Time For Switching Sides On Mueller

[mark46]

No one of trump's team is guilty of collusion. There will be no future indictments. There are no sealed indictments. The family is free and clear of any prosecution regarding Russia.
=====
Perhaps, the REPUBLICANS will now say that, while 2 years has been wasted, that Mueller did a fine job, and that the report and conclusions are valid and serve the cause of justice.

And, DEMOCRATS, when they don't get what they want from Mueller, now switch and attack Mueller for not given them the underlying, incriminating information on the president.

 

[Speedwell]

No one of trump's team is guilty of collusion. There will be no future indictments. There are no sealed indictments. The family is free and clear of any prosecution regarding Russia.
=====
Perhaps, the REPUBLICANS will now say that, while 2 years has been wasted, that Mueller did a fine job, and that the report and conclusions are valid and serve the cause of justice.

And, DEMOCRATS, when they don't get what they want from Mueller, now switch and attack Mueller for not given them the underlying, incriminating information on the president.

Exactly, which is why the Right tried so hard to spin the Mueller investigation into nothing but a "witch hunt" to "get Trump" for "collusion." Now you can brush Russian interference into our elections under the rug and announce "Mueller didn't find anything." I told you that was going to happen. Many months ago.

 

[John 1720]

No one of trump's team is guilty of collusion. There will be no future indictments. There are no sealed indictments. The family is free and clear of any prosecution regarding Russia.
=====
Perhaps, the REPUBLICANS will now say that, while 2 years has been wasted, that Mueller did a fine job, and that the report and conclusions are valid and serve the cause of justice.

And, DEMOCRATS, when they don't get what they want from Mueller, now switch and attack Mueller for not given them the underlying, incriminating information on the president.

When zooming down the slippery slopes of uncertainty, it always a good idea not to get too far ahead of your skis. I would say the American Media has been skiing out of control for the last two years and has sucked many Americans in who love a juicy story. It's been quite lucrative for them but we still don't get it.
A good piece of advice is to wait and see what is at least in the report before judging it to be one way or the other. Polarization being what it is I doubt that will hardly matter.

 

[Silverback]

No one of trump's team is guilty of collusion. There will be no future indictments. There are no sealed indictments. The family is free and clear of any prosecution regarding Russia.
=====
Perhaps, the REPUBLICANS will now say that, while 2 years has been wasted, that Mueller did a fine job, and that the report and conclusions are valid and serve the cause of justice.

And, DEMOCRATS, when they don't get what they want from Mueller, now switch and attack Mueller for not given them the underlying, incriminating information on the president.

you can count on it!

 

[wing2000]

When zooming down the slippery slopes of uncertainty, it always a good idea not to get too far ahead of your skis. I would say the American Media has been skiing out of control for the last two years and has sucked many Americans in who love a juicy story. It's been quite lucrative for them but we still don't get it.
A good piece of advice is to wait and see what is at least in the report before judging it to be one way or the other. Polarization being what it is I doubt that will hardly matter.

Good advice.

And those of us who have been around for a while recall the same speculation around prior Special Counsel investigations....Iran Contral, Clintons-Whitewater (I was too young to remember Watergate).

 

[FreeinChrist]

No one of trump's team is guilty of collusion. There will be no future indictments. There are no sealed indictments. The family is free and clear of any prosecution regarding Russia.
=====
Perhaps, the REPUBLICANS will now say that, while 2 years has been wasted, that Mueller did a fine job, and that the report and conclusions are valid and serve the cause of justice.

And, DEMOCRATS, when they don't get what they want from Mueller, now switch and attack Mueller for not given them the underlying, incriminating information on the president.

There is a reason Barr talked in his letter about having Mueller and Rosenstein assist in deciding what can be released. There is significant information in the report.

Mueller uncovered a great deal and indicted quite a few including Manafort, Flynn, Gates, Cohen, Stone and 13 Russians. There are more. see All of Robert Mueller’s indictments and plea deals in the Russia investigation

And because of the investigation, we found out about the hush payments, and the ongoing negotiations for Trump Tower Moscow during his primary campaign, and much more. He may not be recommending indictments simply because there is not enough evidence for conviction despite the strong suggestion it took place. Robert Mueller report will be a gold mine of improprieties. Trump shouldn't celebrate yet.

A Mueller decision to decline any new indictments does not, by itself, mean that Mueller concluded President Donald Trump committed no crimes. In only means that Mueller followed DOJ protocol that prohibits the department from indicting a sitting president.......

