If Mueller would have 'had the goods' on Trump he would have indicted him.

[danielpalos]

any implied right wing fantasy works for the right wing. a DOJ special counsel simply cannot charge his "boss" since it is a Constitutionally provided for issue and should require Congress and a Congressional special counsel.

So why is Pelosi refusing to install one?

Is she a Secret Russian Agent?

They already have the special counsel report. In my opinion, they merely need to Inquire into foreign involvement in our foreign affairs.

Impeachment is the process by which a legislative body levels charges against a government official. It does not mean removal from office; it is only a statement of charges, akin to an indictment in criminal law. Once an individual is impeached, he or she must then face the possibility of conviction by a legislative vote, which judgment entails removal from office.--Impeachment - Wikipedia

The Senate shall have the sole Power to try all Impeachments. When sitting for that Purpose, they shall be on Oath or Affirmation. When the President of the United States is tried, the Chief Justice shall preside: And no Person shall be convicted without the Concurrence of two thirds of the Members present.

Besides, this is a political process and we already know there are not enough morals to go around on the right wing.

 

[boedicca]

He himself denied that was the reason for his decision in front of witnesses three ******* times.

You imbeciles are totally ******* shameless when it comes to lying.

This is Mueller saying it right here..
You claim that Mueller denied saying what he just said here?

He said precisely the opposite in front of witnesses three ******* times, shit for brains.

I showed you a video of Mueller saying that if he had confidence the president hadnt committed a crime, he would have said so.
You claim he said the opposite, but you have nothing to back it up. Play the tapes.

Mueller Takes a Parting Shot at the President, Reinvigorating Dems’ Impeachment Efforts | Conservative Angle

Mueller’s comments regarding his team’s conclusion on obstruction seemed to contradict Attorney General William Barr’s assertion last month that Mueller told him that he “was not saying that but for the OLC opinion, he would have found a crime.”

During a press conference on April 18, Barr noted that there were two other Justice Department officials with him when Mueller “made it clear” that that was not his position.

I would leave it to his description in the report, the special counsel’s own articulation of why he did not want to make a determination as to whether or not there was an obstruction offense.

But I will say that when we met with him, Deputy Attorney General Rosenstein and I met with him, along with Ed o’Callaghan, who is the principal associate deputy, on March 5th. We specifically asked him about the OLC opinion and whether or not he was taking a position that he would have found a crime but for the existence of the OLC opinion. And he made it very clear several times that that was not his position. He was not saying that but for the OLC opinion, he would have found a crime. He made it clear that he had not made the determination that there was a crime.

The discrepancy between Mueller’s remarks Wednesday, and what Barr says he and two other top DOJ officials heard in April, is glaring, to say the least.​

You're relying on Barr's account of what Mueller said.
But, since Barr lied to congress, can anything Barr says be trusted?

We can only trust what Mueller actually said.

Your acquaintance with reality is non-existent.

In Realityland, Trump thwarted a coup attempt orchestrated by the Losing Losers Who Lost in 2016.

 

[danielpalos]

Mueller did in fact follow the OLC decision on indicting sitting president.

Mueller's job was to "recommend" indictments on Trump or his campaign members if anyone had committed a crime.

Trump is innocent.

Grow up.

not as a DOJ special counsel.

we need a Congressional special counsel, for that.

 

[dudmuck]

This is Mueller saying it right here..
You claim that Mueller denied saying what he just said here?

He said precisely the opposite in front of witnesses three ******* times, shit for brains.

I showed you a video of Mueller saying that if he had confidence the president hadnt committed a crime, he would have said so.
You claim he said the opposite, but you have nothing to back it up. Play the tapes.

Mueller Takes a Parting Shot at the President, Reinvigorating Dems’ Impeachment Efforts | Conservative Angle

Mueller’s comments regarding his team’s conclusion on obstruction seemed to contradict Attorney General William Barr’s assertion last month that Mueller told him that he “was not saying that but for the OLC opinion, he would have found a crime.”

During a press conference on April 18, Barr noted that there were two other Justice Department officials with him when Mueller “made it clear” that that was not his position.

I would leave it to his description in the report, the special counsel’s own articulation of why he did not want to make a determination as to whether or not there was an obstruction offense.

