Mueller Delivers Report on Russia Investigation to Attorney General

[TSA]

Barr's conference is going down so well that Trump is doubling down. Cool

You never should have come back to the political forum and should have stayed in hiding with your welshing buddy djohn.
It’s only getting worse for you from here on out.

[Reck]

You never should have come back to the political forum and should have stayed in hiding with your welshing buddy djohn.
It’s only getting worse for you from here on out.

How is it getting worse for me?

You're the one with the scarlet letter that everone can see everytime you post. Also has a Trump avatar. :lol

Just come out and say you're ultra gay for Trump's orange butthole.

[TSA]

:lol fantasizing about Trump’s butthole

[TSA]

It’ll be fun tomorrow to see djohn come out from under his rock for a few hours and then scurry back to his safe place.

[Pavlov]

Why? No one will have read the report by then.

[Spurs Homer]

Mueller had his chance to indict and charge for collusion. He didn’t. Why do you think that is?

dumbshit;

1) because collusion is not a legal term - it does not exist in the penal code
2) doj policy forbids him from indicting a sitting president - even though trump committed cospiracy to defraud the usa
3) barr impeded the investigation and told mueller to wrap it up
4) the investigation was branched out (pre- barr) and those indictments are in our future
5) since mueller could not indict - he left the outcome open so that congress could conduct their constitutional duty and open impeachment proceedings with muellers evidence plus congress own findings

[TSA]

dumbshit;

1) because collusion is not a legal term - it does not exist in the penal code
2) doj policy forbids him from indicting a sitting president - even though trump committed cospiracy to defraud the usa
3) barr impeded the investigation and told mueller to wrap it up
4) the investigation was branched out (pre- barr) and those indictments are in our future
5) since mueller could not indict - he left the outcome open so that congress could conduct their constitutional duty and open impeachment proceedings with muellers evidence plus congress own findings

Mueller didn’t indict or charge anyone on the Trump campaign for doing anything nefarious with Russia. Why do you think that is? You’re running out of bullshit excuses.

[TSA]

Not only did Mueller not indict or charge anyone from the Trump campaign for doing anything nefarious with Russia he didn’t even hint at it in a single indictment lol.

[Spurs Homer]

Not only did Mueller not indict or charge anyone from the Trump campaign for doing anything nefarious with Russia he didn’t even hint at it in a single indictment lol.

so why are they covering up the mueller report?

and

learn to fucking read

said it many times

mueller branched out his investigation

stone trial
internet co trial

gates/flynn STILL. cooperating

you are a piece of shit traitor or a russian

[boutons_deux]

Barr’s press conference ‘makes Trump look blatantly guilty’: Ex-Solicitor General




https://www.rawstory.com/2019/04/barrs-press-conference-makes-trump-look-blatantly-guilty-ex-solicitor-general-briefs-maddow-unprecedented-showdown/?utm_source=feedburner&utm_medium=feed&utm_campaign=Feed%3A+TheRawStory+%28The+Raw+Story% 29 (https://www.rawstory.com/2019/04/barrs-press-conference-makes-trump-look-blatantly-guilty-ex-solicitor-general-briefs-maddow-unprecedented-showdown/?utm_source=feedburner&utm_medium=feed&utm_campaign=Feed%3A+TheRawStory+%28The+Raw+Story% 29)

[Reck]

Barr’s press conference ‘makes Trump look blatantly guilty’: Ex-Solicitor General




https://www.rawstory.com/2019/04/barrs-press-conference-makes-trump-look-blatantly-guilty-ex-solicitor-general-briefs-maddow-unprecedented-showdown/?utm_source=feedburner&utm_medium=feed&utm_campaign=Feed%3A+TheRawStory+%28The+Raw+Story% 29 (https://www.rawstory.com/2019/04/barrs-press-conference-makes-trump-look-blatantly-guilty-ex-solicitor-general-briefs-maddow-unprecedented-showdown/?utm_source=feedburner&utm_medium=feed&utm_campaign=Feed%3A+TheRawStory+%28The+Raw+Story% 29)

Nah TSA and Chris thinks Barr's conference and Trump's conference following this one is grade A, top notch move.

:lol

[TSA]

so why are they covering up the mueller report?

and

learn to fucking read

said it many times

mueller branched out his investigation

stone trial
internet co trial

gates/flynn STILL. cooperating

you are a piece of shit traitor or a russian

You look like a fool saying they’re covering up the report when it hasn’t even been released yet.

[TSA]

so why are they covering up the mueller report?

and

learn to fucking read

said it many times

mueller branched out his investigation

stone trial
internet co trial

gates/flynn STILL. cooperating

you are a piece of shit traitor or a russian


Also, Mueller didn’t indict or charge anyone on the Trump campaign for doing anything nefarious with Russia. Why do you think that is? You’re running out of bullshit excuses.

[TSA]

Barr’s press conference ‘makes Trump look blatantly guilty’: Ex-Solicitor General




https://www.rawstory.com/2019/04/barrs-press-conference-makes-trump-look-blatantly-guilty-ex-solicitor-general-briefs-maddow-unprecedented-showdown/?utm_source=feedburner&utm_medium=feed&utm_campaign=Feed%3A+TheRawStory+%28The+Raw+Story% 29 (https://www.rawstory.com/2019/04/barrs-press-conference-makes-trump-look-blatantly-guilty-ex-solicitor-general-briefs-maddow-unprecedented-showdown/?utm_source=feedburner&utm_medium=feed&utm_campaign=Feed%3A+TheRawStory+%28The+Raw+Story% 29)

So guilty Mueller punted :lmao

[Reck]

You look like a fool saying they’re covering up the report when it hasn’t even been released yet.

So do you when you speak for other people. Specially those that you dont even know.

[Spurs Homer]

You look like a fool saying they’re covering up the report when it hasn’t even been released yet.

its been a month since barr forced mueller to wrap up

a month

what part of “ cover up” dont you get?

lol

you really went all in on a piece of shit criminal

[TSA]

So do you when you speak for other people. Specially those that you dont even know.

I gave you exact words from Mueller’s report saying no collusion with Russia. Do you dispute that?

[TSA]

its been a month since barr forced mueller to wrap up

a month

what part of “ cover up” dont you get?

lol

you really went all in on a piece of shit criminal


:lol forced

Also, Mueller didn’t indict or charge anyone on the Trump campaign for doing anything nefarious with Russia. Why do you think that is? You’re running out of bullshit excuses.

[TSA]

I’m literally arguing with retards right now :lol I’m out.

[Chris]

Nah TSA and Chris thinks Barr's conference and Trump's conference following this one is grade A, top notch move.

:lol

Resistance Reck and his raw story articles (that he didn't read) :lol

[Reck]

I’m literally arguing with retards right now :lol I’m out.

Shit is getting too real for me...let me start name calling because I'm clearly winning the argument right now. :lol

BTW, you do know you're the dude that promoted pizzagate, pedo paintings and cannibalism, right?

Retard, he said. :lol

[Winehole23]

I’m literally arguing with retards right now :lol I’m out.that's a weird thing to call talking to yourself, but yeah, i can relate: Spurs Homer is a sanctimonious bore.

[Pavlov]

:lmao the report is being delivered on CD-ROMs.

[Winehole23]

press conference --> rebuttal --> release

right?

[Pavlov]

press conference --> rebuttal --> release

right?Looks accurate.

https://media.giphy.com/media/vVCRG2ICPFKJW/giphy.gif

[Spurs Homer]

that's a weird thing to call talking to yourself, but yeah, i can relate: Spurs Homer is a sanctimonious bore.

If this was about - where you stand on abortion - or the death penalty -

You might have a point - if I was aggressively labeling someone because of their stance on an issue.

This is about a criminal and his criminal administration and our democracy.

If you think that taking the side of russia and denouncing the USA's intelligence agencies and our FBI - to try and obstruct your own treason - is ok -

and if you think that when we have seen evidence of treason with our own eyes - that 33% of the population is defending this treason - if you think that is ok -

well I don't.

If you think me calling a traitor - traitor and his defenders - traitors - is "sanctimonious"

then I think you are sadly mistaken and you are part of this problem we have in this country right now.

[Nbadan]

https://twitter.com/SethAbramson/status/1118689208724611072

[DarrinS]

"The investigation did not establish that members of the Trump Campaign conspired or coordinated with the Russian government in its election interference activities."

[Spurs Homer]

"The investigation did not establish that members of the Trump Campaign conspired or coordinated with the Russian government in its election interference activities."

Those are Barr's words = meaningless

We saw the conspiracy with our own eyes - you did too - except your cult forbids you to trust your own eyes.

[Nbadan]

Some say...

Mueller report will be lightly redacted, revealing detailed look at obstruction of justice investiga
Source: Washington Post


The Justice Department plans to release a lightly redacted version of special counsel Robert S. Mueller III’s 400-page report Thursday, offering a granular look at the ways in which President Trump was suspected of having obstructed justice, people familiar with the matter said.

The report — the general outlines of which the Justice Department has briefed the White House on — will reveal that Mueller decided he could not come to a conclusion on the question of obstruction because it was difficult to determine Trump’s intent and because some of his actions could be interpreted innocently, these people said. But it will offer a detailed blow-by-blow of the president’s alleged conduct — analyzing tweets, private threats and other episodes at the center of Mueller’s inquiry, they added.

Read more: https://www.washingtonpost.com/world/national-security/attorney-general-plans-news-conference-to-discuss-mueller-report/2019/04/17/f5ca1cc6-6138-11e9-9ff2-abc984dc9eec_story.html?utm_term=.519071f71769

[DarrinS]

Those are Barr's words = meaningless

We saw the conspiracy with our own eyes - you did too - except your cult forbids you to trust your own eyes.

