If not investigating “OBSTRUCTION”...there is no valid opinion on “OBSTRUCTION”....Simple shit

[BrokeLoser]

“While investigating DaShawn’s murder charge we learned that he may have run a red light once.”

Come on desperate, ignorant fools....Trump was not investigated for “OBSTRUCTION OF JUSTICE”.

 

[Mortis]

Come on desperate, ignorant fools....Trump was not investigated for “OBSTRUCTION OF JUSTICE”.

Thank you!

 

[Care4all]

Mueller did investigate Obstruction of Justice/Obstruction of an official Investigation? Why did you say he did not?


Read the full transcript of Mueller's statement on the Russia investigation

That is also a reason we investigated efforts to obstruct the investigation. The matters we investigated were of paramount importance. It was critical for us to obtain full and accurate information from every person we questioned. When a subject of an investigation obstructs that investigation or lies to investigators, it strikes at the core of the government’s effort to find the truth and hold wrongdoers accountable.

 

[Mortis]

Mueller did investigate Obstruction of Justice/Obstruction of an official Investigation? Why did you say he did not?

“We were frankly surprised that they were not going to reach a decision on obstruction and we asked them a lot about the reasoning behind this. Mueller stated three times to us in that meeting, in response to our questioning, that he emphatically was not saying that but for the OLC opinion he would have found obstruction.”

The special counsel created the impression that Trump might have engaged in wrongdoing because he could not prove otherwise.

 

[Rambunctious]

Mueller is part of the coup...after today there is no doubt in my mind....and the coup is ongoing.....

 

[Dekster]

“While investigating DaShawn’s murder charge we learned that he may have run a red light once.”

Come on desperate, ignorant fools....Trump was not investigated for “OBSTRUCTION OF JUSTICE”.

Perhaps if the democrats were saying "We should investigate the possibility" instead of going straight to "We must start Impeachment Hearings" they would have some credibility on this. This is premature ejaculation # 10,111 by the DNC since he took office.

 

[Mortis]

Perhaps if the democrats were saying "We should investigate the possibility" instead of going straight to "We must start Impeachment Hearings" they would have some credibility on this. This is premature ejaculation # 10,111 by the DNC since he took office.

There are plausible scenarios under which it would be unambiguously imperative to get Trump out of office: if he were planning to launch a nuclear strike or an invasion against another country, for example. But under current circumstances, it’s far from obvious that impeachment would be the unalloyed good that some Democrats seem to be imagining. If anything, I think there’s a significant possibility that we would be worse off after impeaching Trump. We should proceed with extreme caution, and not lose our heads in the event that there ends up being a sudden groundswell of support for the measure among Republican lawmakers. Rather than simply fantasizing about a World Without Trump, we have to soberly weigh the cons of a Trump presidency against the cons of a Trump removal. There are no good options here: there are only bad options, and worse options.

The first and most important consequence of a Trump removal is a Pence presidency. Some commentators are sanguine about this outcome, regarding Pence as a run-of-the-mill Republican politician who will likely be a steady hand at the wheel. In a Chicago Tribune article entitled “The liberal case for President Mike Pence,” Francis Wilkinson writesthat “the Indiana Republican is as dull and serviceable a politician as Trump is bizarre and broken,” adding that “I’m consistently perplexed when others don’t share my enthusiasm for the humdrum Hoosier.” Democrats who are eager for Trump’s impeachment, presumably, must feel similarly.

But we’d be stupid to underestimate the amount of damage a “humdrum” conservative can do.

 

[Dekster]

Perhaps if the democrats were saying "We should investigate the possibility" instead of going straight to "We must start Impeachment Hearings" they would have some credibility on this. This is premature ejaculation # 10,111 by the DNC since he took office.

