Mueller did not exonerate trump on obstruction

[LV426]

I am aware of that. He left it up to the DOJ. The DOJ made the call based on the evidence presented in the report.

Why should we take Barr's word for it?

GOP: Not enough evidence to charge Trump with obstruction, according to the report.

All: Let us see the report.

GOP: LOL no are you crazy, that would be terrible.

[LV426]

Nobody has presented anything everybody already knows. But we all know this - the entire investigation was predicated on a fake dossier paid for by the Clinton campaign

The dossier isn't fake.

Furthermore, you haven't seen the Mueller report, so you don't know shit.

The GOP is refusing to release the report; it's pretty obvious why.

Instead, they are trying to force us to accept their conclusions of something without even seeing that something.

Why the fuck should anyone take anything they say as the truth?

This is just like the GOP fixing Iraq WMD Intel to fit the conclusion.

[LV426]

So there'll be an investigation on whether Trump fired Comey ???? I can save the country a lot of money. Trump fired Comey. Comey was investigating his boss based on an illegal fake dossier.

How was the dossier "fake" and "illegal"?

And how do you know this without even reading Mueller's report?

The answer is that you're a hack.

Why the fuck should anyone take anything you people say as the truth?

[LV426]

Since the whole investigation resulted in the collusion to be a big hoax

Who said it was a hoax?

Barr.

That's it.

You don't know what Mueller said because you haven't read his report, and it doesn't seem like you want to.

You just want everyone to accept Barr's conclusions and move on.

That's sketchy behavior.

[cancel2 2022]

Who said it was a hoax?

Barr.

That's it.

You don't know what Mueller said because you haven't read his report, and it doesn't seem like you want to.

You just want everyone to accept Barr's conclusions and move on.

That's sketchy behavior.

Shut the fuck up, you're a total loony!!

[anonymoose]

Shut the fuck up, you're a total loony!!

I don't have him on ignore but I ignore him.
Wish I had a screen shot of the settings page where it shows 'who quoted me' previously. He apparently spent most of a day replying to me. He's a stalker and he's a sicko.

[reagansghost]

sorry Tea Bag Nation, Mueller did not exonerate trump on obstruction


I think everybody is missing the true bombshell in the Mueller report. But it is sitting there almost in plain sight. Ask yourself why Mueller did not draw a conclusion on the obstruction question. Not because he couldn’t decide the question, but because he believes it wasn’t his place to decide the question.

Justice department guidelines hold that a sitting president cannot be indicted. So what would be the point of weighing in on that issue?

Who is assigned the role of standing in judgement of a sitting president then? No one?

Answer the Congress, obviously! And Mueller intended to lay out the “difficult issues of law and fact” to the Congress. Mueller’s report is an open invitation to Congress to begin deliberating impeachment, with his findings as a roadmap.

That’s the real bombshell.

But a funny thing happened, on the way to these deliberations. In a brazen act of usurpation, Barr intercepted the invitation and tried to hide it.

Image if he had not. Imagine the headlines.

Dateline Washington DC. Mueller invites Congress to consider impeachment.

~ kennetha's Journal, DU

[domer76]

so how do the two situations differ in terms of follow up, and going forward? does it mean dems will waste the precious time until 2020 avoiding policy discussions and pushing lies? do it. fine. you will lose. we're trying to talk you off the ledge here.

I’m trying to educate you. Obviously, you have earned an “F”

[Southern Chicken]

sorry Tea Bag Nation, Mueller did not exonerate trump on obstruction


I think everybody is missing the true bombshell in the Mueller report. But it is sitting there almost in plain sight. Ask yourself why Mueller did not draw a conclusion on the obstruction question. Not because he couldn’t decide the question, but because he believes it wasn’t his place to decide the question.

Justice department guidelines hold that a sitting president cannot be indicted. So what would be the point of weighing in on that issue?

Who is assigned the role of standing in judgement of a sitting president then? No one?

Answer the Congress, obviously! And Mueller intended to lay out the “difficult issues of law and fact” to the Congress. Mueller’s report is an open invitation to Congress to begin deliberating impeachment, with his findings as a roadmap.

That’s the real bombshell.

But a funny thing happened, on the way to these deliberations. In a brazen act of usurpation, Barr intercepted the invitation and tried to hide it.

Image if he had not. Imagine the headlines.

Dateline Washington DC. Mueller invites Congress to consider impeachment.

~ kennetha's Journal, DU

Interesting quake fluff article, We know the constitution’s core remedy for a President who commits “high crimes or misdemeanours” is through Congress and the power of impeachment, but that this doesn’t legally mean a sitting President cannot be indicted. if Mueller thought there was a public interest requirement to indict Trump, he could ask Attorney General Bill Barr for an exception. In short ,He left it open for the public and up to the AG to decide.

[christiefan915]

So why didn't Mueller go deeper into a conclusion for potential obstruction instead of leaving it open for the AG?

That's something I hope we'll learn if and when the entire report is made public.

[christiefan915]

Keep spinning Christie. Keep spinning. The desperation of the left is quite amusing. So sure that your masters wouldn't lie to you again, now you find out that they duped you for the 1000th time. It must be rough parroting all of their bullshit, believing they were telling you the truth... then being betrayed by them yet again.

How am I spinning, moron? I'm saying what Barr said, is he spinning also?

[PoliTalker]

Hello anonymoose,

Nobody has presented anything everybody already knows. But we all know this - the entire investigation was predicated on a fake dossier paid for by the Clinton campaign.
So there'll be an investigation on whether Trump fired Comey ???? I can save the country a lot of money. Trump fired Comey. Comey was investigating his boss based on an illegal fake dossier. I wouldn't even call that justice. It was an attempted coup.
Since the whole investigation resulted in the collusion to be a big hoax I'd say Trump did the country a service firing Comey.
Lindsey Graham et al have vowed to get to the bottom of the whole thing. I hope they do.

I hope they try. I'm sure it will turn up at least as much quality results as the President's Commission on Voter Fraud didn't.

[christiefan915]

Comey is full of shit.
"gross negligence" does NOT REQUIRE intent- the act of placing any classified info on a non-secure server,
or safe ( like Kendall and the thumb drive) are all ipso facto statute violations

There was a sailor who took pics of his sub when he left service (classified) for his own use-
he was indicted and jailed

That's not what I read. Gross negligence is defined as "a conscious and voluntary disregard of the need to use reasonable care, which is likely to cause foreseeable grave injury or harm to persons, property, or both. It is conduct that is extreme when compared with ordinary Negligence, which is a mere failure to exercise reasonable care."

Conscious and voluntary = the intention not to use reasonable care.

[christiefan915]

In order to prosecute for obstruction one must CHARGE a person with obstruction.
Mueller didn't have anything that he could charge him with. Got it?
Trump was never CHARGED with obstruction.
THEREFORRRRRRRRRRRRRRRE..........without a prosecuted charge, there can be no "exoneration" in the pure technical sense.
THE END.........roll the credits.

You are claiming Mueller had nothing chargeable but there is no evidence of that. I am claiming that Mueller has something dicey but it's not enough to charge him.

If your claim were 100% certain the headlines would read: "Mueller did not find trump or his campaign conspired with Russia, and also exonerated him on obstruction."

[christiefan915]

Yet Trump is exonerated and did not collude. Interesting.

Do I have to type these words in another language? The Special Counsel states that "while this report does not conclude that the President committed a crime, it also does not exonerate him."

You seem to be having a real hard time understanding Barr's words.