███████████ Mueller Investigation Results Thread ███████████

[Aglaopheme]

I understand the frustration from the Ds. I've read the report and it's not easy. Someone needs to do a Cliff note version for easy consumption by the voting public.

I am not reading everything that came after this post. Mueller did his own cliff notes.

https://www.lawfareblog.com/full-text-mueller-reports-executive-summaries

 

[Rightguide]

I never thought or said that the Mueller report was written for public review. That is why we need televised hearings. Both sides get to ask questions and play politics. Sunlight being an effective disinfectant of political scum, let’s get it all out....Clinton, Obama, Trump. After all evidence is considered congress can release their majority and minority report as was done in Iran/Contra. I have no fear of truth, do you?

The reason the law is the way it is now is because your party, the Democrats, didn't appreciate Ken Starr pointing out 11 felonies that Bill Clinton committed to the public. They wanted it kept secret so they changed the law.

 

[Rightguide]

First of all, the Mueller report wasn't supposed to be for public consumption. The statute says very specifically that the report is to be given to the AG and it was at the AG's sole discretion how much, if any, to release. Mueller wrote the report for Barr and no one else. People say he wrote it for Congress, but Mueller couldn't know if Barr would release it or not. And, since the statute is pretty specific that it's BARR'S sole discretion on what to disclose, I don't know if Congress could subpoena it and get it even after a court hearing.

Secondly, the Government doesn't "exonerate" anyone. They investigate and, if there's evidence of a crime, they charge and prosecute. UNLESS they do so, one can safely assume that there is no evidence sufficient to constitute a crime. Without such, the failure of the Gov to charge is an implicit exoneration.

Third, it would be nice if all you TDS sufferers would stop ignoring these details instead of regurgitating the unsupportable D narrative endlessly and repeatedly. It's not like this is new news or anything.

Poor ignorant libs probably never heard that simple pronouncement of truth in the last two years from any of their sources.

 

[Boxlicker101]

you as well.

this "coup" only legally needs 285 confederates.
keep bailing, seaman.

It would need 218 members of the house, which is barely possible, and 68 senators, which is not going to happen.

 

[cleaver]

Poor ignorant libs probably never heard that simple pronouncement of truth in the last two years from any of their sources.

https://encrypted-tbn0.gstatic.com/images?q=tbn:ANd9GcTb6QBgb1iBxTNaomT_84E5L7HKnVpaNgIzv7_fLgG6PE3oUme4pQ

 

[phrodeau]

It would need 218 members of the house, which is barely possible, and 68 senators, which is not going to happen.

Sadly, yes. There are far too many Republicans willing to allow criminals and thugs to hold high office.

 

[Kantarii]

It would need 218 members of the house, which is barely possible, and 68 senators, which is not going to happen.

A snowball has a better chance in Hell

 

[LincolnDuncan]

I am not reading everything that came after this post. Mueller did his own cliff notes.

https://www.lawfareblog.com/full-text-mueller-reports-executive-summaries

Thank you much

 

[Que]

Sadly, yes. There are far too many Republicans willing to allow criminals and thugs to hold high office.

Nonsense. They tried with Bill Clinton managed to keep Hillary Clinton out of office and held Eric Holder in contempt. Admittedly they should not have given Obama adversity score points over Fast and Furious but what are you going to do who wants to impeach the first black president?

 

[LincolnDuncan]

The reason the law is the way it is now is because your party, the Democrats, didn't appreciate Ken Starr pointing out 11 felonies that Bill Clinton committed to the public. They wanted it kept secret so they changed the law.

What are you trying to tell me now? I'm a rabid independent who usually vote the D as the lessor of evil.
If you assume that I'm just some liberal democrat, then you don't understand me at all.

 

[Que]

What are you trying to tell me now? I'm a rabid independent who usually vote the D as the lessor of evil.
If you assume that I'm just some liberal democrat, then you don't understand me at all.

That's a pretty common assumption in America and here specifically. We kind of tend to assume everyone is on a team making binary choices. I've noticed a relatively independent streak and you myself. I doubt we agree on much but our disagreements are not consistently in sync with the rationale of other people who agree with us.

I am a rabid reactionary, so I have no party. In my case, R would be the lesser of two evils.

I would like to like the Libertarians but they can't seem to find anyone but Cooks to run for them.

 

[phrodeau]

Nonsense. They tried with Bill Clinton managed to keep Hillary Clinton out of office and held Eric Holder in contempt. Admittedly they should not have given Obama adversity score points over Fast and Furious but what are you going to do who wants to impeach the first black president?

Well, now is their chance to get a criminal thug out of office. What should they do?

 

[Que]

Deep State Clinton investigation: “We have conclusive evidence of wrongdoing, but we don’t believe she intended to."