But I will say that when we met with him, Deputy Attorney General Rosenstein and I met with him, along with Ed o’Callaghan, who is the principal associate deputy, on March 5th. We specifically asked him about the OLC opinion and whether or not he was taking a position that he would have found a crime but for the existence of the OLC opinion. And he made it very clear several times that that was not his position. He was not saying that but for the OLC opinion, he would have found a crime. He made it clear that he had not made the determination that there was a crime.

The discrepancy between Mueller’s remarks Wednesday, and what Barr says he and two other top DOJ officials heard in April, is glaring, to say the least.​

You're relying on Barr's account of what Mueller said.
But, since Barr lied to congress, can anything Barr says be trusted?

We can only trust what Mueller actually said.

Your acquaintance with reality is non-existent.

In Realityland, Trump thwarted a coup attempt orchestrated by the Losing Losers Who Lost in 2016.

Was Donald Trump the target of a coup? No

 

[boedicca]

He said precisely the opposite in front of witnesses three ******* times, shit for brains.

I showed you a video of Mueller saying that if he had confidence the president hadnt committed a crime, he would have said so.
You claim he said the opposite, but you have nothing to back it up. Play the tapes.

Mueller Takes a Parting Shot at the President, Reinvigorating Dems’ Impeachment Efforts | Conservative Angle

Mueller’s comments regarding his team’s conclusion on obstruction seemed to contradict Attorney General William Barr’s assertion last month that Mueller told him that he “was not saying that but for the OLC opinion, he would have found a crime.”

During a press conference on April 18, Barr noted that there were two other Justice Department officials with him when Mueller “made it clear” that that was not his position.

I would leave it to his description in the report, the special counsel’s own articulation of why he did not want to make a determination as to whether or not there was an obstruction offense.

But I will say that when we met with him, Deputy Attorney General Rosenstein and I met with him, along with Ed o’Callaghan, who is the principal associate deputy, on March 5th. We specifically asked him about the OLC opinion and whether or not he was taking a position that he would have found a crime but for the existence of the OLC opinion. And he made it very clear several times that that was not his position. He was not saying that but for the OLC opinion, he would have found a crime. He made it clear that he had not made the determination that there was a crime.

The discrepancy between Mueller’s remarks Wednesday, and what Barr says he and two other top DOJ officials heard in April, is glaring, to say the least.​

You're relying on Barr's account of what Mueller said.
But, since Barr lied to congress, can anything Barr says be trusted?

We can only trust what Mueller actually said.

Your acquaintance with reality is non-existent.

In Realityland, Trump thwarted a coup attempt orchestrated by the Losing Losers Who Lost in 2016.

Was Donald Trump the target of a coup? No

BZZZZZZTTTTT!!!!!!

Wrong. You lose.

The fact that there was a coup attempt is why the Progs are so desperate to interfere with Barr's investigations.

 

[dudmuck]

I showed you a video of Mueller saying that if he had confidence the president hadnt committed a crime, he would have said so.
You claim he said the opposite, but you have nothing to back it up. Play the tapes.

Mueller Takes a Parting Shot at the President, Reinvigorating Dems’ Impeachment Efforts | Conservative Angle

Mueller’s comments regarding his team’s conclusion on obstruction seemed to contradict Attorney General William Barr’s assertion last month that Mueller told him that he “was not saying that but for the OLC opinion, he would have found a crime.”

During a press conference on April 18, Barr noted that there were two other Justice Department officials with him when Mueller “made it clear” that that was not his position.

I would leave it to his description in the report, the special counsel’s own articulation of why he did not want to make a determination as to whether or not there was an obstruction offense.

But I will say that when we met with him, Deputy Attorney General Rosenstein and I met with him, along with Ed o’Callaghan, who is the principal associate deputy, on March 5th. We specifically asked him about the OLC opinion and whether or not he was taking a position that he would have found a crime but for the existence of the OLC opinion. And he made it very clear several times that that was not his position. He was not saying that but for the OLC opinion, he would have found a crime. He made it clear that he had not made the determination that there was a crime.

The discrepancy between Mueller’s remarks Wednesday, and what Barr says he and two other top DOJ officials heard in April, is glaring, to say the least.​

You're relying on Barr's account of what Mueller said.
But, since Barr lied to congress, can anything Barr says be trusted?

We can only trust what Mueller actually said.

Your acquaintance with reality is non-existent.

In Realityland, Trump thwarted a coup attempt orchestrated by the Losing Losers Who Lost in 2016.

Was Donald Trump the target of a coup? No

BZZZZZZTTTTT!!!!!!

Wrong. You lose.

The fact that there was a coup attempt is why the Progs are so desperate to interfere with Barr's investigations.

The Mueller report does describe a "coup": Dozens of Trump government officials not doing what Trump demands.

The coup is against Trump, largely and mostly by his own party and people he hired himself, it's not against the government itself (even if Trump think he is the government)

I can see how Trump thinks it's from people outside of his inner circles, but it's not and he is projecting again.

 

[Toddsterpatriot]

Mueller did in fact follow the OLC decision on indicting sitting president.

Mueller's job was to "recommend" indictments on Trump or his campaign members if anyone had committed a crime.

Trump is innocent.

Grow up.

not as a DOJ special counsel.

we need a Congressional special counsel, for that.

we need a Congressional special counsel,

No such thing.

 

[easyt65]

Barr lied to Charlie Crist when asked about being aware of any concerns that Mueller’s investigators might have expressed about his four-page summary of Mueller’s findings.Mueller himself wrote to the attorney general, saying he was worried that Barr’s summary “threatens to undermine ... public confidence” in the Russia probe. Mueller: You misrepresented what I wrote in my report.

I asked for a quote - here, allow me to provide the ENTIRE exchange between Mueller and the US AG, to get the full context of their conversation and the full story:


1. Mueller's initial letter / communication with the US AG in regards to the US AG's summary of his report:

“The summary letter the Department sent to Congress and released to the public late in the afternoon of March 24 did not fully capture the context, nature, and substance of this office’s work and conclusions,” Mueller wrote. “There is now public confusion about critical aspects of the results of our investigation. This threatens to undermine a central purpose for which the Department appointed the Special Counsel: to assure full public confidence in the outcome of the investigations.”


Mueller was tasked with investigating and filing a report stating there was a crime committed or there was NOT. Mueller made clear in the 1st half of his report there was no crime of collusion and that he refused to / could not / would not make a decision regarding obstruction.

-- In the US every American is presumed INNOCENT until PROVEN GUILTY in a COURT OF LAW. Mueller FAILED to prove Guilt. Mueller chose to allow OTHERS to make that decision. Barr did NOT misrepresent Mueller's NOT finding / ruling President Trump was guilty of obstruction - Mueller did not do so.

What Mueller objected to is the Fact that Barr withheld all of Mueller's additional narrative that was meant to incite the Trump-hating Democrats into Impeaching the President!


EVIDENCE OF THIS?

2. A day after Mueller sent his letter to Barr, the two men spoke by phone for about 15 minutes, according to law enforcement officials. In that call, Mueller said he was concerned that media coverage of the obstruction probe was misguided and creating public misunderstandings about the office’s work.

"When Barr pressed Mueller on whether he thought Barr’s memo to Congress was inaccurate, “In a cordial and professional conversation, the Special Counsel emphasized that nothing in the Attorney General’s March 24 letter was inaccurate or misleading. But, he did express frustration over the lack of context and the resulting media coverage regarding the Special Counsel’s obstruction analysis."

Again, Mueller expressed frustration NOT over the summary of Barr's conclusion of his report but instead over Barr's omission of his 2nd page analysis of his own investigation / observations / beliefs.

-- Mueller was NOT appointed Special Counsel to give opinionated commentary AFTER his declaration that a crime had been committed or not - and his decision was that he would NOT make that call one way or the other (failure to declare / find guilt). His personal views AFTER his decision was given, an analysis that was meant to incite Democrats to begin Impeachment proceedings, was NOT part of his tasked assignment and thus did not need to be expressed.


Let me post this one more time for you and the other triggered / disgruntled snowflakes who continue to spew the false narrative that Barr lied about what Mueller really said:

“In a cordial and professional conversation, the Special Counsel emphasized that nothing in the Attorney General’s March 24 letter was inaccurate or misleading."


https://www.washingtonpost.com/worl...e9-a66d-a82d3f3d96d5_story.html?noredirect=on

.

 

[dudmuck]

Barr lied to Charlie Crist when asked about being aware of any concerns that Mueller’s investigators might have expressed about his four-page summary of Mueller’s findings.Mueller himself wrote to the attorney general, saying he was worried that Barr’s summary “threatens to undermine ... public confidence” in the Russia probe. Mueller: You misrepresented what I wrote in my report.

I asked for a quote - here, allow me to provide the ENTIRE exchange between Mueller and the US AG, to get the full context of their conversation and the full story:


1. Mueller's initial letter / communication with the US AG in regards to the US AG's summary of his report:

“The summary letter the Department sent to Congress and released to the public late in the afternoon of March 24 did not fully capture the context, nature, and substance of this office’s work and conclusions,” Mueller wrote. “There is now public confusion about critical aspects of the results of our investigation. This threatens to undermine a central purpose for which the Department appointed the Special Counsel: to assure full public confidence in the outcome of the investigations.”


Mueller was tasked with investigating and filing a report stating there was a crime committed or there was NOT. Mueller made clear in the 1st half of his report there was no crime of collusion and that he refused to / could not / would not make a decision regarding obstruction.

-- In the US every American is presumed INNOCENT until PROVEN GUILTY in a COURT OF LAW. Mueller FAILED to prove Guilt. Mueller chose to allow OTHERS to make that decision. Barr did NOT misrepresent Mueller's NOT finding / ruling President Trump was guilty of obstruction - Mueller did not do so.

What Mueller objected to is the Fact that Barr withheld all of Mueller's additional narrative that was meant to incite the Trump-hating Democrats into Impeaching the President!


EVIDENCE OF THIS?

2. A day after Mueller sent his letter to Barr, the two men spoke by phone for about 15 minutes, according to law enforcement officials. In that call, Mueller said he was concerned that media coverage of the obstruction probe was misguided and creating public misunderstandings about the office’s work.

"When Barr pressed Mueller on whether he thought Barr’s memo to Congress was inaccurate, “In a cordial and professional conversation, the Special Counsel emphasized that nothing in the Attorney General’s March 24 letter was inaccurate or misleading. But, he did express frustration over the lack of context and the resulting media coverage regarding the Special Counsel’s obstruction analysis."

Again, Mueller expressed frustration NOT over the summary of Barr's conclusion of his report but instead over Barr's omission of his 2nd page analysis of his own investigation / observations / beliefs.

-- Mueller was NOT appointed Special Counsel to give opinionated commentary AFTER his declaration that a crime had been committed or not - and his decision was that he would NOT make that call one way or the other (failure to declare / find guilt). His personal views AFTER his decision was given, an analysis that was meant to incite Democrats to begin Impeachment proceedings, was NOT part of his tasked assignment and thus did not need to be expressed.


Let me post this one more time for you and the other triggered / disgruntled snowflakes who continue to spew the false narrative that Barr lied about what Mueller really said:

“In a cordial and professional conversation, the Special Counsel emphasized that nothing in the Attorney General’s March 24 letter was inaccurate or misleading."


https://www.washingtonpost.com/worl...e9-a66d-a82d3f3d96d5_story.html?noredirect=on

.

this "the Special Counsel emphasized that nothing in the Attorney General’s March 24 letter was inaccurate or misleading." is from the DOJ spokeswoman. Not from Mueller.
The only source of what Mueller says is from Mueller.

Mueller actually said, "you did not fully capture" my report.

 

[bripat9643]

He said precisely the opposite in front of witnesses three ******* times, shit for brains.

I showed you a video of Mueller saying that if he had confidence the president hadnt committed a crime, he would have said so.
You claim he said the opposite, but you have nothing to back it up. Play the tapes.

The issue under discussion, shit for brains, is his claim that he didn't make a determination solely because DOJ policy prevented him from doing so. That was clearly a lie since he told Barr in front of multiple witnesses that it wasn't the case.

Please quit lying. You're only making a fool of yourself.

No, Barr said he told him. And Barr has no cred on this anymore. Mueller's take on things have never changed. It's been dead on with the report and he has never deviated. Since you, obviously, haven't bothered to read the report, you are just parroting what your handlers tell you to say. In otherwords, you are repeating a lie. And repeating a lie over and over, it's still a lie. I read the Mueller Report, as painful as that was. And I know Mueller is shooting straight and Barr is lying out his ass.

He said it in front of multiple witnesses, shit for brains. He said exactly the opposite of what he said in his press conference. Mueller is talking out of both sides of his mouth.

You seem to believe that if you repeat a lie enough times it becomes the truth. Newsflash: It never does.

It's so eerie the way everything leftwingers accuse you of is exactly what they are guilty of.

 

[bripat9643]

He himself denied that was the reason for his decision in front of witnesses three ******* times.

You imbeciles are totally ******* shameless when it comes to lying.

This is Mueller saying it right here..
You claim that Mueller denied saying what he just said here?

He said precisely the opposite in front of witnesses three ******* times, shit for brains.

I showed you a video of Mueller saying that if he had confidence the president hadnt committed a crime, he would have said so.
You claim he said the opposite, but you have nothing to back it up. Play the tapes.

Mueller Takes a Parting Shot at the President, Reinvigorating Dems’ Impeachment Efforts | Conservative Angle

Mueller’s comments regarding his team’s conclusion on obstruction seemed to contradict Attorney General William Barr’s assertion last month that Mueller told him that he “was not saying that but for the OLC opinion, he would have found a crime.”

During a press conference on April 18, Barr noted that there were two other Justice Department officials with him when Mueller “made it clear” that that was not his position.

I would leave it to his description in the report, the special counsel’s own articulation of why he did not want to make a determination as to whether or not there was an obstruction offense.

But I will say that when we met with him, Deputy Attorney General Rosenstein and I met with him, along with Ed o’Callaghan, who is the principal associate deputy, on March 5th. We specifically asked him about the OLC opinion and whether or not he was taking a position that he would have found a crime but for the existence of the OLC opinion. And he made it very clear several times that that was not his position. He was not saying that but for the OLC opinion, he would have found a crime. He made it clear that he had not made the determination that there was a crime.

The discrepancy between Mueller’s remarks Wednesday, and what Barr says he and two other top DOJ officials heard in April, is glaring, to say the least.​

You're relying on Barr's account of what Mueller said.
But, since Barr lied to congress, can anything Barr says be trusted?

We can only trust what Mueller actually said.

When did Barr lie to Congress? Why don't they indict him for lying to Congress?

 

[bripat9643]

Mueller did in fact follow the OLC decision on indicting sitting president.

Snowflakes need to learn that saying, "If we had confidence that the President did not commit a crime we would have said so' is NOT the same thing as officially reporting, "The President of the United States committed a crime!"

The fact is Mueller never had any evidence that a crime was ever committed involving the President or anyone associated with him that warranted an investigation being opened or a Special Counsel being appointed...

That is why not 1 single person was ever indicted / convicted of illegal collusion or Obstruction as a result of Mueller's investigation.

That is why Mueller was forced to broadcast his innuendoes and insinuations of possible crimes having been committed in an attempt to incite Trump-hating Democrats into initiating Impeachment proceedings to do what he and his team of 19 hand-picked DNC/Hillary supporters and donors could not do - take down the President.

That is also why Mueller declared he refuses to testify or answer questions about his investigation under oath before Congress.

There are plenty of crimes in the mueller report.
These are the top 10 crimes.

The reason Mueller doesnt want to testify is because he'll just say the same stuff thats in his report. Personally, I think he should testify. He just wants to avoid political spectacle.

Mueller didn't prove beyond any doubt that Biden didn't commit pedophilia either.

In America citizens are innocent until proven otherwise.

Clearly you'd be happier in NAZI Germany, the USSR, or some other Progressive Shithole that doesn't have a Bill of Rights

These leftwing scum who believe Trump is guilty until proven innocent should all be deported.

Yes, deport me to the United States. I'll gladly leave whatever hell hole you live in and go back to America. It's just going to take a little time to get there.

