1. #16341
    Quote Originally Posted by CostinR View Post
    Mueller was uncertain on the charge, he did not say Trump obstructed justice, nor did he say he didn't. I'm sure people will argue this to death.

    So anyway Mueller, with all the information presented to him made it clear: Trump did not collude with Russia.
    Mueller didn't make a "standard prosecutorial judgement." We don't know if he was certain trump obstructed justice or not.

    So anyway, barr, with all the information presented to him made it clear: trump is not exonerated in the report.
    Quote Originally Posted by Rudol Von Stroheim View Post
    I do not need to play the role of "holier than thou". I'm above that..

  2. #16342
    Quote Originally Posted by CostinR View Post
    In the report? Mueller basically didn't draw a conclusion. He didn't find Trump guilty nor did he find innocent.
    You said that without a shadow of a doubt that Trump didn't collude with Russia, then you post this that Mueller didn't draw a conclusion, so which is it?

  3. #16343
    Quote Originally Posted by Orbitus View Post
    The fact that his dumbass son, campaign manager, and son in law took that meeting in Trump Tower, based on getting dirt on Hillary Clinton, means that Barr is a Trump knob gobbler.
    That is not illegal. Believe it or not taking a meeting with someone from Russia is not illegal. This report is pretty cut and dry there was no collusion period. There was no dirt transferred in the meeting and was a ruse in order to reverse sanctions on adoptions. This was a giant hoax pushed by the Democrat party and a willing media.

  4. #16344
    Quote Originally Posted by Vatrilian View Post
    Mueller left it up to the discretion of the attorney general and his deputies. Barr is not a henchmen or hoax, but a well respected attorney general with a distinguished career. That's how these things work. You need an underlying crime for obstruction. There is no crime here. This was a total hoax and I am glad the President is vindicated.
    If there was any doubt in Muellers mind, KNOWING that his report will first go to the DOJ and AG Barr, why wouldn't he just recommend charges there? The only possible explanation is there wasn't enough actual evidence to show they willingly and criminally obstructed justice. Unless Mueller is playing 9D chess with us all...

    Quote Originally Posted by Orbitus View Post
    The fact that his dumbass son, campaign manager, and son in law took that meeting in Trump Tower, based on getting dirt on Hillary Clinton, means that Barr is a Trump knob gobbler.
    Just because somone on TV said meeting or interacting with Russians/citizens is literally the worst thing a person could do, doesn't mean it's true.
    If Jr knew this person was a Russian Agent or acting on behalf of the Russian government then he would already be in jail.
    Last edited by Sinyc; 2019-03-24 at 11:02 PM.

  5. #16345
    Quote Originally Posted by Ripster42 View Post
    Mueller didn't make a "standard prosecutorial judgement." We don't know if he was certain trump obstructed justice or not.

    So anyway, barr, with all the information presented to him made it clear: trump is not exonerated in the report.
    "After reviewing the Special Counsel’s final report on these issues… 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."

  6. #16346
    Quote Originally Posted by Vatrilian View Post
    That is not illegal. Believe it or not taking a meeting with someone from Russia is not illegal. This report is pretty cut and dry there was no collusion period. There was no dirt transferred in the meeting and was a ruse in order to reverse sanctions on adoptions. This was a giant hoax pushed by the Democrat party and a willing media.
    The barr letter pretty clearly says the report does not exonerate him.
    Quote Originally Posted by Rudol Von Stroheim View Post
    I do not need to play the role of "holier than thou". I'm above that..

  7. #16347
    Quote Originally Posted by Sinyc View Post
    If there was any doubt in Muellers mind, KNOWING that his report will first go to the DOJ and AG Barr, why wouldn't he just recommend charges there? The only possible explanation is there wasn't enough actual evidence to show they willingly and criminally obstructed justice. Unless Mueller is playing 9D chess with us all...
    Mueller doesn't have that power. Mueller was following the rule of law.
    World needs more Goblin Warriors https://i.imgur.com/WKs8aJA.jpg

  8. #16348
    Quote Originally Posted by Veknazel View Post
    Innocent until proven guilty
    Guilty until proven innocent
    Guilty even after proven innocent! F*ck yeah, these are the true liberal democratic values!
    Hiliary says, "Hello".

    Even after being found innocent many times over the emails it was still used against her in the 2016 elections. As will this be used against Trump in the 2020 election, Karma

  9. #16349
    Quote Originally Posted by Vatrilian View Post
    "After reviewing the Special Counsel’s final report on these issues… 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."
    Barr doesn't think a sitting president can commit obstruction of justice period because of his views on the extent of presidential power. He doesn't believe a president can act with "corrupt intent" because of how the constitution empowers him.
    Quote Originally Posted by Rudol Von Stroheim View Post
    I do not need to play the role of "holier than thou". I'm above that..

  10. #16350
    Quote Originally Posted by Hobb View Post
    Hiliary says, "Hello".

    Even after being found innocent many times over the emails it was still used against her in the 2016 elections. As will this be used against Trump in the 2020 election, Karma
    Probably because the emails were real.

  11. #16351
    Quote Originally Posted by Vatrilian View Post
    That is not illegal. Believe it or not taking a meeting with someone from Russia is not illegal. This report is pretty cut and dry there was no collusion period. There was no dirt transferred in the meeting and was a ruse in order to reverse sanctions on adoptions. This was a giant hoax pushed by the Democrat party and a willing media.
    Taking a meeting, based on getting dirt on a political opponent ABSOLUTELY is illegal. And the report doesn't say there was no collusion, Mueller didn't make any recommendation.

