Fox News says Mueller report did NOT clear Trump

Redundant posts from the loons will be responded to.

No collusion and insufficient evidence to pursue obstruction.

In America, that means that you are innocent until proven guilty.
 
reagansghost said:
that's not what he said

you've been schooled on this 20 times just today retard
Click to expand...

“The job of the prosecutor is to decide, yes or no. Make a decision. And then if you say yes, you indict. If you say no, you shut up. You don't go on and say, no, we're not going to indict, but let me tell you all the evidence that might have led us to indict. That's exactly what prosecutors shouldn't do,” he said

From Dershowitz.

https://www.washingtonexaminer.com/...-to-conclude-whether-trump-obstructed-justice
 
LV426 said:
Mueller couldn't make a formal charge, so as he says, he didn't contemplate it.

If your defense is tantamount to "Mueller didn't recommend a conclusion" while leaving out "because he didn't think it was his place", then you're a sophist who is deliberately pushing a false narrative to save your own ass from the embarrassment of being conned by Donald fucking Trump.
Click to expand...

Would you agree that appointing an SC but disallowing them from stating a conclusion to their investigation—is utterly asinine lol?
 
reagansghost said:
nope, accusing someone of a crime when they can't defend themselves in court is unethical and immoral

you're lost
Click to expand...

You are an idiot. Tell us, why did they investigate Trump then? Why were you Dems so adamant about him testifying? If you claim he can't be indicted, then why investigate?
 
Superfreak said:
He could have recommended indicting Trump.
Click to expand...

He didn't think he could even recommend that.

And what does it matter, anyway?

Trump still committed those acts of obstruction.

Now are you going to argue those acts of obstruction weren't acts of obstruction?

OK, so then please explain why Trump ordering Cohen to lie to Congress about the Moscow Project isn't obstruction of justice?
 
Superfreak said:
You are an idiot. Tell us, why did they investigate Trump then? Why were you Dems so adamant about him testifying? If you claim he can't be indicted, then why investigate?
Click to expand...

an investigation for Congress to impeach, by law he couldn't indict.........Trump campaign was communicating with over 70 Russians, discovered by surveillance, even allied intel was giving them the heads up

Fox has rendered you senseless
 
Superfreak said:
“The job of the prosecutor is to decide, yes or no. Make a decision. And then if you say yes, you indict. If you say no, you shut up. You don't go on and say, no, we're not going to indict, but let me tell you all the evidence that might have led us to indict. That's exactly what prosecutors shouldn't do,” he said

From Dershowitz.

https://www.washingtonexaminer.com/...-to-conclude-whether-trump-obstructed-justice
Click to expand...

LOL!

So after screeching about Democrats resurrecting John Dean, you decide you want to resurrect your own 20th-century legal fossil by invoking Dershowitz?

Get a grip.
 
reagansghost said:
nope, accusing someone of a crime when they can't defend themselves in court is unethical and immoral

you're lost
Click to expand...

What is also comical is that an indictment actually allows the accused to defend themselves. But what Mueller has done is said 'I can't conclude he is innocent, here is a lot of alleged dirt and supposition, I am not indicting or reaching conclusions, but I disagree with anyone who doesn't take the supposition in direction I want to go, again Trump isn't verified 100% innocent, but I cannot indict him'... How the fuck is that ethical or moral? How the fuck is anyone supposed to defend against that nonsense?

You are sitting here, along with many other Dems, insisting that obstruction occurred. Then you say, 'he couldn't indict'... meaning that Trump cannot defend himself in court. Which means you are the unethical and immoral person.
 
reagansghost said:
an investigation for Congress to impeach, by law he couldn't indict.........Trump campaign was communicating with over 70 Russians, discovered by surveillance, even allied intel was giving them the heads up

Fox has rendered you senseless
Click to expand...

Again moron... YOU are the one quoting Fox. Again Moron, there is NO LAW that says he couldn't indict. There is a DOJ letter ruling that states not to indict a sitting President. That is not a law, but an internal procedure. A procedure that DOES NOT stop the prosecutor from drawing conclusions. You are an idiot.
 
Superfreak said:
What is also comical is that an indictment actually allows the accused to defend themselves. But what Mueller has done is said 'I can't conclude he is innocent, here is a lot of alleged dirt and supposition, I am not indicting or reaching conclusions, but I disagree with anyone who doesn't take the supposition in direction I want to go, again Trump isn't verified 100% innocent, but I cannot indict him'... How the fuck is that ethical or moral? How the fuck is anyone supposed to defend against that nonsense?

You are sitting here, along with many other Dems, insisting that obstruction occurred. Then you say, 'he couldn't indict'... meaning that Trump cannot defend himself in court. Which means you are the unethical and immoral person.
Click to expand...

nope, Mueller stated clearly he couldn't indict a sitting president

you're dumb
 
Darth Omar said:
Would you agree that appointing an SC but disallowing them from stating a conclusion to their investigation—is utterly asinine lol?
Click to expand...

Mueller made plenty of conclusions; the report is filled with them.

34 individuals and businesses indicted across over 150+ charges and convictions totaling at least $40M in seized assets.

What he didn't conclude was whether or not the President should be indicted, and the reason he didn't conclude that was because he didn't think he could thanks to DOJ rules.
 
Superfreak said:
Why were you Dems so adamant about him testifying? If you claim he can't be indicted, then why investigate?
Click to expand...

Because he can be impeached, you jackass. That's why you investigate.

Wow.

What a fucking idiot.

It's like you're getting dumber on purpose as you realize your position is increasingly untenable.

You can only play stupid for so long before it catches up with you.
 
reagansghost said:
nope, Mueller stated clearly he couldn't indict a sitting president

you're dumb
Click to expand...

So Dershowitz is dumb according to you?

You are an immoral and unethical person, using the standards you set forth.

you also are a liar. I spelled out exactly what he could have done, as did Dershowitz. Yet you still lie.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top