No collusion!

ThatOwlWoman said:
Let's put it this way. Here's a scenario all of us have seen on the news at one time or the other. A woman is found murdered. The police gather clues. They have a pretty good idea that her bf did it. There is some evidence, but unfortunately not enough to prove him guilty "beyond a reasonable doubt." The crime eventually goes into the cold case files.

That's the same standard Barr & Rosenstein (who you used to lovingly refer to as "Rosenweasel," no?) used when they declined to charge Trump & Co with criminal activities. Does that mean they are innocent and did nothing? Nope. It just means that there is not enough evidence to secure a conviction, in their experience as PAs. As Mueller said, Trump was not exonerated. They simply did not have enough evidence to convict.
Click to expand...

INNOCENT UNTIL PROVEN GUILTY. :good4u:
 
domer76 said:
I keep trying here, illiterate, but it doesn’t sink in for you simpletons,

The comment that he is “not exonerated” does not mean he is innocent.

Are all you fucking RWers homeschooled with the lack of English comprehension?

Look uo the the difference between “not gulity” and “innocent”. Then, try to figure out why prosecutors choose to take things to trial or not. Not based on guilt or innocence, stupid shit, but based in their judgement of meeting the prosecutorial burden of proof.

Amazing that so many lack the basics of law and civics. You are among the most ignorant.
Click to expand...

INNOCENT UNTIL PROVEN GUILTY. :good4u:
 
Jarod said:
Of course it’s funny how now you Rumppers love Mueller...
Click to expand...

Nope.

Even Mullet can’t manufacture collusion out of whole cloth. If it’s not there—it’s not there. I’m thankful that our judicial system is such that it would prevent an ‘over enthusiastic’ prosecutor from bringing indictments that won’t stand up in court. In other words, it’s better for Mullet to come up empty than to be remembered as an idiot.

And Mullet screwed up with the non-exoneration on obstruction. In fact, it proves once and for all that Mullet played on Team Resistance. The non-exoneration is a bone thrown to House Democrats: it’s a life line for their hopes of impeachment, and finally, over-turning the election of 2016.

Mullet basically pulled a Comey. Comey gave Hillary a non-exoneration in the email scandal except in Comey’s instance it was a ‘stay out of jail card’ for Hillary. In contrast—and this is truly ironic, it’s actually true no prosecutor would take Trump to court on obstruction—unless they want to get laughed out of it.

Mullet himself, provided that evidence: The prosecutor passed on it.
 
There is proof that Hillary exposed state secrets on her private server that ended up on the pervert, Weiner's computer'
There is proof that Hillary destroyed thousands of E-Mails after they were subpoenaed.
There is proof that Hilary used "bleach" on her hard drive to destroy evidence.
 
Darth Beto Omar said:
Nope.

Even Mullet can’t manufacture collusion out of whole cloth. If it’s not there—it’s not there. I’m thankful that our judicial system is such that it would prevent an ‘over enthusiastic’ prosecutor from bringing indictments that won’t stand up in court. In other words, it’s better for Mullet to come up empty than to be remembered as an idiot.

And Mullet screwed up with the non-exoneration on obstruction. In fact, it proves once and for all that Mullet played on Team Resistance. The non-exoneration is a bone thrown to House Democrats: it’s a life line for their hopes of impeachment, and finally, over-turning the election of 2016.

Mullet basically pulled a Comey. Comey gave Hillary a non-exoneration in the email scandal except in Comey’s instance it was a ‘stay out of jail card’ for Hillary. In contrast—and this is truly ironic, it’s actually true no prosecutor would take Trump to court on obstruction—unless they want to get laughed out of it.

Mullet himself, provided that evidence: The prosecutor passed on it.
Click to expand...

Yes the newly appointed Trump prosecutor passed, shocker!!!

But all in alI see this as the best scenario for Democrats in 2020. Americans are sick of Rump’s behavior, but the majority want to express that at the ballot box, not in the halls of Congress.
 
Darth Beto Omar said:
Nope.

Even Mullet can’t manufacture collusion out of whole cloth. If it’s not there—it’s not there. I’m thankful that our judicial system is such that it would prevent an ‘over enthusiastic’ prosecutor from bringing indictments that won’t stand up in court. In other words, it’s better for Mullet to come up empty than to be remembered as an idiot.

And Mullet screwed up with the non-exoneration on obstruction. In fact, it proves once and for all that Mullet played on Team Resistance. The non-exoneration is a bone thrown to House Democrats: it’s a life line for their hopes of impeachment, and finally, over-turning the election of 2016.

