Mueller Report Imminent

#7,954
#7,954
Velo Vol said:
Alternative facts: Russia didn't care which candidate won!

Reality:

D7wElu_WwAE_tD4.png:large
Click to expand...
Unless they were pretty sure, like the rest of us, that Clinton was a certain winner and their goal was to disrupt and call into question the electoral process.

Nevertheless, Comey hurt Clinton's campaign more than the Russians could have ever hoped to, if that was their intention. If it was, one would obviously then ask: "Why?"
 
  • Like
Reactions: NorthDallas40
#7,955
#7,955
37L1 said:
I'm not so sure that the case is closed. Mueller today, certainly did not close it even though he closed his office. He reminds me of a guy walking on a tightrope.

One thing's for certain, they will not be moving on.
Click to expand...
Oh I know they won't. They can't, what else do they have to run on?
 
  • Like
Reactions: AM64
#7,956
#7,956
37L1 said:
OK, tell me what your thoughts are, if it is more than the -1 t0 .9999. I guess I'm interested in those specific actions that could be interpreted as being close to a -1.

Having just watched all of Mueller's statement today, the only thing that is really clear is that he wants to be done with all this, doesn't want to appear before Congress and does not want to talk further about this investigation. "The investigation is my testimony."

If the House of Representatives moves forward with impeachment proceedings, don't you think that there is a good chance that Mueller will be called as a witness? If that is the case, Mueller's wish to be a hermit has as much chance as luther wearing a MAGA hat because he supports Trump's reelection.
Click to expand...


I think Mueller is saying he just has nothing to add. If he testifies, he knows the Dems will just keep trying to get him to say Trump is guilty and the GOPers will just attack the start of the investigation. He has nothing of substance to add beyond what is in the report.

Frankly, it's why the focus should be on getting McGahn in there. Let's hear it directly from the source. If he says Trump directed him to fire Mueller and then lie about it that's obstruction. Trump can deny it, and people can decide who they believe, Trump or McGahn.
 
#7,957
#7,957
37L1 said:
Unless they were pretty sure, like the rest of us, that Clinton was a certain winner and their goal was to disrupt and call into question the electoral process.

Nevertheless, Comey hurt Clinton's campaign more than the Russians could have ever hoped to, if that was their intention. If it was, one would obviously then ask: "Why?"
Click to expand...
Yep. The Russians looked at Comey and probably said “damn dude. Nice job. Not sure why we even bothered after hearing that.” 😂
 
  • Like
Reactions: AM64 and BigOrangeD
#7,958
#7,958
AM64 said:
I wouldn't think so; most of us who seem to favor term limits seem to be on the right side. But, yeah, I understand the fairy tales that only the GOP gets campaign finance bribes by the big corporations and donors.
Click to expand...

The Republican talking point is that liberals get endless amounts of free publicity from the MSM, and political donations counterbalance that. Putting limits on campaign finance favors the left. That's what they argue(d), anyway.
 
#7,959
#7,959
lawgator1 said:
I think Mueller is saying he just has nothing to add. If he testifies, he knows the Dems will just keep trying to get him to say Trump is guilty and the GOPers will just attack the state of the investigation. He has nothing of substance to add beyond what is in the report.

Frankly, it's why the focus should be on getting McGahn in there. Let's hear it directly from the source. If he says Trump directed him to fire Mueller and then lie about it that's obstruction. Trump can deny it, and people can decide who they believe, Trump or McGahn.
Click to expand...
Isn't a crime only a crime if the crime is completed? If no obstruction took place because McGahn didn't follow through, then how is it obstruction?

My big brother tells me to steal a candy bar at the store and I don't, is my brother guilty of theft?
 
  • Like
Reactions: AM64, VolStrom, BigOrangeD and 1 other person
#7,961
#7,961
lawgator1 said:
I think Mueller is saying he just has nothing to add. If he testifies, he knows the Dems will just keep trying to get him to say Trump is guilty and the GOPers will just attack the start of the investigation. He has nothing of substance to add beyond what is in the report.

Frankly, it's why the focus should be on getting McGahn in there. Let's hear it directly from the source. If he says Trump directed him to fire Mueller and then lie about it that's obstruction. Trump can deny it, and people can decide who they believe, Trump or McGahn.
Click to expand...
Last month's version: Let's see the report. That'll settle it.

Today's version: Let's hear it from McGahn.

Like i said, political theater.
 
  • Like
Reactions: AM64, hog88, NorthDallas40 and 4 others
#7,964
#7,964
37L1 said:
Isn't a crime only a crime if the crime is completed? If no obstruction took place because McGahn didn't follow through, then how is it obstruction?

My big brother tells me to steal a candy bar at the store and I don't, is my brother guilty of theft?
Click to expand...
Probably a difference though if it were your boss.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Hunerwadel
#7,967
#7,967
37L1 said:
So my boss tells me to steal a candy bar at the store and I don't, is my boss guilty of theft?

My boss can only fire me, my big brother can hurt me bad.
Click to expand...
Not guilty of theft because no theft occured. Change the circumstances to my boss told me to doctor our SEC report but i didnt. I think the folks who oversee Securities and Exchanges would have something to prosecute.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Orangeburst and 37L1
#7,969
#7,969
McDad said:
Not guilty of theft because no theft occured. Change the circumstances to my boss told me to doctor our SEC report but i didnt. I think the folks who oversee Securities and Exchanges would have something to prosecute.
Click to expand...
I see, good point.
 
#7,972
#7,972
37L1 said:
Isn't a crime only a crime if the crime is completed? If no obstruction took place because McGahn didn't follow through, then how is it obstruction?

My big brother tells me to steal a candy bar at the store and I don't, is my brother guilty of theft?
Click to expand...

So, we have established that Trump tried to obstruct justice. If he were not the president, it wouldn't be as big a deal. Oh, he also tried to get Mcghan to to lie about it to the special counsel, i.e. suborn perjury, although Trump denies it. But he doesn't want Mcghan to testify to Congress.. hmm...

But, as some have excused, "He was just upset that he was unfairly being accused."
 
#7,973
#7,973
McDad said:
Not guilty of theft because no theft occured. Change the circumstances to my boss told me to doctor our SEC report but i didnt. I think the folks who oversee Securities and Exchanges would have something to prosecute.
Click to expand...
Without proof though it is just he said she said.
 
  • Like
Reactions: AM64
New posts
You must log in or register to reply here.

VN Store



Back
Top