Profoundly 'swamp-like' conduct at the least
Given the evidence already breaking the seams of the public domain, it is hard to imagine that Mueller’s report will offer a full exoneration of the president and his campaign. Democrats may be disappointed that Mueller did not indict the likes of Donald Trump Jr. and Jared Kushner, who many consider the closest orbiting co-conspirators to the president. But, given the signs that Mueller’s investigation has been thorough, his report will likely be a treasure trove of evidence that, if not establishing outright crimes, will establish profoundly “swamp-like” conduct by Trump and members of his inner circle.

Perhaps the most significant question Mueller’s report can answer is whether there is evidence that Trump has been compromised by Russia. It may not be a crime to lie to the American public about currying favor with a foreign adversary, to make hundreds of millions of dollars by building Trump Tower Moscow. But it helps explain the president’s siding with Vladimir Putin over U.S. intelligence agencies and his refusal to implement congressionally mandated sanctions against Russia for its election interference.

If Mueller’s report is the gold mine of impropriety I predict it to be, expect Barr to refuse full disclosure and the resulting battle to end up in the Supreme Court.
​

And investigations were handed off to others such as the Southern District of New York. see:
After Mueller: The Ongoing Investigations Surrounding Trump

We need to hear more about what is in the report.

 

[Silverback]

There is a reason Barr talked in his letter about having Mueller and Rosenstein assist in deciding what can be released. There is significant information in the report.

Mueller uncovered a great deal and indicted quite a few including Manafort, Flynn, Gates, Cohen, Stone and 13 Russians. There are more. see All of Robert Mueller’s indictments and plea deals in the Russia investigation

And because of the investigation, we found out about the hush payments, and the ongoing negotiations for Trump Tower Moscow during his primary campaign, and much more. He may not be recommending indictments simply because there is not enough evidence for conviction despite the strong suggestion it took place. Robert Mueller report will be a gold mine of improprieties. Trump shouldn't celebrate yet.

A Mueller decision to decline any new indictments does not, by itself, mean that Mueller concluded President Donald Trump committed no crimes. In only means that Mueller followed DOJ protocol that prohibits the department from indicting a sitting president.......

Profoundly 'swamp-like' conduct at the least
Given the evidence already breaking the seams of the public domain, it is hard to imagine that Mueller’s report will offer a full exoneration of the president and his campaign. Democrats may be disappointed that Mueller did not indict the likes of Donald Trump Jr. and Jared Kushner, who many consider the closest orbiting co-conspirators to the president. But, given the signs that Mueller’s investigation has been thorough, his report will likely be a treasure trove of evidence that, if not establishing outright crimes, will establish profoundly “swamp-like” conduct by Trump and members of his inner circle.

Perhaps the most significant question Mueller’s report can answer is whether there is evidence that Trump has been compromised by Russia. It may not be a crime to lie to the American public about currying favor with a foreign adversary, to make hundreds of millions of dollars by building Trump Tower Moscow. But it helps explain the president’s siding with Vladimir Putin over U.S. intelligence agencies and his refusal to implement congressionally mandated sanctions against Russia for its election interference.

If Mueller’s report is the gold mine of impropriety I predict it to be, expect Barr to refuse full disclosure and the resulting battle to end up in the Supreme Court.
​

And investigations were handed off to others such as the Southern District of New York. see:
After Mueller: The Ongoing Investigations Surrounding Trump

We need to hear more about what is in the report.

So it seems the Presidents conduct in office, has been consistent with every other President over the last 50 years? Essentially that is.

 

[com7fy8]

There is the point that the investigation maybe did not find anything to prove anyone guilty of things people are concerned about; but, also, it might not have enough to prove anyone innocent.

 

[cow451]

No one of trump's team is guilty of collusion. There will be no future indictments. There are no sealed indictments. The family is free and clear of any prosecution regarding Russia.
=====
Perhaps, the REPUBLICANS will now say that, while 2 years has been wasted, that Mueller did a fine job, and that the report and conclusions are valid and serve the cause of justice.

And, DEMOCRATS, when they don't get what they want from Mueller, now switch and attack Mueller for not given them the underlying, incriminating information on the president.

I dontsee that happening anymore than Trump giving Mueller the Presidential Medal of Freedom.

