Explain how this is an exoneration

[Stormy Daniels]

Mueller's report explains his prosecutorial decisions in four points.

1. The DOJ's OLC has issued the opinion that a sitting President cannot be indicted, and the SC accepted that opinion for the purposes of his investigation, further recognizing that a DOJ indictment might preempt the constitutional mechanism of impeachment.
2. The investigation was nevertheless warranted because an criminal investigation is permitted under the OLC's standard, even when an indictment is not. Other individuals engaging in obstruction could be prosecuted immediately. And the President is not immune from prosecution after leaving office, regardless of whether impeachment proceedings are brought or are successful. So the investigation served the purpose of preserving evidence while witness memories were fresh.
3. The normal public mechanism for an individual accused of a crime to clear themselves is a speedy public criminal trial. If the sitting President cannot be brought to a criminal trial while in office, then it would be unfair for the SC to affirmatively accuse him of a crime that cannot be prosecuted in a criminal court of law at this time. Even a sealed indictment's secrecy could not be guaranteed to be preserved. Accordingly, a criminal accusation against a sitting President could be harmful to the country, because the accusation cannot be resolved in the normal adversarial manner of a criminal trial.
   
4. The results of the investigation do not allow the SC to conclude that the President did not commit obstruction.

So please explain how this exonerates Donald?

 

[Harpy Eagle]

Mueller's report explains his prosecutorial decisions in four points.

1. The DOJ's OLC has issued the opinion that a sitting President cannot be indicted, and the SC accepted that opinion for the purposes of his investigation, further recognizing that a DOJ indictment might preempt the constitutional mechanism of impeachment.
2. The investigation was nevertheless warranted because an criminal investigation is permitted under the OLC's standard, even when an indictment is not. Other individuals engaging in obstruction could be prosecuted immediately. And the President is not immune from prosecution after leaving office, regardless of whether impeachment proceedings are brought or are successful. So the investigation served the purpose of preserving evidence while witness memories were fresh.
3. The normal public mechanism for an individual accused of a crime to clear themselves is a speedy public criminal trial. If the sitting President cannot be brought to a criminal trial while in office, then it would be unfair for the SC to affirmatively accuse him of a crime that cannot be prosecuted in a criminal court of law at this time. Even a sealed indictment's secrecy could not be guaranteed to be preserved. Accordingly, a criminal accusation against a sitting President could be harmful to the country, because the accusation cannot be resolved in the normal adversarial manner of a criminal trial.
   
4. The results of the investigation do not allow the SC to conclude that the President did not commit obstruction.

So please explain how this exhonerates Donald?

because their party masters told them it did, and these sheep never disagree with their party masters.

 

[leftwinger]

Just because 20 Dems wrote a story....don't make it true. Who is telling truth and who is lying to please the Dems and stay out of jail?

What is OP babbling about?

 

[DJT for Life]

Mueller's report explains his prosecutorial decisions in four points.

1. The DOJ's OLC has issued the opinion that a sitting President cannot be indicted, and the SC accepted that opinion for the purposes of his investigation, further recognizing that a DOJ indictment might preempt the constitutional mechanism of impeachment.
2. The investigation was nevertheless warranted because an criminal investigation is permitted under the OLC's standard, even when an indictment is not. Other individuals engaging in obstruction could be prosecuted immediately. And the President is not immune from prosecution after leaving office, regardless of whether impeachment proceedings are brought or are successful. So the investigation served the purpose of preserving evidence while witness memories were fresh.
3. The normal public mechanism for an individual accused of a crime to clear themselves is a speedy public criminal trial. If the sitting President cannot be brought to a criminal trial while in office, then it would be unfair for the SC to affirmatively accuse him of a crime that cannot be prosecuted in a criminal court of law at this time. Even a sealed indictment's secrecy could not be guaranteed to be preserved. Accordingly, a criminal accusation against a sitting President could be harmful to the country, because the accusation cannot be resolved in the normal adversarial manner of a criminal trial.
   
4. The results of the investigation do not allow the SC to conclude that the President did not commit obstruction.

So please explain how this exhonerates Donald?