We're going to deport you to Mexico, the country you admire so much.

 

[basquebromance]

either Mueller is stupid or deliberately lying, and the smart money is on deliberately lying!

 

[easyt65]

"The summary letter the Department sent to Congress and released to the public late in the afternoon of March 24 did not fully capture the context, nature, and substance of this office’s work and conclusions," Mueller wrote in the letter on March 27

I will type this slower this time so you can keep up / fully comprehend what SPECIAL COUNSEL MUELLER said:


“In a cordial and professional conversation, the Special Counsel emphasized that nothing in the Attorney General’s March 24 letter was inaccurate or misleading."


That's right - MUELLER himself stated US AG Barr DID NOT misrepresent his Report Bottom Line / Conclusion!

Mueller was just pissed that all that time and effort he and his team put into writing that 2nd page analysis, intended to 'stir the pot' and incite Trump-hating Democrats in the House to begin Impeachment proceedings, was all for nothing - at 1st - because US AG Barr saw no need to reveal anything but Mueller & his team's bottom-line final decision that no crime of collusion was found and that they chose NOT to make a ruling either way on obstruction!

NO MISREPRESENTATION OF MUELLER'S & HIS TEAM'S DECISION - JUST PISSED BARR LEFT OUT HIS UNNECCESSARY ANALYSIS THAT WAS MEANT TO INCITE!

 

[The Purge]

Watch Robert Mueller Tell Congress His Investigation Shows Iraq has WMD....He lied then....he lies now!

 

[easyt65]

this "the Special Counsel emphasized that nothing in the Attorney General’s March 24 letter was inaccurate or misleading." is from the DOJ spokeswoman. Not from Mueller. The only source of what Mueller says is from Mueller. Mueller actually said, "you did not fully capture" my report.

Again, YOU are the only one who wants to 'cherry-pick' one or two comments, using them out of context by doing so, instead of the entire communication between the 2 in an attempt to promote / defend your un-proven / false narrative.

Mueller was pissed that his entire report - to include his analysis consisting of events that failed to help him come to a conclusion of guilt or innocence - was not released so that Trump-hating Democrats could use that analysis to push for Impeachment. In the end, he got his way, and that analysis was released....and that information did NOT change his decision in any way regarding his decision to NOT make a ruling on guilt or not.

Mueller's final report decision remained unchanged - NO DECISION OF GUILT OR INNOCENSE REGARDING OBSTRUCTION.

The only source of what Mueller says is from Mueller

Fortunately for snowflakes and Trump-hating Democrats, Mueller refuses to testify under oath and to answer questions about his investigation and final report decision, allowing them to continue to spread their false narrative. Until Mueller is subpoenaed and forced to testify and answer questions under oath before Congress, all snowflakes have is their own continued opinionated defense of Mueller and their interpretation of what he really meant.

In the meantime, his report's final decision stands: NO collusion, NO decision of Guilt of obstruction...and again, in this country Americans are presumed innocent until PROVEN guilty in a court of law.
--- You snowflakes should have learned that lesson form your failed attempt to declare Kavanaugh was 'Guilty until PROVEN INNOCENT' and that the burden of proof was / is on the ACCUSED instead of the accusers!

 

[bripat9643]

He himself denied that was the reason for his decision in front of witnesses three ******* times.

You imbeciles are totally ******* shameless when it comes to lying.

This is Mueller saying it right here..
You claim that Mueller denied saying what he just said here?

He said precisely the opposite in front of witnesses three ******* times, shit for brains.

I showed you a video of Mueller saying that if he had confidence the president hadnt committed a crime, he would have said so.
You claim he said the opposite, but you have nothing to back it up. Play the tapes.

Mueller Takes a Parting Shot at the President, Reinvigorating Dems’ Impeachment Efforts | Conservative Angle

Mueller’s comments regarding his team’s conclusion on obstruction seemed to contradict Attorney General William Barr’s assertion last month that Mueller told him that he “was not saying that but for the OLC opinion, he would have found a crime.”

During a press conference on April 18, Barr noted that there were two other Justice Department officials with him when Mueller “made it clear” that that was not his position.

