Were you surprised by the result of the Mueller investigation?

[M14 Shooter]

Congress does.

Nothing the law grants Congress access to an IC report other than what the AG send to Congress in his summary.
Congress chose the AG as the vehicle for its oversight.

 

[Hutch Starskey]

Political Cartoons by AF Branco

A Republican appointed DOJ ordered this Special Investigation and it was appropriately completed. It was worth the cost. The outcome should please you. Quit griping.

nope. Rod Rosenstein was obammy's. just saying, I wish you fks would learn who is who.

You are dumb as shit, dude.

Rosenstein was appointed as Deputy AG by..........Trump, dope.

 

[M14 Shooter]

The AG's letter actually doesn't stipulate any facts of the matter.

You only believe this because you don't like what it said.

What is in the letter in not really a matter of belief. It was the AG's summation of the principle conclusions of the Mueller Report. It's only included two brief quotes from Mueller.

And you refuse to accept it because you do not like what it said.

 

[OldLady]

Political Cartoons by AF Branco

A Republican appointed DOJ ordered this Special Investigation and it was appropriately completed. It was worth the cost. The outcome should please you. Quit griping.

nope. Rod Rosenstein was obammy's. just saying, I wish you fks would learn who is who.

I looked, but I couldn't find that anywhere. Bush appointed him as a US Attorney in 2005. He did this and that and Trump made him Deputy blah blah in 2017.

 

[sealybobo]

Seems to me, this caught the left flat-footed -- they really and truly believed this was a slam-dunk case conspiracy and obstruction.

- Did you allow your partisan rage to cloud your objectivity?
- Did you believe your own hype and that fed to you by the likes on MSNBC, CNN, and ABC?
- Were you more surprised by this than the 2016 election?
- Are you more emotionally let down by this than the 2016 election?
- If this - after 2 years of waiting with baited breath for the report, telling us daily that Mueller had the goods and it was a matter of time - does not convince you there was no collusion w/ Russia and/or obstruction of justice, what will?
- Why should we believe you?

No **** head we didn't know we weren't going to get to see the report you ******* fool

Imagine if the Starr Report had been provided only to President Clinton's Attorney General, Janet Reno, who then read it privately and published a 4-page letter based on her private reading stating her conclusion that President Clinton committed no crimes.

 

[sealybobo]

We don't KNOW what the results of the Mueller Probe sare since Barr has so far refused to release it

You know all you need to know. So just keep making up crap like you have all along.

That's what Putin tells his citizens. Or Kim Jung Un. That's what he tells his citizens.

 

[Hutch Starskey]

Congress does.

Nothing the law grants Congress access to an IC report other than what the AG send to Congress in his summary.
Congress chose the AG as the vehicle for its oversight.

Not true in any way. None of it.

Why don't you want congress having the report?

 

[M14 Shooter]

Seems to me, this caught the left flat-footed -- they really and truly believed this was a slam-dunk case conspiracy and obstruction.

- Did you allow your partisan rage to cloud your objectivity?
- Did you believe your own hype and that fed to you by the likes on MSNBC, CNN, and ABC?
- Were you more surprised by this than the 2016 election?
- Are you more emotionally let down by this than the 2016 election?
- If this - after 2 years of waiting with baited breath for the report, telling us daily that Mueller had the goods and it was a matter of time - does not convince you there was no collusion w/ Russia and/or obstruction of justice, what will?
- Why should we believe you?

No **** head we didn't know we weren't going to get to see the report you ******* fool

Your ignorance of the law is not an excuse.
So... can you answer the questions or not?

 

[M14 Shooter]

Congress does.

Nothing the law grants Congress access to an IC report other than what the AG send to Congress in his summary.
Congress chose the AG as the vehicle for its oversight.

Not true in any way. None of it.

If you choose to remain ignorant of the law, you cannot be helped.

 

[sealybobo]

Seems to me, this caught the left flat-footed -- they really and truly believed this was a slam-dunk case conspiracy and obstruction.

- Did you allow your partisan rage to cloud your objectivity?
- Did you believe your own hype and that fed to you by the likes on MSNBC, CNN, and ABC?
- Were you more surprised by this than the 2016 election?
- Are you more emotionally let down by this than the 2016 election?
- If this - after 2 years of waiting with baited breath for the report, telling us daily that Mueller had the goods and it was a matter of time - does not convince you there was no collusion w/ Russia and/or obstruction of justice, what will?
- Why should we believe you?

No **** head we didn't know we weren't going to get to see the report you ******* fool

Your ignorance of the law is not an excuse.
So... can you answer the questions or not?

Imagine if the Starr Report had been provided only to President Clinton's Attorney General, Janet Reno, who then read it privately and published a 4-page letter based on her private reading stating her conclusion that President Clinton committed no crimes.

 

[Hutch Starskey]

We don't KNOW what the results of the Mueller Probe sare since Barr has so far refused to release it

You know all you need to know. So just keep making up crap like you have all along.

You know all you need to know. So just keep making up crap like you have all along.

That's a completely retarded statement considering you know can't know that to be true.

Seeing you are both buttstain scum, yes it is true.

Great. Post the Mueller report and show us it's true.

 

[M14 Shooter]

Seems to me, this caught the left flat-footed -- they really and truly believed this was a slam-dunk case conspiracy and obstruction.

- Did you allow your partisan rage to cloud your objectivity?
- Did you believe your own hype and that fed to you by the likes on MSNBC, CNN, and ABC?
- Were you more surprised by this than the 2016 election?
- Are you more emotionally let down by this than the 2016 election?
- If this - after 2 years of waiting with baited breath for the report, telling us daily that Mueller had the goods and it was a matter of time - does not convince you there was no collusion w/ Russia and/or obstruction of justice, what will?
- Why should we believe you?