The investigation into the Trump campaign was a counter-intelligence operation, not a criminal investigation.

The SC found no conspiracy or collusion by the Trump campaign with a foreign government. Thus the SC never
found a crime..

The POTUS cooperated fully with the SC providing him with unlimited access to WH files and employees and not invoking
Executive Privlidge.

How can a President obstruct a crime that was never committed?

In actuality, the POTUS was defending himself from being unfairly portrayed as committing a crime that the SC said never
happened. He will be forever remember as the POTUS that prevented the FBI and the DOJ along with Pres Zero from
obstructing justice.

 

[Stormy Daniels]

I can't.


(I have NO idea what an 'exhoneration' is.)

This would be considered an off topic trolling post if made by anyone else.

 

[Auld Phart]

I can't.


(I have NO idea what an 'exhoneration' is.)

This would be considered an off topic trolling post if made by anyone else.

The idea was to get a change made to the thread title.

it seems to have worked.

 

[Billy_Kinetta]

Mueller's report explains his prosecutorial decisions in four points.

1. The DOJ's OLC has issued the opinion that a sitting President cannot be indicted, and the SC accepted that opinion for the purposes of his investigation, further recognizing that a DOJ indictment might preempt the constitutional mechanism of impeachment.
2. The investigation was nevertheless warranted because an criminal investigation is permitted under the OLC's standard, even when an indictment is not. Other individuals engaging in obstruction could be prosecuted immediately. And the President is not immune from prosecution after leaving office, regardless of whether impeachment proceedings are brought or are successful. So the investigation served the purpose of preserving evidence while witness memories were fresh.
3. The normal public mechanism for an individual accused of a crime to clear themselves is a speedy public criminal trial. If the sitting President cannot be brought to a criminal trial while in office, then it would be unfair for the SC to affirmatively accuse him of a crime that cannot be prosecuted in a criminal court of law at this time. Even a sealed indictment's secrecy could not be guaranteed to be preserved. Accordingly, a criminal accusation against a sitting President could be harmful to the country, because the accusation cannot be resolved in the normal adversarial manner of a criminal trial.
   
4. The results of the investigation do not allow the SC to conclude that the President did not commit obstruction.

So please explain how this exonerates Donald?

No crime, no exoneration necessary. Exoneration is a silly argument aimed at the uneducated Democrat base.

 

[Stormy Daniels]

I can't.


(I have NO idea what an 'exhoneration' is.)

This would be considered an off topic trolling post if made by anyone else.

The idea was to get a change made to the thread title.

it seems to have worked.

The idea is that you have nothing relevant to say, other than to nitpick a simple spelling error.

 

[Oddball]

I can't.


(I have NO idea what an 'exhoneration' is.)

This would be considered an off topic trolling post if made by anyone else.

The idea was to get a change made to the thread title.

it seems to have worked.

The idea is that you have nothing relevant to say, other than to nitpick a simple spelling error.

Your OP is a giant irrelevancy...Game over....Get the fuck over it....A sound honking was better than it deserved.

 

[Disir]

No crime; therefore, no obstruction.

 

[night_son]

Mueller's report explains his prosecutorial decisions in four points.

1. The DOJ's OLC has issued the opinion that a sitting President cannot be indicted, and the SC accepted that opinion for the purposes of his investigation, further recognizing that a DOJ indictment might preempt the constitutional mechanism of impeachment.
2. The investigation was nevertheless warranted because an criminal investigation is permitted under the OLC's standard, even when an indictment is not. Other individuals engaging in obstruction could be prosecuted immediately. And the President is not immune from prosecution after leaving office, regardless of whether impeachment proceedings are brought or are successful. So the investigation served the purpose of preserving evidence while witness memories were fresh.
3. The normal public mechanism for an individual accused of a crime to clear themselves is a speedy public criminal trial. If the sitting President cannot be brought to a criminal trial while in office, then it would be unfair for the SC to affirmatively accuse him of a crime that cannot be prosecuted in a criminal court of law at this time. Even a sealed indictment's secrecy could not be guaranteed to be preserved. Accordingly, a criminal accusation against a sitting President could be harmful to the country, because the accusation cannot be resolved in the normal adversarial manner of a criminal trial.
   
