2020 Presidential Race

#87,878
#87,878
NCFisher said:
@PointGuard
I did read the Weissmann report, branded for public consumption as the "Mueller report". There was no collusion/conspiracy by any American, and no basis for charging obstruction notwithstanding the DOJ OLC opinion regarding indictment of a sitting president.

===========================================================
Special Counsel Robert Mueller has peddled two different stories. Only one can be true.

In his final act before resigning his position, Mueller told the gathered media on Wednesday that his non-decision decision on whether the president obstructed justice was “informed” by a long-standing opinion by the Office of Legal Counsel (OLC) at the Justice Department that a sitting president cannot be charged with a crime. But according to William Barr, that’s not what Mueller told the attorney general and others during a meeting on March 5, 2017. Here’s what Barr told Senators during his May 1st testimony:

“We were frankly surprised that they were not going to reach a decision on obstruction and we asked them a lot about the reasoning behind this. Mueller stated three times to us in that meeting, in response to our questioning, that he emphatically was not saying that but for the OLC opinion he would have found obstruction.”

Barr said there were others in the meeting who heard Mueller say the same thing – that the OLC opinion played no role in the special counsel’s decision-making or lack thereof. The attorney general repeated this in his news conference the day Mueller’s report was released to the public:

“We specifically asked him about the OLC opinion and whether or not he was taking a position that he would have found a crime but for the existence of the OLC opinion. And he made it very clear several times that was not his position.”

Yet, on Wednesday Mueller was telling a different tale. He seemed to argue that he could not have accused the president of obstruction because he was handcuffed by the OLC opinion. Why, then, did Mueller allegedly inform Barr that a special counsel can abandon the opinion if the facts merit it?

“He (Mueller) said that in the future the facts of a case against a president might be such that a special counsel would recommend abandoning the OLC opinion, but this is not such a case.”

Mueller did not abandon the OLC opinion in this case because he surely knew the facts and evidence did not support the law of obstruction. Instead, in his 448-page report, he implied presidential obstruction in a remarkable achievement in creative writing.

He set forth in luxurious detail “evidence on both sides of the question.” But this is not the job of any chief prosecutor, anywhere.

Mueller was not retained to compose a masterpiece worthy of Proust. He was hired to investigate potential crimes arising from Russian interference in a presidential election and make a reasoned decision on whether charges were merited.

Mueller’s actions were not only noxious but patently unfair to Trump. The special counsel publicly besmirched the president with tales of suspicious behavior instead of stated evidence that rose to the level of criminality.

This is what prosecutors are never permitted to do. Justice Department rules forbid its lawyers from annunciating negative narratives about any person, absent an indictment.

How can that person properly defend himself without trial? This is why prosecutors like Mueller are prohibited from trying their cases in the court of public opinion.

If they have probable cause to levy charges, they should do so. If not, they must refrain from openly disparaging someone that our justice system presumes is innocent.

In this regard, Mueller shrewdly and improperly turned the law on its head. Consider the most inflammatory statement that he leveled at the president in his report. It was guaranteed to ignite the impeachment fire:

“While this report does not conclude that the President committed a crime, it also does not exonerate him.”

To reinforce the point, Mueller stated it twice in his report. He then reiterated the argument on Wednesday when he said: “if we had confidence that the president clearly did not commit a crime, we would have said so.”

Prosecutors are not, and have never been, in the business of exonerating people. That’s not their job.

An experienced federal prosecutor, Mueller certainly knew this. It appears he had no intention of treating Trump equitably or applying the law in conformance with our criminal justice system.

In a singular sentence, Mueller managed to reverse the legal duty that prosecutors have rigidly followed in America for centuries. Their legal obligation is not to exonerate someone or prove an individual’s innocence. Nor is any accused person required to prove his or her own innocence.

Everyone is entitled to the presumption of innocence. It is the bedrock on which justice is built.

Prosecutors must prove guilt beyond a reasonable doubt. To bring charges they must have, at minimum, probable cause to believe that a crime was committed.

The special counsel took this inviolate principle and cleverly inverted it. He argued that he could not prove the president did not commit a crime.

Think about what that rationale really means. It is a double negative. Mueller was contending that he can’t prove something didn’t happen.

What if this were the standard for all criminal investigations? Apply it to yourself.
========================================================
Gregg Jarrett: The two faces of Robert Mueller, and Trump's presumption of guilt
Click to expand...
War and Peace, Volume II
 
#87,879
#87,879
Sin City Vol said:
There’s be absolutely ZERO proof of anything illegal during this election. I’m very surprised by the outcome of the election but talking with many of my conservative friends, we all agree on 1 thing...the majority of votes for Joe Biden were just people who were sick of Trump. I heard the same thing in 2016, lifelong Democrats voted for Trump over their dislike for Hillary Clinton.
Click to expand...

That's pure nonsense.

It was illegal of election and political officials, and courts, to make rules in contravention of federal and state election law, and was done in many states. In PA alone, it could be nearly 700k votes.

