I arrive at this conclusion on the premise of how the "public" will view the report. The only thing that the public would respond to was the "smoking gun" and the impeachment of Trump. Didn't happen. Yup, quite a few folk were found guilty of crimes and got jail sentences - nobody cares - who the hell were they anyway, next year we'll have forgotten their names - guess what - none of 'em are running for office. Let 'em rot in jail, let 'em out, nobody cares one iota. Less the diehard Dems and diehard Repubs - and they don't count for squat - their votes are cast in concrete - be it Hitler, Mickey Mouse or the Tooth Fairy, if they're the ones on the party ticket they get the diehards votes.
Gotta give Mueller a hell of a lot of credit on timing his report. Post mid-terms and early enough that it'll be distant in the memories of the voting public when the next Presidential Election rolls around. Of course, we're gonna be "force fed" the "two" conclusions, "no collusion" and "not exonerated".
However - Trump is the incumbent and incumbents are the odds on favorite.
Regardless of the fine details - the "witch hunt" did not turn up the "smoking gun" everybody was anticipating
...erm..."smocking gun" according to his tangeriness.
S'funny how many racists accuse Obama of having divided the country, like it's actually his fault they're racist!Originally Posted by Texpat
Ah OK, gotcha.Originally Posted by bowie
^Spot on.
I never saw you, Tex, Boon Mee or any of the other racists on here calling him 'Whitey' or trying to use it as a defining characteristic.Originally Posted by britanicus
![]()
Barr needs to release the full report to Congress , till then nothing's resolved
^
get him and mueller in front of the house for questioning.....subpoena them if necessary.
Barr needs to release the full report to Congress , till then nothing's resolvedget him and mueller in front of the house for questioning.....subpoena them if necessary.You know who hasn't been subpoenaed over teh russia investigation? Trump hahahahaha
So after 2.5 years of nothing burgers and garbage pellets to whet your appetites, you have now been served your shit sandwich and you have decided to hold out judgement on how it tastes until you have eaten it.
Oh man, I will be here on and off to gloat for a day or 2. You poor deluded hysterical loons. Its not Trump who has done this to you, its the side that you support. Chow down!![]()
Hi longway, long time...
Mueller couldn't get a 100% sure conviction. Doesn't mean that shit didn't go down and that's why the president isn't exonerated, despite his bleating.
Deleted
Last edited by Norton; 25-03-2019 at 07:24 PM.
CNN Editor-at-large's take - come on now, not CNN, eating' humble pie - say it isn't so
https://edition.cnn.com/2019/03/24/p...ort/index.html
Robert Mueller just handed Donald Trump a huge gift
Analysis by Chris Cillizza, CNN Editor-at-large
Updated 0843 GMT (1643 HKT) March 25, 2019
(CNN) President Donald Trump spent the last 18-plus months attacking the investigation into Russian interference and the possibility of collusion between his campaign and the Russians. On Sunday, that same investigation, led by special counsel Robert Mueller, gave Trump something he wanted -- and needed badly: A dismissal on the question of collusion and no charges of obstruction against either the President or his team.
"The special counsel's investigation did not find that the Trump campaign or anyone associated with it conspired or coordinated with Russia in its efforts to influence the 2016 U.S. Presidential Election," read a summary of Mueller's conclusions by Attorney General William Barr sent to Congress on Sunday afternoon.
On the question of obstruction, Mueller, according to Barr, was less conclusive. While he said there was not enough evidence to say that Trump committed a crime by seeking to slow or end the Mueller investigation, he also didn't provide Trump the full clearance the President and his inner circle likely wanted. "While this report does not conclude that the President committed a crime, it also does not exonerate him,"Barr wrote, quoting Mueller.
The Justice Department's established policy against indicting a sitting president was not part of the decision not to charge him, according to Barr and Mueller.
"In cataloging the President's actions, many of which took place in public view, the report identifies no actions that, in our judgment, constitute obstructive conduct, had a nexus to a pending or contemplated proceeding, and were done with corrupt intent, each of which, under the Department's principles of federal prosecution guiding charging decisions, would need to be proven beyond a reasonable doubt to establish an obstruction-of-justice offense," wrote Barr.
hmm... is that the Fat Lady I hear singing?
^the words you got in boldface are Barr's words..CNN's just reporting what Barr said in his letter......not sure what you're construing it to be
"While this report does not conclude that the President committed a crime, it also does not exonerate him,"Barr wrote........Interesting to note how general this is. Mueller likely suggested more investigation would be in order for money laundering, but that was not part of his investigation, although there certainly were indictments to that effect. This thing is far from over.
You Make Your Own Luck
Of the three boldfaced, number one: (A dismissal on the question of collusion and no charges of obstruction against either the President or his team.) was written by the author of the article Chris Cillizza, CNN Editor-at-large.
Number two (“While this report does not conclude that the President committed a crime, it also does not exonerate him,") was Attorney General William Barr quoting Special Counsel Robert Mueller – so, they are Mueller’s words.
Now, number three (identifies no actions that, in our judgment, constitute obstructive conduct, had a nexus to a pending or contemplated proceeding, and were done with corrupt intent, each of which, under the Department's principles of federal prosecution guiding charging decisions, would need to be proven beyond a reasonable doubt)are, in fact, Attorney General William Barr’s words - Hallelujah.
So, just who does the Attorney General speak for? Well, the Attorney General is the boss man of the Department of Justice, in fact he is the Top Cop, our countries highest law enforcement officer. He is the US Governments Attorney – so, he speaks for the United States Department of Justice.
Most Interesting, and of significant importance, is the fact that in Attorney General William Barr’s own words, (see above – bold face number three) he uses the phrase “in our judgement”, and not (in my judgement).
The United States Department of Justice, our highest level of law enforcement has accepted Mueller’s investigation.
On to the Libtard Crying Room. Best bring your hip waders.
So basically 'Hey Look, Our Morally, Ethically, and Potentially Legally Compromised President Wasn't Specifically Found Guilty of Collusion And Obstruction Relating To The Election That A Foreign Power Interceded In On To His Favor'Originally Posted by bowie
![]()
Who would vote for a candidate based on the Bart Simpson defense? "I didn't do it. Nobody saw me do it. You can't prove anything."
Rhetorical question like...
There are currently 1 users browsing this thread. (0 members and 1 guests)