No **** head we didn't know we weren't going to get to see the report you ******* fool

Your ignorance of the law is not an excuse.
So... can you answer the questions or not?

Imagine if the Starr Report....

If you choose to remain ignorant of the law, you cannot be helped.

 

[miketx]

We don't KNOW what the results of the Mueller Probe sare since Barr has so far refused to release it

You know all you need to know. So just keep making up crap like you have all along.

You know all you need to know. So just keep making up crap like you have all along.

That's a completely retarded statement considering you know can't know that to be true.

Seeing you are both buttstain scum, yes it is true.

Great. Post the Mueller report and show us it's true.

You don't accept facts, as evidenced by your tds.

 

[miketx]

We don't KNOW what the results of the Mueller Probe sare since Barr has so far refused to release it

You know all you need to know. So just keep making up crap like you have all along.

That's what Putin tells his citizens. Or Kim Jung Un. That's what he tells his citizens.

You are liar, again.

 

[Hutch Starskey]

We don't know the results of the Mueller investigation.

You do, you just don't like them.

Post up the Mueller report.

You are fully aware of the fact I need not post the report to know the results of the report.
The fact you do not like the results in no way means they are not the results.

LOL.....
You don't know the results, dope.

Barr quoted exactly two sentences from the report.

and the biggest one he quoted was no indictments to act on. Do you know what that one fact means? I bet you don't have the brain power to understand it. but here, no indictment to act on means there is no crime. no crime=........

and the biggest one he quoted was no indictments to act on. Do you know what that one fact means? I bet you don't have the brain power to understand it. but here, no indictment to act on means there is no crime. no crime=........

It doesn't mean that at all, dope.
A sitting president cannot be indicted. Right?

 

[Hutch Starskey]

We don't KNOW what the results of the Mueller Probe sare since Barr has so far refused to release it

You know all you need to know. So just keep making up crap like you have all along.

You know all you need to know. So just keep making up crap like you have all along.

That's a completely retarded statement considering you know can't know that to be true.

Seeing you are both buttstain scum, yes it is true.

Great. Post the Mueller report and show us it's true.

You don't accept facts, as evidenced by your tds.

You dont have all the facts, dope.

 

[miketx]

You do, you just don't like them.

Post up the Mueller report.

You are fully aware of the fact I need not post the report to know the results of the report.
The fact you do not like the results in no way means they are not the results.

LOL.....
You don't know the results, dope.

Barr quoted exactly two sentences from the report.

and the biggest one he quoted was no indictments to act on. Do you know what that one fact means? I bet you don't have the brain power to understand it. but here, no indictment to act on means there is no crime. no crime=........

and the biggest one he quoted was no indictments to act on. Do you know what that one fact means? I bet you don't have the brain power to understand it. but here, no indictment to act on means there is no crime. no crime=........

It doesn't mean that at all, dope.
A sitting president cannot be indicted. Right?

Show us the crimes liar, not some bullshit media speculation.

 

[miketx]

You know all you need to know. So just keep making up crap like you have all along.

You know all you need to know. So just keep making up crap like you have all along.

That's a completely retarded statement considering you know can't know that to be true.

Seeing you are both buttstain scum, yes it is true.

Great. Post the Mueller report and show us it's true.

You don't accept facts, as evidenced by your tds.

You dont have all the facts, dope.

Wouldn't matter if I did, you scum don't do facts.

 

[BlindBoo]

Post up the Mueller report.

F* YOU! Like with Trump's taxes, you have no authority to demand shit, snowflake!

Also, the continuous claim that Barr is mis-representing Mueller's report / has hijacked the Mueller report and has cleared the President when Mueller did anything but that and that Mueller and his 19 Lawyers are just sitting on their ass silently letting that happen is the biggest bullshit / faux news claim since this whole coup attempt started!

Not long ago Muller did not hesitate to step up and correct a false claim about his investigation, so your claim now that Mueller would suddenly refuse to do the same now is complete desperate snowflake BS!

You, the Democrats, CNN and all the fake news media have LOST ALL CREDIBILITY!

Just like the 2016 election results, your Trump-hating ass refuses to accept that you and the Trump-hating democrats and Leftist Media have LOST....AGAIN. Trump beat you...AGAIN!

If Loretta Lynch had sent Congress a letter that only quoted two sentences of Comey's investigation into Clinton Like

"In looking back at our investigations into mishandling or removal of classified information, we cannot find a case that would support bringing criminal charges on these facts."

Do you think Republicans would have just let it go as the FBI completely exonerated Hillary Clinton and would not have asks for more information about the investigation?

hypotheticals, wow. when the facts just don't line up, use hypotheticals.

The AG's letter actually doesn't stipulate any facts of the matter.

Do you think a letter that seemingly exonerated Clinton could have been crafted using a few select quotes from Comeys' Statement? Do you think the Republicans would have just accepted it and moved on?

well actually it did. it stated no indictments to act on. and you can read the rest on my previous post.

That there are no further indictments coming is a fact, but not a fact of the matters Mueller was investigating.

 

[BlindBoo]

The AG's letter actually doesn't stipulate any facts of the matter.

You only believe this because you don't like what it said.

but it did have a fact. no open indictments. that's a fact. without an indictment means there is no collusion.

Well, of course.
The left generally remains in denial; some of them have moved on to anger and/or bargaining.

Barr's letter also was factual about the number of lawyers Mueller used. But those are not facts of the matter.