easyt65
Diamond Member
- Aug 4, 2015
- 90,307
- 61,190
- 2,645
- Thread starter
- #21
Dude, you posted the fucking thing, didn't you read it?Nice claim / opinion...Lol, this "joint statement" actually says there is not difference between the two statements.That flatly contradicts Mueller's words. So Who is lying? Must have beenHilarious...Mueller's Office backtracked / issued a 'clarification' of what Mueller claimed in his 'Drive-By' press conference yesterday (and his report), contradicting his own statements while shooting a huge hole in the snowflake narrative of how Trump was not found / declared 'guilty' because of the OLC decision that sitting Presidents can not be indicted....
"Mueller refused to allege a crime. So evidence of something -- something that wasn’t prosecutable right now, and that Mueller refused to suggest amounted to a crime for the future. Mueller himself said the investigation was justified because perhaps it would have resulted in evidence that “could be used if there were co-conspirators who could be charged now.” But Mueller didn’t charge co-conspirators in obstruction."
"Mueller’s second justification is more obvious: he essentially said he was doing Congress’ impeachment groundwork for them. “The Constitution requires a process other than the criminal justice system to formally accuse a sitting president of wrongdoing,” Mueller stated. This is an invitation to impeachment."
"A criminal investigation that cannot possibly result in charges is a conflict in terms. Mueller never should have agreed to such an investigation under the law, and Mueller’s own standard makes that clear."
DOJ, Mueller’s Office Release Joint Statement Clarifying Mueller’s Comments
Mueller as Barr's statement is unchanged. I think Mueller just found himself in peril of legal recourse as he has already destroyed his legacy. Mueller will be known as a partisan hack.
From.your link:
The Special Counsel's report and his statement today made clear that the office concluded it would not reach a determination - one way or the other - about whether the President committed a crime. There is no conflict between these statements.
Sorry, my bad - I thought you meant it was saying the same thing as in Mueller's decision was based on the OCL decision, which it was not. My apologies.