Page 9 of 17 FirstFirst ... 5678910111213 ... LastLast
Results 121 to 135 of 245

Thread: Mueller report concludes it was not needed to begin with

  1. #121 | Top
    Join Date
    Jul 2017
    Posts
    43,479
    Thanks
    12,574
    Thanked 23,756 Times in 16,563 Posts
    Groans
    249
    Groaned 1,622 Times in 1,532 Posts

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by archives View Post
    How many times we going see Trump/Barr's talking point, "no collusion, no obstruction?" How about "does not exonerate"
    since when do prosecutor exonerate? they indict ( or in this case recommend indict) or not.
    Mueller is a slime ball who couldn't recommend indictment -so instead of saying so he says "can't exonerate"

  2. #122 | Top
    Join Date
    Sep 2009
    Posts
    107,358
    Thanks
    5
    Thanked 19 Times in 18 Posts
    Groans
    0
    Groaned 2 Times in 2 Posts

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Poor Richard Saunders View Post
    Yes, it is so. From page 1 of Volume II
    So what's the point of the investigation?

  3. #123 | Top
    Join Date
    Jul 2017
    Posts
    43,479
    Thanks
    12,574
    Thanked 23,756 Times in 16,563 Posts
    Groans
    249
    Groaned 1,622 Times in 1,532 Posts

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Poor Richard Saunders View Post
    There is no such thing as a perjury trap if one simply tells the truth. Hillary has testified for over 8 hours to Congress without a lawyer present and she didn't commit perjury. Is it because she is so much smarter than Trump?
    Trump would have been allowed a lawyer in a sit down interview. It seems your entire argument is Trump is so stupid he would lie under oath. That isn't saying much for someone that is supposed to be the smartest man to ever be President.
    Hillary did lie about it not being a terror attack. her tweets to her kid in the middle of the night said just that -but Mike Morrell cam along and clouded the issue ( i seriously forget all the machinations -believe it or not)
    but I never really blamed Hilary for Bengazi -too many people had a hand in it, including Ambassador Stevens.

    I DO BLAME HILLARY for making Qadaffi a 'military target" assassinating him by Predator
    ( causing him to flee the convoy)
    Libya has been in a state of civil wars since then - another going on now.
    Hilary was the driving force of talking Obama into bombing Qadaffi - far surpassing the UN authority for a
    "no fly"zone. Libya remains a failed terrorist infested state because of it to this day

    It seems the GOP impeached Clinton for obstruction with no underlying crime. Did the laws change since then? Or are you admitting that the Republicans were only being political when they impeached Clinton for obstruction with no underlying crime?
    Clinton perjured himself "I did not have sex with that woman"
    Unlike yourself -a complete partisan hack- I opposed Impeachment on Bill Clinton as well on the grounds is was a picayune charge. Just like Obstruction ( not proven here) would be picayune without the underlying crime of conspiracy (collusion)
    It seems you prefer to eat the shit being served to you by RW commentators. How does it taste? If only you could think for yourself.
    go fuck yourself
    Perhaps you could read the report. Just read the Introductions and Executive summaries if you want to discuss this with any intelligence. Otherwise you are simply an idiot full of sound and fury signifying nothing.
    WTF would I want to read it? It's slanted from a prosecutorial POV -it's written to politically damage Trump, even though the lack of a conspiracy by ANYONE in TrumpCo is why the investigation was started
    ( it was not started for Obstruction crap Mueller found -one giant large process crime only of unproven obstruction)

    It is amazing how little you know about Mueller's purpose. You might try crawling out from under your rock and reading page 1, paragraph 5 of the report.
    buzz off. I'm quite aware of the cabal of Rosenstein /Mueller / and Comey that all had it out for Trump.
    Recall Lisa Page said by the time Mueller was appointed they STILL had NO EVIDENCE of "wrongdoing" by TrumpCo.

    Wait till the Deep State Creeps ( Brennan et all) get their reckoning -this little nothingness of Obstruction
    will be a blip kept alive only by the Dems and the media.