 

[super animator]

No one of trump's team is guilty of collusion. There will be no future indictments. There are no sealed indictments. The family is free and clear of any prosecution regarding Russia.
=====
Perhaps, the REPUBLICANS will now say that, while 2 years has been wasted, that Mueller did a fine job, and that the report and conclusions are valid and serve the cause of justice.

And, DEMOCRATS, when they don't get what they want from Mueller, now switch and attack Mueller for not given them the underlying, incriminating information on the president.

There is no way they are going to swap like that easily in a million years @mark46

 

[chevyontheriver]

No one of trump's team is guilty of collusion. There will be no future indictments. There are no sealed indictments. The family is free and clear of any prosecution regarding Russia.
=====
Perhaps, the REPUBLICANS will now say that, while 2 years has been wasted, that Mueller did a fine job, and that the report and conclusions are valid and serve the cause of justice.

And, DEMOCRATS, when they don't get what they want from Mueller, now switch and attack Mueller for not given them the underlying, incriminating information on the president.

Time for a NEW investigation.

 

[FreeinChrist]

So it seems the Presidents conduct in office, has been consistent with every other President over the last 50 years? Essentially that is.

No, it hasn't.

 

[mark46]

Time for a NEW investigation.

The Republicans have asked for one. The Democrats already have a couple of dozen ongoing by the House.

 

[mark46]

You seem to expect that Mueller will report on all his investigations, even if they led him to believe that there was insufficient evidence to go forward. I do NOT believe that Mueller would do this, with the singular exception of information about the president.

Mueller has investigations the ties to Russian interference of the following and found no reason to go forward. I do NOT expect to see information that supports that decision. AND I SHOULD'T HAVE IT!

not guilty - Kushner, Ivanca, Bannon, Don Jr, Hope, Lewendowksi, and some others.

Other courts may investigate these folks on other charges, but investigation regarding Russia should be done.

There is a reason Barr talked in his letter about having Mueller and Rosenstein assist in deciding what can be released. There is significant information in the report.

Mueller uncovered a great deal and indicted quite a few including Manafort, Flynn, Gates, Cohen, Stone and 13 Russians. There are more. see All of Robert Mueller’s indictments and plea deals in the Russia investigation

And because of the investigation, we found out about the hush payments, and the ongoing negotiations for Trump Tower Moscow during his primary campaign, and much more. He may not be recommending indictments simply because there is not enough evidence for conviction despite the strong suggestion it took place. Robert Mueller report will be a gold mine of improprieties. Trump shouldn't celebrate yet.

A Mueller decision to decline any new indictments does not, by itself, mean that Mueller concluded President Donald Trump committed no crimes. In only means that Mueller followed DOJ protocol that prohibits the department from indicting a sitting president.......

Profoundly 'swamp-like' conduct at the least
Given the evidence already breaking the seams of the public domain, it is hard to imagine that Mueller’s report will offer a full exoneration of the president and his campaign. Democrats may be disappointed that Mueller did not indict the likes of Donald Trump Jr. and Jared Kushner, who many consider the closest orbiting co-conspirators to the president. But, given the signs that Mueller’s investigation has been thorough, his report will likely be a treasure trove of evidence that, if not establishing outright crimes, will establish profoundly “swamp-like” conduct by Trump and members of his inner circle.

Perhaps the most significant question Mueller’s report can answer is whether there is evidence that Trump has been compromised by Russia. It may not be a crime to lie to the American public about currying favor with a foreign adversary, to make hundreds of millions of dollars by building Trump Tower Moscow. But it helps explain the president’s siding with Vladimir Putin over U.S. intelligence agencies and his refusal to implement congressionally mandated sanctions against Russia for its election interference.

If Mueller’s report is the gold mine of impropriety I predict it to be, expect Barr to refuse full disclosure and the resulting battle to end up in the Supreme Court.
​

And investigations were handed off to others such as the Southern District of New York. see:
After Mueller: The Ongoing Investigations Surrounding Trump

We need to hear more about what is in the report.

 

[com7fy8]

The Republicans have asked for one. The Democrats already have a couple of dozen ongoing by the House.

But, no matter how many investigations there are, it still stands that anyone is presumed innocent until proven guilty in a court of law.

And I think of this > already, some number are assuming certain people are guilty . . . even though there has been no proof presented in a court of law. So, if ones have the character to assume, contrary to Constitutional law, how can they be trusted to give someone a really honest investigation and trial?????

