PostmodernProphet
fully immersed in faith..
Did they actually read it?
Yes,,,,,,but I am curious....when they finished did they look at each other and say "oh, so THAT's what they were talking about"?......
Did they actually read it?
In legal terms, it means it never happened.Doesn't mean they didn't do it....duh. Mueller even cites examples, but evidently he felt that the POTUS is above the law, and left it to Congress to bring charges
”Tangential to the truth.”Let me help here, Althea is a bullshitter and a polemicist. He is at best tangential to the truth, that's what he does. Oh and he's a racist as well.
Oh man.. We do need some legislation -especially on immigration/asylum reform.I notice one thing... while they are doing that they aren't passing stupid laws. I say, "Go for it!"
never happened. more fake news from the hole brained desh.
29 investigations ongoing
I will invest in the ink, print it out and read along and make notes. Least I can do as my civic duty.
House Democrats to read the entire Mueller report aloud on floor of Congress on Thursday
![]()
BOB BRIGHAM
14 MAY 2019 AT 19:15 ET
[FONT=&]![]()
Rep. Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez (D-NY) presiding over the House of Representatives (screengrab)
House Democrats announced a new effort on Tuesday to educate the American people on the special counsel Robert Mueller’s report.
“More than 20 House Democrats will stage a marathon public reading of the entire redacted Mueller report beginning Thursday at noon, and likely ending in the early morning hours of Friday,” The Washington Post announced.
The effort is being organized by Rep. Mary Gay Scanlon (D-PA), the vice chair of the House Judiciary Committee.
“We’ve been saying for weeks that if you think there was no obstruction and no collusion, you haven’t read the Mueller report. So the ongoing quest has been, ‘How do we get that story out there while we are waiting for the witnesses to come in?’” Scanlon explained.
Judiciary Committee Chairman Jerrold Nadler (D-NY) will be the second reader, after Scanlon.
https://www.rawstory.com/2019/05/ho...eport-aloud-on-floor-of-congress-on-thursday/
[/FONT]
Doesn't mean they didn't do it.
Nonetheless, Trump has now a 1-29 winning record in federal and state investigations.
so you are going to lie about something that you said and others remember me calling you out on?
you are a sociopath
you are broken
that is why you support the idiot ideas you support
ypu are incapable of love grind
that is why ypu are always wrong in the end
That is why you cant see why ypur ideas always fail
YOU DONT UNDERSTAND HUMANS
therefore you can NOT understand how the world works
If you could for ONE DAY see the real world that exists you would understand what you are missing out on in life.
accept your handicap and bow to the reality other humans KNOW inherently
You being mad that people like me who are NORMAL makes you even more pathetic
Doesn't mean they didn't do it....duh. Mueller even cites examples, but evidently he felt that the POTUS is above the law, and left it to Congress to bring charges
Incorrect.No, he did not. He stated there was no collusion/coordination. Meeting with Russians is not collusion/coordination.
Incorrect.
No, he did not. He stated there was no collusion/coordination. Meeting with Russians is not collusion/coordination.
Incorrect.
That is precisely what was stated.
By BarrThat is precisely what was stated.
LMAO. You should continue reading, as Mueller outlines direct conspiracy between Russia and the campaign. I understand that you exist on soundbites." The investigation did not identify evidence that any U.S. persons conspired or coordinated with the IRA."
"...the investigation did not establish that members of the Trump Campaign conspired or coordinated with the Russian government in its election interference activities."
https://www.theatlantic.com/politic...r-report-release-summaries-barr-trump/587182/
The investigation did not always yield admissible information or testimony, or a complete picture of the activities undertaken by subjects of the investigation. Some individuals invoked their Fifth Amendment right against compelled self-incrimination and were not, in the Office's judgment, appropriate candidates for grants of immunity. The Office limited its pursuit of other witnesses and information-such as information known to attorneys or individuals claiming to be members of the media-in light of internal Department of Justice policies. See, e.g. , Justice Manual§§ 9-13.400, 13.410. Some of the information obtained via court process, moreover, was presumptively covered by legal privilege and was screened from investigators by a filter ( or "taint") team. Even when individuals testified or agreed to be interviewed, they sometimes provided information that was false or incomplete, leading to some of the false-statements charges described above. And the Office faced practical limits on its ability to access relevant evidence as well-numerous witnesses and subjects lived abroad, and documents were held outside the United States.
Further, the Office learned that some of the individuals we interviewed or whose conduct we investigated—including some associated with the Trump Campaign—deleted relevant communications or communicated during the relevant period using applications that feature encryption or that do not provide for long-term retention of data or communications records. In such cases, the Office was not able to corroborate witness statements through comparison to contemporaneous communications or fully question witnesses about statements that appeared inconsistent with other known facts.
Accordingly, while this report embodies factual and legal determinations that the Office believes to be accurate and complete to the greatest extent possible, given these identified gaps, the Office cannot rule out the possibility that the unavailable information would shed additional light on (or cast in a new light) the events described in the report.