1. #17201
    I Don't Work Here Endus's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2010
    Location
    Ottawa, ON
    Posts
    64,008
    Quote Originally Posted by Edge- View Post
    I can't imagine Barr would straight up lie about the conclusions, nor that Mueller would allow that.

    But there are a whole lot of questions that won't be answered until the report, or as much of it as possible, is released more broadly.
    I think a big, and relatively unreported, angle on what's going on is that Mueller realized early on that any indictments he filed could be pardoned by the President. So anything that cut too close was going to be rendered irrelevant, and without any second chance. And I think Mueller's too canny to let that happen.

    I won't be shocked in any way to discover that Mueller had enough evidence for a likely conviction, and chose to not indict Trump or his family, because of the risk of pardons being issued; instead, he'd have handed that evidence off to the SDNY or some other State court, where the indictments cannot be pardoned by the President.

  2. #17202
    Just because you defend Trump doesn’t mean you support him.
    "You know you that bitch when you cause all this conversation."

  3. #17203
    Dreadlord FeedsOnDevTears's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2013
    Location
    United States of Azeroth
    Posts
    845
    Quote Originally Posted by Bucks01 View Post
    This is a fucking joke at this point. The shit poster who openly lies and derails threads is free to do that, but anyone that points it out, like Belize here is infracted. Maybe if the fucking mods would do their jobs here, posters would not have to constantly point out who is trolling, shit posting and derailing threads. Que my infraction while we have someone suggesting that only people who want to kill babies have a problem with Trump. It's time for a break from this site.
    Oh, but the Mods are doing their jobs. The only question is whether they get paid in Trump Steaks or Turnips.
    Impeach the MF.

  4. #17204
    Quote Originally Posted by Sinyc View Post
    Shocker... BUT you can defend a person from attacks and NOT support that person politically. Weird huh?

    It's just a super convenient crutch to attack someone as being a Trump supporter because you think that automatically nullifies anything the person says.
    Yawn.

    I mean we can pretend this is the deal if you want to I guess.

    The truth is, the people doing the most and the most vigorous defense of Trump is what is clearly being discussed....but you just invent whatever you want.
    When I despair, I remember that all through history, there have been tyrants and murderers, and for a time, they seem invincible.
    But in the end, they always fall. Always.- Mahatma Gandhi


  5. #17205
    Quote Originally Posted by Sinyc View Post
    Shocker... BUT you can defend a person from attacks and NOT support that person politically. Weird huh?

    It's just a super convenient crutch to attack someone as being a Trump supporter because you think that automatically nullifies anything the person says.
    Rage problem is all he does is defend trump with the most disingenuous bullshit. Hillary investigations were a waste of money and accomplished nothing but mueller makes 48 million. While finding corruption = bad deal some how. He literally using points like a waste of time while defending the investigation into clinton. Which is head scratching.
    Violence Jack Respects Women!

  6. #17206
    Quote Originally Posted by TheramoreIsTheBomb View Post
    Just because you defend Trump doesn’t mean you support him.
    Except there is nothing to defend him on here.

  7. #17207
    Quote Originally Posted by Endus View Post
    I think a big, and relatively unreported, angle on what's going on is that Mueller realized early on that any indictments he filed could be pardoned by the President. So anything that cut too close was going to be rendered irrelevant, and without any second chance. And I think Mueller's too canny to let that happen.

    I won't be shocked in any way to discover that Mueller had enough evidence for a likely conviction, and chose to not indict Trump or his family, because of the risk of pardons being issued; instead, he'd have handed that evidence off to the SDNY or some other State court, where the indictments cannot be pardoned by the President.
    Indeed, the word that Barr/Rosenstein were very surprised that he declined to make a determination on obstruction of justice makes me think he was extremely careful with his report. Like, insanely so, out of an overabundance of caution.

