"If we'd had confidence the president didn't commit a crime, we would have said so,"
- Thread starter Soaring Eagle 74
- Start date
Mueller should have made this appearance right after Barr dragged his feet.
Yes....wow......all this was going on with the blessing of then President Obama and he did nothing.
Exactly. Proving the negative is one thing, and there would have practically been no way for Mueller to prove that negative, but proving the Russians were meddling, easy to do.
Revisionist history. I'd change the subject too if I were you.
Not all of it. Only the conspiracy part. The obstruction of justice part (by Trump) occurred once Trump was in office. You know, offering pardons, encouraging witnesses to lie or withhold evidence.
He told them in no uncertain terms to knock it off.
But I think it was after the Syria red line and they knew they didn’t have to listen......
Yes.....the obstruction part was after.....but the Russian meddling was ongoing well before the election and Obama was well aware of it.
Don't do drugs and am not senile. And I'm old enough to be much wiser than you are. Are you senile......you trying to now claim that then President Obama was clueless about Russian meddling?
Why do you keep repeating false Repub/Trump talking points? You might not like what he did but to say he did nothing is a lie. Do you think BO should have launched a military strike against Russia in the fall of 2016?
Fact-checking Trump's claims Obama 'did nothing' to stop Russian election interference
https://www.cnn.com/2019/05/02/politics/fact-check-trump-claims-obama-did-nothing-russia/index.html
Unlike Trump, Obama wouldn’t act without solid evidence. Before the election, we all had suspicion, but not proof, with the exception of Trump and his family and staff.
Most corrupt president in history! So sad!
You are conveniently leaving out that the WH approached McConnell about issuing a bi partisan condemnation of Russian interference the summer before the election. He refused because he knew Russian interference was benefiting Republicans. The WH could have issued a unilateral statement, but then theybwoigod have been accused of trying to influence the election.
So, when you blame Obama, be sure to mention McConnells role as well.
You’re applying a level of rationale that you’re unable to know for one. For two, you’re conveniently trying to lay blame at the feet of the SML, and not at the institution responsible for the protection of the nation. Moreover, you’re also leaving out the reason Obama did fvckall was due to politics.
Lol, you are shouting that the FBI and intelligence community was working against the Trump campaign and at the same time blaming Obama for not using those same agencies to attack him.
Besides that, we did know Russia was running these operations before the election. It was even discussed during the debates. So, what exactly are you whining about?
If Trump was guilty of a crime, why wouldn't Mueller have stated it and told Congress to prosecute him for it? His job was to find evidence was it not? If he found evidence of a crime, it was his job to name it or present it. Then Congress would indict Trump, and perform their duty to determine his guilt or innocence. Mueller's "excuse" for not at least naming a crime if he suspected one is proof he has nothing.
Trump "colluding" with Russians to steal the '16 election, then "obstructing" Justice of Mueller's investigation of it. None of that happened.
Barr and Mueller both released addendums yesterday attempting to legally tell peeps they are on the same page. Here is the best summary I have read yet, that is comprehensible.
Yeah, Trump might've done something, but it's gray area.
Yeah, Trump might've done something, but it's gray area.
Mueller explained in very clear words the reason he would not have stated if a sitting President had committed a crime. And we still have idiots that come on here and ask. It is mindboggling how stupid brainwashed individuals can get in this country. That is the problem. When citizens and members in our government will turn a blind eye to facts presented from intelligence, that just opens the door for Putin, China, Iran, N.Korea.
You don't have to support a political belief you disagree with. But this is more than that. Believe the truth presented by legitimate intelligence that isn't filtered by a political operative (Barr).
You don't have to support a political belief you disagree with. But this is more than that. Believe the truth presented by legitimate intelligence that isn't filtered by a political operative (Barr).
He wanted to commit some offenses. When I was younger I wanted to beat the crap out of two very annoying classmates but didn’t. So was I guilty of possible assault? Not in America.
You don't have to support a political belief you disagree with. But this is more than that. Believe the truth presented by legitimate intelligence that isn't filtered by a political operative (Mueller).
Mueller is a political operative? LOL! That's why he recommended charges against trump and went against the DOJ policy? GTFOH, idiot.
Mueller is about as apolitical as you can get. He chose the high road throughout, always maintaining a legal focus.
Yes......his pathetic shit show yesterday was all political. I hope the Dems proceed with impeachment so we can all see what Mueller had. It will also be a chance for him to answer a few question while under oath. My guess is that he did not recommend charges,which he could have,because he did not have proof.
I don’t care about some watered down nonsense open to interpretation-obstruction. It’s pretty simple. No evidence of Trump or his campaign committing conspiracy. Period. The rest is orange man bad.
With all due respect.....Mueller selected his words with a purpose.....and it was all political.
Similar threads