4. The results of the investigation do not allow the SC to conclude that the President did not commit obstruction.

So please explain how this exhonerates Donald?

Sadly, you, along with millions of other American Voters have fallen into an endlessly recursive whirlpool/cesspool, really known as the Hegelian-Postmodernist Loop and you cannot escape it because in order to do so, you'd have to want to and wanting to would mean admitting your religion of radical Leftist ideology is wrong? So what is this H-PL mentioned in my first sentence? H-PL is a zealotry disorder wherein adherents (cultists really) who have surrendered their minds and souls fully to the worship of radical Leftist ideology continue endlessly to ask the same question about the same set of issues regardless of the fact that they already know or have the answer(s) and yet nevertheless expect to get a different answer (the one they want) if they ask the same question enough times to enough different people. Of course, facts and truths never change thus the victim of H-PL never receives the answer he or she most desires, no matter how many times he or she asks the same loaded questions. Regrettably, to date no known cure exists.

Perhaps you're sharp enough to understand what I did there in the above paragraph, perhaps not. Allow me to enlighten you. In using true radical Leftist modus operandi I fabricated (from thin air, no less) a new reality wherein a mental disorder no one ever heard of (because I made it up) is sweeping the nation, afflicting mass cross-sections of our Democrat population. My motivation? To mass deceive any who read this thread and sow doubt in the most cherished political foundations of their sentient existence. In short, I wanted to emulate CNN/MSNBC/MSM in general's coverage of the Mueller Report release and much as they are doing to their viewers and the American People at large, plant seeds of, water and nourish a meta narrative forest of overt lies.

What's worse? H-PL, the radical Leftist ideology disorder I created on the fly for this post? It perfectly describes the behavior, MO and symptoms of Leftism dominated mass media, intellectualism and all those who worship its every lying word. That is how blatant are the lies of the MSM who beamed your OP talking points into your brainpan.

In shorter: perhaps you'd like to explain to us how your talking points do not exonerate our great President? Seems the burden to do so rests heavily upon the set of shoulders who will not take "no" for an answer, regardless of truth, facts and the obvious. However, I suspect you will never relent, never accept exoneration, never believe a word not programmed into you by cable news network automatons.

 

[nat4900]

The investigation into the Trump campaign was a counter-intelligence operation, not a criminal investigation.

The above dimwit INSISTS to be labeled a dimwit.....

The investigation's objective was SPECIFICALLY to determine if there existed "obstruction of justice"......and the above moron states that the investigation was NOT a "criminal" one???.........GO FIGURE THE UTTER STUPIDITY.

 

[Oddball]

The above dimwit INSISTS to be labeled a dimwit.....

The investigation's objective was SPECIFICALLY to determine if there existed "obstruction of justice"......and the above moron states that the investigation was NOT a "criminal" one???.........GO FIGURE THE UTTER STUPIDITY.

Did anyone really think those goalposts were going to move themselves?

 

[tyroneweaver]

The investigation into the Trump campaign was a counter-intelligence operation, not a criminal investigation.

The above dimwit INSISTS to be labeled a dimwit.....

The investigation's objective was SPECIFICALLY to determine if there existed "obstruction of justice"......and the above moron states that the investigation was NOT a "criminal" one???.........GO FIGURE THE UTTER STUPIDITY.

You really don’t know a heck of a lot. Counter intelligence can circumvent laws hindered by a CI. Like a search warrant for one

 

[Hellokitty]

Mueller's report explains his prosecutorial decisions in four points.