Mullet basically pulled a Comey. Comey gave Hillary a non-exoneration in the email scandal except in Comey’s instance it was a ‘stay out of jail card’ for Hillary. In contrast—and this is truly ironic, it’s actually true no prosecutor would take Trump to court on obstruction—unless they want to get laughed out of it.

Mullet himself, provided that evidence: The prosecutor passed on it.
Click to expand...

And these blind nuts don't even like that Rosenweasel agreed with Barr. [shaking my head]...the guy who signed off on one of the FISA warrants also signs off on THIS!

"Deputy Attorney General Rod Rosenstein and I have concluded that the evidence developed during the Special Counsel's investigation is not sufficient to establish that the President committed an obstruction-of-justice offense."
 
Jarod said:
Yes the newly appointed Trump prosecutor passed, shocker!!!

But all in alI see this as the best scenario for Democrats in 2020. Americans are sick of Rump’s behavior, but the majority want to express that at the ballot box, not in the halls of Congress.
Click to expand...

Trump didn’t appoint Mullet lol.

Comey was able to say ‘no prosecutor would make a charge’ in the Clinton email scandal because Comey isn’t a prosecutor. Mullet IS a prosecutor and he [was forced] to pass on the obstruction charge.

Pretty much all one needs to know about it. A non-exoneration means nothing. Well, it means there’s no charge and the subject of the investigation can go about their business. Maybe it means an obstruction charge lies somewhere out in the ether lol. I have no idea.

Doubtless, the House Democrats will try and make a case for obstruction out of it. Wait for it. And I’m sure beyond all doubt that’s why Mullet uttered it.

Being the good Team Player that he is. Do you ever tire of defending this crap?
 
Earl said:
There is proof that Hillary exposed state secrets on her private server that ended up on the pervert, Weiner's computer'
There is proof that Hillary destroyed thousands of E-Mails after they were subpoenaed.
There is proof that Hilary used "bleach" on her hard drive to destroy evidence.
Click to expand...

Innocent until proven guilty in a court of law. By the way Trump publicly asked Russia to help his campaign.
 
Darth Beto Omar said:
Trump didn’t appoint Mullet lol.

Comey was able to say ‘no prosecutor would make a charge’ in the Clinton email scandal because Comey isn’t a prosecutor. Mullet IS a prosecutor and he [was forced] to pass on the obstruction charge.

Pretty much all one needs to know about it. A non-exoneration means nothing. Well, it means there’s no charge and the subject of the investigation can go about their business. Maybe it means an obstruction charge lies somewhere out in the ether lol. I have no idea.

Doubtless, the House Democrats will try and make a case for obstruction out of it. Wait for it. And I’m sure beyond all doubt that’s why Mullet uttered it.

Being the good Team Player that he is. Do you ever tire of defending this crap?
Click to expand...

No, Trump appointed William Barr... Who gave us his version of the Mueller report. The same William Barr who decided not to prosecute Trump for obstruction of justice.
 
Stretch said:
And these blind nuts don't even like that Rosenweasel agreed with Barr. [shaking my head]...the guy who signed off on one of the FISA warrants also signs off on THIS!

"Deputy Attorney General Rod Rosenstein and I have concluded that the evidence developed during the Special Counsel's investigation is not sufficient to establish that the President committed an obstruction-of-justice offense."
Click to expand...

Somehow I have a sneaking suspicion someone has the goods on Rod lol.

Just speculation, mind you.
 
Jarod said:
No, Trump appointed William Barr... Who gave us his version of the Mueller report. The same William Barr who decided not to prosecute Trump for obstruction of justice.
Click to expand...
it was ONLY a summary. the REST willbe given out after redacting for sources and methods and grand jury testimony.and classified.
He's only had the findings for 1 weekend! Cripes let him do his job
 
Jarod said:
No, Trump appointed William Barr... Who gave us his version of the Mueller report. The same William Barr who decided not to prosecute Trump for obstruction of justice.
Click to expand...

Both Barr and Rosenstein agreed to the no-charge.

Throw in Mullet and that makes three.
 
CosmicRocker said:
it was ONLY a summary. the REST willbe given out after redacting for sources and methods and grand jury testimony.and classified.
He's only had the findings for 1 weekend! Cripes let him do his job
Click to expand...

The rest will be given out after Trump has had the opportunity to edit it.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top