Mueller's Team Speaking to Reporters

[Deno]

Trumpers have said that Mueller team members would speak out if they thought that Barr wasn't being straight with the American people. Well now they are

WASHINGTON — Some of Robert S. Mueller III’s investigators have told associates that Attorney General William P. Barr failed to adequately portray the findings of their inquiry and that they were more troubling for President Trump than Mr. Barr indicated, according to government officials and others familiar with their simmering frustrations.

NYT: Some on Mueller’s team see their findings more damaging for Trump

I see you are still paying attention to cnn and msnbctard…...

Tic Toc any day now you dumb ass Tard...….

 

[Jitss617]

Trumpers have said that Mueller team members would speak out if they thought that Barr wasn't being straight with the American people. Well now they are

WASHINGTON — Some of Robert S. Mueller III’s investigators have told associates that Attorney General William P. Barr failed to adequately portray the findings of their inquiry and that they were more troubling for President Trump than Mr. Barr indicated, according to government officials and others familiar with their simmering frustrations.

NYT: Some on Mueller’s team see their findings more damaging for Trump

You think all 60 are going to agree ..democrats are stupid

Now they ALL need to be interviewed.

Why

 

[The Purge]

 

[blackhawk]

As I understand it there were about 50 to 60 people on Mueller’s team the idea they would all see things the same way is silly.

 

[Mike473]

This is great news! I've been listening to it on CNN and MSNBC.

Some on Mueller’s Team Say Report Was More Damaging Than Revealed

Just setting things up for more Dem disappointment. Andy's plan failed. The insurance policy did not pay off.

 

[Bootney Lee Farnsworth]

Looks like this is their main bitch:

"The report's second part addresses a number of actions by the President – most of which have been the subject of public reporting – that the Special Counsel investigated as potentially raising obstruction-of-justice concerns. After making a “thorough factual investigation” into these matters, the Special Counsel considered whether to evaluate the conduct under Department standards governing prosecution and declination decisions but ultimately determined not to make a traditional prosecutorial judgment. The Special Counsel therefore did not draw a conclusion - one way or the other – as to whether the examined conduct constituted obstruction. Instead, for each of the relevant actions investigated, the report sets out evidence on both sides of the question and leaves unresolved what the Special Counsel views as “difficult issues” of law and fact concerning whether the President's actions and intent could be viewed as obstruction. The Special Counsel states that “while this report does not conclude that the President committed a crime, it also does not exonerate him.”

"The Special Counsel's decision to describe the facts of his obstruction investigation without reaching any legal conclusions leaves it to the Attorney General to determine whether the conduct described in the report constitutes a crime. Over the course of the investigation, the Special Counsel's office engaged in discussions with certain Department officials regarding many of the legal and factual matters at issue in the Special Counsel's obstruction investigation. After reviewing the Special Counsel's final report on these issues; consulting with Department officials, including the Office of Legal Counsel; and applying the principles of federal prosecution that guide our charging decisions, Deputy Attorney General Rod Rosenstein and I have concluded that the evidence developed during the Special Counsel's investigation is not sufficient to establish that the President committed an obstruction-of-justice offense. Our determination was made without regard to, and is not based on, the constitutional considerations that surround the indictment and criminal prosecution of a sitting president."

Read Attorney General William Barr’s Summary of the Mueller Report

So, Barr did not reach the conclusions they wanted on obstruction? That's it?




After saying these are difficult questions of law....bitch about Barr reaching conclusions they don't like?

..

We're done here.

...

 

[Lesh]

Better idea

Release the Report

 

[beagle9]

Trumpers have said that Mueller team members would speak out if they thought that Barr wasn't being straight with the American people. Well now they are

WASHINGTON — Some of Robert S. Mueller III’s investigators have told associates that Attorney General William P. Barr failed to adequately portray the findings of their inquiry and that they were more troubling for President Trump than Mr. Barr indicated, according to government officials and others familiar with their simmering frustrations.

NYT: Some on Mueller’s team see their findings more damaging for Trump

Oh you mean team Hillary, and the rest of the biased loaded Demon-crat team who wanted a devastating outcome, and yet Mueller robbed them of it ???? ROTFLMBO.

Now they are turning on Mueller ??? You can't make this bullcrap up I tell ya. LOL.

 

[Kondor3]

Looks like this is their main bitch:

"The report's second part addresses a number of actions by the President – most of which have been the subject of public reporting – that the Special Counsel investigated as potentially raising obstruction-of-justice concerns. After making a “thorough factual investigation” into these matters, the Special Counsel considered whether to evaluate the conduct under Department standards governing prosecution and declination decisions but ultimately determined not to make a traditional prosecutorial judgment. The Special Counsel therefore did not draw a conclusion - one way or the other – as to whether the examined conduct constituted obstruction. Instead, for each of the relevant actions investigated, the report sets out evidence on both sides of the question and leaves unresolved what the Special Counsel views as “difficult issues” of law and fact concerning whether the President's actions and intent could be viewed as obstruction. The Special Counsel states that “while this report does not conclude that the President committed a crime, it also does not exonerate him.”

"The Special Counsel's decision to describe the facts of his obstruction investigation without reaching any legal conclusions leaves it to the Attorney General to determine whether the conduct described in the report constitutes a crime. Over the course of the investigation, the Special Counsel's office engaged in discussions with certain Department officials regarding many of the legal and factual matters at issue in the Special Counsel's obstruction investigation. After reviewing the Special Counsel's final report on these issues; consulting with Department officials, including the Office of Legal Counsel; and applying the principles of federal prosecution that guide our charging decisions, Deputy Attorney General Rod Rosenstein and I have concluded that the evidence developed during the Special Counsel's investigation is not sufficient to establish that the President committed an obstruction-of-justice offense. Our determination was made without regard to, and is not based on, the constitutional considerations that surround the indictment and criminal prosecution of a sitting president."

