Mueller testimony delay...
- Thread starter MegaPoke
- Start date
They should use the Mueller gambit and say they stand by what's in their previous testimony. Otherwise, take the 5th or both.
With all of that criminal activity by Trump, why didn't Mueller make a decision like Ken Starr did?
Trumps a President. Ken Starr is a hack and one of Epstein’s best friends. He also loves him some Trump.
Ole Meuller, his faculties are such that soon, he'll be able to wrap his own Christmas presents.
I keep hearing Democrats and those that follow them say that Trump obstructed the investigation, yet I have not seen anyone provide details on an instance that would stand up in a court of law. One of you anti Trumpers want to provide your best case proving obstruction?
It’s called the Mueller report. You should read it. Maybe watch today’s testimony from beginning to end.
I have read each and every word with the exception of the redacted portions. Not a single thing listed in the report is anything that IMO could be used to prove obstruction in a court of law. The mere fact that Trump never used Executive Privilege, which he was more than entitled to use and the fact he didn't stand in the way of a single witness testifying to the investigators overrides any of the accusation of obstruction made to any rational person. Despite the best efforts of Democrats to change one of the most precious founding principles this country has, the burden of proof is still on the Democrats to prove beyond a reasonable doubt Trump obstructed. I guess that's part of what Obama meant when he said he was going to fundamentally transform the country.
Were reading from different reports then. I dont agree and can’t help you any further.
Soon my ass, that senile old fool would be wrappin' 'em right now.....if only he could find the paper, scissors, tape, ribbon, and the instructions....oh wait, what am I supposed to be doing.......
Yea that's the same thing Democrats are trying to get away with, just scream obstruction while not providing the facts to back their accusations up.
Trump is guilty until proven innocent in their eyes because he is Trump. No changing their opinion, deep seated hate here.
Bill Clinton was a President too. Starr recommended impeachment hearings. Clinton was impeached. Mueller said he wouldn't come to a conclusion. He left that to Barr and Rosenstein. Neither found evidence for a charge of obstruction. Mueller could have made a direct impeachment hearing recommendation on his own, no? He didn't. Why not? Impeachment hearing recommendations aren't covered by the 2000 OLC guidance. That only refers to indictment.
Because he is a good prosecutor. He follows the rules. He’s an honorable man. I don’t agree with some of his choices and actions but, it is what it is.
Uh, you must not be familiar with his past. A good prosecutor would have laid his case out with recommendations to what he thought should happen. I'm not aware of any "good" prosecutor that leaves everything up to interpretation.
"We found that the defendant did own the gun that was used in the murder, was at the crime scene, had gunshot residue on his hands, had a motive of life insurance money, but we're going to decline recommending prosecution. Someone else can decide that."
Pelosi could be a winner today as well. She knows impeachment will hurt the Dems in the elections. