Mueller Report Imminent

#9,751
#9,751
37L1 said:
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 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.
Click to expand...

That's ironic since you were just whining about Mueller not breaking protocol to charge the president. Your bobbing and weaving could use some work.
 
#9,753
#9,753
His Boss said he could have said if he committed a crime, not charge him. But he didn't and his Boss said that he didn't have a problem with his reasons for not doing so but it then had to go to his Boss to decide. Both Barr and Rosenstein decided not.

It is what it is. No bobbing and weaving, that's your take. That's on you.
 
#9,756
#9,756
37L1 said:
His Boss said he could have said if he committed a crime, not charge him. But he didn't and his Boss said that he didn't have a problem with his reasons for not doing so but it then had to go to his Boss to decide. Both Barr and Rosenstein decided not.

It is what it is. No bobbing and weaving, that's your take. That's on you.
Click to expand...

Just out of curiosity, let's say Mueller said Trump had committed a crime... Then could Barr choose to prosecute?
 
#9,760
#9,760
37L1 said:
Nope but he could refer it to the House for impeachment.
Click to expand...
Sure, As Barr's first act after confirmation would be to refer the President for Impeachment. There is a reason Trump appointed him, care to take a guess as why? I want to see if you're smarter than a 5th grader.
 
  • Like
Reactions: luthervol
#9,761
#9,761
Stew Cook said:
And that, I believe is why Mueller layed things out the way he did.. It's the role of Congress, and what Barr believes doesn't really matter.
Click to expand...
But it obviously does. Since it's usually the job of the DOJ to charge or recommend charges and it's who Mueller reports to.

Otherwise why all the vituperation directed towards him by the libs if "what he believes doesn't really matter?"
 
#9,762
#9,762
Stew Cook said:
And that, I believe is why Mueller layed things out the way he did.. It's the role of Congress, and what Barr believes doesn't really matter.
Click to expand...

I’ve grown tired of arguing over the Meuller vs Barr interpretation of the law. If Bob left it up to Congress to finish the job and it was so clear that’s what he meant then why aren’t we watching Impeachment hearings? Not the bull crap we’ve seen so far. Sh!t or get off the pot. The fact that they haven’t says a lot. If it’s so clear to everybody that Trump colluded with Russia and then blatantly obstructed the investigation and our Democratic controlled Congress hasn’t started impeachment hearings based on those facts then every Democratic leader should resign today or be forced to step down for dereliction of duty.
 
  • Like
Reactions: volinsd, MWR, Orange_Vol1321 and 3 others
#9,763
#9,763
Mick said:
Sure, As Barr's first act after confirmation would be to refer the President for Impeachment. There is a reason Trump appointed him, care to take a guess as why? I want to see if you're smarter than a 5th grader.
Click to expand...
If Mueller truly believed that, don't you think he just might have done things differently and taken the decision one way or the other out of Barr's hands?

Let's see if you are smarter than a 4th grader.
 
#9,764
#9,764
37L1 said:
But it obviously does. Since it's usually the job of the DOJ to charge or recommend charges and it's who Mueller reports to.

Otherwise why all the vituperation directed towards him by the libs if "what he believes doesn't really matter?"
Click to expand...

I can see how it would matter, in that Barr would dedicate resources from the FBI to aid in impeachment investigations. But honestly, I don't know if an Attorney General is expected to recommend impeachment.

I suppose the Democrats didn't like him putting his thumb on the report, by crafting his own summary, before it being released.
 
  • Like
Reactions: 37L1
#9,765
#9,765
37L1 said:
If Mueller truly believed that, don't you think he just might have done things differently and taken the decision one way or the other out of Barr's hands?

Let's see if you are smarter than a 4th grader.
Click to expand...
Mueller acted professionally; therefore, he didn't have preconceived beliefs of such things. It was never in Mueller's hands to begin with, much less to act outside his mandate or department policies.
 
#9,766
#9,766
nuclearjunky said:
I’ve grown tired of arguing over the Meuller vs Barr interpretation of the law. If Bob left it up to Congress to finish the job and it was so clear that’s what he meant then why aren’t we watching Impeachment hearings? Not the bull crap we’ve seen so far. Sh!t or get off the pot. The fact that they haven’t says a lot. If it’s so clear to everybody that Trump colluded with Russia and then blatantly obstructed the investigation and our Democratic controlled Congress hasn’t started impeachment hearings based on those facts then every Democratic leader should resign today or be forced to step down for dereliction of duty.
Click to expand...

I mostly agree. If they get everything they're asking for and still don't choose impeachment, it should be declared that they don't believe it's enough to do so.
 
  • Like
Reactions: 37L1 and nuclearjunky
#9,767
#9,767
Stew Cook said:
I can see how it would matter, in that Barr would dedicate resources from the FBI to aid in impeachment investigations. But honestly, I don't know if an Attorney General is expected to recommend impeachment.

I suppose the Democrats didn't like him putting his thumb on the report, by crafting his own summary, before it being released.
Click to expand...

Did Meuller disagree with Barr’s summary?
 
#9,768
#9,768
37L1 said:
The 1000 former prosecutors has been addressed on here just as many times. That didn't stop you from doing it again. Wonder how many former prosecutors would have had the same opinion regarding Comey's claim regarding Ms. Clinton. . .

Regarding your comments as to the standard for impeachment:

So the people don't feel he is guilty of a crime or of a crime that reaches the level of impeachment. Is that right?

Did the Muell think so? Would he even dare say? Mueller certainly chickened out on this whole deal and used a bunch of BS to cast doubt about the President but did not reach a conclusion that the President committed a crime, (even though he could have) but didn't because he didn't want to because it would be "wrong" for him to accuse someone of wrongdoing who couldn't then have a fair trial and get the chance to defend himself. And yet that seems to be exactly what he did with a footnote* explanation saying it's someone else's job. BS covering for CS. He punted on third down when the goal became "too political" for him.

Either way, I thought that the House can determine what is an impeachable offense or not? Am I wrong? So far they have not.

So what you are saying essentially is that it is not about right or wrong, crime or no crime, but "politics"? No wonder we are in such a mess.
Click to expand...

I just didn’t think the fact that experience and expertise are foreign concepts to many of the posters here should be cause for @luthervol to short sell the credentials backing those opinions.

The fact that impeachment doesn’t have sufficient public support does not have any relevance to the criminal/not criminal query because a) there are people who don’t know what his behavior was (quite a few here, it seems) b) there are people who acknowledge that it was criminal, but don’t think it merits removal (also some of those here) and c) there are people who are unwilling to acknowledge that his behavior was criminal (maybe a lot here) or d) believe impeachment should not go forward for other reasons (everybody’s a pundit). All of these are reasons for not supporting impeachment and none of them have any relevance to whether his behavior was criminal.
 
#9,769
#9,769
Seems so, albeit a gracious one. Sorry if the letter is to small to read, but the text of it is easy enough to find.D5fGhnYX4AATVyb.jpeg
 
#9,771
#9,771
Orange_Vol1321 said:
If he doesn't discuss it or explain it or how a Iphone gets completely wiped, his credibility that's at about 3 out of 100 will go to 0.
Click to expand...

What phones got "completely wiped"? Link? (To authentic website please, not loony tunes right wing site parroting all the others)
 
#9,774
#9,774
37L1 said:
The report is submitted to the DOJ, first, then Congress. Isn't that so? DOJ makes their recommendation. Congress can do as it likes.
Click to expand...

That's different than what you said. Of course Barr can give his opinion. But it is not binding on Congress.

Yet, it was represented to have some official conclusion status. False.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Septic
New posts
You must log in or register to reply here.

VN Store



Back
Top