Exact quote from Mueller report, hence the quotation marks.

[Pavlov]

Exact quote from Mueller report, hence the quotation marks.Left out the brackets and maybe ellipses.

[DarrinS]

Left out the brackets and maybe ellipses.

Nope.

[Reck]

https://twitter.com/SethAbramson/status/1118689208724611072

They are acting like bitches though. Whining about canceling a press conference is pathetic. They can use that against Barr and Trump.

It doesn’t make them look good at all. HEY LOOK AT ME I’M INNOCENT, THEREFORE HERE IS A CONFERENCE BEFORE A REPORT THAT MAY OR MAY NOT EXONERATE ME.

Let this play out.

[Trill Clinton]

can someone explain why we're getting the redacted report and not the full thing? non troll response please.

[Pavlov]

Nope.Definitely left out the brackets.

You shouldn't lie, Darrin.

[Winehole23]

Looks accurate.

https://media.giphy.com/media/vVCRG2ICPFKJW/giphy.gif
I guess technically that’s a prebuttal.

[DarrinS]

can someone explain why we're getting the redacted report and not the full thing? non troll response please.

I'll let a younger, fatter Nadler explain


https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=p9PW-Snrmx0

[DarrinS]

Definitely left out the brackets.

You shouldn't lie, Darrin.

Oh, the capital [T]. My bad

[Pavlov]

Oh, the capital [T]. My badYep, you were completely wrong.:tu

[Chris]

I'll let a younger, fatter Nadler explain


https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=p9PW-Snrmx0

:lol

[Winehole23]

oh the prebuttal already started

[Reck]

I think it’s cool that he dropped 100 pounds. What are your excuses for not doing the same Chris and Darrin?

[Winehole23]

If this was about - where you stand on abortion - or the death penalty -

You might have a point - if I was aggressively labeling someone because of their stance on an issue.

This is about a criminal and his criminal administration and our democracy.

If you think that taking the side of russia and denouncing the USA's intelligence agencies and our FBI - to try and obstruct your own treason - is ok -

and if you think that when we have seen evidence of treason with our own eyes - that 33% of the population is defending this treason - if you think that is ok -

well I don't.

If you think me calling a traitor - traitor and his defenders - traitors - is "sanctimonious"

then I think you are sadly mistaken and you are part of this problem we have in this country right now.You are part of the problem, you sanctimonious bish.

You paint everything that doesn't agree exactly with you one shade; it is hard to distinguish from solipsism, tbh.

You attract more flies with honey than being lost in sour milk sea.

rTzPY_Zwyoc

[DarrinS]

I think it’s cool that he dropped 100 pounds. What are your excuses for not doing the same Chris and Darrin?

If I dropped 100 lbs, I'd weigh 50 lbs. Doesn't seem very healthy, tbh.

[Winehole23]

G3TToiiel0c

[Th'Pusher]

If I dropped 100 lbs, I'd weigh 50 lbs. Doesn't seem very healthy, tbh.

You’re 5’ 4”

[pgardn]

"The investigation did not establish that members of the Trump Campaign conspired or coordinated with the Russian government in its election interference activities."


So Barr believes the Russian government did interfere.

Where is Trump on this now?
And is America great again?
If so, when did it go bad?

[DarrinS]

Report will be posted here, after it is delivered to congress.

https://www.justice.gov/sco

[Spurs Homer]

Lolol

Baghdad Barr - tells us “do not believe your eyes & ears- only what dear leader says!”

banana republic

[Spurminator]

Baghdad Barr

Pretty good one, tbh

[Spurminator]

If Joe Walsh has a more reasonable take on the events of this morning than you do, you should reflect on that.

1118886421333463041

[Spurs Homer]

lololol

198 pages (where are the other 200 pages?)- redactions up the arse -

and a LOT of Baghdad Barr's opinions....


called it.

[Chucho]

I wonder how the Trump fans are going to turn on the party when it really becomes fashionable for some unknown party members to announce they are running for the Republican nomination.

Has a sitting president ever lost their parties nomination? Would hope it happens, no one on the blue side is going to move the needle for me as it looks like another weak shit show that would enable another Trump victory and he's really, really ran his course.

[Spurs Homer]

lololol

Mueller referred 14 investigations - to other districts -


14


12 - are redacted!




"but her emails!"


Criminals

[TSA]

If Joe Walsh has a more reasonable take on the events of this morning than you do, you should reflect on that.

1118886421333463041

:lol scouring Never Trumper's twitter feeds

[spurraider21]

lololol

198 pages (where are the other 200 pages?)- redactions up the arse -

and a LOT of Baghdad Barr's opinions....


called it.
im seeing 448 pages

calm your tits

[TSA]

im seeing 448 pages

calm your tits

BRAINWASHED CULT TRAITOR!!!

[TSA]

1118900041941434370

[Chucho]

BRAINWASHED CULT TRAITOR!!!


Be honest, I've no inclination to insult you at all, but the amount of redaction doesn't concern you in the least?

[TSA]

1118879977552928771

1118881792835112963
hater enjoy the tears :lmao

[TSA]

Be honest, I've no inclination to insult you at all, but the amount of redaction doesn't concern you in the least?

Not in the least, this was for public consumption. The gang of eight will receive a far less redacted form.

[in2deep]

Wolf is pretty quiet but that idiot in the middle of the panel is the worst one

[Spurs Homer]

im seeing 448 pages

calm your tits

I can't find that?

[spurraider21]

I can't find that?
probably semen in your eyes

https://www.justice.gov/sco

[Spurs Homer]

probably semen in your eyes

https://www.justice.gov/sco

Conclusion on page 182

and a few appendices after that

*and 198 on this link?

[spurraider21]

nothing about cohen/prague

:lol mcclatchy

[Spurminator]

:lol scouring Never Trumper's twitter feeds

See... how Twitter works is if someone I follow retweets someone else, I see that tweet.

And :lol at Walsh being a Never Trumper.

[spurraider21]

Conclusion on page 182

and a few appendices after that

*and 198 on this link?
this is what i have

https://i.gyazo.com/2d39fec0d015251fb77861a5226c0381.png

[boutons_deux]

If Pelosi doesn't allow her Dem dogs to rip Trash to pieces with a VERY LONG articles of impeachment,

she will confirm that the feckless, passive, enabling Dem establishment is as guilty as the Repugs/oligarchy of fucking America into irretrievable unfuckability.

[Spurs Homer]

this is what i have

https://i.gyazo.com/2d39fec0d015251fb77861a5226c0381.png


ok found it

i had found an early one that did not include Section 2

also - I never had semen in my eyes in my life -

but your mom did squirt once in my eyes and pretty much sprayed the entire room where I violated her.

[TSA]

1118898019259305984

ouch

[Spurs Homer]

If Pelosi doesn't allow her Dem dogs to rip Trash to pieces with a VERY LONG articles of impeachment,

she will confirm that the feckless, passive, enabling Dem establishment is as guilty as the Repugs/oligarchy of fucking America into irretrievable unfuckability.

She will.

She isn't stupid. She never took impeachment off the table - she was just strategizing.

[TSA]

1118898019259305984

ouch

[spurraider21]

1118898019259305984

ouch
:lol we didnt need sean davis to tell us that. page was never charged with anything. the standards for a warrant and indictment/conviction are quite different, as you know

[vy65]

"At the same time, if we had confidence after a thorough investigation of the facts that the President clearly did not commit obstruction of justice, we would so state. Based on the facts and the applicable legal standards, we are unable to reach that judgment. Accordingly, while this report does not conclude that the President committed a crime, it also does not exonerate him."

[Spurs Homer]

Mueller came through.

1) He was handcuffed by the DOJ policy to indict a sitting president and THIS is why he did not determine that trump obstructed justice - in other words - the evidence showed obstruction - the DOJ policy forbid it - so Mueller handed it off to Congress -
Baghdad Barr intervened and began his spin/cover up.

2) Mueller states that - even though a sitting president cannot be indicted - the EVIDENCE found in this investigation CAN be used to prosecute AFTER trump leaves office



THIS report will be known as Trumps end.

[Spurs Homer]

"At the same time, if we had confidence after a thorough investigation of the facts that the President clearly did not commit obstruction of justice, we would so state. Based on the facts and the applicable legal standards, we are unable to reach that judgment. Accordingly, while this report does not conclude that the President committed a crime, it also does not exonerate him."


This is what I was trying to show comrade TSA - that Mueller cherry-picked parts to flatter trump.

But my crayons ran out before I could open TSA's eyes...:rollin

[vy65]

1109918388133023744


"At the same time, if we had confidence after a thorough investigation of the facts that the President clearly did not commit obstruction of justice, we would so state. Based on the facts and the applicable legal standards, we are unable to reach that judgment. Accordingly, while this report does not conclude that the President committed a crime, it also does not exonerate him."

[Spurminator]

"At the same time, if we had confidence after a thorough investigation of the facts that the President clearly did not commit obstruction of justice, we would so state. Based on the facts and the applicable legal standards, we are unable to reach that judgment. Accordingly, while this report does not conclude that the President committed a crime, it also does not exonerate him."

Totally reasonable to read this as complete exoneration.

Totally responsible to be okay with our leaders saying as much.

[vy65]

Totally reasonable to read this as complete exoneration.

Totally responsible to be okay with our leaders saying as much.

Yeah well, ignorance is strength

[Spurminator]

Yeah well, ignorance is strength

It's been a while since I read 1984 but as I recall Orwell may have underestimated the willingness and enthusiasm with which the plebs would participate in the overt dishonesty.

[vy65]

It's been a while since I read 1984 but as I recall Orwell may have underestimated the willingness and enthusiasm with which the plebs would participate in the overt dishonesty.

Reminds me of Spinoza: Why do the masses fight for their servitude as if it was salvation?

[TSA]

"At the same time, if we had confidence after a thorough investigation of the facts that the President clearly did not commit obstruction of justice, we would so state. Based on the facts and the applicable legal standards, we are unable to reach that judgment. Accordingly, while this report does not conclude that the President committed a crime, it also does not exonerate him."


"The Special Counsel's decision to describe the facts of his obstruction investigation without reaching any legal conclusions leaves it to the Attorney General to determine whether the conduct described in the report constitutes a crime. Over the course of the investigation, the Special Counsel's office engaged in discussions with certain Department officials regarding many of the legal and factual matters at issue in the Special Counsel's obstruction investigation. After reviewing the Special Counsel's final report on these issues; consulting with Department officials, including the Office of Legal Counsel; and applying the principles of federal prosecution that guide our charging decisions, 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. Our determination was made without regard to, and is not based on, the constitutional considerations that surround the indictment and criminal prosecution of a sitting president.
2

In making this determination, we noted that the Special Counsel recognized that “the evidence does not establish that the President was involved in an underlying crime related to Russian election interference," and that, while not determinative, the absence of such evidence bears upon the President's intent with respect to obstruction. Generally speaking, to obtain and sustain an obstruction conviction, the government would need to prove beyond a reasonable doubt that a person, acting with corrupt intent, engaged in obstructive conduct with a sufficient nexus to a pending or contemplated proceeding. In cataloguing the President's actions, many of which took place in public view, the report identifies no actions that, in our judgment, constitute obstructive conduct, had a nexus to a pending or contemplated proceeding, and were done with corrupt intent, each of which, under the Department's principles of federal prosecution guiding charging decisions, would need to be proven beyond a reasonable doubt to establish an obstruction-of-justice offense."

[vy65]

And your point is?

[DarrinS]

also - I never had semen in my eyes in my life -




if we had confidence after a thorough investigation of the facts that you clearly did not got jizzed on, we would so state. Based on the facts and the applicable legal standards, we are unable to reach that judgment. Accordingly, while this report does not conclude that you were once blinded by semen, it also does not exonerate you

[Not exonerated] until proven guilty

[TSA]

Mueller came through.

1) He was handcuffed by the DOJ policy to indict a sitting president and THIS is why he did not determine that trump obstructed justice - in other words - the evidence showed obstruction - the DOJ policy forbid it - so Mueller handed it off to Congress -
Baghdad Barr intervened and began his spin/cover up.

2) Mueller states that - even though a sitting president cannot be indicted - the EVIDENCE found in this investigation CAN be used to prosecute AFTER trump leaves office



THIS report will be known as Trumps end.

:lol obstructing an investigation with no underlying crime

[TSA]

And your point is?

Mueller couldn't conclude either way so he punted to Barr. Game over.

[vy65]

:lol obstructing an investigation with no underlying crime

This is incorrect.

[Pavlov]

Looks like Mueller's actually punting to Congress per DoJ regs tbh.

[vy65]

Mueller couldn't conclude either way so he punted to Barr. Game over.


Looks like Mueller's actually punting to Congress per DoJ regs tbh.

[vy65]

There's also a difference between couldn't and didn't.

[Spurs Homer]

:lol obstructing an investigation with no underlying crime

idiot

underlying crime is NOT a necessary component in obstruction

[boutons_deux]

The Scope and Barr’s Misdirection

It’s a given at this point that Bill Barr has been willfully deceptive about the contents of this report.

But even taking that as a given

this passage is critical in understanding the standards Mueller applied to the “collusion” part of the investigation.

Indeed, he says explicitly, contra Barr, that he didn’t use that standard.




https://cdn.talkingpointsmemo.com/wp-content/uploads/2019/04/AD1AFC56-D315-47B4-9AB9-33C381CA6712.jpeg

https://talkingpointsmemo.com/edblog/the-scope-and-barrs-misdirection?utm_source=feedburner&utm_medium=feed&utm_campaign=Feed%3A+tpm-news+%28TPMNews%29

[CitizenDwayne]

Can someone explain to me how the McGahn situation is not obvious obstruction? Not looking for trolling bullshit, legitimately curious.

[Spurs Homer]

Mueller couldn't conclude either way so he punted to Barr. Game over.

wrong

mueller names Congress as the sole authority

see mueller report and wipe your ass with Baghdad Barrs report

lolol

[Pavlov]

Mueller punts to Congress as he concludes it's the only play in the book.

Barr shows up with a paper ball he made himself and spikes it in the endzone for Trump.

[vy65]

So, wrong bout punting to Barr, wrong bout predicate crime for obstruction, and wrong bout TOTAL EXONERATION

Tough day for team trump

[TSA]

This is incorrect.

take it up with Rosenstein

"In making this determination, we noted that the Special Counsel recognized that “the evidence does not establish that the President was involved in an underlying crime related to Russian election interference," and that, while not determinative, the absence of such evidence bears upon the President's intent with respect to obstruction. Generally speaking, to obtain and sustain an obstruction conviction, the government would need to prove beyond a reasonable doubt that a person, acting with corrupt intent, engaged in obstructive conduct with a sufficient nexus to a pending or contemplated proceeding."

[Spurs Homer]

Can someone explain to me how the McGahn situation is not obvious obstruction? Not looking for trolling bullshit, legitimately curious.

it is obstruction but mueller lays out the exact OPPOSITE

of what Baghdad Barr falsely asserted


that because of DOJ policy he will not make a criminal determination on the criminal in chief

and even though there is evidence

since he is forbidden to make that call - he wont pick a side of the equation

then he lays out why Congress is the sole authority in this call

he further states that Baghdad Barrs premise that a prez cannot commit a crime and cannot be held to account because he could not run the country

is not accurate when a prez corruptly uses his exec power

you know - just like i said a month ago

[TSA]

So, wrong bout punting to Barr, wrong bout predicate crime for obstruction, and wrong bout TOTAL EXONERATION

Tough day for team trump

:lol whatever helps you sleep at night

The only people crying today are still :cry with her :cry

[TSA]

it is obstruction but mueller lays out the exact OPPOSITE

of what Baghdad Barr falsely asserted


that because of DOJ policy he will not make a criminal determination on the criminal in chief

and even though there is evidence

since he is forbidden to make that call - he wont pick a side of the equation

then he lays out why Congress is the sole authority in this call

he further states that Baghdad Barrs premise that a prez cannot commit a crime and cannot be held to account because he could not run the country

is not accurate when a prez corruptly uses his exec power

you know - just like i said a month ago

you were wrong a month ago and you are still wrong today

1118878526281789441

[Spurs Homer]

take it up with Rosenstein

"In making this determination, we noted that the Special Counsel recognized that “the evidence does not establish that the President was involved in an underlying crime related to Russian election interference," and that, while not determinative, the absence of such evidence bears upon the President's intent with respect to obstruction. Generally speaking, to obtain and sustain an obstruction conviction, the government would need to prove beyond a reasonable doubt that a person, acting with corrupt intent, engaged in obstructive conduct with a sufficient nexus to a pending or contemplated proceeding."

but the COURT

will make that call

this is barr & rosensteins treason play

the court will rule on whether those two comrades-

or congress

makes that call

[Pavlov]

Come on-- what other reason would there be to fire Mueller other than obstructing justice?

[spurraider21]

take it up with Rosenstein

"In making this determination, we noted that the Special Counsel recognized that “the evidence does not establish that the President was involved in an underlying crime related to Russian election interference," and that, while not determinative, the absence of such evidence bears upon the President's intent with respect to obstruction. Generally speaking, to obtain and sustain an obstruction conviction, the government would need to prove beyond a reasonable doubt that a person, acting with corrupt intent, engaged in obstructive conduct with a sufficient nexus to a pending or contemplated proceeding."

[Spurs Homer]

Nope - not what I said or what I have been saying;

I would trust Muellers report - when I see Muellers report.

Mueller could have said something way different than what Barr spun.

I said Barr - and Trump - are in a cover up.

Barr could have choked the life out of Muellers investigation and pressured Mueller to wrap up early.

Many things are fishy.

Release the full Mueller report.
Have Mueller testify under oath. (also Rosenstein) -

I don't give a shit about Barr testifying because he will just lie or evade answering. He already said that even if he was advised to recuse - he would not.

You sound like FOX news - distorting the words I wrote.

Mueller supposedly decided not to make a conclusion. (on Obstruction)
(WHY? - Did Barr tell him to leave it open? Did Mueller leave it open - so that Congress could make the call?
Did Barr give Mueller a strict set of rules to keep Mueller from making a conclusion? Did Barr misrepresent Muellers report?)

yup

[vy65]

take it up with Rosenstein

"In making this determination, we noted that the Special Counsel recognized that “the evidence does not establish that the President was involved in an underlying crime related to Russian election interference," and that, while not determinative, the absence of such evidence bears upon the President's intent with respect to obstruction. Generally speaking, to obtain and sustain an obstruction conviction, the government would need to prove beyond a reasonable doubt that a person, acting with corrupt intent, engaged in obstructive conduct with a sufficient nexus to a pending or contemplated proceeding."

Intent is an element; a predicate offense is not. So, no.

[vy65]

:lol whatever helps you sleep at night

The only people crying today are still :cry with her :cry

T
O
T
A
L

E
X
O
N
E
R
A
T
I
O
N

[DarrinS]

Come on-- what other reason would there be to fire Mueller other than obstructing justice?

He was fired?

