francoHFW
Diamond Member
It's a hell of a lot more than that please....
AG Barr: I’ve Received No Satisfactory Response Behind the Spying on Trump
- Thread starter Weatherman2020
- Start date
It's more than just my opinion For example what do you call him telling all those issued subpoenas to not honor them ?And firing Comey because he wouldn't pledge loyalty, stop russian investigation? Trump is slime and only brainless idiots can't see it
We did investigate. Are you saying that Mueller didn't do his job and needs random internet keyboard jockeys to do it for him?
francoHFW
Diamond Member
Actually he said it is not his job to make conclusions, for a sitting president that is for Congress to do....
The Executive Branch is not answerable to the Legislation branch and does not need to honor subpoenas issued by hem. Firing Comey because he was inept. Because he did stupid things like announce to the world he was investigating Hillary and then listing out the crimes Hillary committed and saying but they aren't crimes when they are later on.
No, he said he couldn't indict a sitting president. That's not the same as stating conclusively that the president broke the law or not.
SweetTea
Diamond Member
- May 10, 2015
- 18,769
- 16,705
- 2,290
Mueller did come to a conclusion about collusion. Didn't happen. In fact, he knew this before the mid-terms, but oddly enough decided to keep going with the investigation, leading to more angst from Trump. This served 2 purposes for the left. 1 is to steal the mid-terms and 2 to piss of Trump and try to get more "evidence" in a case for obstruction. He didn't come to a conclusion about obstruction because he didn't have enough and he KNEW it. The AG did come to a conclusion about obstruction. Didn't happen. End of story. Not sure why you guys don't get.
What you should be worried about is why our security agencies showed such partisanship. That is potentially the biggest problem our country faces by a long shot. It appears that Obama armed several government agencies in favor of the left. That should be thoroughly investigated. It shouldn't happen whether Republican or Democrat.
SweetTea
Diamond Member
- May 10, 2015
- 18,769
- 16,705
- 2,290
Comey leaked information to his buddy at Columbia University in hopes it would get to the media, which it did. That in an of itself is grounds for dismissal.
francoHFW
Diamond Member
Tell me something I Don't know LOL
And now you have Trump ass kisser Barr
If you knew that, why did you say we need to investigate stuff Mueller has already exhaustively investigated?
For you mr Hadit
The investigation was officially concluded on March 22, 2019, with the Mueller Reportsubmitted to Attorney General William Barr.[38] Barr had been critical of the investigation before he became Attorney General. The report was released to the public on April 18, 2019, with redacted parts concerning ongoing investigations or confidential intelligence information. The report concluded that two forms of Russian interference occurred and "violated U.S. criminal law."[39][40] Firstly the IRA's social media campaign supported Trump's presidential candidacy while attacking Clinton's.[41][42][43] Secondly, Russian intelligence hacked and released damaging material from the Clinton campaign and various Democratic Party organizations.[44][45][46] The investigation "identified numerous links between the Russian government and the Trump campaign", and determined that the Trump campaign "expected it would benefit electorally" from Russian hacking efforts. However, ultimately "the investigation did not establish that members of the Trump campaign conspired or coordinated with the Russian government in its election interference activities".[47][48][49] The report's second volume describes ten episodes that could be construed as obstruction of justice,[50][51] but investigators would not indict a sitting president per an Office of Legal Counsel (OLC) opinion, and would not accuse him of a crime when he cannot clear his name in court.[52][53] The report "does not conclude that the President committed a crime," but also "does not exonerate him".[42] Congress can decide whether Trump obstructed justice,[54] and has the authority to take action against him.[55][56][57] Attorney General Barr and Deputy Attorney General Rod Rosenstein, who had authorized the Mueller probe, decided that the evidence was insufficient to establish a finding of obstruction of justice.[58] Upon the abolishment of his position on May 29, 2019, Mueller stated that: "the Constitution requires a process other than the criminal justice system to formally accuse a sitting president of wrongdoing".[59][60][61]
I'm not a lawyer, so I'll defer to Mueller's understanding of the law, but didn't the Starr report state definitively that Bill Clinton broke specific laws in specific incidents, while not attempting to indict him? It would seem to me that an investigator/prosecutor would not only be authorized, but expected to state whether the subject broke the law, and under our justice system, a failure to conclusively prove he did is exoneration.
We can be frustrated, for example, that Hillary wasn't hauled from her home in handcuffs during a pre-dawn raid, but that doesn't mean we should demand that she be locked up without being found guilty.
Basically, our justice system is biased in favor of the accused, and should be. Now, if the rich and famous get a different system than everyone else, that's a problem. If Hillary, for example, was shielded from prosecution when a low level Navy Corpsman would not be, that's not justice.
I don't see the problem.
francoHFW
Diamond Member
Because he believes you cannot indict criminally a sitting president, brainwashed functional moron, for the millionth time. He believes Congress has to make the conclusion....
francoHFW
Diamond Member
Then you don't give a damn about the Constitution where the attorney general is supposed to be independent, ignoramus doop.
I call shenanigans. If all you're going to do is re-investigate everything Mueller already did, there was no reason to waste all that time and money on the investigation. Face reality, mini dupe propaganda believer, the only reason you want to do it is to create a spectacle, because it's already been done and there's a 400+ page report to prove it.
When Bubba was impeached, the Starr report laid out specific laws and specific instances where he broke them. The House did not have to redo the Starr investigation and this one doesn't have to redo Mueller's.
It is the investigator's responsibility to state if the subject of the investigation broke the law or not. If he did, the next steps are carried out by the prosecuting authorities. If, however, he did not break the law, the matter stops right there, with no need for further investigation. That is why the Mueller report, as badly as he wanted it to condemn the president, did not.
Where in the Constitution does it say that?
He is a member of the executive branch.
Similar threads
- Locked
New Topics
-
-
-
A solution to the growing number of unemployable Americans
- Started by GuyOnInternet
- Replies: 4
-
-
Latest Discussions
-
-
Zone1 Ever have a moment of stress and then you just sense that G-d is there for you and has your back?
- Latest: MostBoringManInTheWorld
-
