Mueller Report Imminent

[37L1]

He couldn't charge him but he could have said that he broke a law. Instead he said it "sort of", and mealy mouthed.

If he hadn't committed a crime we would have said so. I mean WTFF? What law? What incidents of it? So say he did FFS. Pussyfooting.

 

[Franklin Pierce]

Mueller is an old man now with not a whole lot of stamina. How long can he last testifying while being grilled by the Republican members on the committee?

 

[Septic]

He couldn't charge him but he could have said that he broke a law. Instead he said it "sort of", and mealy mouthed.

If he hadn't committed a crime we would have said so. I mean WTFF? What law? What incidents of it? So say he did FFS. Pussyfooting.

Mr Mueller stated:

And beyond Department policy we were guided by principles of fairness. It would be unfair to potentially — it would be unfair to potentially accuse somebody of a crime when there can be no court resolution of the actual charge.

It's like you guys just listened to Hannity's bullet points and parrot them without any modicum of critical thought.

 

[37L1]

Mr Mueller stated:



It's like you guys just listened to Hannity's bullet points and parrot them without any modicum of critical thought.

I don't watch Hannity.

Amazingly enough, I reach my own warped conclusions all on my own. "Charge" is the key word. He can opine and not charge and that is what he kind of did but not quite.

My statement still stands, Mueller tried to "split the baby" and all he did was kill it and looked bad in doing so.

 

[Septic]

I don't watch Hannity.

Amazingly enough, I reach my own warped conclusions all on my own.

My statement still stands, Mueller tried to "split the baby" and all he did was kill it and looked bad in doing so.

Maybe you should watch Hannity, at least then you'd have an excuse for saying ignorant sht.

 

[37L1]

Maybe you should watch Hannity, at least then you'd have an excuse for saying ignorant sht.

You're fascinating to talk to.

 

[Septic]

I don't watch Hannity.

Amazingly enough, I reach my own warped conclusions all on my own. "Charge" is the key word. He can opine and not charge and that is what he kind of did but not quite.

My statement still stands, Mueller tried to "split the baby" and all he did was kill it and looked bad in doing so.

I'm not a lawyer but have seen enough SVU to know that a "charge" is the same as an accusation. Again, Mueller clearly and explicitly stated what he could and couldn't do. Had he eschewed that and made the charge, the trumpers would have rioted from his "bias." Instead, he followed protocol and the red hats have backed that into an exoneration. That is what's fascinating.

 

[IPleadInsanity]

100 days in power, what have the Democrats done? They control congress we should be seeing problems solved by this time??

 

[Septic]

100 days in power, what have the Democrats done? They control congress we should be seeing problems solved by this time??

Is that how it works?

 

[37L1]

I'm not a lawyer but have seen enough SVU to know that a "charge" is the same as an accusation. Again, Mueller clearly and explicitly stated what he could and couldn't do. Had he eschewed that and made the charge, the trumpers would have rioted from his "bias." Instead, he followed protocol and the red hats have backed that into an exoneration. That is what's fascinating.

"I personally felt he could've reached a decision. He could've reached a conclusion," Barr said.

Barr, in excerpts of his CBS interview, said he concurred with respect to charges but said he thought Mueller nonetheless could have declared whether he believed they were necessary.

In other words, Barr is saying Mueller could have said that he believed Trump should be charged — if he thought so — without the ability to actually ask a grand jury for an indictment.

"The opinion says you cannot indict a president while he is in office. But he could've reached a decision as to whether it was criminal activity. But he had his reasons for not doing it, which he explained," Barr said.

Barr told CBS he would not argue with Mueller's reasons, but that the special counsel's decisions not to reach a firm conclusion meant the question rose to his level and that of Deputy Attorney General Rod Rosenstein. The men concluded that Trump would not face charges.

Mueller punted, Barr and Rosenstein received and rendered their decision. That's on the Muell.

 

[Stew Cook]

Is that how it works?

 

[UT_VOLS13]

100 days in power, what have the Democrats done? They control congress we should be seeing problems solved by this time??

Search Bills in Congress - GovTrack.us

 

[ajvol01]

1000+ former federal prosecutors.*

Key word

 

[Stew Cook]

Key word

Do explain why that word is key.

 

[Septic]

"I personally felt he could've reached a decision. He could've reached a conclusion," Barr said.

Barr, in excerpts of his CBS interview, said he concurred with respect to charges but said he thought Mueller nonetheless could have declared whether he believed they were necessary.