"Gee, thanks NCFisher for correcting every babbling, leftist talking head I've subscribed to since Nov. 3rd! Now, I won't have to parrot the babbling!"

You're welcome.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Bassmaster_Vol, AM64, VolinWayne and 3 others
#87,880
#87,880
PointGuard said:
How many were unable to show up based on prior suppression? You conveniently leave out it was record turnout to assist in your denial that voter suppression is widely known yet unAccepted as a happenstance by racists
Click to expand...
What? And again what?

"How many were unable to show up based on prior suppression?". Like to this election, negative 1.1 million? There were 1.1 million more black voters than before. 2020 election results explode the identity politics narrative
Or just ever? Because I was clearly talking about the clearly Hitler Trump.

"You conveniently leave out it was record turnout" uh I freaking brought up the record turnout.

"To assist in your denial that voter suppression is widely known yet unAccepted as a happenstance by racists" I dont see how this fits in with the last line.

The Dems have been harping racism at every turn for years. And yet the minorities keep increasing their vote for the racists? The math literally doesnt add up.
 
  • Like
Reactions: FallCreekVols, AM64, VolinWayne and 2 others
#87,883
#87,883
TennesseeTopHat said:
How are trump supporters going to call Kamala a slut and a bitch but look the other way on all of trumps extra marital affairs? Oh it’s because he’s a man. Something about strong women really sets some people off
Click to expand...
Lmao, the only thing strong about Harris, is her breath after felating willie brown. She was 29 and he was 60! She is a woman that used A powerful man to get her career started, she’s not a person to be looked up to, she’s pond scum. She and uncle Joe jailed a whole lot of dark skinned people https://www.google.com/amp/s/amp.miamiherald.com/opinion/op-ed/article245213680.html But you go right ahead and praise this tramp all you need to.
 
  • Like
Reactions: allvol123, tennvols77, AM64 and 3 others
#87,885
#87,885
37L1 said:
At least learn how to spell her name, if she's such a hero to you.

She likes to keep innocent people in prison to suit her aspirations even when she is well aware that there is evidence that would free them.

That's your person with "class".
Click to expand...

And Trump takes out full page ads in four newspapers calling for the death penalty of 5 innocent men with accused of rape.

But he’s all class.
 
  • Like
Reactions: DJimgo
#87,889
#87,889
Rickyvol77 said:
They weren’t innocent. They were just innocent of that particular rape
Click to expand...
You mean they were innocent of rapes they were suspected of being involved in too because the guy who actually did do those crimes including the rape they were forced to confess to was caught, convicted and imprisoned.
 
#87,891
#87,891
z9jqh9eodB.jpeg
 
#87,893
#87,893
FallBranchChick said:
Lmao, the only thing strong about Harris, is her breath after felating willie brown. She was 29 and he was 60! She is a woman that used A powerful man to get her career started, she’s not a person to be looked up to, she’s pond scum. She and uncle Joe jailed a whole lot of dark skinned people https://www.google.com/amp/s/amp.miamiherald.com/opinion/op-ed/article245213680.html But you go right ahead and praise this tramp all you need to.
Click to expand...

Very strong talk around Los Angeles and Hollywood people that Willie shared her with his friends, both male and female at swinger clubs. One of the reasons many did not want her to be chosen as VP in fear it would all come out.
 
  • Like
Reactions: FallBranchChick and AM64
#87,894
#87,894
carlos86 said:
You mean they were innocent of rapes they were suspected of being involved in too because the guy who actually did do those crimes including the rape they were forced to confess to was caught, convicted and imprisoned.
Click to expand...
Yes but they were involved in several other assaults and robberies that day
 
#87,895
#87,895
burntorangeVOLffle said:
And Trump takes out full page ads in four newspapers calling for the death penalty of 5 innocent men with accused of rape.

But he’s all class.
Click to expand...

One is a DA and state AG and the other is a private citizen taking out an ad expressing his opinion.

Is it just me or is there no analogy here?
 
#87,896
#87,896
Weezer said:
Not guilty of the crime you've been charged of is kind of like the exact definition of innocent.



Some things just shouldn't be argued.
Click to expand...

Again they had committed other crimes against other men and women that day in that exact area which is why they were charged to begin with
 
  • Like
Reactions: AM64
#87,898
#87,898
  • Like
Reactions: FallCreekVols, volinsd and AM64
#87,899
#87,899
NCFisher said:
In before resident legal experts and election gurus with:
"Heh."
"He's obviously a poor, uneducated Forever Trumper who gets his info from the Babylon Bee."
"Prolly an Evanjellykul, too."
"It's over, move on."
Click to expand...
If history repeats, they'll ignore the facts and complain about who reported them.
 
  • Like
Reactions: cnick14, NorthDallas40, Bassmaster_Vol and 3 others
New posts
You must log in or register to reply here.

VN Store



Back
Top