Read Attorney General William Barr’s Summary of the Mueller Report

So, Barr did not reach the conclusions they wanted on obstruction? That's it?




After saying these are difficult questions of law....bitch about Barr reaching conclusions they don't like?

..

We're done here.

...

Barr is not to be trusted with this.

Time for the public to see both the Mueller Report and Trump's tax records.

Democratic Party -controlled major committees in the House of Representatives are now demanding to see both.

In accordance with United States law, and the Constitution itself.

 

[Bootney Lee Farnsworth]

Barr is not to be trusted with this.

Based on what?

Why don't these Mueller tools pipe up with specifics?

 

[Mike473]

Looks like this is their main bitch:

"The report's second part addresses a number of actions by the President – most of which have been the subject of public reporting – that the Special Counsel investigated as potentially raising obstruction-of-justice concerns. After making a “thorough factual investigation” into these matters, the Special Counsel considered whether to evaluate the conduct under Department standards governing prosecution and declination decisions but ultimately determined not to make a traditional prosecutorial judgment. The Special Counsel therefore did not draw a conclusion - one way or the other – as to whether the examined conduct constituted obstruction. Instead, for each of the relevant actions investigated, the report sets out evidence on both sides of the question and leaves unresolved what the Special Counsel views as “difficult issues” of law and fact concerning whether the President's actions and intent could be viewed as obstruction. The Special Counsel states that “while this report does not conclude that the President committed a crime, it also does not exonerate him.”

"The Special Counsel's decision to describe the facts of his obstruction investigation without reaching any legal conclusions leaves it to the Attorney General to determine whether the conduct described in the report constitutes a crime. Over the course of the investigation, the Special Counsel's office engaged in discussions with certain Department officials regarding many of the legal and factual matters at issue in the Special Counsel's obstruction investigation. After reviewing the Special Counsel's final report on these issues; consulting with Department officials, including the Office of Legal Counsel; and applying the principles of federal prosecution that guide our charging decisions, Deputy Attorney General Rod Rosenstein and I have concluded that the evidence developed during the Special Counsel's investigation is not sufficient to establish that the President committed an obstruction-of-justice offense. Our determination was made without regard to, and is not based on, the constitutional considerations that surround the indictment and criminal prosecution of a sitting president."

Read Attorney General William Barr’s Summary of the Mueller Report

So, Barr did not reach the conclusions they wanted on obstruction? That's it?




After saying these are difficult questions of law....bitch about Barr reaching conclusions they don't like?

..

We're done here.

...

So, the charge against Trump would be his alleged obstruction of Andy's insurance plan? The Dems have to be crazy to push something like that.

 

[Kondor3]

Barr is not to be trusted with this.

Based on what?

Why don't these Mueller tools pipe up with specifics?

You may be right.

So let's see it all, and put those doubts to rest, once and for all, right?

 

[The Purge]

Better idea

Release the Report

Best idea...let's dispatch all DeathRATS!.....In 2 days America would be paradise again!

 

[WaitingFor2020]

Barr failed to adequately portray the findings of their inquiry and that they were more troubling for President Trump than Mr. Barr indicated,

Any specifics? Any suggestions as to how Barr should have summarized it?

.

Read the article.

Does any grown up adult with an IQ above 75 really think that there can be 37 indictments, 6 people serving time and somehow Trump's hands are clean?

Really?
.
.
.

 

[Bootney Lee Farnsworth]

Barr is not to be trusted with this.

Based on what?

Why don't these Mueller tools pipe up with specifics?

You may be right.

So let's see it all, and put those doubts to rest, once and for all, right?

I have always wanted the report in its entirety.

The thing is...I don't believe high-ranking Democrats or Republicans want it released.

There's probably enough stink on everyone to open a can of worms.

.

 

[Mike473]

Barr is not to be trusted with this.

Based on what?

Why don't these Mueller tools pipe up with specifics?

You may be right.

So let's see it all, and put those doubts to rest, once and for all, right?

Indeed. I think Pelosi should put forward a bill allowing all evidence, grand jury or not, to be revealed publicly. Let's see what everyone has been up to lately

 

[Bootney Lee Farnsworth]

Does any grown up adult with an IQ above 75 really think that there can be 37 indictments, 6 people serving time and somehow Trump's hands are clean?

Process crimes.

We've been over this 10000 times.

.

 

[Mike473]

Barr failed to adequately portray the findings of their inquiry and that they were more troubling for President Trump than Mr. Barr indicated,

Any specifics? Any suggestions as to how Barr should have summarized it?

.

Read the article.

Does any grown up adult with an IQ above 75 really think that there can be 37 indictments, 6 people serving time and somehow Trump's hands are clean?

Really?
.
.
.

Mueller believes so. Is he that stupid? I don't like him, but I estimate his IQ to he higher than 75.

 

[WaitingFor2020]

Fun to watch Trumpies resort to nothing but radical memes.
But then it's obvious in the first place you let others do your thinking for you.
BTW, show us the meme where Mueller says he doesn't exonerate Trump.
That wouldn't be a meme, that's the truth.
.
.
.

 

[Kondor3]

Better idea

Release the Report

Best idea...let's dispatch all DeathRATS!.....In 2 days America would be paradise again!

Calm yourself, child, or you'll "purge" in your pants again.

American democracy is based upon multiple parties advancing multiple and diverse agendas.

One-party rule... be it from Left, Right or Center... is a poison pill, not a paradise.

Even a lightweight like you should understand that, eh?