Yooper
Up. Identified. Lase. Fire. On the way.
Excellent answer.
I think this is a good game. Let's keep it going, everyone! Fill in the blank!
--- End of line (MCP)
Once again: NO COLLUSION
- Thread starter vraiblonde
- Start date
I think this is a good game. Let's keep it going, everyone! Fill in the blank!
--- End of line (MCP)
Sounds like Trump has his staff to thank for keeping him out of hot water wrt obstruction.
Grumpy
Well-Known Member
From what I am seeing, I am guessing MR
Yooper
Up. Identified. Lase. Fire. On the way.
No doubt from years growing up in the Cuomo family. Like Nancy (D'Alesandro) Pelosi growing up in hers.
--- End of line (MCP)
Midnightrider
Well-Known Member
And if Eric Holder had issued a report clearing Obama you would take his word for it right? I know I didn’t/wouldn’t. That’s why I will read the report for myself. I was busy all day so I will get to it tonight.
You mean Barr’s ‘audition letter’ as it is being called doesn’t give you any reason to question his impartiality just a little?
I didn’t hear Rosenstein talk. I had to leave when Barr was taking questions. Did he actually say anything or are you basing your belief that he is in complete agreement with Barr on the fact that he stood silent behind his boss?
PsyOps
Pixelated
You're asking me to speculate on something we all know would have never happened.
Barr is the messenger of the Mueller report. If you believe he's lying to protect the president, I have no idea where you're getting that. All I know at this point is that Mueller concluded there was no collusion - which is what you people were really after; and Mueller could not conclude one way or the other whether Trump obstructed. Obstruction has to have the element of intent; you have to know that it was the intention of the person to act in a way to obstruct. Mueller reportedly interviewed over a 1000 people and it appears not one person can testify that they heard Trump say he was going to do things to obstruct the investigation. So, devoid of any witnesses to testify to this, all you're left with is guessing his frame of mind or an actual admission by Trump. Bottom line, it's not there. All you're left with is your belief that he obstructed.
Rosenstein said nothing. But he has every opportunity to do so, if he was in disagreement. The other part is, that Barr conferred with Mueller when he was preparing the redacted version of the report. So far, Mueller is silent about any disputes he might have on Barr's presser. I get no impression at all that Barr was deceptive in his press conference.
gemma_rae
Well-Known Member
PeoplesElbow
Well-Known Member
He's a big meanie!
Yooper
Up. Identified. Lase. Fire. On the way.
I did. I did. Five slaps with a wet noodle!View attachment 136531 You missed Mudnightrider?
--- End of line (MCP)
Hijinx
Well-Known Member
Nadler didn't happen to state what he found that led him to make this accusation did he?
He would have to look inward to find that information and ask himself why he has chosen a career where he has to pander to the ignorant and mentally ill, and make himself look like a horse's ass to the sane.
kom526
They call me ... Sarcasmo
The recurring theme I’ve seen is “I have to read the report for myself!” You know what? You can read that 400 page sonofabitch front to back and back to front, and it will end the same way every time. But I have all the faith in the world in the hacks from CNN, MSNBC et.al., to tell me what and how I should think about the report.
Mueller completely dropped the ball with obstruction punt
On the other hand, there is evidence that cuts sharply against obstruction. The president could have shut down the investigation at any time, but he didn’t. He could have asserted executive privilege to deny the special counsel access to key White House witnesses, such as McGahn. To the contrary, numerous witnesses were made available voluntarily (there was no need to try to subpoena them to the grand jury), and well over a million documents were disclosed, including voluminous notes of meetings between the president and his White House counsel.
Most important, the special counsel found that there was no collusion between the Trump campaign and Russia, and that the president’s frustration wasn’t over fear of guilt — the typical motivation for obstruction — but that the investigation was undermining his ability to govern the country. The existence of such a motive is a strong counter to evidence of a corrupt intent, critical because corrupt intent must be proved beyond a reasonable doubt in an obstruction case.
In his report, Mueller didn’t resolve the issue. If he had been satisfied that there was no obstruction crime, he said, he would have so found. He claimed he wasn’t satisfied. Yet he was also not convinced that there was sufficient proof to charge. Therefore, he made no decision, leaving it to Attorney General William Barr to find that there was no obstruction.
https://nypost.com/2019/04/18/mueller-completely-dropped-the-ball-with-obstruction-punt/
On the other hand, there is evidence that cuts sharply against obstruction. The president could have shut down the investigation at any time, but he didn’t. He could have asserted executive privilege to deny the special counsel access to key White House witnesses, such as McGahn. To the contrary, numerous witnesses were made available voluntarily (there was no need to try to subpoena them to the grand jury), and well over a million documents were disclosed, including voluminous notes of meetings between the president and his White House counsel.
Most important, the special counsel found that there was no collusion between the Trump campaign and Russia, and that the president’s frustration wasn’t over fear of guilt — the typical motivation for obstruction — but that the investigation was undermining his ability to govern the country. The existence of such a motive is a strong counter to evidence of a corrupt intent, critical because corrupt intent must be proved beyond a reasonable doubt in an obstruction case.
In his report, Mueller didn’t resolve the issue. If he had been satisfied that there was no obstruction crime, he said, he would have so found. He claimed he wasn’t satisfied. Yet he was also not convinced that there was sufficient proof to charge. Therefore, he made no decision, leaving it to Attorney General William Barr to find that there was no obstruction.
https://nypost.com/2019/04/18/mueller-completely-dropped-the-ball-with-obstruction-punt/