I have proof that the Muller report found no collusion

[jc456]

Which part, specifically?

that he most likely is guilty. you reached a conclusion that no one has. good for you!!! step on that island.

That's my opinion just as yours is that he is innocent and the report specifically does not exonerate him. Anyway, I'm sure lots of people have come to the same conclusion, doesn't mean there shouldn't be an impeachment (trial) to get to the bottom of it.

You think Clinton is guilty of something or other so **** off.

The report exonerates him learn how the law works

although, mueller claimed in his statement that the report doesn't exonerate trump, that wasn't its purpose, it was to find him guilty and it didn't. so he failed to provide evidence of guilt. INNOCENT

Exactly

there is absolutely no other position one can take. to impeach is to impeach and innocent man. hmmmm go for it loons

 

[The Original Tree]

Quit Spamming and Trolling The Forum with shit like this.

What are you going to do next, post the phone book?

One more reply.

I specifically posted all the names to demonstrate how meaningless the opinion of one lawyer is just because he happens to agree with you.

Nancy agrees with me, no impeachment

So asking about obstruction and obstruction are the same thing? He asked and was advised not to do what he thought he could do. I read The report.

You cannot have Obstruction if you have not committed a crime.

Asserting your rights and exercising your Constitutional Powers is NEVER OBSTRUCTION.

Right but at the time he was unsure what the SC would find. Either way someone needs to explain how he obstructed. People are dumb.

That's what makes having discussions on here frustrating. People on here are so uneducated, I feel like they have mental illness, or have a head injury. Almost impossible to have factual discussions about the topics.

 

[jc456]

Are you concerned with Congress opinion not to impeach?

Yes. I'm on the fence as to whether Congress should impeach also but I think he's most likely guilty and in a perfect world he should be impeached. However we have an upcoming election and we saw what the impeachment of Clinton did to Republicans.

Then again Clinton was more popular than Trump is now (or at least not as unpopular) and I'm not so sure impeachment would hurt the Democrats here. Especially when you consider there are other on going investigations in other jurisdictions, Trumps taxes may come out shortly, Trump who can't keep his hand from the fire and won't for whatever reason stop talking about the Mueller report.

There is a lot up in the air and in the end I think the Democrats (or their leadership anyway) are playing it too safe, understandably so but they should probably just pull the trigger. So, I don't fault the Dems who are for or against impeachment, I just happen to marginally disagree with one side.

Note I only read 1 sentence, so keep the runons
Short

Great, that's another thing you haven't read then.

Dude 3 million words or less and Nancy read it and said there is no there there.

So there

She never said that.

well yeah she did. why isn't there an impeachment hearing going on right now then?

 

[jc456]

One more reply.

I specifically posted all the names to demonstrate how meaningless the opinion of one lawyer is just because he happens to agree with you.

Nancy agrees with me, no impeachment

So asking about obstruction and obstruction are the same thing? He asked and was advised not to do what he thought he could do. I read The report.

You cannot have Obstruction if you have not committed a crime.

Asserting your rights and exercising your Constitutional Powers is NEVER OBSTRUCTION.

Right but at the time he was unsure what the SC would find. Either way someone needs to explain how he obstructed. People are dumb.

That's what makes having discussions on here frustrating. People on here are so uneducated, I feel like they have mental illness, or have a head injury. Almost impossible to have factual discussions about the topics.

how can one, when leftists just make up fake information. words that aren't there in the report coming out in here, amazing. Can't help that level of stupid tree, impossible. rocks have more value.

 

[The Original Tree]

that he most likely is guilty. you reached a conclusion that no one has. good for you!!! step on that island.

That's my opinion just as yours is that he is innocent and the report specifically does not exonerate him. Anyway, I'm sure lots of people have come to the same conclusion, doesn't mean there shouldn't be an impeachment (trial) to get to the bottom of it.

You think Clinton is guilty of something or other so **** off.

The report exonerates him learn how the law works

although, mueller claimed in his statement that the report doesn't exonerate trump, that wasn't its purpose, it was to find him guilty and it didn't. so he failed to provide evidence of guilt. INNOCENT

Exactly

there is absolutely no other position one can take. to impeach is to impeach and innocent man. hmmmm go for it loons

The Sanhedrin, Sadducees and Pharisees crucified an innocent man.

Trump is not white as driven snow, but the facts show that the entire investigation is a hoax. Mueller should be embarrassed for participating in it especially when he knew 18 months ago, The President was innocent.

The facts show, he did not do what The Clinton & Obama Smear Machines said he did.

 

[jc456]

QUOTE="The Original Tree, post: 22473598, member: 60550"]

That's my opinion just as yours is that he is innocent and the report specifically does not exonerate him. Anyway, I'm sure lots of people have come to the same conclusion, doesn't mean there shouldn't be an impeachment (trial) to get to the bottom of it.

You think Clinton is guilty of something or other so **** off.

The report exonerates him learn how the law works

although, mueller claimed in his statement that the report doesn't exonerate trump, that wasn't its purpose, it was to find him guilty and it didn't. so he failed to provide evidence of guilt. INNOCENT

Exactly

there is absolutely no other position one can take. to impeach is to impeach and innocent man. hmmmm go for it loons

The Sanhedrin, Sadducees and Pharisees crucified an innocent man.

Trump is not white as driven snow, but the facts show that the entire investigation is a hoax. Mueller should be embarrassed for participating in it especially when he knew 18 months ago, The President was innocent.[/QUOTE]

I can't say anymore than that right there^^^^^^^^^^^^

 

[jc456]

Why is Congress not impeaching?

If I were a betting man I'd put my money on the optics of the impeachment of President Clinton.

You realize that one can only obstruct if there is a crime and there was no crime.

"Each of us believes that the conduct of President Trump described in Special Counsel Robert Mueller’s report would, in the case of any other person not covered by the Office of Legal Counsel policy against indicting a sitting President, result in multiple felony charges for obstruction of justice," according to the letter"

But there’s no evidence! In my country, you need that and intent

https://www.justice.gov/storage/report.pdf

Barr Says Mueller Was Wrong, 'Could've Reached a Decision' on Obstruction

BlindBoo , you have me confused with someone who cares!!

 

[Frannie]

that he most likely is guilty. you reached a conclusion that no one has. good for you!!! step on that island.

That's my opinion just as yours is that he is innocent and the report specifically does not exonerate him. Anyway, I'm sure lots of people have come to the same conclusion, doesn't mean there shouldn't be an impeachment (trial) to get to the bottom of it.

You think Clinton is guilty of something or other so **** off.

The report exonerates him learn how the law works

although, mueller claimed in his statement that the report doesn't exonerate trump, that wasn't its purpose, it was to find him guilty and it didn't. so he failed to provide evidence of guilt. INNOCENT

Exactly

there is absolutely no other position one can take. to impeach is to impeach and innocent man. hmmmm go for it loons

But to them he is not innocent

 

[The Original Tree]

QUOTE="The Original Tree, post: 22473598, member: 60550"]

That's my opinion just as yours is that he is innocent and the report specifically does not exonerate him. Anyway, I'm sure lots of people have come to the same conclusion, doesn't mean there shouldn't be an impeachment (trial) to get to the bottom of it.

You think Clinton is guilty of something or other so **** off.

The report exonerates him learn how the law works

although, mueller claimed in his statement that the report doesn't exonerate trump, that wasn't its purpose, it was to find him guilty and it didn't. so he failed to provide evidence of guilt. INNOCENT

Exactly

there is absolutely no other position one can take. to impeach is to impeach and innocent man. hmmmm go for it loons

The Sanhedrin, Sadducees and Pharisees crucified an innocent man.

Trump is not white as driven snow, but the facts show that the entire investigation is a hoax. Mueller should be embarrassed for participating in it especially when he knew 18 months ago, The President was innocent.

I can't say anymore than that right there^^^^^^^^^^^^[/QUOTE]
What's worse that crucifying an innocent man?

Crucifying an Innocent Man, when you KNOW HE IS INNOCENT!

Mueller knew for 18 months The President was innocent. Yet Mueller and his attack dogs kept going after everyone they could. Explain how that happens when you know what you are investigating is a fraud?

Mueller btw has done this before. He put several people in Prison on Trumped up False Charges, with held exculpatory evidence, and even tampered with witness statements, and lied in court to get those people put away.

That is why he was appointed. The man is not a man of honor, nor unbiased. He is and has always been a hatchet man.

Mueller also protected a KNOWN MURDERER even while MUELLER knew Bulger was Murdering everyone around him.

Mueller is Unjust and Wicked to his Core.

Why Mueller Left Four Innocent People in Jail in the ****** Bulger Case

Here are documents that prove Mueller knowingly put innocent men in jail and used false charges and manufactured evidence to do it.

BREAKING: Did Robert Mueller conspire to keep four innocent men framed by the FBI in prison for life for a murder they did not commit? The Boston Globe and a longtime member of the MA Parole Board say YES.