1. The DOJ's OLC has issued the opinion that a sitting President cannot be indicted, and the SC accepted that opinion for the purposes of his investigation, further recognizing that a DOJ indictment might preempt the constitutional mechanism of impeachment.
2. The investigation was nevertheless warranted because an criminal investigation is permitted under the OLC's standard, even when an indictment is not. Other individuals engaging in obstruction could be prosecuted immediately. And the President is not immune from prosecution after leaving office, regardless of whether impeachment proceedings are brought or are successful. So the investigation served the purpose of preserving evidence while witness memories were fresh.
3. The normal public mechanism for an individual accused of a crime to clear themselves is a speedy public criminal trial. If the sitting President cannot be brought to a criminal trial while in office, then it would be unfair for the SC to affirmatively accuse him of a crime that cannot be prosecuted in a criminal court of law at this time. Even a sealed indictment's secrecy could not be guaranteed to be preserved. Accordingly, a criminal accusation against a sitting President could be harmful to the country, because the accusation cannot be resolved in the normal adversarial manner of a criminal trial.
   
4. The results of the investigation do not allow the SC to conclude that the President did not commit obstruction.

So please explain how this exonerates Donald?

It exonerates TRUMP by exposing the underlying purpose of the entire Russia investigation and appointment of Mueller as being political.

 

[nat4900]

No crime; therefore, no obstruction.

"Brilliant".....just damn "brilliant"........

The first fucking point in the O/P states that based on DOJ policy (NOT law) a sitting president CANNOT be indicted.
Then sure, "no crime" can be charged to a sitting president....

HOWEVER, Mueller's CLEAR point is that TWO options remain open AFTER his investigation:

1. Impeachment proceedings by the House.......and/or

2. Indicting Trump AFTER he is out of office......

Therefore, Trump's campaign slogan SHOULD be: "Vote for me, my cult, and keep me out of prison"

 

[Pilot1]

So Democrats, keep harping about Mueller and the Russians while not having any message of your own except we Hate Trump, because...………..

Yes, that is certainly a winning formula for 2020. So pathetic it is laughable.

 

[ptbw forever]

The investigation into the Trump campaign was a counter-intelligence operation, not a criminal investigation.

The above dimwit INSISTS to be labeled a dimwit.....

The investigation's objective was SPECIFICALLY to determine if there existed "obstruction of justice"......and the above moron states that the investigation was NOT a "criminal" one???.........GO FIGURE THE UTTER STUPIDITY.

No dimwit.

There was no investigation into obstruction.

The investigation was about Russia influencing the election and accusations of Trump colluding with Russia to help them do it. Now that Trump has been found to not have colluded with Russia any “obstruction” of that particular part of the investigation is null and void, especially since Trump didn’t do anything to “obstruct” the investigation that any president couldn’t have done at any time.

 

[Stormy Daniels]

Mueller's report explains his prosecutorial decisions in four points.

1. The DOJ's OLC has issued the opinion that a sitting President cannot be indicted, and the SC accepted that opinion for the purposes of his investigation, further recognizing that a DOJ indictment might preempt the constitutional mechanism of impeachment.
2. The investigation was nevertheless warranted because an criminal investigation is permitted under the OLC's standard, even when an indictment is not. Other individuals engaging in obstruction could be prosecuted immediately. And the President is not immune from prosecution after leaving office, regardless of whether impeachment proceedings are brought or are successful. So the investigation served the purpose of preserving evidence while witness memories were fresh.
3. The normal public mechanism for an individual accused of a crime to clear themselves is a speedy public criminal trial. If the sitting President cannot be brought to a criminal trial while in office, then it would be unfair for the SC to affirmatively accuse him of a crime that cannot be prosecuted in a criminal court of law at this time. Even a sealed indictment's secrecy could not be guaranteed to be preserved. Accordingly, a criminal accusation against a sitting President could be harmful to the country, because the accusation cannot be resolved in the normal adversarial manner of a criminal trial.
   
4. The results of the investigation do not allow the SC to conclude that the President did not commit obstruction.

So please explain how this exonerates Donald?

It exonerates TRUMP by exposing the underlying purpose of the entire Russia investigation and appointment of Mueller as being political.

You must have been reading Brietbart Report, not the Mueller report.

 

[nat4900]

It exonerates TRUMP

Just for fun.....where the fuck do morons like you draw THAT "conclusion"????

Did you hear it from Trump himself, Hannity, Donny-baby, Ivanka???

God how truly DUMB these cult members are...........deplorables is too kind a term.....lol