  8. #17208
    Quote Originally Posted by TheramoreIsTheBomb View Post
    Just because you defend Trump doesn’t mean you support him.
    Bullshit.

    repeated defense of Trump against any of the actual claims made against him does, in fact, illustrate a support fo him...literally by definition.
    When I despair, I remember that all through history, there have been tyrants and murderers, and for a time, they seem invincible.
    But in the end, they always fall. Always.- Mahatma Gandhi


  9. #17209
    Dreadlord
    Join Date
    Nov 2014
    Location
    Atlanta, GA
    Posts
    847
    Welcome to Trump was right, yall where wrong. boo hoo just remember.

    This line that the Mueller report “doesn’t exonerate” the President. Folks, prosecutors don’t exonerate people. They either find evidence or they don’t. They looked for 22 months and found none. It isn’t there. No collusion, no obstruction so just stop and move on. geshhh and remember the saying u can indite a sandwich, well. no sandwich here.. lol

  10. #17210
    Quote Originally Posted by Bodakane View Post
    Bullshit.

    repeated defense of Trump against any of the actual claims made against him does, in fact, illustrate a support fo him...literally by definition.
    how so? being opposed to a false accusation directed towards anybody doesn't mean you support that person. it simply means you are against the false accusation.

    If somebody accused Charles Manson of having killed the dinosaurs, I can confidently dismiss that claim as bogus without being a Charles Manson supporter.

  11. #17211
    Legendary! Collegeguy's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2010
    Location
    Antarctica
    Posts
    6,821
    Quote Originally Posted by Bodakane View Post
    Bullshit.

    repeated defense of Trump against any of the actual claims made against him does, in fact, illustrate a support fo him...literally by definition.
    Maybe some just people don't like conspiracy theorists with agendas.

  12. #17212
    Merely a Setback Breccia's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2010
    Location
    NY, USA
    Posts
    27,046
    Quote Originally Posted by spanishninja View Post
    If somebody accused Charles Manson of having killed the dinosaurs, I can confidently dismiss that claim as bogus without being a Charles Manson supporter.
    Charles Manson wasn't found with a time machine, a bloody cleaver, and a bunch of dinosaur bones.

    Trump hired enough Russian agents, did enough favors for Russia, took enough Russian money and tried to do enough business deals with Russia, all at the same time, to warrant (literally) an investigation. Which he then tried to block multiple times.

  13. #17213
    Maybe we don't need this thread now that the investigation is over and all is well in the republic.

  14. #17214
    Void Lord Elegiac's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2012
    Location
    Late Capitalism
    Posts
    50,449
    Quote Originally Posted by Knadra View Post
    Maybe we don't need this thread now that the investigation is over and all is well in the republic.
    Then leave it, if you deem it that way.
    This website is not a place of honor. No highly esteemed deed is commemorated here. Nothing valued is here. What is here is dangerous and repulsive to us. The danger is in a particular location. The danger is still present in your time as it was in ours.

    Get in loser, we're saving the USPS.

  15. #17215
    Lawyer who wrote special counsel rules says Trump should not take victory lap

    "First, obviously, he still faces the New York investigations into campaign finance violations by the Trump team and the various investigations into the Trump organization. And Mr. Barr, in his letter, acknowledges that the Mueller report 'does not exonerate' Mr. Trump on the issue of obstruction, even if it does not recommend an indictment," Katyal writes.

    "But the critical part of the letter is that it now creates a whole new mess. After laying out the scope of the investigation and noting that Mr. Mueller’s report does not offer any legal recommendations, Mr. Barr declares that it therefore 'leaves it to the attorney general to decide whether the conduct described in the report constitutes a crime.' He then concludes the president did not obstruct justice when he fired the F.B.I. director, James Comey," he added.

    "Such a conclusion would be momentous in any event. But to do so within 48 hours of receiving the report (which pointedly did not reach that conclusion) should be deeply concerning to every American."

  16. #17216
    Quote Originally Posted by Didactic View Post
    Then leave it, if you deem it that way.
    I would never leave you guys.

  17. #17217
    The Insane draynay's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2009
    Location
    California
    Posts
    15,819
    Quote Originally Posted by Knadra View Post
    Maybe we don't need this thread now that the investigation is over and all is well in the republic.
    Was waiting for some short-sighted post about that, honestly it does your agenda better to just have the one thread since all spinoffs get locked.
    /s

  18. #17218
    Oh Onion, you nailed it again.

    William Barr declares Mueller Investigation Fully Exonerates members Of Reagan Administration From Iran-contra Involvement

    WASHINGTON—Following the completion of the special counsel’s 22-month probe, Attorney General William P. Barr declared Monday that Robert Mueller’s investigation fully exonerates all members of Ronald Reagan’s presidential administration from involvement in the Iran–Contra affair. “I’ve reviewed Mr. Mueller’s findings and have determined conclusively that neither the late president nor any White House or Cabinet official serving between 1981 and 1989 ever ordered, oversaw, or even knew about the covert sales of American arms to Iran,” Barr said in a letter to the House and Senate judiciary committees, clearing key figures such as retired National Security Adviser John Poindexter and former staffer Oliver North in a move that finally lifts what many have seen as a dark cloud over the scandal-plagued presidency. “I assessed this report carefully and can at long last say with full certainty that Caspar Weinberger, Robert McFarlane, Elliott Abrams, and all others in the president’s inner circle operated lawfully from the time of the initial dealings in 1981 until the illegal arrangement was exposed five years later. From the 1985 diversion of funds to Contra rebels in Nicaragua, to Reagan’s untruthful 1986 denial of an arms-for-hostage trade, to the flagrant destruction of countless documents relevant to the investigation, everyone acted properly and with the best interests of the United States in mind. It is my hope that the country can now move forward and put this unfortunate episode behind it.” At press time, sources reported that Democratic leaders in Congress were still discussing a possible push for President Reagan’s impeachment.

  19. #17219
    Quote Originally Posted by Shadowferal View Post
    Lawyer who wrote special counsel rules says Trump should not take victory lap

    "First, obviously, he still faces the New York investigations into campaign finance violations by the Trump team and the various investigations into the Trump organization. And Mr. Barr, in his letter, acknowledges that the Mueller report 'does not exonerate' Mr. Trump on the issue of obstruction, even if it does not recommend an indictment," Katyal writes.

    "But the critical part of the letter is that it now creates a whole new mess. After laying out the scope of the investigation and noting that Mr. Mueller’s report does not offer any legal recommendations, Mr. Barr declares that it therefore 'leaves it to the attorney general to decide whether the conduct described in the report constitutes a crime.' He then concludes the president did not obstruct justice when he fired the F.B.I. director, James Comey," he added.

    "Such a conclusion would be momentous in any event. But to do so within 48 hours of receiving the report (which pointedly did not reach that conclusion) should be deeply concerning to every American."
    Also considering that Barr laid out his conclusion far in advance of the report being released in a letter to the white house. He's not exactly an unbiased party.
    While you live, shine / Have no grief at all / Life exists only for a short while / And time demands its toll.

  20. #17220
    The Insane Acidbaron's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2010
    Location
    Belgium, Flanders
    Posts
    17,421
    Quote Originally Posted by Shadowferal View Post
    Lawyer who wrote special counsel rules says Trump should not take victory lap

    "First, obviously, he still faces the New York investigations into campaign finance violations by the Trump team and the various investigations into the Trump organization. And Mr. Barr, in his letter, acknowledges that the Mueller report 'does not exonerate' Mr. Trump on the issue of obstruction, even if it does not recommend an indictment," Katyal writes.

    "But the critical part of the letter is that it now creates a whole new mess. After laying out the scope of the investigation and noting that Mr. Mueller’s report does not offer any legal recommendations, Mr. Barr declares that it therefore 'leaves it to the attorney general to decide whether the conduct described in the report constitutes a crime.' He then concludes the president did not obstruct justice when he fired the F.B.I. director, James Comey," he added.

    "Such a conclusion would be momentous in any event. But to do so within 48 hours of receiving the report (which pointedly did not reach that conclusion) should be deeply concerning to every American."
    Begone ye filthy witch with your facts and logic!

    Its what most of us know, some desperate folk are clinging on to this exonerating him. Not sure why they want a criminal as president but i guess it has something to do with the way he treats immigrants, women and everyone who actually got a degree not granted with a box of cereals.

Posting Permissions

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