There are plausible scenarios under which it would be unambiguously imperative to get Trump out of office: if he were planning to launch a nuclear strike or an invasion against another country, for example. But under current circumstances, it’s far from obvious that impeachment would be the unalloyed good that some Democrats seem to be imagining. If anything, I think there’s a significant possibility that we would be worse off after impeaching Trump. We should proceed with extreme caution, and not lose our heads in the event that there ends up being a sudden groundswell of support for the measure among Republican lawmakers. Rather than simply fantasizing about a World Without Trump, we have to soberly weigh the cons of a Trump presidency against the cons of a Trump removal. There are no good options here: there are only bad options, and worse options.

The first and most important consequence of a Trump removal is a Pence presidency. Some commentators are sanguine about this outcome, regarding Pence as a run-of-the-mill Republican politician who will likely be a steady hand at the wheel. In a Chicago Tribune article entitled “The liberal case for President Mike Pence,” Francis Wilkinson writesthat “the Indiana Republican is as dull and serviceable a politician as Trump is bizarre and broken,” adding that “I’m consistently perplexed when others don’t share my enthusiasm for the humdrum Hoosier.” Democrats who are eager for Trump’s impeachment, presumably, must feel similarly.

But we’d be stupid to underestimate the amount of damage a “humdrum” conservative can do.

Pence is a dyed in the wool conservative and would go hard right on social issues. That said, that is not the biggest problem for the DNC. The American public will not respond well to an impeachment drama with virtually no possibility of going to trial.

 

[Mortis]

Pence is a dyed in the wool conservative and would go hard right on social issues. That said, that is not the biggest problem for the DNC. The American public will not respond well to an impeachment drama with virtually no possibility of going to trial.

Right, I was only stating if Trump was to be impeached and removed from Office...Pence would eventually take over. I don't think the Democrats want to go down down that road.

 

[Dekster]

Pence is a dyed in the wool conservative and would go hard right on social issues. That said, that is not the biggest problem for the DNC. The American public will not respond well to an impeachment drama with virtually no possibility of going to trial.

Right, I was only stating if Trump was to be impeached and removed from Office...Pence would eventually take over. I don't think the Democrats want to go down down that road.

I think they do because it would fire up their base and rather than move toward the center, the DNC has this bizarre notion that they need to go further to the left and rely in more turnout from their base to get them across the finish line. The are in a partisan death spiral in that sense so there would be no convincing them to pull out.

 

[Nosmo King]

“While investigating DaShawn’s murder charge we learned that he may have run a red light once.”

Come on desperate, ignorant fools....Trump was not investigated for “OBSTRUCTION OF JUSTICE”.

What's volume II of the Mueller Report?

Ever read or, or are you just lazy enough to believe Barr's spin?

 

[BrokeLoser]

“While investigating DaShawn’s murder charge we learned that he may have run a red light once.”

Come on desperate, ignorant fools....Trump was not investigated for “OBSTRUCTION OF JUSTICE”.

What's volume II of the Mueller Report?

Ever read or, or are you just lazy enough to believe Barr's spin?

Barr”s spin?
Barr simply said it like it is...this shit isn’t complicated.
There was no collusion which is what was investigated. The obstruction allegation is nothing more than another desperate reach fabricated by the filth.
Obstruction can not be confirmed or denied since it was not what was investigated...Further, intent to obstruct would have to be proven....NOT ******* HAPPENING...sorry filth.

 

[Nosmo King]

“While investigating DaShawn’s murder charge we learned that he may have run a red light once.”

Come on desperate, ignorant fools....Trump was not investigated for “OBSTRUCTION OF JUSTICE”.

What's volume II of the Mueller Report?

Ever read or, or are you just lazy enough to believe Barr's spin?

Barr”s spin?
Barr simply said it like it is...this shit isn’t complicated.
There was no collusion which is what was investigated. The obstruction allegation is nothing more than another desperate reach fabricated by the filth.
Obstruction can not be confirmed or denied since it was not what was investigated...Further, intent to obstruct would have to be proven....NOT ******* HAPPENING...sorry filth.

Ah! It is incredibly complicated for anyone too lazy to read the report, fails to understand the law and remains captive to the mountain of lies told by this administration.

And I find it pathetic you would regard any of your fellow citizens as 'filth' when they are trying to uphold the constitution. Go now and mature.