    Meanwhile we have the "manufactured border crisis" and much unfinished business by Congress due to their Obstructions - real damage to the country because of Dems
    Last edited by dukkha; 04-23-2019 at 12:47 PM.
    I don't know how you were diverted / You were perverted too
    I don't know how you were inverted / No one alerted you

  4. #124 | Top
    Join Date
    Dec 2018
    Posts
    10,829
    Thanks
    5
    Thanked 4,989 Times in 3,362 Posts
    Groans
    0
    Groaned 637 Times in 605 Posts

    Default

    So, you simply ignore your own writings and run away from facts.
    Quote Originally Posted by Truth Detector View Post
    NO ONE destroyed evidence.
    Quote Originally Posted by Poor Richard Saunders View Post
    No one destroyed evidence? It appears you didn't read the report then because Mueller clearly states "some of the individuals... deleted relevant communications or communicated ... using applications that feature encryption or that do not provide for long-term retention of data.."
    Quote Originally Posted by Truth Detector View Post
    That wasn't Trump or his campaign snowflake. I have the report.....page number and section and we will argue that point.
    Quote Originally Posted by Poor Richard Saunders View Post
    Really? Kushner, Gates and Manafort were not part of the Trump campaign? What reality do you live in?
    Quote Originally Posted by Truth Detector View Post
    Moron; their crimes had NOTHING to do with the Trump campaign or Trump himself. What part of NOTHING do you have difficulty comprehending you triggered mental midget?
    Kushner, Gates and Manafort were part of the Trump campaign. They deleted relevant communications which would be destroying evidence.

    Evidence was destroyed by members of Trump's campaign. Your attempt to divert to something else only shows you to be unable to support your argument.
    "We are all born ignorant, but one must work hard to remain stupid."

    "Any fool can criticize, condemn and complain - and most fools do."

  5. #125 | Top
    Join Date
    Dec 2018
    Posts
    10,829
    Thanks
    5
    Thanked 4,989 Times in 3,362 Posts
    Groans
    0
    Groaned 637 Times in 605 Posts

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Truth Detector View Post
    There you go again like the lying cunt we know you to be; these weren't COURT rulings you ranting lunatic; they were the claims made by a partisan hack investigation that found NOTHING.
    Really?
    Arthur Andersen LLP v. United States,
    544 U.S. 696, isn't a court ruling
    United States v. Gordon, 710 F.3d 1124, 1151
    (I 0th Cir. 2013) isn't a court ruling
    United States v. Pasha, 797 F .3d 1122, 1132 isn't a court ruling?

    The report cites multiple court rulings and laws when it lays out the case for obstruction and why the arguments you now parrot are legally unsupported.

    If only you were able to read beyond a 2nd grade level......
    "We are all born ignorant, but one must work hard to remain stupid."

    "Any fool can criticize, condemn and complain - and most fools do."

  6. #126 | Top
    Join Date
    Jul 2017
    Posts
    43,479
    Thanks
    12,574
    Thanked 23,756 Times in 16,563 Posts
    Groans
    249
    Groaned 1,622 Times in 1,532 Posts

    Default

    ^ ROFL @ "deleting relevant communication" -Hillary deleted, Bleachbit and hammered her cellphones!
    You seriously lack awareness of the the Espionage Act ( gross negligence) that does not require intent

  7. The Following User Says Thank You to dukkha For This Post:

    Truth Detector (04-23-2019)

  8. #127 | Top
    Join Date
    Jul 2017
    Posts
    43,479
    Thanks
    12,574
    Thanked 23,756 Times in 16,563 Posts
    Groans
    249
    Groaned 1,622 Times in 1,532 Posts

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Poor Richard Saunders View Post
    Really?
    Arthur Andersen LLP v. United States,
    544 U.S. 696, isn't a court ruling
    United States v. Gordon, 710 F.3d 1124, 1151
    (I 0th Cir. 2013) isn't a court ruling
    United States v. Pasha, 797 F .3d 1122, 1132 isn't a court ruling?

    The report cites multiple court rulings and laws when it lays out the case for obstruction and why the arguments you now parrot are legally unsupported.

    If only you were able to read beyond a 2nd grade level......
    ROFL are you joking??

    Your buddy Andrew Weissman was overturned 9-0 by SCOTUS
    https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Arthur..._United_States
    In a unanimous decision by the Supreme Court, Arthur Andersen's conviction was overturned. Chief Justice William Rehnquist wrote the opinion for the court, and was joined by all associate justices.

    In the court's view, the instructions allowed the jury to convict Andersen without proving that the firm knew it had broken the law or that there had been a link to any official proceeding that prohibited the destruction of documents. The instructions were so vague that they "simply failed to convey the requisite consciousness of wrongdoing", Rehnquist wrote. "Indeed, it is striking how little culpability the instructions required." Rehnquist's opinion also expressed grave skepticism at the government's definition of "corrupt persuasion"—persuasion with an improper purpose even without knowing an act is unlawful. "Only persons conscious of wrongdoing can be said to 'knowingly corruptly persuade,' " he wrote.

  9. The Following User Says Thank You to dukkha For This Post:

    Truth Detector (04-23-2019)

  10. #128 | Top
    Join Date
    Oct 2016
    Location
    land-locked in Ocala,FL
    Posts
    27,321
    Thanks
    30,862
    Thanked 16,758 Times in 11,557 Posts
    Groans
    1,063
    Groaned 889 Times in 847 Posts

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Poor Richard Saunders View Post
    I am unclear what you are trying to say. Are you saying he didn't investigate to see if crimes happened?
    Since no crime had occurred, there was no reason to go on a fishing expedition to try and find one.
    The "criminals" were the Russians and the DNC campaign. There was and is still evidence.
    Bama knew they were messing with us at least as far back as '15.
    Abortion rights dogma can obscure human reason & harden the human heart so much that the same person who feels
    empathy for animal suffering can lack compassion for unborn children who experience lethal violence and excruciating
    pain in abortion.

    Unborn animals are protected in their nesting places, humans are not. To abort something is to end something
    which has begun. To abort life is to end it.



  11. The Following 2 Users Say Thank You to Stretch For This Post:

    Darth Omar (04-23-2019), Truth Detector (04-23-2019)

  12. #129 | Top
    Join Date
    Dec 2018
    Posts
    10,829
    Thanks
    5
    Thanked 4,989 Times in 3,362 Posts
    Groans
    0
    Groaned 637 Times in 605 Posts

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Legion View Post
    So what's the point of the investigation?
    Page 1, paragraph 2.
    "We are all born ignorant, but one must work hard to remain stupid."

    "Any fool can criticize, condemn and complain - and most fools do."

  13. #130 | Top
    Join Date
    Nov 2016
    Posts
    41,960
    Thanks
    3
    Thanked 22,041 Times in 13,848 Posts
    Groans
    0
    Groaned 3,042 Times in 2,838 Posts

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Stretch View Post
    Since no crime had occurred, there was no reason to go on a fishing expedition to try and find one.
    The "criminals" were the Russians and the DNC campaign. There was and is still evidence.
    Bama knew they were messing with us at least as far back as '15.
    Once again, Mueller didn't go looking for a crime, he was appointed by a Trump Justice Dept, picked by a Trump appointee, to investigate Russians influence in the election, and I don't know how it could be a fishing expedition given the number of indictments and guilty pleas he attained in just two years

  14. The Following 2 Users Say Thank You to archives For This Post:

    christiefan915 (04-23-2019), Phantasmal (04-23-2019)

  15. #131 | Top
    Join Date
    Sep 2009
    Posts
    107,358
    Thanks
    5
    Thanked 19 Times in 18 Posts
    Groans
    0
    Groaned 2 Times in 2 Posts

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Poor Richard Saunders View Post
    Page 1, paragraph 2.
    So you don't know?

  16. #132 | Top
    Join Date
    Nov 2016
    Posts
    41,960
    Thanks
    3
    Thanked 22,041 Times in 13,848 Posts
    Groans
    0
    Groaned 3,042 Times in 2,838 Posts

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Legion View Post
    So you don't know?
    Prove he "don't know"

    We will understand if you can't

  17. #133 | Top
    Join Date
    Dec 2018
    Posts
    10,829
    Thanks
    5
    Thanked 4,989 Times in 3,362 Posts
    Groans
    0
    Groaned 637 Times in 605 Posts

    Default

    So, your argument is in the case of Hillary you need no evidence but in the case of Trump you can just ignore the evidence.