I would leave it to his description in the report, the special counsel’s own articulation of why he did not want to make a determination as to whether or not there was an obstruction offense.

But I will say that when we met with him, Deputy Attorney General Rosenstein and I met with him, along with Ed o’Callaghan, who is the principal associate deputy, on March 5th. We specifically asked him about the OLC opinion and whether or not he was taking a position that he would have found a crime but for the existence of the OLC opinion. And he made it very clear several times that that was not his position. He was not saying that but for the OLC opinion, he would have found a crime. He made it clear that he had not made the determination that there was a crime.

The discrepancy between Mueller’s remarks Wednesday, and what Barr says he and two other top DOJ officials heard in April, is glaring, to say the least.​

You're relying on Barr's account of what Mueller said.
But, since Barr lied to congress, can anything Barr says be trusted?

We can only trust what Mueller actually said.

There were multiple witnesses to what Mueller said, shit for brains. Why should anyone trust that lying douchebag Mueller?

 

[bripat9643]

He himself denied that was the reason for his decision in front of witnesses three ******* times.

You imbeciles are totally ******* shameless when it comes to lying.

This is Mueller saying it right here..
You claim that Mueller denied saying what he just said here?

He said precisely the opposite in front of witnesses three ******* times, shit for brains.

I showed you a video of Mueller saying that if he had confidence the president hadnt committed a crime, he would have said so.
You claim he said the opposite, but you have nothing to back it up. Play the tapes.

Mueller Takes a Parting Shot at the President, Reinvigorating Dems’ Impeachment Efforts | Conservative Angle

Mueller’s comments regarding his team’s conclusion on obstruction seemed to contradict Attorney General William Barr’s assertion last month that Mueller told him that he “was not saying that but for the OLC opinion, he would have found a crime.”

During a press conference on April 18, Barr noted that there were two other Justice Department officials with him when Mueller “made it clear” that that was not his position.

I would leave it to his description in the report, the special counsel’s own articulation of why he did not want to make a determination as to whether or not there was an obstruction offense.

But I will say that when we met with him, Deputy Attorney General Rosenstein and I met with him, along with Ed o’Callaghan, who is the principal associate deputy, on March 5th. We specifically asked him about the OLC opinion and whether or not he was taking a position that he would have found a crime but for the existence of the OLC opinion. And he made it very clear several times that that was not his position. He was not saying that but for the OLC opinion, he would have found a crime. He made it clear that he had not made the determination that there was a crime.

The discrepancy between Mueller’s remarks Wednesday, and what Barr says he and two other top DOJ officials heard in April, is glaring, to say the least.​

You're relying on Barr's account of what Mueller said.
But, since Barr lied to congress, can anything Barr says be trusted?

We can only trust what Mueller actually said.

When did Barr lie to Congress?

 

[bripat9643]

Actually, Mueller said that because he couldn't prove Trump's intent or motive, he wasn't able to bring charges against him, but he also said that the report does not exonerate him either.

So he's guilty until proven innocent? Trump haters are fundamentally unamerican. They reject fundamental American values, like the principles of justice.

Trump supporters fundamentally hate the Constitution and the rule of law. You show that every day you post you hate and bike against the left.

Hating the left is as American as you can get. The left is America's enemy.

 

[Billy_Bob]

any implied right wing fantasy works for the right wing. a DOJ special counsel simply cannot charge his "boss" since it is a Constitutionally provided for issue and should require Congress and a Congressional special counsel.

Forgetting for a minute that US AG Barr testified under oath (something Mueller refuses to do to avoid perjury / answering any questions about his investigation and role in it) that Mueller told him on 3 separate occasions that the OLC's decision PLAYED NO PART in his own investigation and final decision....


"If President Trump actually committed a crime, there is nothing in the OLC’s opinion that would have prevented the special counsel or the attorney general from saying so.

The most relevant concern the OLC raises is that an indictment “exposes the President to an official pronouncement that there is probable cause to believe he committed a criminal act,” which could impair “his credibility in carrying out his constitutional responsibilities.”

A special counsel’s private report to the attorney general ran no such risk, especially since Barr was under no legal obligation to make Mueller’s report public. Special counsels don’t issue indictments – grand juries do.

