Starting today August 7th, 2024, in order to post in the Married Couples, Courting Couples, or Singles forums, you will not be allowed to post if you have your Marital status designated as private. Announcements will be made in the respective forums as well but please note that if yours is currently listed as Private, you will need to submit a ticket in the Support Area to have yours changed.
Hmmm, didn't read the report did you? You also must not have paid attention to the hearing. Plenty of evidence was laid out in the report of collusion and obstruction of justice.A lot of misinformation surrounded the Special Council's investigation and final report. Mueller didn't write the report. Which is why he simply referred to what was in the report when asked, and didn't provide any direct information as pertained to pages, or sections.
Furthermore, a Democrat in the panel asked Mueller to reiterate that he did not exonerate Trump in his report. Well, no kidding. Mueller doesn't have the authority to either convict nor exonerate. His was an investigation. And President Donald Trump is fully protected by the presumption of innocence till proven guilty in any investigation.
What did happen that was under Mueller's jurisdiction is, he found no evidence of either collusion or obstruction of justice by Donald Trump or anyone related to his campaign or other interests.
That settles the whole matter. Because that's all Mueller was charged with finding out and all that he could arrive at as a conclusion, by law.
If Russia collusion and obstruction of justice were a fair intent for an open investigation , we know there is plenty to find on the other side of the aisle. Starting with our former President Obama, down to his appointed Secretary of State who served the office at his pleasure, down to Comey, who is one of Mueller's best friends, and onward.
Will that investigation with actual evidence get underway? Not likely. But at least this fiasco is over and done with.
Poor Mueller. He was failing terribly in that five hour circus. But at least he can go home and stay retired now.
God be with him.
Why?Excellent. Thank you.That's one alleged impeachable issue that won't float.
That's false. You may choose to ignore Mueller's remarks because you want Trump to be guilty of something no matter the truth that he is not, but that does not alter what Mueller, who you invoke, stated.He did, however document that Trump repeatedly attempted to obstruct the investigation, each of which is a felony.
Correct and Mueller didn't say that he did.
There's a lot of talk that Mueller did not exonerate Trump in his report. Even Mueller states that.
That's because Mueller in his designation as Special Counsel did not have the power to exonerate Trump.
GOP lawmaker takes out textbook, tells Mueller he doesn't have 'power to exonerate'
No he didn't. He said collusion is not a legal term used.However, when Mueller stated there was insufficient evidence to support either collusion,
That is not correct. It all depends on what one colludes to do. If that action is illegal, then one can be prosecuted.which is not illegal,
Incorrect again. The report outlined a number of attempts by Trump to obstruct the investigation. He couldn't file charges against Trump because of DOJ regulations. He did say that Trump could be charged after he leaves office.or obstruction, that means there is no evidence to warrant charges.
There was insufficient evidence that Trump cooperated in a conspiracy to interfere in the last election with Russia. There was, though, plenty of evidence that Russia did and still is meddling in our election process.When there is insufficient evidence, and Trump under law is presumed innocent till proven guilty, there is no evidence to bring charges.
Then its case closed. OR ought to be.There was insufficient evidence that Trump cooperated in a conspiracy to interfere in the last election with Russia.
The criminal case is closed against criminal conspiracy, unless further evidence comes to light.Then its case closed. OR ought to be.
Not unless evidence is found.That Nadler and Co. keep subpoena-ing people and documents just to keep a toothless theory before the voters doesn't change it.
That's false.
I never said otherwise. Read my post again.Correct and Mueller didn't say that he did.
Why? I read it and replied correctly.I never said otherwise. Read my post again.
No he didn't. Mueller said the they didn't find sufficient evidence to charge him with cooperation in the Russian election crimes. His investigation was limited and there may be evidence which he was unable to find.Trump haters imagine there's more. When Mueller says there isn't ,
Provide the evidence that he said that. Mueller didn't exonerate Trump of any of the crimes he was investigating. He investigated and charged those he could prosecute with crimes. He didn't charge Trump because he cannot because of DOJ rules.and the law says Mueller can't exonerate anyone, which Mueller stated when he said he didn't exonerate Trump, only that was language he knew the Dem's would latch on to to then argue that Mueller didn't exonerate Trump means Trump is guilty, is just more smoke and mirrors surrounding the witch hunt.
We'll see after the next election.It's done.
The Dems are utterly desperate. If they don't stop Trump one way or another many Dem leaders may go to prison for the Russia hoax.
That moment during the testimony and his not knowing what Fusion GPS meant were very telling, weren't they?
Go ahead and ignore all the parts of the Mueller report that stated there was not sufficient evidence to support collusion nor obstruction on the part of Trump.Hmmm, didn't read the report did you? You also must not have paid attention to the hearing. Plenty of evidence was laid out in the report of collusion and obstruction of justice.
I didn't get the opportunity to watch much of the Intelligence Committee hearing but the first hearing focused mainly on the obstruction case, which explained that clearly.
All the rest is just a rehash of, 'nuh uh". The case is closed. No sufficient evidence to support either collusion nor obstruction. That's in the report that I did read cover to cover.[/quote]Why? I read it and replied correctly.
Great question. You should forward that to the Democrats in the house since they seem to think that is the case.Why?
Where exactly is it mandated that an offense must be found in the criminal code in order for it to be impeachable?
Clearly not to Democrats.Do you really think they'll do better than the "Hillary is a crook" fiasco? Do you remember Trey Gowdy stammering and evading questions from reporters when he finally had to admit there was nothing illegal there?
The difference between the democrats going free and the host of Trump underlings going to jail is, in Trump's case, there were actual crimes committed.
Reality still counts.
We use cookies and similar technologies for the following purposes:
Do you accept cookies and these technologies?
We use cookies and similar technologies for the following purposes:
Do you accept cookies and these technologies?