[TSA]

vy65 and spurraider21 --- thoughts on this thread from another lawyer that trying obstruction under 1512 as Mueller attempted is legally dubious



1118643991308906498

1118643996367163393

1118644019590987776

1118644024762621953

1118644032605806594

1118644038939357184

1118650489707683840

1118650494057103360

1118650498834415616

Pretty tough to argue against the above.

[Pavlov]

He was fired?
https://media1.tenor.com/images/83116dac5575fef19f9a39e17984e7bd/tenor.gif

[Spurs Homer]

I disagree -somewhat- maybe because I am still naive....

but -

I predict that Barr will fight this for as long as Trump is in office...if Trump steals another election he will bury it deeper - if Trump is ousted - then the report will leak eventually - but it will be too late.

I also cannot blame Mueller - yet.
We have no idea - but my best guess is along these lines;

When Barr weaseled his way into the AG job - he immediately cut Mueller's balls off.
He "guided" the investigation in a way that turned it into a "general synopsis" of what Russia did - but made sure to restrict Mueller from exposing anything on Trump for "executive privilege reasons"

Barr also caused Mueller to prematurely end the investigation -
Mueller was no way near finished but Barr pressured Mueller to conclude and turn in his report
'WITHOUT CONCLUSIONS" -

or

at least - pointed out the DOJ "POLICIES" to Mueller so that Mueller had no choice but to refrain from any "decisions"

Still - there were hundreds of witness interviews that - in years from now - the world will see just how guilty Trump is -and there is more conspiracy with Russia - that we all saw with our own eyes - and the counter-intel part of it will show that Trump has an "allegiance" driven by present and future monetary rewards - to Russia and Putin-

-but it will be too late by the time we get to see this evidence.

Mueller needs to testify - but they can't talk to him until they see the full unredacted report -

and Barr will make sure that does not happen.

I did call it - actually - on Barr - I knew it when I saw his memo and his hiring and his confirmation.

It is pretty plain to see that he did his job - cover up the criminal presidents crimes.


i stand by what i said a month ago

[TSA]

i stand by what i said a month ago

PM yourself, no one here gives a shit.

[CitizenDwayne]

Come on-- what other reason would there be to fire Mueller other than obstructing justice?
Yeah that’s where I’m confused

[Pavlov]

vy65 and spurraider21 --- thoughts on this thread from another lawyer that trying obstruction under 1512 as Mueller attempted is legally dubious



1118643991308906498

1118643996367163393

1118644019590987776

1118644024762621953

1118644032605806594

1118644038939357184

1118650489707683840

1118650494057103360

1118650498834415616

Pretty tough to argue against the above.So the evidence supporting Barr's decision is....


Barr's memo.

[Spurs Homer]

PM yourself, no one here gives a shit.

only you are to blame for being gullible

please drink the poison upon trumps order and

MAGA!!!


crofl

[spurraider21]

Can someone explain to me how the McGahn situation is not obvious obstruction? Not looking for trolling bullshit, legitimately curious.


Come on-- what other reason would there be to fire Mueller other than obstructing justice?
im not going to pretend to have read through the full report. have read mostly the executive summaries and select portions. the part about mcgahn in the obstruction report reads almost comically tbh... its hard to explain that away.

my favorite part, just for comedic purposes:

"The President also asked McGahn in the meeting why he had told Special COunsel's Office investigators that the President had told him to have the Special Counsel removed. McGahn responded that he had to and that his conversations with the President were not protected by attorney-client privilege. The President then asked, 'What about these notes? Why do you take notes? Lawyers don't take notes. I never had a lawyer who took notes.' McGan responded that he keeps notes because he is a 'real lawyer' and explained that notes create a record and are not a bad thing. The President said, 'I've had a lot of great lawyers, like Roy Cohn. He did not take notes.'"

:lmao

[Spurminator]

It's been a while since I read 1984 but as I recall Orwell may have underestimated the willingness and enthusiasm with which the plebs would participate in the overt dishonesty.


:lol whatever helps you sleep at night

The only people crying today are still :cry with her :cry

Exhibit A right here.

[spurraider21]

the most interesting part of this, legally speaking, is the long discussion that begins on page 159 of vol 2, or page 371 of the PDF... talking about whether or not a president CAN commit obstruction.

"But counsel has made a categorical argument that 'the President's exercise of his constitutional authority here to terminate an FBI Director and to close investigations cannot constitutionally constitute obstruction of justice.'

In analyzing counsel's statutory arguments, we concluded that the President's proposed interpretation of Section 1512(c)(2) is contrary to the litigating position of the Department of Justice and is not supported by principles of statutory construction.

As for the constitutional arguments, we recognized that the Department of Justice and the courts have not definitively resolved these constitutional issues. We therefore analyzed the President's position through the framework of Supreme Court precedent addressing the separation of powers. Under that framework, we concluded, Article II of the Constitution does not categorically and permanently immunize the President from potential liability for the conduct that was investigated. Rather, our analysis led us to conclude that the obstruction-of-justice statues can validly prohibit a President's corrupt efforts to use his official powers to curtail, end, or interfere with an investigation."

then goes on to explain each of those conclusions in great detail

[spurraider21]

oddly enough, the obstruction section reads quite a bit like comey's presser on hillary's emails...

here's a list of all the things he did, but ultimately we couldn't prove intent (in part because he was not found to have committed the underlying crime). they also acknowledged early on that they agreed that they can't indict a sitting president.

[vy65]

Pretty tough to argue against the above.

Do you know what a circuit split is?

[Spurs Homer]

oddly enough, the obstruction section reads quite a bit like comey's presser on hillary's emails...

here's a list of all the things he did, but ultimately we couldn't prove intent (in part because he was not found to have committed the underlying crime).

i dont believe mueller landed there

barr did - not mueller

mueller landed on congress being the deciding authority

[vy65]

And for the record, we went from "No Collusion, No Obstruction," to a Twitter memo on what an official proceeding is under one of several statutes cited in the Report.

[vy65]

Rather than a coniption fit of tweets, here's what substantive legal analysis looks like:

https://www.lawfareblog.com/does-fbi-investigation-qualify-under-obstruction-justice-statutes-closer-look

[UnWantedTheory]

"Trump may have been saved from an obstruction of justice charge by his own aides’ refusal to follow his orders. “The President’s efforts to influence the investigation were mostly unsuccessful, but that is largely because the persons who surround the President declined to carry out orders or accede to his requests,” Mueller wrote."

So he tried to obstruct justice, but no one would help him. Lmao.

[boutons_deux]

The Four Loopholes Barr Used to Protect Trump

1. “Illegally participated.”

Notice the shift in Barr’s language. He starts by talking about whether anyone affiliated with Trump “encouraged or otherwise played a role” in the dissemination. But Barr doesn’t answer that question. Instead, he shifts to a different question: whether any Trump affiliates “illegally participated” in the dissemination. The answer, he says, is no, because WikiLeaks’ publication of the hacked material isn’t criminal. This distinction protects Roger Stone, a Trump campaign associate who colluded with WikiLeaks to promote the distribution of the hacked emails.

2. “Conspiracy to violate U.S. law.”

This paragraph covers the June 2016 meeting at Trump Tower between leaders of the Trump campaign and Russian intermediaries who had explicitly, as “part of Russia and its government’s support for Mr. Trump,” offered to give Donald Trump Jr. “official documents and information that would incriminate Hillary … and would be very useful to your father.” This meeting meets the layman’s definition of collusion. But under Barr’s analysis, and ostensibly Mueller’s, it doesn’t constitute a “conspiracy to violate U.S. law.”

3. “Illegally interfere.”

Barr concluded, the investigation “confirmed that the Russian government sponsored efforts to illegally interfere with the 2016 presidential election but did not find that the Trump campaign or other Americans colluded in those schemes.” Here, Barr introduces the word collusion in order to deny that Trump or any of his associates engaged in it. Until this point, Barr carefully used the word conspiracy in order to shield the Trump campaign from culpability for its collusions. But now he shifts to collusion in order to create an appearance that Trump and his associates have been fully exonerated. And to make this claim technically accurate, he inserts the phrase “illegally interfere,” which excludes the Trump Tower meeting and the Stone-WikiLeaks contacts from consideration.

4. “No collusion.”

Having shuffled between conspiracy and collusion in order generate an impression that no collusion occurred, Barr then used that claim to argue that Trump’s attempts to obstruct the investigation weren’t obstruction of justice. Trump had a “sincere belief that the investigation was undermining his presidency,” said Barr—never mind that the same could have been said of President Richard Nixon’s Watergate cover-up—and, as Trump “said from the beginning, there was in fact no collusion.” Given the absence of collusion, according to Barr, Trump’s efforts to thwart the investigation weren’t criminal. This sleight of hand insulates Trump against the argument that the offenses whose discovery he tried to prevent were, if not prosecutable, impeachable.

Barr auditioned for his job by writing a memo (https://int.nyt.com/data/documenthelper/549-june-2018-barr-memo-to-doj-mue/b4c05e39318dd2d136b3/optimized/full.pdf) outlining how to protect Trump from the investigation.

As attorney general, he has used his position to fulfill that mission.

He’s a clever lawyer, and

his efforts to shield the president pay close attention to legal distinctions.

That does not, however, make them honest.

https://slate.com/news-and-politics/2019/04/barr-press-conference-mueller-report-loopholes-protect-trump.html

[vy65]

oddly enough, the obstruction section reads quite a bit like comey's presser on hillary's emails...

here's a list of all the things he did, but ultimately we couldn't prove intent (in part because he was not found to have committed the underlying crime). they also acknowledged early on that they agreed that they can't indict a sitting president.

For what it's worth, I don't think the cases on intent will be all that applicable to a politician who can have a motive (votes, pandering to his constituency, etc...) to impede a proceeding other than avoiding liability for the predicate offense. I doubt that situation comes up often in the case law.