Deep State Trump investigation: “We can’t find any conclusive evidence of wrongdoing, but we’re certain he intended to.”

Tweet by Chris Stigal.

Absolutely, succinctly perfect.

 

[Carnal_Flower]

Not true.

In the case of conspiracy, Mueller said there is no conclusive evidence to support that, end of story.

In the case of obstruction, there is no conclusive evidence that Trump did NOT commit a crime, therefore I cannot exonerate him.

In either case, he was NEVER going to charge the Prez with a crime. The question was whether there was conclusive evidence to exonerate him; in one case yes, in the other case no.

Deep State Trump investigation: “We can’t find any conclusive evidence of wrongdoing, but we’re certain he intended to.”

Tweet by Chris Stigal.

Absolutely, succinctly perfect.

 

[icanhelp1]

you enter a certain pantheon with this post

Your sarcasm is duly noted, you certainly exist within your own.

 

[icanhelp1]

Not true.

In the case of conspiracy, Mueller said there is no conclusive evidence to support that, end of story.

In the case of obstruction, there is no conclusive evidence that Trump did NOT commit a crime, therefore I cannot exonerate him.

In either case, he was NEVER going to charge the Prez with a crime. The question was whether there was conclusive evidence to exonerate him; in one case yes, in the other case no.

Exonerate? It's not the job of a prosecutor to exonerate, that assumes there was a crime. A prosecutor prosecutes, no crime no case, game over. Move on to impeachment. Your mixing impeachment politics with legal prosecution.

 

[IrezumiKiss]

I'm glad I made you smile

Broken clock, etc., etc...

http://media.tumblr.com/tumblr_lxpj6grFIe1qcaomb.gif

 

[Kantarii]

Exonerate? It's not the job of a prosecutor to exonerate, that assumes there was a crime. A prosecutor prosecutes, no crime no case, game over. Move on to impeachment. Your mixing impeachment politics with legal prosecution.

I see you and I read the same article. Might help if someone else read the article as well.

 

[jomar]

Fake news. The meme about "hand picked" is sooooo much bullshit. Tell us, since you voted for your representative, are they "hand picked" as well? If so, does that taint their opinions too?

Mueller's REPORT proves it was a witch hunt. Parse all you want to, but the OFFICIAL WORD is that there is insufficient evidence to accuse Trump of committing a crime.

I already commented about Congressional abuse of power.

The only reason Barr is AG this go round is that he sent an application letter saying he promised not to indict Trump. And he's doing the job Trump hired him to do.

Muellor said no collusion (interestingly, a very recent Trump tweet: “And now Russia has disappeared because I had nothing to do with Russia helping me to get elected. It was a crime that didn’t exist.”) so that part's done. But the US needs to address the Russian behavior during the election.

As far as obstruction, he laid out a road map for congress because the rules he had to abide by precluded him from from making a judgement. He said that very clearly in his opening remarks. And insufficient evidence to clear Trump does not mean there is insufficient evidence that he did obstruct.

 

[HisArpy]

In the case of obstruction, there is no conclusive evidence that Trump did NOT commit a crime, therefore I cannot exonerate him.

Please show us how this means Trump COMMITTED a crime.

Not having evidence of innocence isn't the same as having evidence showing guilt.

 

[HisArpy]

The only reason Barr is AG this go round is that he sent an application letter saying he promised not to indict Trump. And he's doing the job Trump hired him to do.

Do you have a linky to said letter?

 

[icanhelp1]

I see you and I read the same article. Might help if someone else read the article as well.

People are emotional. They try to massage opinion and innuendo into something it is not. You're guilty until proven innocent is rampant among the left. When the evidence does not meet the burden of proof of a crime, there is no crime, you're innocent. There's no rehashing evidence or deliberating additional opinion, it's over. Trump may be guilty in a court of opinion but you know what opinions are. On to FISA violations.

 

[Que]

The only reason Barr is AG this go round is that he sent an application letter saying he promised not to indict Trump. And he's doing the job Trump hired him to do.

Muellor said no collusion (interestingly, a very recent Trump tweet: “And now Russia has disappeared because I had nothing to do with Russia helping me to get elected. It was a crime that didn’t exist.”) so that part's done. But the US needs to address the Russian behavior during the election.

As far as obstruction, he laid out a road map for congress because the rules he had to abide by precluded him from from making a judgement. He said that very clearly in his opening remarks. And insufficient evidence to clear Trump does not mean there is insufficient evidence that he did obstruct.

When will you provide sufficient evidence to conclusively fix the time stamp as to when you ceased beating your wife?

 

[jomar]

Do you have a linky to said letter?

I was referring to his paper stating a sitting president could not be charged with a crime, making Barr the perfect guy for the job in Trump’s eyes.

 

[bbx56]

did anyone notice

that MuleLiar said something different yesterday

then was in his "report"?