    Just because there was no dirt given, doesn't make it not illegal. Let's take your shitty suggestion and say that if someone tries to kill someone else's wife, and misses with the shot, and gives up when he is caught. Does that mean that attempted murder isn't illegal? The fact that they were discussing sanctions alone makes it a Hatch Act violation because they weren't even sworn in as government officials.

  12. #16352
    Quote Originally Posted by Ripster42 View Post
    Barr doesn't think a sitting president can commit obstruction of justice period because of his views on the extent of presidential power. He doesn't believe a president can act with "corrupt intent" because of how the constitution empowers him.
    Again:
    "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."
    I am so glad this attorney general is so thorough.

  13. #16353
    Quote Originally Posted by CostinR View Post
    In the report? Mueller basically didn't draw a conclusion. He didn't find Trump guilty nor did he find innocent.
    Mm, the specific quote is "while this report does not conclude the President committed a crime, it also does not exonerate him." Which could be read a couple ways:

    1) Trump didn't do anything against the letter of the law.
    2) Trump didn't do anything, period; you can't exonerate someone who is not a criminal.

    In any case, the Barr letter also suggests that there was no conspiracy, which is one of the primary asks of the special counsel: "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..."

    In any event, we'll get to see most or all of the report. "As I have previously stated, however, I am mindful of the public interest in this matter. For that reason, my goal and intent is to release as much of the Special Counsel's report as I can consistent with applicable law, regulations, and Departmental policies."

  14. #16354
    Quote Originally Posted by Hobb View Post
    Hiliary says, "Hello".

    Even after being found innocent many times over the emails it was still used against her in the 2016 elections. As will this be used against Trump in the 2020 election, Karma
    Yeah but no one believes this nonsense because it never happened. Hillary actually had a server in her closet ran by some fly by night company in Colorado.

  15. #16355
    Quote Originally Posted by Vatrilian View Post
    Probably because the emails were real.
    Yet, nothing came of it. But millions wasted in investigations and no indictments. Meanwhile we have several guilty pleas and several indictments that are still going through the courts.

  16. #16356
    Quote Originally Posted by Vatrilian View Post
    Probably because the emails were real.
    Moving goalposts I see.

  17. #16357
    Quote Originally Posted by Toppy View Post
    Mueller doesn't have that power. Mueller was following the rule of law.
    Well if he can't recommend charges be filed, is there no way, under his power given him to by the law, to convey overwhelming evidence and give his opinion on the matter? I will wait to read the entire report, because I don't fully frust Barr as he is a Trump appointee. Barr is getting to set the narrative for these first 24-48 hours, which is the most important time frame because everyone just assumes what is being relayed to them is 100% truth, and after 24-48 hours the public's attention is gone on that subject.

    Edit: Barr quotes the Mueller report where it states: “[T]he investigation did not establish that members of the Trump Campaign conspired or coordinated with the Russian government in its election interference activities.”

    Why couldn't he do the inverse for Obstruction?
    Last edited by Sinyc; 2019-03-24 at 11:13 PM.

  18. #16358
    Quote Originally Posted by lockedout View Post
    Yeah but no one believes this nonsense because it never happened. Hillary actually had a server in her closet ran by some fly by night company in Colorado.
    You mean like Trump's staff and own family members are doing right now?

  19. #16359
    Quote Originally Posted by Orbitus View Post
    Taking a meeting, based on getting dirt on a political opponent ABSOLUTELY is illegal. And the report doesn't say there was no collusion, Mueller didn't make any recommendation.

    Just because there was no dirt given, doesn't make it not illegal. Let's take your shitty suggestion and say that if someone tries to kill someone else's wife, and misses with the shot, and gives up when he is caught. Does that mean that attempted murder isn't illegal? The fact that they were discussing sanctions alone makes it a Hatch Act violation because they weren't even sworn in as government officials.
    Then how come Mueller's principle conclusion was: "the Special Counsel did not find that any U.S. person or Trump campaign official or associate conspired or knowingly coordinated with the IRA in its efforts, although the Special Counsel brought criminal charges against a number of Russian nationals and entities in connection with these activities."

    You lost, its been fun but its over. You people should be eating crow at this point. There was no collusion and no obstruction of justice as there was no underlying crime.

    - - - Updated - - -

    Quote Originally Posted by Hobb View Post
    Moving goalposts I see.
    I am not moving any goal posts. I don't believe that Hillary Clinton should have been tried because I don't think she had intent when she mishandled classified information. The emails hacked by WikiLeaks did do a lot of damage to her campaign but the emails were not fake they were real. The American people simply got to know her better.

  20. #16360
    Quote Originally Posted by Vatrilian View Post
    Again:
    "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."
    I am so glad this attorney general is so thorough.
    Again, barr not believing a president can act with corrupt intent with regards to obstruction of justice has nothing to do with whether or not a sitting president can be indicted. I have already covered this in a previous post. Barr's footnote is specific to the constitutional considerations of whether or not a sitting president can be indicted. That has nothing to do with the constitutional considerations of whether or not a president can act with corrupt intent.
    Quote Originally Posted by Rudol Von Stroheim View Post
    I do not need to play the role of "holier than thou". I'm above that..

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •