Will "Bob" Testify?

[RDD_1210]

I will never call him a traitor. I have said all along if he finds that Trump is innocent, then so be it. But I want to hear it from him. Not from Barr who was hand picked by Trump to massage the findings into his predetermined narrative.

Was Holder (who claimed to be Barry's "wing man") hand-picked? How about Loretta ("Bill and I only talked about our grandkids, honest") Lynch...who picked her? Did Mueller find "collusion"? No, because he didn't look at Hillary and the dirty cops. But he will and you know it.

When in doubt, switch the conversation to Obama/Hillary.

 

[toomuchtime_]

Dimwit, no federal employees are allowed to perform in the circus the Democrats are running, not just Mueller. Mueller is not a special case.

So once Mueller resigns you are fully onboard with him testifying I assume. Yes?

Spokesman: Mueller leaving Justice Department 'within the coming days'

I have no say in it, but if Mueller does resign and decide he wants to perform for the Democrats, then nothing will stop him, but what do you imagine he will say? He will either make a fool of himself by contradicting his own report or you will be on here the next day calling him a traitor.

I will never call him a traitor. I have said all along if he finds that Trump is innocent, then so be it. But I want to hear it from him. Not from Barr who was hand picked by Trump to massage the findings into his predetermined narrative.

Sure you will. If he doesn't tell you what you want to hear, you'll call him a coward or a traitor and then look for another way to invent a crime that doesn't exist.

LOL ok, are you done now? A crime clearly exists and his reports says as much. The question is will anyone do anything about it.

You want there to be a crime, but there is no crime and Mueller declined to say there was a crime. When you grow up you will learn that sometimes you don't get everything you want.

 

[debbiedowner]

You are dumb aren't you? You accused someone of something and can't back it up. I have no proof either way but to put that out there hoping someone may have proof is not ours to prove but rather yours. You are some kid at a computer today, the other's were right about junior or boy or just dumbshit.

So you have no proof...anything else?

You are an idiot I can't even fathom you being able to use a computer.

 

[RDD_1210]

So once Mueller resigns you are fully onboard with him testifying I assume. Yes?

Spokesman: Mueller leaving Justice Department 'within the coming days'

I have no say in it, but if Mueller does resign and decide he wants to perform for the Democrats, then nothing will stop him, but what do you imagine he will say? He will either make a fool of himself by contradicting his own report or you will be on here the next day calling him a traitor.

I will never call him a traitor. I have said all along if he finds that Trump is innocent, then so be it. But I want to hear it from him. Not from Barr who was hand picked by Trump to massage the findings into his predetermined narrative.

Sure you will. If he doesn't tell you what you want to hear, you'll call him a coward or a traitor and then look for another way to invent a crime that doesn't exist.

LOL ok, are you done now? A crime clearly exists and his reports says as much. The question is will anyone do anything about it.

You want there to be a crime, but there is no crime and Mueller declined to say there was a crime. When you grow up you will learn that sometimes you don't get everything you want.

Oh I get it, you didn't bother to read the report. Makes sense now.

 

[toomuchtime_]

I have no say in it, but if Mueller does resign and decide he wants to perform for the Democrats, then nothing will stop him, but what do you imagine he will say? He will either make a fool of himself by contradicting his own report or you will be on here the next day calling him a traitor.

I will never call him a traitor. I have said all along if he finds that Trump is innocent, then so be it. But I want to hear it from him. Not from Barr who was hand picked by Trump to massage the findings into his predetermined narrative.

Sure you will. If he doesn't tell you what you want to hear, you'll call him a coward or a traitor and then look for another way to invent a crime that doesn't exist.

LOL ok, are you done now? A crime clearly exists and his reports says as much. The question is will anyone do anything about it.

You want there to be a crime, but there is no crime and Mueller declined to say there was a crime. When you grow up you will learn that sometimes you don't get everything you want.

Oh I get it, you didn't bother to read the report. Makes sense now.

lol I read the report,Mueller's letters,Barr's memo, but clearly you didn't or you wouldn't be posting that Mueller said there was a crime when he clearly never said that.

 

[RDD_1210]

I will never call him a traitor. I have said all along if he finds that Trump is innocent, then so be it. But I want to hear it from him. Not from Barr who was hand picked by Trump to massage the findings into his predetermined narrative.

Sure you will. If he doesn't tell you what you want to hear, you'll call him a coward or a traitor and then look for another way to invent a crime that doesn't exist.

LOL ok, are you done now? A crime clearly exists and his reports says as much. The question is will anyone do anything about it.

You want there to be a crime, but there is no crime and Mueller declined to say there was a crime. When you grow up you will learn that sometimes you don't get everything you want.

Oh I get it, you didn't bother to read the report. Makes sense now.

lol I read the report,Mueller's letters,Barr's memo, but clearly you didn't or you wouldn't be posting that Mueller said there was a crime when he clearly never said that.

There are probably a dozen instances of Obstruction of Justice that Mueller clearly says he will leave up to congress to decide how to proceed. Which ******* report did you read?

 

[toomuchtime_]

Sure you will. If he doesn't tell you what you want to hear, you'll call him a coward or a traitor and then look for another way to invent a crime that doesn't exist.

LOL ok, are you done now? A crime clearly exists and his reports says as much. The question is will anyone do anything about it.

You want there to be a crime, but there is no crime and Mueller declined to say there was a crime. When you grow up you will learn that sometimes you don't get everything you want.

Oh I get it, you didn't bother to read the report. Makes sense now.

lol I read the report,Mueller's letters,Barr's memo, but clearly you didn't or you wouldn't be posting that Mueller said there was a crime when he clearly never said that.

There are probably a dozen instances of Obstruction of Justice that Mueller clearly says he will leave up to congress to decide how to proceed. Which ******* report did you read?

I read the Mueller report which listed ten possible cases of obstruction of justice. What did you read that said there were at least a dozen?

Were you capable of thinking, you would understand that despite your passionate desire to find a crime, none of these incidents Mueller listed could be called obstruction of justice. Obstruction of justice can only occur in a criminal investigation, but as Mueller notes in his report, collusion is not a crime so Mueller was not conducting a criminal investigation at the time these events occurred. Perhaps Trump could have been charged with interfering with a federal office in performance of his duties, but the President has the ultimate prosecutorial supervisory authority so even if he had fired Mueller, it could not have been called obstruction of justice in the legal sense of the term.

I know you want things to be simple and bloody, but in fact, the are not. You would understand this if you had actually read the relevant documents and were able to understand them instead of just looking for comments about them.

 

[imawhosure]

I sure hope so. The pompous turd may or may not go to the Hill for Nadler's circus. On one hand, he's still all about getting Trump; the fact he leaked his letter to Barr proves that. On the other hand, he knows he's not all that sharp when it comes to answering questions from people who already know the answers...like the FBI does to targets every day. Bob knows Nadler's fools will toss him softballs so he can indict Trump without being able to indict Trump. Where it gets tricky is, it's his word against Barr's how his HOAX came to an end. Even trickier is he knows the GOP gets to interrogate him if he shows up...and they'll toss hand grenades. Real tricky with questions about why his "investigation" didn't look at the conspiracy to bring down the President. The mind boggles (ouch) on what he may be asked to explain. Come on in, Bob...let's see ya get a taste of your own medicine.

Your OP is based on and relies on Trump nonsense propaganda that will never stand up. Russian interference was nor a hoax. Mueller was not tasked with investigating a conspiracy to bring down Trump and that is how he will answer Republican clowns who try to make it part of a hearing about his report.

How do you know? Have you seen the REVISED SCOPE MEMO? If so, tell us what is in it-)

 

[imawhosure]

Let's try a fun exercise. Let's list all the reasons why Trump would want a report that he claims "fully exonerates" him to be prevented from being seen by the public, nevermind congress AND insists that the man that wrote that report that again, "fully exonerates" him, not be allowed to speak to congress directly.

Why do we think that is? Let's list all the reasons we can think of.

1) ___________

Because the AG can NOT LEGALLY, release a totally unredacted one. It has Grand Jury testimony in it. It is AGAINST THE LAW, or didn't you know that?

The AG did NOT have to release the report at all, or didn't you know that either.

As far as I know, Trump has said that if they want to interview Mueller and agrees, he has no problem with it.

And that as they say, is that!

 

[RDD_1210]

LOL ok, are you done now? A crime clearly exists and his reports says as much. The question is will anyone do anything about it.

You want there to be a crime, but there is no crime and Mueller declined to say there was a crime. When you grow up you will learn that sometimes you don't get everything you want.

Oh I get it, you didn't bother to read the report. Makes sense now.

lol I read the report,Mueller's letters,Barr's memo, but clearly you didn't or you wouldn't be posting that Mueller said there was a crime when he clearly never said that.

There are probably a dozen instances of Obstruction of Justice that Mueller clearly says he will leave up to congress to decide how to proceed. Which ******* report did you read?

I read the Mueller report which listed ten possible cases of obstruction of justice. What did you read that said there were at least a dozen?

Were you capable of thinking, you would understand that despite your passionate desire to find a crime, none of these incidents Mueller listed could be called obstruction of justice. Obstruction of justice can only occur in a criminal investigation, but as Mueller notes in his report, collusion is not a crime so Mueller was not conducting a criminal investigation at the time these events occurred. Perhaps Trump could have been charged with interfering with a federal office in performance of his duties, but the President has the ultimate prosecutorial supervisory authority so even if he had fired Mueller, it could not have been called obstruction of justice in the legal sense of the term.

I know you want things to be simple and bloody, but in fact, the are not. You would understand this if you had actually read the relevant documents and were able to understand them instead of just looking for comments about them.

And where did you receive your law degree from?