That’s why the last man with responsibilities similar to Mueller’s – Independent Counsel Ken Starr – had no qualms writing definitively about findings of criminal wrongdoing by the subject of his investigation, President Bill Clinton.

“The Office of Independent Counsel (OIC) hereby submits substantial and credible information that President /Clinton obstructed justice … the President lied under oath to the grand jury and obstructed justice,” Starr wrote, along with dozens of other unambiguous determinations that President Clinton had committed crimes.

The idea that the OLC somehow stopped Mueller from doing the same thing is absurd."

Joe diGenova: Mueller wants Americans to believe Trump is a criminal and it's up to Congress to impeach him


Mueller's theatrical performance yesterday - safely holding a press conference where he could say anything he wanted to without risk or repercussion instead of under oath testifying before Congress - amounted to a political 'drive-by' intended to 'stir the pot' / to incite Trump-hating Democrats in the House to begin Impeachment proceedings, to accomplish what he could NOT do - take down Trump!

Mueller is a liar and fraud who knew for 18 months there was NO Collusion and that his investigation was a fraud. This is why he refuses to testify under oath. He was part of The Insurance Policy. James Comey even said so. Comey intentionally committed crimes to get Bob Mueller appointed., and Bob Mueller, only. He did not want anyone else, because they might turn out to be Non-partisan. He did not have to risk that with Bob Mueller.

You know, there's pretty much no evidence that Trump has ties to Russia, except for the...

Flynn Thing
Manafort Thing
Tillerson Thing
Sessions Thing
Kushner Thing
Wray Thing
Morgan, Lewis, & Bockius "Russian Law Firm of the Year" Thing
Carter Page Thing
Roger Stone Thing
Felix Sater Thing
Boris Epshteyn Thing
Rosneft Thing
Gazprom Thing
Sergey Gorkov banker Thing
Azerbaijan Thing
"I Love Putin" Thing
Lavrov Thing
Sergey Kislyak Thing
Oval Office Thing
Gingrich Kislyak Phone Calls Thing
Russian Business Interest Thing
Emoluments Clause Thing
Alex Schnaider Thing
Hack of the DNC Thing

Guccifer 2.0 Thing
Mike Pence "I don't know anything" Thing
Russians Mysteriously Dying Thing
Trump's public request to Russia to hack Hillary's email Thing
Trump house sale for $100 million at the bottom of the housing bust to the Russian fertilizer king Thing
Russian fertilizer king's plane showing up in Concord, NC during Trump rally campaign Thing
Nunes sudden flight to the White House in the night Thing
Nunes personal investments in the Russian winery Thing
Cyprus bank Thing
Trump not Releasing his Tax Returns Thing
the Republican Party's rejection of an amendment to require Trump to show his taxes thing
Election Hacking Thing
GOP platform change to the Ukraine Thing
Steele Dossier Thing
Sally Yates Can't Testify Thing
Intelligence Community's Investigative Reports Thing
Trump reassurance that the Russian connection is all "fake news" Thing
Chaffetz not willing to start an Investigation Thing
Chaffetz suddenly deciding to go back to private life in the middle of an investigation Thing
Appointment of Pam Bondi who was bribed by Trump in the Trump University scandal appointed to head the investigation Thing The White House going into cover-up mode, refusing to turn over the documents related to the hiring and firing of Flynn Thing
Chaffetz and White House blaming the poor vetting of Flynn on Obama Thing
Poland and British intelligence gave information regarding the hacking back in 2015 to Paul Ryan and he didn't do anything Thing
Agent M16 following the money thing
Trump team KNEW about Flynn's involvement but hired him anyway Thing
Let's Fire Comey Thing
Election night Russian trademark gifts Things
Russian diplomatic compound electronic equipment destruction Thing
let's give back the diplomatic compounds back to the Russians Thing
Let's Back Away From Cuba Thing
Donny Jr met with Russians Thing
Donny Jr emails details "Russian Government's support for Trump" Thing
Trump's secret second meeting with his boss Putin Thing

The Trump tweet admitting Russia helped get him elected Thing

A bunch of 'things' that are all lies, concocted stories, and utter bull shit...