Why are Dems clinging to the "does not exonerate" quote? That's just stupid.

[whitehall]

The only thing that isn't exonerated is the psychopathic hatred on the left. The original premise of the investigation was that (candidate) Trump colluded with Russia to skew the results of the investigation and there was never any real evidence other than the junk fabricated by rogue elements in the FBI. President Trump was vindicated and exonerated.

 

[justoffal]

This statement has been quoted millions of times now, and it's absolutely meaningless:

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

The same statement could be said by any investigator in any circumstance where no evidence has been found of a crime. For instance:

Judge: "You have been found innocent of the crime you were accused of here, but that does not exonerate you of any and all crimes you may or may not have committed throughout your life."

No duh!

Is this the best you can do, Dems? Grasp at an utterly meaningless quote?

Mueller did that totally for self protection.
Schiff already wants to arrest him.
Totally A-FUKKIN-MAZING.

JO

Jo

 

[boedicca]

The Prog-Dems have merged the first three stages of grief (Denial, Anger, Bargaining) into one giant ball of hysterical outrage. I fear that this has created a circular process for them, and that they will never push through Depression and get to Acceptance without extreme cognitive reconditioning.

 

[Fueri]

Their clinging to it is simply them grabbing onto something to justify their continued investigations.

If it wasn't that, it would have been something else used as the talking point/justification/spin for them continuing with their obstruction of a duly elected president.

This would be getting embarrassing for Schumer, Pelosi et al, if they were actually capable of such a thing.....

 

[easyt65]

There's no way a summary authored by a Trump appointee is going to be the final say on this.

After 2+ years of being lied to by Hillary, Holder, Lynch, Rosenstein, Clapper, Brennan, Comey, McCabe, Strzok, Baker, and others, the same Democrats / snowflakes who have been duped by them and parroted their lies and false accusations - all of whom have ZERO credibility now - want to claim that it is an independent US AG whose word can not be trusted?

Bwuhahahaha!

Mueller's report proved TRUMP was the one right / telling the truth the last 2+ years about the BS attempted coup, and snowflakes want to claim that the conspirators who were just exposed are more trustworthy than Barr?!


[URL='https://www.google.com/imgres?imgurl=https%3A%2F%2Fi.pinimg.com%2Foriginals%2F0b%2F29%2Fd3%2F0b29d3c9327641c0bf8cc3d1d4e433aa.jpg&imgrefurl=https%3A%2F%2Fwww.pinterest.com%2Fpin%2F390265123941229431%2F&docid=5B11ILASn3C_XM&tbnid=Qm14OmfqNtlqZM%3A&vet=10ahUKEwjQw47C1Z3hAhWkTN8KHb1lDGYQMwg9KAgwCA..i&w=736&h=552&bih=846&biw=1652&q=laughing%20hysterically&ved=0ahUKEwjQw47C1Z3hAhWkTN8KHb1lDGYQMwg9KAgwCA&iact=mrc&uact=8']

[/URL]

 

[deanrd]

Why are Dems clinging to the "does not exonerate" quote?

Because of the William bar report. Duh!

 

[Defiant1]

This statement has been quoted millions of times now, and it's absolutely meaningless:

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

The same statement could be said by any investigator in any circumstance where no evidence has been found of a crime. For instance:

Judge: "You have been found innocent of the crime you were accused of here, but that does not exonerate you of any and all crimes you may or may not have committed throughout your life."

No duh!

Is this the best you can do, Dems? Grasp at an utterly meaningless quote?

It other words , "I wanted to prosecute Trump on collusion but I couldn't find the evidence, so I'm disappointed."
That's what mueller is really saying.

How can someone be prosecuted for a crime that doesn't exist?

 

[deanrd]

There's no way a summary authored by a Trump appointee is going to be the final say on this.

After 2+ years of being lied to by Hillary, Holder, Lynch, Rosenstein, Clapper, Brennan, Comey, McCabe, Strzok, Baker, and others, the same Democrats / snowflakes who have been duped by them and parroted their lies and false accusations - all of whom have ZERO credibility now - want to claim that it is an independent US AG whose word can not be trusted?

Bwuhahahaha!

Mueller's report proved TRUMP was the one right / telling the truth the last 2+ years about the BS attempted coup, and snowflakes want to claim that the conspirators who were just exposed are more trustworthy than Barr?!


View attachment 252143 View attachment 252144

The investigation was started by Republicans since Democrats had no power for the last two years, does that mean Trump is going to apologize for trying to destroy the career of Robert Mueller?

 

[Edgetho]

 

[deanrd]

This statement has been quoted millions of times now, and it's absolutely meaningless:

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

The same statement could be said by any investigator in any circumstance where no evidence has been found of a crime. For instance:

Judge: "You have been found innocent of the crime you were accused of here, but that does not exonerate you of any and all crimes you may or may not have committed throughout your life."

No duh!

Is this the best you can do, Dems? Grasp at an utterly meaningless quote?

It other words , "I wanted to prosecute Trump on collusion but I couldn't find the evidence, so I'm disappointed."
That's what mueller is really saying.

How someone be prosecuted for a crime that doesn't exist?

Ask Hillary.

 

[deanrd]

So does trump still believe Vladimir Putin over the FBI and US Intel agencies?

 

[easyt65]

The investigation was started by Republicans since Democrats had no power for the last two years, does that mean Trump is going to apologize for trying to destroy the career of Robert Mueller?

You LIE!

Paige testified the FBI had investigated Trump for illegal collusion for months and found NOTHING - No evidence, no crime...but they proceeded with conning the FISA Court & Congress by illegally using the Dossier they KNEW was unreliable yet passed it off as legitimate Intel.

Your LIES have been exposed, debunked - YOU LOSE!

 

[boedicca]

*snicker* Twoof:

Still, it is a free country and the Dems are welcome to pursue the pipe dreams that RussiaGate isn’t over. Their denial recalls those Japanese soldiers who hid out in island caves for 30 and 40 years after World War II, determined never to surrender.

https://nypost.com/2019/03/24/we-should-all-be-celebrating-the-collapse-of-hillarys-big-lie/

 

[easyt65]

So does trump still believe Vladimir Putin over the FBI and US Intel agencies?

Why do you keep repeating your same old propaganda?

Oh yeah, because after Mueller's report, that's all you have!

 

[Edgetho]

So does trump still believe Vladimir Putin over the FBI and US Intel agencies?

scumbag dimocraps are all the same

 

[Defiant1]

What has

This statement has been quoted millions of times now, and it's absolutely meaningless:

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

The same statement could be said by any investigator in any circumstance where no evidence has been found of a crime. For instance:

Judge: "You have been found innocent of the crime you were accused of here, but that does not exonerate you of any and all crimes you may or may not have committed throughout your life."

No duh!

Is this the best you can do, Dems? Grasp at an utterly meaningless quote?

It other words , "I wanted to prosecute Trump on collusion but I couldn't find the evidence, so I'm disappointed."
That's what mueller is really saying.

How someone be prosecuted for a crime that doesn't exist?

Ask Hillary.

What was she prosecuted for?

 

[Hale]

This isn't going to be over until the FULL Mueller report is released to congress...and most of it is released to the public.

There's no way a summary authored by a Trump appointee is going to be the final say on this.

If there was truly no collusion and no obstruction, neither Trump, the Republicans or Trump's supporters should object to this.

Trump has already said he'd be "happy for Americans to see Robert Mueller's final report".

Why are you now pretending he's against it?

He has no objection, we have no objection, bring it on!

 

[toobfreak]

This statement has been quoted millions of times now, and it's absolutely meaningless:
"While this report does not conclude that the President committed a crime, it also does not exonerate him.”

Liberal spin just to keep snowflake hopes alive. Of course it doesn't exonerate him~~ ~~ ~~ it CAN'T! The investigator (Mueller) has no authority to exonerate anyone, that is the job of the AG. The investigator presents the evidence and the AG decides whether to prosecute. If there are insufficient grounds to charge with a crime, the president is immediately, automatically exonerated. And even if there was, it would have to wait until he is out of office or the Senate impeaches him.

 

[iamwhatiseem]

Because Trump Derangement Syndrome does not allow anything other than guilty. They simply cannot comprehend it. Therefore, the only possibility is now that Mueller was incompetent or Barr is hiding something.
At the same time, there is Clinton Derangement Syndrome. Only it works in the opposite way. No matter how much evidence there was/is... she is innocent.

 

[ZZ PUPPS]

So.. Mueller did not find exculpatory evidence?

How does that change the fact the evidence collected by Mueller did not establish that Trump committed the crime of obstruction of justice?

And, when did Democrats change their minds on obstruction rising to the level of an impeachable offense?

It is impossible to find exculpatory evidence for a non-event - something that did not occur.