .. not open a whole nether can of worms for more 'fishing expeditions … 

He added that the report contained information that necessitated a counterintelligence investigation into Russian election interference, saying, “The depth and breadth of the Russian efforts to me was really chilling.”

I do not think Christie's 2 cents matter much … where was the depth and breadth of the US efforts to stop Russian meddling in the 2016 election?  Interestingly enough an investigation was started into the Trump campaign rather than stepping up to the plate to prevent the Russia's actions .. …?

I could be wrong      -James Comey 

Mueller followed 'the code' of not indicting a seated president, yet also found that charges of obstruction would not impede Trump's Constitution duties as president... 

From the report: 

Applying the Court's framework for analysis, we concluded that Congress can validly regulate the President's exercise of official duties to prohibit actions motivated by a corrupt intent to obstruct justice. The limited effect on presidential power that results from that restriction would not impermissibly undermine the President's ability to perform his Article II functions.

yet still kicked the can down the road..or across the aisle and never filed a charge,

As required by the OLC decision. 

 but claims the report does not 'exonerate' the president ..?

That's because the report DOESN'T exonerate Trump. In fact, there is a plethora of evidence to convict him of obstruction, MUCH of it in his own words.