Polishprince
Diamond Member
- Jun 8, 2016
- 45,076
- 34,481
- 3,615
You avoided the questions. I'll ask again:wtf?...what is contradictory between CONSIDERING and finding a clear patern of corrupt actions that show intent?Lol you don't know what youa re reading - Mueller is talking about a demanding standard, not that it's a standard that can't be met.
Mueller states specifically:
the absence of that evidence affects the analysis of the President’s intent and requires consideration of other possible motives for his conduct."
If other motives must be considered, how can there be a concrete showing that a person acted with an intent to obtain an improper advantage for himself or someone else, inconsistent with official duty and the rights of others?
Where in the report does Mueller provide a concrete illustration that Trump acted with an intent to obtain an improper advantage for himself or someone else, inconsistent with official duty and the rights of others?
How is he wrong and how are you right?
If other motives must be considered, how can there be a concrete showing that a person acted with an intent to obtain an improper advantage for himself or someone else, inconsistent with official duty and the rights of others?
Where in the report does Mueller provide a concrete illustration that Trump acted with an intent to obtain an improper advantage for himself or someone else, inconsistent with official duty and the rights of others?
How is he wrong and how are you right?
I gave you an exmaple of Trump pressuring Comey to drop investigation into a guilty man named Flynn.
Go ahead, consider the motives and tell us in what fucking world that is that done without a corrupt intent.
Flynn's offense was very minor and the general had a long history of great service to America. Asking someone to do something isn't "pressure" at all, particularly as the witch hunt against Flynn was continued by the deep state.