Reply With Quote
You missed the whole point why. I mean Darrin, the post illustrated at least 4 reasons why.
It doesn’t matter if there were crimes committed or not.
That is an insane assertion.
The Summary and report itself contradict that and Mueller’s letter affirms it.
Barr had issues with the Mueller report. It did not exonerate Trump.
You’re stupid, man.
How can you say Barr didn’t question Mueller on anything and took his word when Barr didn’t agree with the Obstruction side of the investigation. Mueller all but said Congress is the one to deal with it and Barr basically shut it all down.
Mueller was essentially muzzled by the thug Barr.
Not gonna pretend you have even read the report because you haven’t.
Oh and BTW, Barr calling this report his “baby” after it was Mueller who did all the hard work and put so much time into it.You’re a laughingstock TSA.
You missed the whole point why. I mean Darrin, the post illustrated at least 4 reasons why.
It doesn’t matter if there were crimes committed or not.
Do you really need an explanation on that? It’s so obvious.
Yet it’s true you do have your ass up Trump’s ass.
No explanation, just ad hominem.
I agree - but - I had already stated all this in several threads -
Mueller could not indict - therefore he couldn't charge = and like I posted before -
since the laws are set up to protect criminals -
Mueller had to look out for "trumps rights" instead of actually protecting the rule of law -
but even that is flawed - because
for example - let us say Mueller did not charge trump - but stated that "the evidence points to trump guilty of crimes" then all trump would have to do using his executive power -is -
cancel/void the OLC regulation and take his case to trial and defend himself - so even Mueller gave trump the full benefit of the doubt - that he clearly does not deserve
here we go
SR21 is explaining to you the legal aspect, you respond with an opinion. You're certainly en led to it, but it's wholly irrelevant to the legal matter at hand. It's important to understand the legal process in order to have an actual informed opinion.
As was explained when the case started, Congress is the only branch authorized of bringing impeachment proceedings to a sitting president. That is, charge him with one of the cons utionally enumerated offenses, try him, and reach a verdict, through a political process (how that process is conducted is strictly political, not controlled by the judiciary at all).
Considering that Mueller and his team did not have the authority to charge the president (even if, in arguendo, the evidence he collected during his investigation would purportedly point to any criminal activity from the sitting president), his job, as far as the president is concerned at least, was to investigate and relay his investigation findings to Congress. It is then up to Congress, starting with the House, to either bring impeachment charges or not.
Unlike what djohn has incorrectly repeated for a while, it was never Mueller's job to either charge or 'exonerate' the president. The investigation itself is a tool for Congress to make that decision. Because that's a political, not a judicial process, it's of the utmost importance that the investigation findings are clear, concise, and as public as they can be. Both because Congress has a big decision to make based on them, and because it provides the public with transparency for whatever Congress decides to do.
Hopefully it's more clear now.
Last edited by ElNono; 05-02-2019 at 05:00 AM.
It's difficult to pin point if you only hear from Barr and he gets to pick and choose what information reaches Congress (specifically because it's Congress' role to make a decision based on the findings).
That doesn't mean there's an impeachable offense, and that Barr is protecting Trump. But without a relatively full disclosure, at least to Congresscritters, it's difficult to ascertain he not protecting him either.
Ask Trump's DOJ.
You don't get it. Even if they had mounds of evidence, Trump couldn't be charged as he is a sitting president. That is why it was left up to Congress.
Bad press for starters. There is enough info in the report to make the WH look awful for those who read it and actually care about what is happening there. This is all about perception and getting out in front of things, hence the Barr presser. Why else is it so important for Trump to attack everyone and everything so consistently, even when they don't directly attack him? He knows you people believe whatever he tells you, and even if you don't, he knows you will rationalize or ignore it, "because at least he isn't a liberal." American politics has become a sporting event. Red vs blue. He knows that and uses it.
Durbin got Barr to admit that Barr was working on exoneration before he got Mueller's report
Russian-connected Barr isn't in law enforcement, he's a political hack
I'm not sure how much of this is directed at me/TSA, but I agree this won't have much of an impact on the next election.
I also think that if we're talking about the right thing to do, this simply isn't very high on my list. Holding Trump accountable for failing on the promises he made with respect to infrastructure, jobs, etc. is much more appropriate imo since those failures affect more people in their everyday life. That stuff isn't necessarily mutually exclusive with Russiagate but I don't see any time being spent on it, I see Russiagate as another wedge issue.
I just told you in the post you quoted. He's protecting Trump from bad press like a PR representative, not an Attorney General. I'm sorry if that's not the answer you were trying to get.
dp
I can agree that those other concerns are not being given appropriate time or commentary by Democrats but I also don't know how they'd solve that legislatively. Trump's failings in those areas seem like good talking points for 2020 campaigns.
I don't understand what all the bull is about Mueller's letter. Everything Mueller asked to be released "to give full context" has been released.
should be your sig tbh
sup, loser?
Not much old fart. Did you finally realize you were mistaken last night?
Was worried you were sundowning.
Nope. I don't live on here like you do. Pretty much have a full life going on.
Looks like I’ll have to dunce this down for you.That is an insane assertion.
The Summary and report itself contradict that and Mueller’s letter affirms it.
Barr had issues with the Mueller report. It did not exonerate Trump.
You’re stupid, man.
How can you say Barr didn’t question Mueller on anything and took his word when Barr didn’t agree with the Obstruction side of the investigation. Mueller all but said Congress is the one to deal with it and Barr basically shut it all down.
Mueller was essentially muzzled by the thug Barr.
Not gonna pretend you have even read the report because you haven’t.
Oh and BTW, Barr calling this report his “baby” after it was Mueller who did all the hard work and put so much time into it.
Is underlying evidence and a legal theory the same thing? Yes or no.
ah...that's a convenient way to not have to admit you're wrong. "oh...I'm too busy to realize I'm re ed".
Dam the day the report came out you thought it was the best thing ever now it’s a smear giftwrapped for Democrats?
There are currently 1 users browsing this thread. (0 members and 1 guests)
Posting Permissions