[spurraider21]

i dont believe mueller landed there

barr did - not mueller

mueller landed on congress being the deciding authority
nah.

mueller acknowledged early on that the DOJ cant indict a sitting president:

"The Office of Legal Counsle (OLC) has issued an opinion finding that 'the indictment or criminal prosecution of a sitting President would impoermissibly undermine the capacity of the executive branch to perform its constitutionally assigned functions' in violation of 'the constitutional separation of powers.' Given the role of the Special Counsel as an attorney in the Department of Justice and the framework of the Special Counsel regulations . . . this office accepted OLC's legal conclusion for the purpose of exercising prosecutorial jurisdiction."

and then later in the summary, "Accordingly, while this report does not conclude that the President committed a crime, it also does not exonerate him."

they talk quite a bit about his intent, and how the lack of finding of an underlying crime is a significant factor in proving intent... as well as the complication that it becomes fairly gray when determining if a particular action was done in the scope of presidential authority vs purely for corrupt purposes. it may lean one way or another, but a criminal conviction would require it to go "beyond a reasonable doubt"

[TSA]

And for the record, we went from "No Collusion, No Obstruction," to a Twitter memo on what an official proceeding is under one of several statutes cited in the Report.

No one here is even discussing collusion :lol It’s too embarrassing for them to even utter the words after the report was released.

And the statue being discussed on obstruction was specifically named in Mueller’s report

1118914201819414529

So is an FBI investigation an official proceeding? Yes or no.

1118650489707683840

If yes, back it with proof.

If no, is trying obstruction under 1512 DOA?

[spurraider21]

For what it's worth, I don't think the cases on intent will be all that applicable to a politician who can have a motive (votes, pandering to his constituency, etc...) to impede a proceeding other than avoiding liability for the predicate offense. I doubt that situation comes up often in the case law.
true. the underlying crime is a factor, but not determinative. political posturing to improve your chances of re-election would certainly be considered a corrupt motive

[Pavlov]

Rather than a coniption fit of tweets, here's what substantive legal analysis looks like:

https://www.lawfareblog.com/does-fbi-investigation-qualify-under-obstruction-justice-statutes-closer-lookNO UNDERCOVER HUBER SAID FBI INVESTIGATIONS CAN BE OBSTRUCTED BY ANYONE FOR ANY REASON WITHOUT PENALTY

[TSA]

Rather than a coniption fit of tweets, here's what substantive legal analysis looks like:

https://www.lawfareblog.com/does-fbi-investigation-qualify-under-obstruction-justice-statutes-closer-look

I haven’t even read it yet but you do know that Benjamin Wittes is one of James Comey’s good friends that is constantly running cover for him from lawfareblog right?

[vy65]

No one here is even discussing collusion :lol It’s too embarrassing for them to even utter the words after the report was released.

1109918388133023744


"At the same time, if we had confidence after a thorough investigation of the facts that the President clearly did not commit obstruction of justice, we would so state. Based on the facts and the applicable legal standards, we are unable to reach that judgment. Accordingly, while this report does not conclude that the President committed a crime, it also does not exonerate him."

[vy65]

The hallmark of every great piece of legal analysis is three red police light emojis ...

[vy65]

I haven’t even read it yet but you do know that Benjamin Wittes is one of James Comey’s good friends that is constantly running cover for him from lawfareblog right?

Fascinating. Please identify the problems in his analysis on the applicable statutes when you get a chance.

[vy65]

So is an FBI investigation an official proceeding? Yes or no.

You really have no idea what a circuit split is.

[Pavlov]

I haven’t even read it yet but you do know that Benjamin Wittes is one of James Comey’s good friends that is constantly running cover for him from lawfareblog right?Good point.

Question: Who is Undercover Huber?

[Spurminator]

I haven’t even read it yet but you do know that Benjamin Wittes is one of James Comey’s good friends that is constantly running cover for him from lawfareblog right?

:lol Oh okay, who is running the Undercover Huber account and what's his background?

[TSA]

You really have no idea what a circuit split is.

Question should be simple to answer than. Is an FBI investigation an official proceeding? Yes or no.

If yes support with proof.

[spurraider21]

No one here is even discussing collusion :lol It’s too embarrassing for them to even utter the words after the report was released.
there was a two year investigation into collusion. the special counsel's report was less than conclusory in that respect...

"The investigation did not always yield admissible information or testimony, or a complete picture of the activities undertaken by subjects of the investigation. Some individuals invoked their Fifth Amendment right against compelled self-incrimination and were not, in the Office's judgment, appropriate candidates for grants of immunity. The Office limited its pursuit of other witnesses and information - such as information known to attorneys or individuals claiming to be members of the media - in light of internal Department of Justice policies . . . Some of the information obtained via court process, moreover, was preemptively covered by legal privilege and was screened from investigators by a filter (or "taint") team. Even when individuals testified or agreed to be interviewed, they sometimes provided information that was false or incomplete, leading to some of the false-statements charges described above. And the Office faced practical limits on it s ability to access relevant evidence as well - numerous witnesses and subjects lived abroad, and documetns wre held outside the United States.

Further, the Office learned that some of the individuals we interviewed or whose conduct we investigated - including some associated with the Trump Campaign - deleted relevant communications or communicated during the relevant period using applications that feature encryption or that do not provide for long-term retention of date or communication records. In such cases, the Office was not able toe corroborate witness statements through comparison to contemporaneous communications or fully question witnesses about the statements that appeared inconsistent with other known facts.

Accordingly, while this report embodies factual and legal determinations that the Office believes to be accurate and complete to the greatest extent possible, given these identified gaps, the Office cannot rule out the possibility that the unavailable information would shed additional light on (or cast in a new light) the events described in the report."

[vy65]

Question should be simple to answer than. Is an FBI investigation an official proceeding? Yes or no.

If yes support with proof.

I answered. You don't realize that because you don't know what a circuit split is.

[spurraider21]

Good point.

Question: Who is Undercover Huber?
well if we knew that, he wouldn't be undercover

[vy65]

well if we knew that, he wouldn't be undercover

https://hotemoji.com/images/emoji/n/8xxhai1jd0mon.pnghttps://hotemoji.com/images/emoji/n/8xxhai1jd0mon.pnghttps://hotemoji.com/images/emoji/n/8xxhai1jd0mon.png

[Pavlov]

Question should be simple to answer than. Is an FBI investigation an official proceeding? Yes or no.

If yes support with proof.:lol he just posted analysis citing decisions that conclude both yes and no.

Do you need it broken up into anonymous tweets, sweetie?

[Spurs Homer]

Questions for Mueller when he testifies;

1) how did you arrive at the decision to end your investigation?
2) who played a part in that decision?
3) you have a subject who has lied over 9000 times- why on earth would you decline to compel him to testify?
How can you possibly deny that this was not a political decision? Was this solely your decision? Why would perjury from this subject NOT compel YOU to compel testimony?
4) you stated that trumps testimony would delay the investigation-why was this a factor? Why were you in a rush to conclude?
5) several trump admin officials refused to answer questions under oath in congressional testimony- claiming that the white house restricted them from answering - without asserting exec privilege - did you compel this testimony?
6) did you investigate trump jrs perjury to congress? Why not?


more later

[Reck]

:lol TSA is on another reality while everyone is pretty much on the same page about Barr shilling/this report.

[vy65]

So let's recap:

TOTAL EXONERATION --> "This report does not conclude that the President committed a crime, it also does not exonerate him."
No Obstruction because no collusion --> don't need a predicate offense for obstruction.
FBI Investigation doesn't qualify --> TSA don't know what a circuit split is.

But yeah, Hillary tho ...

[Spurminator]

Also, be sure to only read sources who consistently, unwaveringly, and anonymously shill for the most powerful man in the country. Be skeptical of anyone else.

[TSA]

Rather than a coniption fit of tweets, here's what substantive legal analysis looks like:

https://www.lawfareblog.com/does-fbi-investigation-qualify-under-obstruction-justice-statutes-closer-lookGot around to reading it and thanks for posting very informative :bobo

[CitizenDwayne]

So it’s an impeachment referral, right?

[Pavlov]

Got around to reading it and thanks for posting very informative :boboWittes good now?

[Reck]

Mueller thinks Trump's public actions can be considered obstruction...then punted to congress to do something about it. :lol TSA

[boutons_deux]

Sen. Richard Burr leaked major Trump-linked 'targets' of FBI's Russia probe to Trump's White House (https://www.dailykos.com/stories/2019/4/18/1851285/-Sen-Richard-Burr-leaked-major-Trump-linked-targets-of-FBI-s-Russia-probe-to-Trump-s-White-House)

Only months after Trump's inauguration,

used his position as Gang of Eight member

to inform the Trump White House of just

which members of Trump's own inner circle were the identified "targets" of the FBI’s Russia investigation—

just as that criminal and counterintelligence investigation was getting off the ground.

https://www.dailykos.com/stories/1851285 (https://www.dailykos.com/stories/1851285)

[hater]

1118879977552928771

1118881792835112963
hater enjoy the tears :lmao

:lmao

https://twitter.com/RT_com/status/1118956109455343617?s=19

[hater]

They just brought out Clappers dead body to give his "unbiased" 2 cents :lmao

:lol cnn

[hater]

:lmao

https://twitter.com/heatherhunterdc/status/1118955846157971456?s=19

[TSA]

why is no one from the left happy that Mueller concluded Trump did not collide with Russia?