    WTF would I want to read it? It's slanted from a prosecutorial POV -it's written to politically damage Trump, even though the lack of a conspiracy by ANYONE in TrumpCo is why the investigation was started
    ( it was not started for Obstruction crap Mueller found -one giant large process crime only of unproven obstruction)
    You should want to read it because it is the only way to make rational arguments against what is in it. Without reading it, you are simply waving your hands in the air and making irrational sounds. A sound argument would list Mueller's arguments and then show why his arguments are wrong with sources to support your claims.


    Wait till the Deep State Creeps ( Brennan et all) get their reckoning -this little nothingness of Obstruction
    will be a blip kept alive only by the Dems and the media.
    Once again, you simply make a claim with no evidence. The Mueller report includes much of the information and evidence that led up to the investigation. Unless you can dispute what is laid out in the report your argument about "deep state creeps" makes you look unhinged. Courts rely on evidence and arguments that are well thought out with valid support. Investigators rely on the same thing. They also rely on the same standard the Mueller lays out. Unless there is enough evidence to charge and convict of a crime that is actually on the books, they will not bring any charges.
    "We are all born ignorant, but one must work hard to remain stupid."

    "Any fool can criticize, condemn and complain - and most fools do."

  18. #134 | Top
    Join Date
    Oct 2016
    Location
    land-locked in Ocala,FL
    Posts
    27,321
    Thanks
    30,862
    Thanked 16,758 Times in 11,557 Posts
    Groans
    1,063
    Groaned 889 Times in 847 Posts

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by archives View Post
    Once again, Mueller didn't go looking for a crime, he was appointed by a Trump Justice Dept, picked by a Trump appointee, to investigate Russians influence in the election, and I don't know how it could be a fishing expedition given the number of indictments and guilty pleas he attained in just two years
    Russian influence, yes,
    Trump, no.
    They should have investigated Bama...........he was aware of it in '15.
    Abortion rights dogma can obscure human reason & harden the human heart so much that the same person who feels
    empathy for animal suffering can lack compassion for unborn children who experience lethal violence and excruciating
    pain in abortion.

    Unborn animals are protected in their nesting places, humans are not. To abort something is to end something
    which has begun. To abort life is to end it.



  19. The Following User Says Thank You to Stretch For This Post:

    Truth Detector (04-23-2019)

  20. #135 | Top
    Join Date
    Dec 2018
    Posts
    10,829
    Thanks
    5
    Thanked 4,989 Times in 3,362 Posts
    Groans
    0
    Groaned 637 Times in 605 Posts

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by bodhisattva View Post
    ^ ROFL @ "deleting relevant communication" -Hillary deleted, Bleachbit and hammered her cellphones!
    You seriously lack awareness of the the Espionage Act ( gross negligence) that does not require intent
    Hillary is "whataboutism". If Hillary is guilty of a crime then Kushner, Gates and Manafort would also be. But the reality is that none of them knowinlgy destroyed evidence under subpoena so none of them are guilty. But it doesn't change the fact that evidence clearly was deleted contrary to Truth Detector's claim.

    I am fully aware of the Espionage Acts that Hillary could have been charged with. It seems it is you that that lacks awareness. Feel free to cite the act you think makes gross negligence a felony. It requires one be grossly negligent about specific things that lead to a specific result. I doubt you will provide a link to any law. And it is even less likely you will provide any evidence to show how Hillary's actions meet the standard of the law.
    "We are all born ignorant, but one must work hard to remain stupid."

    "Any fool can criticize, condemn and complain - and most fools do."

Similar Threads

  1. Replies: 54
    Last Post: 04-15-2019, 02:06 PM
  2. Replies: 10
    Last Post: 04-03-2019, 09:06 AM
  3. Replies: 5
    Last Post: 03-26-2019, 02:33 PM
  4. While Trump's away, 'much-needed' White House renovations begin
    By Cancel 2018.2 in forum Current Events Forum
    Replies: 13
    Last Post: 08-05-2017, 11:47 PM
  5. Report details BP's ability to deliver oil where least needed
    By Guns Guns Guns in forum Current Events Forum
    Replies: 3
    Last Post: 06-07-2012, 06:16 AM

Bookmarks

Posting Rules

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •