Complete nonsense. His job isn't too prove innocence you idiot. How the hell are you a lawyer? His job is to see if the EVIDENCE is strong enough to bring charges.
Again, he absolutely, 100%, could have concluded indictment was warranted. The DoJ then would have waited until Trump was out of office to do so. Basic law you moron.
There is nothing that said Mueller couldn't reach conclusions.
Sure not, liar.
“So that was Justice Department policy. Those were the principles under which we operated. And from them, we concluded that we would not reach a determination one way or the other about whether the president committed a crime.”
“As set forth in the report, after the investigation, if we had confidence that the president did not clearly commit a crime, we would have said so. We did not.”
He reached 10 conclusions
FACTUAL RESULTS OF THE OBSTRUCTION INVESTIGATION”
A. The Campaign's Response to Reports About Russian Support for Trump
B. The President's Conduct Concerning the Investigation of Michael Flynn
C. The President's Reaction to Public Confirmation of the FBl's Russia Investigation
D. Events Leading Up To and Surrounding the Termination of FBI Director Corney
E. The President's Efforts to Remove the Special Counsel
F. The President's Efforts to Curtail the Special Counsel Investigation
H. The President's Further Efforts to Have the Attorney General Take Over the Investigation
I. The President Orders McGahn to Deny that the President Tried to Fire the Special Counsel
J. The President's Conduct Towards Flynn, Manafort,
K. The President's Conduct Involving Michael Cohen
[QUOTE=domer76;3096923]
He reached 10 conclusions
FACTUAL RESULTS OF THE OBSTRUCTION INVESTIGATION”
how is that obstruction of justice, other than in lala landA. The Campaign's Response to Reports About Russian Support for Trump
which conduct is that nutjob?B. The President's Conduct Concerning the Investigation of Michael Flynn
we're only three in and you've claimed twice that a reaction is obstruction, and you wonder why we all think you're a triggered cupcake?C. The President's Reaction to Public Confirmation of the FBl's Russia Investigation
last I checked trump can fire anyone he wants to first of all, and secondly I think Comey's incompetence is beyond being able to dispute, no?D. Events Leading Up To and Surrounding the Termination of FBI Director Corney
but he didn't huh nutbags, he could have right, but didn't.. I'm trying to follow your triggered babble I really amE. The President's Efforts to Remove the Special Counsel
that's just a lie, he said repeatedly he wanted it to finish because he did nothing wrong, but pointing out what a waste of time and resource it was... RIGHT AGAIN wasn't he tiny?F. The President's Efforts to Curtail the Special Counsel Investigation
What ?^^^^H. The President's Further Efforts to Have the Attorney General Take Over the Investigation
why would he deny he tried to do something that he could have done anytime he wanted to, ina n instant, that ^^^makes about as much sense as paying for your education did to your parents probablyI. The President Orders McGahn to Deny that the President Tried to Fire the Special Counsel
^^^ what? did you take your meds? they're in a cup at the deskJ. The President's Conduct Towards Flynn, Manafort,
what doe's that even mean?K. The President's Conduct Involving Michael Cohen
you have too much time on your hands, ever think about knitting flower boy?
This just In::: Trump indicted for living in liberals heads and not paying RENT
C̶N̶N̶ SNN.... Shithole News Network
Trump Is Coming back to a White House Near you
Hello Southern Chicken,
I disagree.
Mueller indeed left it up to the house to proceed with charges if they deem fit. He did so create a list of possible infractions. He stated that he is prevented from bringing an indictment against a sitting president.
The AG is likewise unable to indict the president. That task is left up to the house.
Personal Ignore Policy PIP: I like civil discourse. I will give you all the respect in the world if you respect me. Mouth off to me, or express overt racism, you will be PERMANENTLY Ignore Listed. Zero tolerance. No exceptions. I'll never read a word you write, even if quoted by another, nor respond to you, nor participate in your threads. ... Ignore the shallow. Cherish the thoughtful. Long Live Civil Discourse, Mutual Respect, and Good Debate! ps: Feel free to adopt my PIP. It works well.
Personal Ignore Policy PIP: I like civil discourse. I will give you all the respect in the world if you respect me. Mouth off to me, or express overt racism, you will be PERMANENTLY Ignore Listed. Zero tolerance. No exceptions. I'll never read a word you write, even if quoted by another, nor respond to you, nor participate in your threads. ... Ignore the shallow. Cherish the thoughtful. Long Live Civil Discourse, Mutual Respect, and Good Debate! ps: Feel free to adopt my PIP. It works well.
But that’s kind of it lol.
It’s a policy and it’s open to interpretation. The reason presidents should be immune from indictment is because state Attorneys General could file bogus indictments against a president for partisan reasons. So rather than opening that Pandoras Box it was decided presidents should be immune from indictments—while serving. Makes perfect sense and it’s a good rule.
Sadly, presidents aren’t immune from partisan Witch Hunts.
At any rate, note that says *nothing* about presidents being immune from criminal conclusions or determinations that arise out of investigations. A conclusion is not an indictment. Mullet is totally on his own with that one. There is NO reason Mullet couldn’t have concluded Trump’s actions were worthy of indictment and then *plainly stated* it as such.
But he left us this Mumbo-jumbo about Trump being not not guilty of obstruction. I challenge anyone to cite another single instance where a federal prosecutor ended with such an absurd proclamation. And along with it, the so-called ten instances of obstruction which are actually ten potential instances of obstruction.
It’s very easy to get the idea it was done in order to give House Democrats something to work with. In fact, that’s the most plausible explanation for the contortions.
Coup has started. First of many steps. Impeachment will follow ultimately~WB attorney Mark Zaid, January 2017
Hello politalker.
The special counsel sends the report to the AG not to congress. The AG explains it to congress.
For your review please read this thoroughly or this is a wasted exercise
https://www.brookings.edu/testimonie...l-regulations/
PoliTalker (06-13-2019)
"The Attorney General has full control over the assignment to a special counsel of additional jurisdiction (section 600.4(b)) that is “necessary in order to fully investigate and resolve the matters assigned, or to investigate new matters that come to light” during a special counsel’s investigation. A special counsel is to consult with the Attorney General, who will then “determine whether to include the additional matters within the Special Counsel’s jurisdiction or assign them elsewhere.”
Bookmarks