In other words, Barr is saying Mueller could have said that he believed Trump should be charged — if he thought so — without the ability to actually ask a grand jury for an indictment.

"The opinion says you cannot indict a president while he is in office. But he could've reached a decision as to whether it was criminal activity. But he had his reasons for not doing it, which he explained," Barr said.

Barr told CBS he would not argue with Mueller's reasons, but that the special counsel's decisions not to reach a firm conclusion meant the question rose to his level and that of Deputy Attorney General Rod Rosenstein. The men concluded that Trump would not face charges.

Mueller punted, Barr and Rosenstein received and rendered their decision. That's on the Muell.

Oh so Barr "personally felt"? His after the fact "personal feelings" are both irrelevant and hilariously convenient.

Again, had Mueller broken protocol - he'd have been crucified for it (*much worse than he is for maintaining it). Barr had the luxury of throwing Mueller under the bus and whose political bias was on full display long before the full redacted report was released.

It'd be too much to hope for to see Mueller level what he really believes to congress - instead he's got too much character to do so. I'd wager that's a very, very good thing for trump.

 

[Septic]

Do explain why that word is key.

Because once they are no longer current Federal Prosecutors, they immediately become incompetent, disbarred, pssy hat wearing liberals who as a result have no idea how the legal system operates.

 

[Mick]

How much will he discuss beyond what's in the report?

Strzok and Page texts and FISA abuse.

 

[ajvol01]

Do explain why that word is key.

Seriously?

 

[37L1]

Oh so Barr "personally felt"? His after the fact "personal feelings" are both irrelevant and hilariously convenient.

Again, had Mueller broken protocol - he'd have been crucified for it (*much worse than he is for maintaining it). Barr had the luxury of throwing Mueller under the bus and whose political bias was on full display long before the full redacted report was released.

It'd be too much to hope for to see Mueller level what he really believes to congress - instead he's got too much character to do so. I'd wager that's a very, very good thing for trump.

What about "Hot" Rod Rosenstein? You have conspicuously left him out of this equation.

 

[Mick]

It's like watching a Road Runner cartoon. I think you have him this time Wiley!

 

[Septic]

What about "Hot" Rod Rosenstein? You have conspicuously left him out of this equation.

LOL, you brought up Barr, not me.

You keep inserting people in to the conversation, possibly in an attempt to shore up a failing argument? So what about RR? What does he have to do with the protocol that Mueller chose not to break in terms of fairness to the POTUS?

 

[37L1]

LOL, you brought up Barr, not me.

You keep inserting people in to the conversation, possibly in an attempt to shore up a failing argument? So what about RR? What does he have to do with the protocol that Mueller chose not to break in terms of fairness to the POTUS?

Instant replay:

Barr told CBS he would not argue with Mueller's reasons, but that the special counsel's decisions not to reach a firm conclusion meant the question rose to his level and that of Deputy Attorney General Rod Rosenstein. The men concluded that Trump would not face charges.

 

[RockyTop85]

Do explain why that word is key.

Because they don’t have the power to do anything about it, I assume.

Actually, I have no idea since that also would have no impact on the amount of weight their opinions deserve.

 

[Septic]

Instant replay:

Barr told CBS he would not argue with Mueller's reasons, but that the special counsel's decisions not to reach a firm conclusion meant the question rose to his level and that of Deputy Attorney General Rod Rosenstein. The men concluded that Trump would not face charges.

Super slow mo:

What does he have to do with the protocol that Mueller chose not to break in terms of fairness to the POTUS?

You're trying hard to move the goal posts without anyone noticing. On the one hand - it was Mueller that didn't have the stones to "charge" the POTUS. When back handed with facts, you deflect to Barr's personal feelings and an anecdote about RR.

A convincing argument you've crafted.

 

[37L1]

Super slow mo:



You're trying hard to move the goal posts without anyone noticing. On the one hand - it was Mueller that didn't have the stones to "charge" the POTUS. When back handed with facts, you deflect to Barr's personal feelings and an anecdote about RR.

A convincing argument you've crafted.

No it's quite simple but you have chosen to ignore the result of Mueller not reaching a conclusion. It then falls to the DOJ and they concluded, well, you know, and that involved Barr and Rosenstein. I didn't insert them, that's just how the ball game went.

Now it's the House's turn, and so far, crickets.

You got a problem with the game's rules, not me.