Whether I buy President Trump or not, there is a point to making his reference to the witch trials. People are still human, still capable of that, including even killing unborn innocents. So, yes we humans are capable of convincing ourselves of anything and being so lethally wrong.

And, even if a person has been guilty of past crimes > the Constitution, if I remember correctly, requires how the person must be tried only based on evidence about the present crime he or she is accused of doing. The fact that someone did a past crime is not admissible as evidence of if he or she is guilty of the crime the person is accused of, presently.

But ones do appear to be using past performance in order to claim proof of present crimes, in the case of how Donald Trump is accused by certain people. And if they do this, they are breaking with their oath to uphold basic Constitutional law. And breaking Constitutional law is a crime, is it not?

So, in case during campaigning and future debates, anyone accuses anyone of a crime, without it being properly dealt with in a court of law, possibly that candidate is committing a crime, on television, witnessed by whoever is watching TV!! But when ones do presume like this, I note how it is not prosecuted.

So, in case the Constitution is being dealt with this sloppily, it is possible that investigations also have really been sloppy. And sloppers can criticize and accuse other swampers.

So . . . pray. God is committed to how obedient prayer will accomplish His own blessing. We might not be realistic to expect anything from humans who can't keep their own word, but we can expect all which God guarantees will work.

 

[Speedwell]

But, no matter how many investigations there are, it still stands that anyone is presumed innocent until proven guilty in a court of law.

And I think of this > already, some number are assuming certain people are guilty . . . even though there has been no proof presented in a court of law. So, if ones have the character to assume, contrary to Constitutional law, how can they be trusted to give someone a really honest investigation and trial?????

Whether I buy President Trump or not, there is a point to making his reference to the witch trials. People are still human, still capable of that, including even killing unborn innocents. So, yes we humans are capable of convincing ourselves of anything and being so lethally wrong.

And, even if a person has been guilty of past crimes > the Constitution, if I remember correctly, requires how the person must be tried only based on evidence about the present crime he or she is accused of doing. The fact that someone did a past crime is not admissible as evidence of if he or she is guilty of the crime the person is accused of, presently.

But ones do appear to be using past performance in order to claim proof of present crimes, in the case of how Donald Trump is accused by certain people. And if they do this, they are breaking with their oath to uphold basic Constitutional law. And breaking Constitutional law is a crime, is it not?

So, in case during campaigning and future debates, anyone accuses anyone of a crime, without it being properly dealt with in a court of law, possibly that candidate is committing a crime, on television, witnessed by whoever is watching TV!! But when ones do presume like this, I note how it is not prosecuted.

So, in case the Constitution is being dealt with this sloppily, it is possible that investigations also have really been sloppy. And sloppers can criticize and accuse other swampers.

So . . . pray. God is committed to how obedient prayer will accomplish His own blessing. We might not be realistic to expect anything from humans who can't keep their own word, but we can expect all which God guarantees will work.

Congressional investigations are not held to determine or prosecute criminality. They are a tool for the Congress to acquire information bearing on their responsibility to craft legislation and to carry out oversight of the Executive Branch. Any evidence of a possible crime they uncover would be referred to the Justice Department.

 

[LivingWordUnity]

The ones who say Trump colluded with the Russians will probably strap their tinfoil hats on tighter.

 

[Speedwell]

The ones who say Trump colluded with the Russians will probably strap their tinfoil hats on tighter.

Maybe so, but none of the Liberals you love to hate in this forum thought "collusion" was very likely in the first place.

 

[childeye 2]

No one of trump's team is guilty of collusion. There will be no future indictments. There are no sealed indictments. The family is free and clear of any prosecution regarding Russia.
=====
Perhaps, the REPUBLICANS will now say that, while 2 years has been wasted, that Mueller did a fine job, and that the report and conclusions are valid and serve the cause of justice.

And, DEMOCRATS, when they don't get what they want from Mueller, now switch and attack Mueller for not given them the underlying, incriminating information on the president.

Actually the report may show that there was collusion but it's not illegal.

 

[mark46]

I'm not sure what you mean.

"Collusion" in this case means conspiracy or illegal cooperation.

If you mean to suggest that Mueller proved that members of the campaign had communications with the Russians, about legal actions taken by the Russians, that is true, and certainly not illegal. Stone is the only one who seems to have illegally cooperating with the Russians.

The bottom line is that there can be no "legal" collusion.

Actually the report may show that there was collusion but it's not illegal.