[TSA]

:lmao

https://twitter.com/heatherhunterdc/status/1118955846157971456?s=19

:lmao

[hater]

:lmao

Male reporter Richard Maddows show on msnbc tonight is gonna be must see :lmao

[hater]

:lmao

https://twitter.com/Mal_McKie/status/1118960757947994113?s=19

[TSA]

Male reporter Richard Maddows show on msnbc tonight is gonna be must see :lmao

I think he’ll actually cry tonight

[Reck]

I think he’ll actually cry tonight

I think you're doing a decent job of it right now, TSA.

[Chris]

https://twitter.com/RealSaavedra/status/1118879464170115072

[Spurminator]

why is no one from the left happy that Mueller concluded Trump did not collide with Russia?

You spend 12 hours a day on this stuff and you still think Mueller "concluded Trump did not collude with Russia."

Like, you're not even right about the Cliff's Notes level stuff. What is wrong with you?

[Chris]

https://twitter.com/RealKyleMorris/status/1118948935786221568

[vy65]

Got around to reading it and thanks for posting very informative :bobo

L'chaim

[in2deep]

You spend 12 hours a day on this stuff and you still think Mueller "concluded Trump did not collude with Russia."

Like, you're not even right about the Cliff's Notes level stuff. What is wrong with you?

Which pages on the Mueller describe evidence of Trump collusion with Russia? Thanks

[Pavlov]

I think you're doing a decent job of it right now, TSA.:lol

[Chris]

https://twitter.com/IngrahamAngle/status/1118881454212243456

[TSA]

You spend 12 hours a day on this stuff and you still think Mueller "concluded Trump did not collude with Russia."

Like, you're not even right about the Cliff's Notes level stuff. What is wrong with you?

“The investigation did not establish that members of the Trump Campaign conspired or coordinated with the Russian government in its election interference activities.”

[Spurminator]

Which pages on the Mueller describe evidence of Trump collusion with Russia? Thanks

Finding no evidence is not the same as concluding the thing didn't happen.

Cliff's Notes.

[Spurminator]

“The investigation did not establish that members of the Trump Campaign conspired or coordinated with the Russian government in its election interference activities.”

You: "Mueller concluded Trump did not collide with Russia"

Mueller: We didn't look at collusion.


In evaluating whether evidence about collective action of multiple individuals constituted a crime, we applied the framework of conspiracy law, not the concept of “collusion.” In so doing, the Office recognized that the word “collud[e]” was used in communications with the Acting Attorney General confirming certain aspects of the investigation’s scope and that the term has frequently been invoked in public reporting about the investigation. But collusion is not a specific offense or theory of liability found in the United States Code, nor is it a term of art in federal criminal law. For those reasons, the Office’s focus in analyzing questions of joint criminal liability was on conspiracy as defined in federal law.

[Pavlov]

why is no one from the left happy that Mueller concluded Trump did not collide with Russia?I'm still trying to figure out why he tried to fire Mueller if there was nothing to it.

[TSA]

Finding no evidence is not the same as concluding the thing didn't happen.

Cliff's Notes.

What evidence did Mueller find? He presented zero of it in any indictment.

[Spurminator]

What evidence did Mueller find? He presented zero of it in any indictment.

I literally said "finding no evidence" in the post you quoted.

Your panic over Dear Leader is making you even dumber than usual.

[TSA]

You: "Mueller concluded Trump did not collide with Russia"

Mueller: We didn't look at collusion.

lol semantics. You know what the fuck was meant by collusion.

[in2deep]

Finding no evidence is not the same as concluding the thing didn't happen.

Cliff's Notes.

No but it shows there's an extremely high probability that it didn't happen. And it also shows collusion cannot be proven.

[TSA]

I literally said "finding no evidence" in the post you quoted.

Your panic over Dear Leader is making you even dumber than usual.


:lol panic?

Mueller was the only threat.

:lol thinking Congress is a threat after Mueller and his team of prosecutors/investigators and all the resources of the government couldn’t nail Trump.

[Spurminator]

No but it shows there's an extremely high probability that it didn't happen. And it also shows collusion cannot be proven.

So why not just say Mueller found no evidence supporting collusion? Or, more accurately, supporting conspiracy?

Why say Mueller concluded there was no collusion when that's not what happened?

[spurraider21]

:lol panic?

Mueller was the only threat.

:lol thinking Congress is a threat after Mueller and his team of prosecutors/investigators and all the resources of the government couldn’t nail Trump.
lol characterizing special counsel as a threat. he was doing his job.

[Spurminator]

:lol panic?

Mueller was the only threat.

:lol thinking Congress is a threat after Mueller and his team of prosecutors/investigators and all the resources of the government couldn’t nail Trump.

I don't know who you're panicking over, could just be that you've tied so much of your self worth to Donald Trump in the past 3 years that any negative attention grates at you.

Weird since you were such a Kasich guy before. All that 4channing and pizzagate brainwashing really had an effect on you. Shame.


I'd be voting for Kasich but I'm not even sure he'll be in the race by the time California primaries roll around.


My guy Kasich


Yeah last night listening to [Trump] was brutal and he rarely actually answered a question. Really wish Kasich had more support, most level headed guy left.


Kasich was my begrudged pick from the start.


Kasich was the only GOP candidate I would have voted for and said it here from the start. I don't think the GOP is as close to swinging the vote as you think.

[hater]

So why not just say Mueller found no evidence supporting collusion? Or, more accurately, supporting conspiracy?

Why say Mueller concluded there was no collusion when that's not what happened?

Mueller is a person who has his own opinion. I could care less what he thinks. But based on the fact there are no charges and report says there's no evidence I would say Mueller investigation has proven there is no collusion.

That is an accurate statement

[Spurminator]

Mueller is a person who has his own opinion. I could care less what he thinks. But based on the fact there are no charges and report says there's no evidence I would say Mueller investigation has proven there is no collusion.

That is an accurate statement

I wasn't asking you. Or was I?

[TSA]

lol characterizing special counsel as a threat. he was doing his job.

No shit he was doing his job, that didn’t change the investigation being a threat to Trump.

[Pavlov]

:lol TSA worried about "threats" to Trump now.

[Spurs Homer]

Seems like the ones

exonerated

was the media

crofl

[Chris]

lol semantics. You know what the fuck was meant by collusion.

He's a turd.

[Pavlov]

It's so weird that Trump has to stack the deck with Barr if the report speaks for itself in completely exonerating him.

Or that he would order Mueller's firing....

[Pavlov]

He's a turd.Reduced to name calling now.

Not as great a day as was claimed, apparently.

[Chris]

Reduced to name calling now.

Not as great a day as was claimed, apparently.

It's a great day. Lawyer boy from the salt mines in here flexing his legalese and the turd crew shitting all over themselves.

: )

[Pavlov]

It's a great day. Lawyer boy from the salt mines in here flexing his legalese and the turd crew shitting all over themselves.

: ):lmao moar name calling.

You couldn't be any more insecure if you tried.

[TSA]

Seems like the ones

exonerated

was the media

crofl

Yup. They really nailed it with their breathless reporting of Trump and his campaign coordinating with Russia and Wikileaks to disseminate the hacked emails.

[boutons_deux]

And the feckless, chickenshit Dems cave on queue

House majority leader dismisses impeachment talk after Mueller report (https://theweek.com/speedreads/836186/house-majority-leader-dismisses-impeachment-talk-after-mueller-report)

House Majority Leader Steny Hoyer (D-Md.) doesn't feel any differently about impeachment in light of Special Counsel Robert Mueller's report.

Hoyer told CNN's Dana Bash on Thursday (https://twitter.com/DanaBashCNN/status/1118961512629116928) that "based on what we have seen to date, going forward on impeachment is not worthwhile at this point."

The top Democrat had in January called impeachment talk a "distraction" but said that "we'll have to see what the Mueller report says," per The Hill (https://thehill.com/homenews/sunday-talk-shows/424058-hoyer-says-impeachment-talks-are-a-distraction).

Now that the report is out, Hoyer still feels these issues should be

litigated at the ballot box in 2020 rather than through the impeachment process,

telling CNN, "Very frankly, there is an election in 18 months and the American people will make a judgement." Hoyer previously made this argument in March and told Fox News (https://www.foxnews.com/politics/steny-hoyer-warns-that-impeaching-trump-would-take-dems-eye-off-the-ball-on-other-promises) that

impeachment is an "extraordinarily all-consuming process." :lol what else ya got to do? all your legislation will DIE in the Senate

House Speaker Nancy Pelosi (D-Calif.) has similarly said that

impeaching Trump is "just not worth it,"

per The Washington Post (https://www.washingtonpost.com/news/magazine/wp/2019/03/11/feature/nancy-pelosi-on-impeaching-president-trump-hes-just-not-worth-it/?utm_term=.c289c9d5b934),

but she has yet to make a similar statement since the release of Mueller's report.

https://theweek.com/speedreads/836186/house-majority-leader-dismisses-impeachment-talk-after-mueller-reportk

Hoyer hasn't even seen the redacted shit, yet, and he caves

What's Hoyer gonna do after he and his Dem/RNC ilk subvert Bernie yet again, handing re-election to Trash?

Fuck all these Dems to hell

[Pavlov]

Yup. They really nailed it with their breathless reporting of Trump and his campaign coordinating with Russia and Wikileaks to disseminate the hacked emails.
Beginning in the summer of 2016, Assange and WikiLeaks made a number of statements about Seth Rich, a former DNC staff member who was killed in July 2016. The statements about Rich implied falsely that he had been the source of the stolen DNC emails.

TICK TOCK

[vy65]

It's a great day. Lawyer boy from the salt mines in here flexing his legalese and the turd crew shitting all over themselves.

: )

^^ Still can't pay VY's fees.

[Spurs Homer]

Yup. They really nailed it with their breathless reporting of Trump and his campaign coordinating with Russia and Wikileaks to disseminate the hacked emails.

your hero was

”collusion curious”

rofl

[pgardn]

why is no one from the left happy that Mueller concluded Trump did not collide with Russia?

I said way back this was a big reach even though the way Trump acted in public made him reek. Way too complex for simple impulsive types.

Is anyone on the Right concerned that the Russians interfered with our elections and the WH either reuses to admit it, or is not giving info on what we are going to do to prevent future interference?

Or like Trump, you actually believe they did help him win thus you make up some BS about 3,000,000 illegal votes for Hillary?

[Spurs Homer]

And the feckless, chickenshit Dems cave on queue

House majority leader dismisses impeachment talk after Mueller report (https://theweek.com/speedreads/836186/house-majority-leader-dismisses-impeachment-talk-after-mueller-report)

House Majority Leader Steny Hoyer (D-Md.) doesn't feel any differently about impeachment in light of Special Counsel Robert Mueller's report.

Hoyer told CNN's Dana Bash on Thursday (https://twitter.com/DanaBashCNN/status/1118961512629116928) that "based on what we have seen to date, going forward on impeachment is not worthwhile at this point."

The top Democrat had in January called impeachment talk a "distraction" but said that "we'll have to see what the Mueller report says," per The Hill (https://thehill.com/homenews/sunday-talk-shows/424058-hoyer-says-impeachment-talks-are-a-distraction).

Now that the report is out, Hoyer still feels these issues should be

litigated at the ballot box in 2020 rather than through the impeachment process,

telling CNN, "Very frankly, there is an election in 18 months and the American people will make a judgement." Hoyer previously made this argument in March and told Fox News (https://www.foxnews.com/politics/steny-hoyer-warns-that-impeaching-trump-would-take-dems-eye-off-the-ball-on-other-promises) that

impeachment is an "extraordinarily all-consuming process." :lol what else ya got to do? all your legislation will DIE in the Senate

House Speaker Nancy Pelosi (D-Calif.) has similarly said that

impeaching Trump is "just not worth it,"

per The Washington Post (https://www.washingtonpost.com/news/magazine/wp/2019/03/11/feature/nancy-pelosi-on-impeaching-president-trump-hes-just-not-worth-it/?utm_term=.c289c9d5b934),

but she has yet to make a similar statement since the release of Mueller's report.

https://theweek.com/speedreads/836186/house-majority-leader-dismisses-impeachment-talk-after-mueller-reportk

Hoyer hasn't even seen the redacted shit, yet, and he caves

What's Hoyer gonna do after he and his Dem/RNC ilk subvert Bernie yet again, handing re-election to Trash?

Fuck all these Dems to hell





relax

they will go down that road soon

first - get the full report and the grand jury info

then

mueller testimony

then the country will demand impeachment

all in due time

[pgardn]

It's a great day. Lawyer boy from the salt mines in here flexing his legalese and the turd crew shitting all over themselves.

: )

The avenging Christian Angel smiting the infidels.

[Chris]

https://proxy.duckduckgo.com/iu/?u=http%3A%2F%2Fimg2.rnkr-static.com%2Fuser_node_img%2F50046%2F1000901496%2F 870%2Fharold-photo-u1.jpg&f=1

[TSA]

And the feckless, chickenshit Dems cave on queue

House majority leader dismisses impeachment talk after Mueller report (https://theweek.com/speedreads/836186/house-majority-leader-dismisses-impeachment-talk-after-mueller-report)

House Majority Leader Steny Hoyer (D-Md.) doesn't feel any differently about impeachment in light of Special Counsel Robert Mueller's report.

Hoyer told CNN's Dana Bash on Thursday (https://twitter.com/DanaBashCNN/status/1118961512629116928) that "based on what we have seen to date, going forward on impeachment is not worthwhile at this point."

The top Democrat had in January called impeachment talk a "distraction" but said that "we'll have to see what the Mueller report says," per The Hill (https://thehill.com/homenews/sunday-talk-shows/424058-hoyer-says-impeachment-talks-are-a-distraction).

Now that the report is out, Hoyer still feels these issues should be

litigated at the ballot box in 2020 rather than through the impeachment process,

telling CNN, "Very frankly, there is an election in 18 months and the American people will make a judgement." Hoyer previously made this argument in March and told Fox News (https://www.foxnews.com/politics/steny-hoyer-warns-that-impeaching-trump-would-take-dems-eye-off-the-ball-on-other-promises) that

impeachment is an "extraordinarily all-consuming process." :lol what else ya got to do? all your legislation will DIE in the Senate

House Speaker Nancy Pelosi (D-Calif.) has similarly said that

impeaching Trump is "just not worth it,"

per The Washington Post (https://www.washingtonpost.com/news/magazine/wp/2019/03/11/feature/nancy-pelosi-on-impeaching-president-trump-hes-just-not-worth-it/?utm_term=.c289c9d5b934),

but she has yet to make a similar statement since the release of Mueller's report.

https://theweek.com/speedreads/836186/house-majority-leader-dismisses-impeachment-talk-after-mueller-reportk

Hoyer hasn't even seen the redacted shit, yet, and he caves

What's Hoyer gonna do after he and his Dem/RNC ilk subvert Bernie yet again, handing re-election to Trash?

Fuck all these Dems to hell





:lol well that didn't take very long

[Chris]

AG Barr: “Thanks to the special counsel's investigation, we now know that Russian operatives who perpetrated these schemes did not have the cooperation of President Trump or the Trump campaign."

:tu

[Chris]

Reporter: why did you say it was an unprecedented situation?

Barr: is there a precedent for it?

Reporter: well no

Barr: okay so unprecedented is an accurate description, isn't it?

Reporter: ...yeah

[Pavlov]

AG Barr: “Thanks to the special counsel's investigation, we now know that Russian operatives who perpetrated these schemes did not have the cooperation of President Trump or the Trump campaign."

:tuAlthough the investigation established that the Russian government perceived it would benefit from a Trump presidency and worked to secure that outcome, and that the Campaign expected it would benefit electorally from information stolen and released through Russian efforts, the investigation did not establish that members of the Trump Campaign conspired or coordinated with the Russian government in its election interference activities.

Hooray, I guess?

[boutons_deux]

Trash's campaign mgr giving Russians voter data for 4 key states, 3 of which gave Trash the EC by 80K votes, and DJTJr, Manafort, etc, meeting with Russians to obtain dirt on Hillary, then Trash LYING in writing about the meeting:

how are these, at least, not coordination/conspiring?

[TSA]

1118975491745157126

shocked to see this on CNN

[TSA]

Trash's campaign mgr giving Russians voter data for 4 key states, 3 of which gave Trash the EC by 80K votes, and DJTJr, Manafort, etc, meeting with Russians to obtain dirt on Hillary, then Trash LYING in writing about the meeting:

how are these, at least, not coordination/conspiring?

Because Mueller said so.

[Chris]

Although the investigation established that the Russian government perceived it would benefit from a Trump presidency and worked to secure that outcome, and that the Campaign expected it would benefit electorally from information stolen and released through Russian efforts, the investigation did not establish that members of the Trump Campaign conspired or coordinated with the Russian government in its election interference activities.

Hooray, I guess?

"So that's the bottom line. After nearly two years of investigation, thousands of subpoenas, hundreds of warrants and witness interviews, the special counsel confirmed -- the Trump campaign nor any other Americans colluded," with the Russians."

: )

[boutons_deux]

Manafort briefed Russian political operative on key battleground state polling in 2016 (https://www.dailykos.com/stories/2019/4/18/1851342/-Mueller-Manafort-briefed-Russian-political-operative-on-key-battleground-state-polling-in-2016)
https://www.dailykos.com/stories/1851342 (https://www.dailykos.com/stories/1851342)

[Pavlov]

"So that's the bottom line. After nearly two years of investigation, thousands of subpoenas, hundreds of warrants and witness interviews, the special counsel confirmed -- the Trump campaign nor any other Americans colluded," with the Russians."

: )Although the investigation established that the Russian government perceived it would benefit from a Trump presidency and worked to secure that outcome, and that the Campaign expected it would benefit electorally from information stolen and released through Russian efforts, the investigation did not establish that members of the Trump Campaign conspired or coordinated with the Russian government in its election interference activities.

Hooray, I guess?

[TSA]

1118927939905753089

zUyqDxa2k3w

[Spurs Homer]

Trumps written answers;

”i dont recall”


37 times



lololol

[Pavlov]

Trumps written answers;

”i dont recall”


37 times



lololol"Right from the beginning, there's no hesitation, one of the great memories of all time."

:rollin

[Chris]

https://twitter.com/RealSaavedra/status/1118979242501517314

[Chris]

https://twitter.com/DevinNunes/status/1118976810811678720


Nunes on the warpath :tu

[TSA]

Trumps written answers;

”i dont recall”


37 times



lololol

Clinton 39 times
Comey 245 times

:bobo

[Reck]

1118975491745157126

shocked to see this on CNN

You're reeling.

Unable to conclude does not mean there wasn't obstruction...also does not exonarate him

Explain this then TSA.

https://pbs.twimg.com/media/D4dKwViU8AEhAKF.jpg:large

I know some have pointed this out to you already but you keep glossing over it for some odd reason.

Let's leave you with one last line:

"..Congress may apply the obstruction laws to the President's corrupt exercise of powers of office.."

That no one is above the law thingy. :lol

[boutons_deux]

"Right from the beginning, there's no hesitation, one of the great memories of all time."

:rollin

A great brain, the best brain, filled with all the best words.

[Chris]

Unable to conclude does not mean there wasn't obstruction

Resistance Reck still wants to believe :lol


V0EZobdiJ4M

[Reck]

Resistance Reck still wants to believe :lol


V0EZobdiJ4M

:lol Reduced to cleanup duty for TSA. Dumber and dumberer.