Mueller has done this OVER and OVER AGAIN. This is why he was "annointed" to be Trump's Political Assassin!

Trust me, these DOUCHEBAGS DO NOT BUNGLE CASES. They railroad people using trumped up and false evidence. That is their MO. Ask General Flynn about that.

When Comey and Mueller Bungled the Anthrax Case | RealClearPolitics

Comey, Mueller bungled big anthrax case together – Orange County Register

Robert Mueller is a hothead who can't own up to his mistakes, former aides say

Revealed: Mueller's FBI Repeatedly Abused Prosecutorial Discretion

Explosive New Docs Reveal Weissmann’s Misconduct In Enron Case

The Complete Humiliation Of The Enron Task Force

POWELL: Andrew Weissmann — The Kingpin Of Prosecutorial Misconduct — Leaves Mueller’s Squad

 

[AzogtheDefiler]

One more reply.

I specifically posted all the names to demonstrate how meaningless the opinion of one lawyer is just because he happens to agree with you.

Nancy agrees with me, no impeachment

So asking about obstruction and obstruction are the same thing? He asked and was advised not to do what he thought he could do. I read The report.

You cannot have Obstruction if you have not committed a crime.

Asserting your rights and exercising your Constitutional Powers is NEVER OBSTRUCTION.

Right but at the time he was unsure what the SC would find. Either way someone needs to explain how he obstructed. People are dumb.

That's what makes having discussions on here frustrating. People on here are so uneducated, I feel like they have mental illness, or have a head injury. Almost impossible to have factual discussions about the topics.

They are dumb. Simple as that.

 

[BlindBoo]

Why is Congress not impeaching?

If I were a betting man I'd put my money on the optics of the impeachment of President Clinton.

You realize that one can only obstruct if there is a crime and there was no crime.

"Each of us believes that the conduct of President Trump described in Special Counsel Robert Mueller’s report would, in the case of any other person not covered by the Office of Legal Counsel policy against indicting a sitting President, result in multiple felony charges for obstruction of justice," according to the letter"

But there’s no evidence! In my country, you need that and intent

https://www.justice.gov/storage/report.pdf

Barr Says Mueller Was Wrong, 'Could've Reached a Decision' on Obstruction

"I personally felt he could’ve reached a decision Barr said during an interview with CBS on May 30. Barr said Mueller “had his reasons” for not making a recommendation but declined to explain, adding: “I’m not going to, you know, argue about those reasons.”

Not really a legal opinion from the AG. Certainly doesn't counter the facts Mueller provided even in the un-redacted version.

 

[AzogtheDefiler]

Why is Congress not impeaching?

If I were a betting man I'd put my money on the optics of the impeachment of President Clinton.

You realize that one can only obstruct if there is a crime and there was no crime.

"Each of us believes that the conduct of President Trump described in Special Counsel Robert Mueller’s report would, in the case of any other person not covered by the Office of Legal Counsel policy against indicting a sitting President, result in multiple felony charges for obstruction of justice," according to the letter"

But there’s no evidence! In my country, you need that and intent

https://www.justice.gov/storage/report.pdf

Barr Says Mueller Was Wrong, 'Could've Reached a Decision' on Obstruction

"I personally felt he could’ve reached a decision Barr said during an interview with CBS on May 30. Barr said Mueller “had his reasons” for not making a recommendation but declined to explain, adding: “I’m not going to, you know, argue about those reasons.”

Not really a legal opinion from the AG. Certainly doesn't counter the facts Mueller provided even in the un-redacted version.

Again. How did he obstruct? There was no conspiracy. So what did he obstruct? His innocence? He thought it was a witch hunt and Barr said he understood why.

 

[jc456]

That's my opinion just as yours is that he is innocent and the report specifically does not exonerate him. Anyway, I'm sure lots of people have come to the same conclusion, doesn't mean there shouldn't be an impeachment (trial) to get to the bottom of it.

You think Clinton is guilty of something or other so **** off.

The report exonerates him learn how the law works

although, mueller claimed in his statement that the report doesn't exonerate trump, that wasn't its purpose, it was to find him guilty and it didn't. so he failed to provide evidence of guilt. INNOCENT

Exactly

there is absolutely no other position one can take. to impeach is to impeach and innocent man. hmmmm go for it loons

But to them he is not innocent

no evidence, when did we become a fourth world country that dictates guilt?

 

[jc456]

Nancy agrees with me, no impeachment

So asking about obstruction and obstruction are the same thing? He asked and was advised not to do what he thought he could do. I read The report.

You cannot have Obstruction if you have not committed a crime.

Asserting your rights and exercising your Constitutional Powers is NEVER OBSTRUCTION.

Right but at the time he was unsure what the SC would find. Either way someone needs to explain how he obstructed. People are dumb.

That's what makes having discussions on here frustrating. People on here are so uneducated, I feel like they have mental illness, or have a head injury. Almost impossible to have factual discussions about the topics.

They are dumb. Simple as that.

it's called stupid, and they are kings and queens of stupid.

 

[jc456]

Why is Congress not impeaching?

If I were a betting man I'd put my money on the optics of the impeachment of President Clinton.

You realize that one can only obstruct if there is a crime and there was no crime.

"Each of us believes that the conduct of President Trump described in Special Counsel Robert Mueller’s report would, in the case of any other person not covered by the Office of Legal Counsel policy against indicting a sitting President, result in multiple felony charges for obstruction of justice," according to the letter"

But there’s no evidence! In my country, you need that and intent

https://www.justice.gov/storage/report.pdf

Barr Says Mueller Was Wrong, 'Could've Reached a Decision' on Obstruction

"I personally felt he could’ve reached a decision Barr said during an interview with CBS on May 30. Barr said Mueller “had his reasons” for not making a recommendation but declined to explain, adding: “I’m not going to, you know, argue about those reasons.”

Not really a legal opinion from the AG. Certainly doesn't counter the facts Mueller provided even in the un-redacted version.

well, he said he wasn't going to ask him why he didn't. What he said was he legally could. now, I give two shits left or right, but an innocent man under impeachment can't be a good thing for our country, unless you feel your country should abandon innocent until proven guilty. you tell me.

 

[The Original Tree]

So anyone with a brain can see that Mueller and his team WERE NEVER HIRED TO GET TO THE TRUTH.

They completely avoided all Russian Connections that went through Podesta, Obama, Clinton, and The Russian Dossier.

The Mueller Team was formed as Political Assassins to destroy The President.

They failed because its extremely hard to frame an innocent man that has the resources and will to fight you.

 

[BlindBoo]

At least with that Starr listed 11 Crimes Clinton Committed, and it was criminal activity that started the investigation.

Know what Mueller listed as Crimes Committed by Trump recommended for indictment?

One more time. Starr was working under Congress and reported directly to Congress and was not constrained by DOJ legal opinions.

So let's get it on. Impeach President Trump.

Okay, let the pubic impeachment inquiries begin as soon as Congress receives it's un-redacted copy of the Mueller report and has a chance to review it. That doesn't mean they have to vote yes to impeach him of course.

It's against The Law to reveal Grand Jury Testimony Chump.

And you know that.

99% of the Report was given to you and Barr did not have to give you any of it.

Go **** your treasonous hairy man butt loving selves.

Yes there is a process they must go through to get the Grand Jury information. A judge can release the information.

What is it with you and ******* hairymanbutt?

Are you repressing?

 

[Siete]

THE EVIDENCE OF OBSTRUCTION IS SITTING IN PRISON - OR WAITING TO GO TO PRISON.

THE END.

 

[jc456]

QUOTE="The Original Tree, post: 22473702, member: 60550"]So anyone with a brain can see that Mueller and his team WERE NEVER HIRED TO GET TO THE TRUTH.

They completely avoided all Russian Connections that went through Podesta, Obama, Clinton, and The Russian Dossier.

The Mueller Team was formed as Political Assassins to destroy The President.

They failed because its extremely hard to frame an innocent man that has the resources and will to fight you.[/QUOTE]

ahh shit tree, you did it again....EXACTLY^^^^^^

 

[jc456]

At least with that Starr listed 11 Crimes Clinton Committed, and it was criminal activity that started the investigation.

Know what Mueller listed as Crimes Committed by Trump recommended for indictment?

One more time. Starr was working under Congress and reported directly to Congress and was not constrained by DOJ legal opinions.

So let's get it on. Impeach President Trump.

Okay, let the pubic impeachment inquiries begin as soon as Congress receives it's un-redacted copy of the Mueller report and has a chance to review it. That doesn't mean they have to vote yes to impeach him of course.

It's against The Law to reveal Grand Jury Testimony Chump.

And you know that.

99% of the Report was given to you and Barr did not have to give you any of it.

Go **** your treasonous hairy man butt loving selves.

Yes there is a process they must go through to get the Grand Jury information. A judge can release the information.

What is it with you and ******* hairymanbutt?

Are you repressing?

well actually, no an individual judge cannot, the SCOTUS can.