Congress should impeach Bob Barr
- Thread starter Jarod
- Start date
Superfreak
Verified User
Wrong. Which is why you refuse to state what was misrepresented.
No moron... the contention that Mueller had was the amount of the report released two days after he gave it to Barr. Not whether or not it was eventually released.
Again... Barr did not lie. Did not misrepresent Mueller's report. You lied.
Adolf_Twitler
Verified User
They don't call you SUPERSTUPID for no reason! LOL!
Superfreak
Verified User
lol... still no evidence moron?
So says Barr from a phone conversation.
Those two statements were lies. The March 27 letter proves it.
Adolf_Twitler
Verified User
The Mueller report offered no conclusions about didly dick!
Or haven't you been paying attention?
Mueller explained why the investigation led to no conclusions on behalf of the Justice department- as if it were not the Justice department's job to do that- and as if it is Congress's job to form a conclusion.
Now his explanations were pretty weak blaming that on OLC opinions to not be able to indict a sitting president, but that's OK Congress will form a conclusion.
Robert Mueller looked weak and so was his argument about not being to indict a sitting president! I say bullshit on that!
There is nothing in the Constitution that says the Justice Department may not indict a sitting president.
And that is what Robert Mueller should have said! He should have used better judgement.
First of all, we don't use OLC opinions about our Constitution to make a decision to indict a sitting president- we use the Constitution to make all of our decisions!
The Constitution says what it says, and it doesn't say- what it doesn't say!
Last edited:
"If we had had the confidence that the president had not clearly committed a crime,
we would have said so," Mueller announced. He once again pointed to inconclusive evidence.
They did not have that confidence. They did not have that evidence to indict.
Therefore, if Mullet DID conclude he committed a crime, he would indict. Oh wait......he did NOT indict.
we would have said so," Mueller announced. He once again pointed to inconclusive evidence.
They did not have that confidence. They did not have that evidence to indict.
Therefore, if Mullet DID conclude he committed a crime, he would indict. Oh wait......he did NOT indict.
Well let's try that route because the moronic narratives that he lied is moronic.
LIE and LAME. Link us up to those exact comments from Mueller.
You need a crime to Indict. Who do you think does the indictment snowflake? That's right, the AG who clearly stated there was insufficient cause to indict for obstruction.
This is a low IQ OPINION and not connected to evidence, reality or any criminal behavior snowflake. Congress cannot subpoena a President for something he has never done. What part of no crime do you morons not comprehend?
What the fuck are they waiting for! bring it on. The Senate will not convict. Then what? More crying, lying and buffoonish clown shows in the House?
No snowflake. FUCK YOU and your fellow leftist retards who are spending so much time flailing, lying, defaming and impugning.
Mueller never said such a thing you lying dumbass. LINK snowflake or STFU.
Irony from a massive lying vagina dunce on steroids. STFU you glaring asshole; seriously.
Adolf_Twitler
Verified User
Eat a dick you ugly American!
So you can't back any of your bullshit and lies up eh snowflake? Cry harder you repugnant twat.
Adolf_Twitler
Verified User
So you can't back any of your bullshit and lies up eh snowflake? Cry harder you repugnant twat.
I'm not here to entertain you asshole- and tell you things you want to hear!
If you watched the press conference, you would not be asking me stupid questions and now lying about what Mueller said.
Or, maybe you are just retarded!