Mueller report concludes it was not needed to begin with

[Truth Detector]

My hobby is dismantling clowns like you, ma'am.

Your hobby is ensuring that you remove any doubt what a repugnant, ranting loon you are. SUCCESS!

[CharacterAssassin]

I love it when asshats who know I have them on ignore still post to me.

It's their way of saying they're my bitch.

Fun!

[CharacterAssassin]

You mean like this from yesterday?

Could you explain what he's trying to say here? It's a "hit job" aka witch hunt, but it clears him of collusion?

You can't reason with Trump True Believers. They are immune to rationality and logic and it causes them literal physical pain.

[Truth Detector]

I love it when asshats who know I have them on ignore still post to me.

It's their way of saying they're my bitch.

Fun!

I love it when asshats have me on ignore and still post to me.

It's their way of saying they're my bitch.

Fun!

[Truth Detector]

You can't reason with Trump True Believers haters. They are immune to rationality and logic and it causes them literal physical pain.

Very true; look at a low IQ moron like yourself. The only thing you know is the playground. Sad little cunt.

[CharacterAssassin]

I love it when asshats who know I have them on ignore still post to me.

It's their way of saying they're my bitch.

Fun!!

[archives]

They didn't need a HOAX investigation to do this dumb fuck. That was a Federal issue that had already started investigating. It had NOTHING to do with the HOAX of Trump campaign and Russians conspiring.

He found NOTHING dumb fuck. Russian conspiracy with Trump was a HOAX by a cabal of corrupt Obama holdovers in the Justice Department. But you have no brains so you cannot comprehend the OBVIOUS.

You look stupid even when you cry dumb fuck. Given that there was NO obstruction and NO conspiracy, Democrats once again overplayed their hand and look like morons.

I do hope that Nadler is moronic enough to begin impeachment proceedings.

How many times we going see Trump/Barr's talking point, "no collusion, no obstruction?" How about "does not exonerate"

Funny their running with it but all over right wing media, FOX to the local demogoue, their working hard to sell it

Facts remain Russians was all over the Trump campaign, everywhere, and the Trump campaign eagerly looked to the Russians for help, now if the Trumpkin lemmings find no problem with Putin being involved in selecting our President, fine, but that would mean they also would have no problem with Putin organizing a 2020 Super PAC for Trump

[JPF]

you'd have to be specific



I don't think I would have either, given the entire end game was to get him to perjure himself under oath, which is a very low bar when "I did not have sex with that woman" qualifies


Trump could have shut down the investigation at any time, at his discretion


dozens and dozens?

ok



not in dispute by who, CNN?

Comey, Priebus, McGhan… several others.
If you chose not to testify, you would not be cooperating either. Claiming that he cooperated is false.
All of what I wrote was factual.

[JPF]

you do know they are process crimes or old tax cases like Manafort? Nothing to do with obstructing the investigation or collusion

Sure.

Only because of this investigation are the felons off the street and no longer working for the White House. That is a good thing, right?

[JPF]

Mueller could have subpoena for Trump to testify. He would have lost
There was no requirement for verbal interview, they answered by written questioner.

Not sure he would have lost. There was precedent for the OIC to interview a sitting President.

[Truth Detector]

How many times we going see Trump/Barr's talking point, "no collusion, no obstruction?" How about "does not exonerate"

Until it gets through your thick low IQ head???

[Truth Detector]

Comey, Priebus, McGhan… several others.
If you chose not to testify, you would not be cooperating either. Claiming that he cooperated is false.
All of what I wrote was factual.

None of what you write is factual; it is pure loony fantasy. NO ONE got fired. NO ONE destroyed evidence. NO ONE refused to cooperate. NO ONE shut down the investigation NO ONE chose not to release the entire report. NO ONE exercised executive privilege.

[Poor Richard Saunders]

Jonathan Turley addressed obstruction in his recent column.

It basically came down to Mullet not knowing whether Trump had criminal intent when he discussed removing Mullet. In Mullet’s words ‘he couldn’t tell what Trump was thinking’ or to the effect.

That, coupled with the fact the investigation itself, produced no crime, equals no charge. Or maybe more precisely, no charge worth pursuing. Unless, you’re really bad desperate to impeach and remove a president.

And yes, any third year law student could knock it down between Budweisers.

Did Turley read the report before he wrote his column? In some of the instances, intent is hard to tell. In other instances the intent comes from looking at statements made to others and in public and in private as well as other actions. Trump refused to testify on the issue so we have no statement from him under oath as to what his intent was. Mueller (his name is Mueller and your refusal to use his correct name works to undermine your argument) lays out a strong case for intent that meets the standard for obstruction. Mueller also lays out the law and court rulings that show the argument that there was no underlying crime so there can't be obstruction is complete legal nonsense.

Any first year law student could knock down your nonsense 1 hour into their first year.

Here's a simple question for you. If there can be no obstruction if there is no underlying crime then are you saying the GOP was wrong to include obstruction in the impeachment charges against Clinton since they accused him of obstruction in a civil case? I'll bet you won't answer the question honestly, but will do "whataboutism."

https://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-sr...?noredirect=on

[Earl]

No collusion, insufficient evidence to pursue obstruction.

Case closed ...except for the radical, Democrat Socialists who have done squat for the American people except libel and slander President Trump and his family.

He should sue.

[Poor Richard Saunders]

No evidence of collusion . not "some", "not rising to criminal intent" - none -by anyone associated with the Trump campaign
~~

the rest of the crap is Trump throwing a fit as an innocent man -but there WAS NO OBSTRUCTION

There was full transparency, full access to depositions.full document request fulfillment ,
and no claims/executions of privileges.

Trump yelling at his staff to fire Mueller/persona isn't meaningful without a firing.

Perhaps you should read the report before you make yourself look like a fool.

Full transparency is Trump refusing to clarify his answers under oath that he contradicts in public statements? Full transparency is Don Jr refusing to answer questions by the Office of Special Counsel?

Since you seem to be unable to read the report yourself, here is an answer as to the full transparency issue which includes the relevant quotes from the report.
https://www.politifact.com/truth-o-m...estigation-no/