The Mueller report for all of us to see

a reply to: Sookiechacha

No, it is an established fact. The underlying crime of conspiracy (AKA "collusion") did not occur. How can there be corrupt intent to obstruct an investigation into a crime you know for a fact you didn't commit?

Proving intent is hard, but under these circumstances it is impossible (or at the very least, extremely improbable)

The idea he conspired with the Russians has been a sick joke on you guys from the get go. Just like your Dem party down South who made their self-titled "false flag" with Russian bots to convince you all the 2018 midterms were being influenced by "Russian bots" that turned out to be their self-styled "false flag operation"

Who do you think that false flag was targeting Sookie? It was targeting YOU GUYS! Not us

a reply to: JDmOKI

Also on obstruction the investigation was able to be completed without any interference from Trump even through he wanted it ended.

There was interference, but Trump's orders were disobeyed or ignored. Trump's interference resulted in Don McGahn's resignation.

originally posted by: Sookiechacha
a reply to: Grambler

You're assuming that there's no corrupt intent on Trump's part. That's an opinion.

Fortunately we have thresholds for evidence for these situations. None of which was passed in the opinion of the Special Counsel's investigators. We don't jail or impeach people based on "opinions" without sufficient underlying evidence.

a reply to: Sookiechacha

There was no interference because the prospective orders weren't followed.

How can he interfere when his staff wouldn't carry out the actions he floated?

Stop pearl clutching and straw grasping

a reply to: Sookiechacha

The only corrupt intent that is becoming oblivious is the Obama administration not alerting Trump campaign of possible Russian interference and the more recent Dem politician's lies. Whatever happened to Adam Schiff's supposed evidence that apparently Mueller was not aware of?

Now remember what started the whole russia investigation.

First we thought it was the dossier.

When that seemed bad for the FBI as it was never verified and paid for by the dnc, they said it was papadopolous telling Clinton friend andrew downer that he heard some russians had dirt on hillary.

He connected with this russian through Jopseph Mifsud.

I am shocked to find that Mueller discusses mifsud, and yet never once accuses him of being a russian agent, nor charges him with interfering in the election in any way.

How could Mueller not have found eveidnce to charge the very russian assett who started this whole thing.

Unless Mifsud wasnt a russian asset and was working for someone else

originally posted by: watchitburn
How exactly does one obstruct justice on an investigation of a crime that never occurred?

An investigation that was predicated on illegal spying based on information that was made up by an opposing political campaign.

Yet this is the basket the leftists have thrown all their eggs in.
It might be funny if it wasn't so tragic.

Sadly this is what it takes for the 2 party system to die its much needed death. Our Founders warned of the toxicity of a 2 party system and they were center mass on that one

a reply to: JBurns

It wasn't a crime for Bill Clinton to have sexual relationships with an intern either, yet his obstruction into the investigation into his sexual relationship with Monica Lewinsky resulted in him being charged with obstruction of justice.

a reply to: Sookiechacha

There was interference

Another outright falsehood disputed by the report.

AG Barr specifically said Mueller was never blocked from any avenue of investigation nor was any proposed action denied.

originally posted by: underwerks

originally posted by: Arnie123

originally posted by: underwerks
"Oh my god. This is terrible. This is the end of my Presidency. I'm f****d." -Donald J. Trump

Page 290.

Get ready for the crap show about to begin.

Like Knoxie, you guys didn't even read beyond why he said that, lol, already we're seeing the cherry pickers, though we already knew that, hmmm?

Of course I read beyond what he said.

What I didn't do is read INTO what he said. Which is the basis for your delusional beliefs.

Man this is fun.

lol, so it comes down to "orange man bad"?

Oh you poor thing, we know you don't like Trump, of course that's no excuse to display your emotional response of the issue.

You're right, this is fun 🤭

a reply to: JBurns

The underlying crime of conspiracy (AKA "collusion") did not occur

Technically, we do not know for sure it did not occur. The key fact is that despite a multiyear investigation with hundreds of thousands of man hours, subpoena power and interrogations, there was not enough evidence that would establish it even "probably" occurred.

Investigators don't say "nothing occurred" without a mountain of incontrovertible evidence. They just say "insufficient evidence to establish" something occurred. That's as close as you get to exoneration.

If someone accuses Sookie of rape, that's evidence. If after months of investigations, warrants, subpoenas, and interrogations the investigators say "evidence cannot establish this occurred", that's as close to exoneration as he's going to get unless he has a mountain of incontrovertible exculpatory evidence that he was nowhere near there, etc.

We don't jail people because in our opinion, he is really guilty of rape.

originally posted by: Sookiechacha
a reply to: Grambler

You're assuming that there's no corrupt intent on Trump's part. That's an opinion.

Several points.

1. This was in response to your opinion attempted obstruction is a crime like succeeded obstruction. If there was no intent, then its also not attempted obstruction.

2. Its not just my opinion. If Mueller could have proven corrupt intent, he would have charged Trump. He could not prove it, thus he did not charge it. End of story.

originally posted by: Sookiechacha
a reply to: JBurns

It wasn't a crime for Bill Clinton to have sexual relationships with an intern either, yet his obstruction into the investigation into his sexual relationship with Monica Lewinsky resulted in him being charged with obstruction of justice.

He lied under oath, thus his attempt to obstruct. Trump did not lie, he is innocent.

a reply to: Grambler

Its not just my opinion. If Mueller could have proven corrupt intent, he would have charged Trump. He could not prove it, thus he did not charge it. End of story.

Again, Mueller kicked that ball to Congress.

"With respect to whether the President can be found to have obstructed justice by exercising his powers under Article II of the Constitution, we concluded that Congress has the authority to prohibit a President's corrupt use of his authority in order to protect the integrity of the administration of justice,"

www.msn.com...

originally posted by: knoxie
a reply to: Grambler

this report is damaging as hell.

imo, republicans want him out, but they want the dems to do it, they're pusses.

Wow, lol, your mind is soooo WARPED, I can only humor at your strange conclusions.

The only thing damaging are the ones screaming "Collusion" from supposed verfied and credentialed "Sources" 😂, of which you gloriously and hillariousy fell for 🤭

Some RINOs want him out, the entire radical leftwing of Dems want him out to, to include you people.

originally posted by: Sookiechacha
a reply to: JDmOKI

Also on obstruction the investigation was able to be completed without any interference from Trump even through he wanted it ended.

There was interference, but Trump's orders were disobeyed or ignored. Trump's interference resulted in Don McGahn's resignation.

No there was not interference. Considering interfering is not interfering.

I like this conversation, but just a breif aside.

Where were you when Hillarys team actually verifiably obstructed by destroying subpoenaed evidence?

Its seems strange many of the people so upset about trumps hypothetical obstruction were perfectly fine with that

a reply to: Grambler

Trump ordering Don McGahn to order the firing of Mueller, that resulted in McGahn's resignation, was interference.

a reply to: vinifalou

As I hope every person on the right does. This report states he tried to obstruct justice. If this were a report about Hillary you would be SCREAMING. Oh the double standards.