[Kim Jong-il]

https://www.yahoo.com/news/mueller-report-quotes-trumps-reaction-to-russia-investigation-im-fed-172422827.html

“This is the end of my presidency. I'm fucked.”

:lol the words of a guy who definitely thought he was completely innocent.

[TSA]

You're reeling.

Unable to conclude does not mean there wasn't obstruction...also does not exonarate him

Explain this then TSA.

https://pbs.twimg.com/media/D4dKwViU8AEhAKF.jpg:large

I know some have pointed this out to you already but you keep glossing over it for some odd reason.

Let's leave you with one last line:

"..Congress may apply the obstruction laws to the President's corrupt exercise of powers of office.."

That no one is above the law thingy. :lol

If you think congress has a better chance of establishing obstruction than Mueller and his entire team and all their resources you are stupider than I thought.

[TSA]

Not sure about the perjury part since the FBI used "believes" but once Trump declassifies all the FISA apps the FBI is going to be thoroughly embarrassed.

1118882533419048961

[boutons_deux]

Here’s the most crucial paragraph from the Mueller report

Mueller:

"Under applicable Supreme Court precedent,

the Constitution does not categorically and permanently immunize a President for obstructing justice through the use of his Article II powers.

The separation-of-powers doctrine authorizes Congress to protect official proceedings, including those of courts and grand juries, from corrupt, obstructive acts regardless of their source.

We also concluded that any inroad on presidential authority that would occur from prohibiting corrupt acts does not undermine the President’s ability to fulfill his constitutional mission.

The term “corruptly” sets a demanding standard.

It requires a concrete showing that a person acted with an intent to obtain an improper advantage for himself or someone else,

inconsistent with official duty and the rights of others.

A preclusion of “corrupt” official action does not diminish the President’s ability to exercise Article II powers.

For example, the proper supervision of criminal law does not demand freedom for the President to act with a corrupt intention of shielding himself from criminal punishment, avoiding financial liability, or preventing personal embarrassment.

To the contrary, a statute that prohibits official action undertaken for such corrupt purposes furthers, rather than hinders, the impartial and evenhanded administration of the law.

It also aligns with the President’s constitutional duty to faithfully execute the laws.

Finally, we concluded that in the rare case in which a criminal investigation of the President’s conduct is justified,

inquiries to determine whether the President acted for a corrupt motive should not impermissibly chili his performance of his constitutionally assigned duties.

The conclusion that Congress may apply the obstruction laws to the President’s corrupt exercise of the powers of office accords with our constitutional system of checks and balances and the principle that no person is above the law."

https://www.rawstory.com/2019/04/heres-crucial-paragraph-mueller-report/?utm_source=feedburner&utm_medium=feed&utm_campaign=Feed%3A+TheRawStory+%28The+Raw+Story% 29

[Chris]

"Legally, a decision not to prosecute on the basis that no crimes were committed is an exoneration. Why? Because of the presumption of innocence. Trump doesn’t have to be PROVEN innocent. He IS innocent until proven guilty."
-Herr D'Souza

[baseline bum]

https://www.yahoo.com/news/mueller-report-quotes-trumps-reaction-to-russia-investigation-im-fed-172422827.html

“This is the end of my presidency. I'm fucked.”

:lol the words of a guy who definitely thought he was completely innocent.

:lol

[Pavlov]

"Legally, a decision not to prosecute on the basis that no crimes were committed is an exoneration. Why? Because of the presumption of innocence. Trump doesn’t have to be PROVEN innocent. He IS innocent until proven guilty."
-Herr D'SouzaSo is Hillary.

And D'Souza knows about being guilty.

https://images.dailykos.com/images/550577/large/dinesh-mugshot-690x388.png

[spurraider21]

"Legally, a decision not to prosecute on the basis that no crimes were committed is an exoneration. Why? Because of the presumption of innocence. Trump doesn’t have to be PROVEN innocent. He IS innocent until proven guilty."
-Herr D'Souza
thats not the basis

[Spurs Homer]

"Right from the beginning, there's no hesitation, one of the great memories of all time."

:rollin

lol

[spurraider21]

Not sure about the perjury part since the FBI used "believes" but once Trump declassifies all the FISA apps the FBI is going to be thoroughly embarrassed.

1118882533419048961
shocking, i know, but this is not the first time in history that law enforcement had probable cause to execute a warrant but did not uncover enough evidence to indict/convict. that doesnt retroactively invalidate the warrants

[boutons_deux]

If a knitter Dem Pres had done any of this Trash shit, the Repug rabid dog pack, the hate industrial complex, would be frothing and howling for impeachment.

The Dems? nada.

[Spurs Homer]

If you think congress has a better chance of establishing obstruction than Mueller and his entire team and all their resources you are stupider than I thought.

you are unable to see the forest for the trees


mueller already established it

substitute trumps name for any other name and that person is indicted

except for the doj policy

so mueller spoon fed congress

[Chris]

What's a knitter boots?

[Chris]

https://twitter.com/realDonaldTrump/status/1118990550235877376

:tu

[TSA]

shocking, i know, but this is not the first time in history that law enforcement had probable cause to execute a warrant but did not uncover enough evidence to indict/convict. that doesnt retroactively invalidate the warrants

It's not that they didn't find enough, they didn't find a single thing on Carter Page to indict/convict. How could the FBI be so wrong on Carter Page? What led them to believe he was working in coordination with the Russian government?

[CitizenDwayne]

https://twitter.com/realDonaldTrump/status/1118990550235877376

:tu
He tried and was ignored by his counsel, dummy.

[TSA]

you are unable to see the forest for the trees


mueller already established it

substitute trumps name for any other name and that person is indicted

except for the doj policy

so mueller spoon fed congress

I've asked you this multiple times and you've never answered. Why then was no one from the campaign indicted? They were not shielded by DOJ policy.

[Reck]

If you think congress has a better chance of establishing obstruction than Mueller and his entire team and all their resources you are stupider than I thought.

:lol Mueller sure as fuck seems to think so.

[Chris]

He tried

He didn't fire Mueller. That's a fact.

[Pavlov]

It's not that they didn't find enough, they didn't find a single thing on Carter Page to indict/convict. How could the FBI be so wrong on Carter Page? What led them to believe he was working in coordination with the Russian government?What are the criteria for renewing a FISA warrant?

[Chris]

https://twitter.com/MarkDice/status/1118961034205597696

[TSA]

Robert Mueller Did Not Merely Reject the Trump/Russia Conspiracy Theories. He Obliterated Them.

The two-pronged conspiracy theory that has dominated U.S. political discourse for almost three years – that (1) Trump, his family and his campaign conspired or coordinated with Russia to interfere in the 2016 election, and (2) Trump is beholden to Russian President Vladimir Putin — was not merely rejected today by the final report of Special Counsel Robert Mueller. It was obliterated: in an undeniable and definitive manner.

https://theintercept.com/2019/04/18/robert-mueller-did-not-merely-reject-the-trumprussia-conspiracy-theories-he-obliterated-them/

Greenwald with an absolute beat down

[TSA]

:lol Mueller sure as fuck seems to think so.

No, that's just you stupidly clinging to the last shred of hope.

[Reck]

No, that's just you stupidly clinging to the last shred of hope.

Reading comprehesion fail. Maybe wipe the tears and read the actual report. :lol

[Pavlov]

Robert Mueller Did Not Merely Reject the Trump/Russia Conspiracy Theories. He Obliterated Them.

The two-pronged conspiracy theory that has dominated U.S. political discourse for almost three years – that (1) Trump, his family and his campaign conspired or coordinated with Russia to interfere in the 2016 election, and (2) Trump is beholden to Russian President Vladimir Putin — was not merely rejected today by the final report of Special Counsel Robert Mueller. It was obliterated: in an undeniable and definitive manner.

https://theintercept.com/2019/04/18/robert-mueller-did-not-merely-reject-the-trumprussia-conspiracy-theories-he-obliterated-them/

Greenwald with an absolute beat downDid you notice he obliterated your Seth Rich conspiracy theory too?

Mueller with an absolute beat down

[Reck]

"OH MY GOD, I'M FUCKED"

:lol TSA calls this winning.

[ducks]

https://www.yahoo.com/news/mueller-report-quotes-trumps-reaction-to-russia-investigation-im-fed-172422827.html

“This is the end of my presidency. I'm fucked.”

:lol the words of a guy who definitely thought he was completely innocent.
Anyone would have said the same thing
That was 2 years ago

[ducks]

"OH MY GOD, I'M FUCKED"

:lol TSA calls this winning.

All people with special counsel said same thing

[Spurs Homer]

I've asked you this multiple times and you've never answered. Why then was no one from the campaign indicted? They were not shielded by DOJ policy.

ive answered several times

mueller branched out 14 investigations

learn to fucking read

this was one narrow investigation and when evidence arose mueller branched it out

and

we dont know until mueller testifies if barr impeded the investigation

[spurraider21]

Robert Mueller Did Not Merely Reject the Trump/Russia Conspiracy Theories. He Obliterated Them.

The two-pronged conspiracy theory that has dominated U.S. political discourse for almost three years – that (1) Trump, his family and his campaign conspired or coordinated with Russia to interfere in the 2016 election, and (2) Trump is beholden to Russian President Vladimir Putin — was not merely rejected today by the final report of Special Counsel Robert Mueller. It was obliterated: in an undeniable and definitive manner.

https://theintercept.com/2019/04/18/robert-mueller-did-not-merely-reject-the-trumprussia-conspiracy-theories-he-obliterated-them/

Greenwald with an absolute beat down
wow mueller is really bad at being out to get trump and conducting a witch hunt tbh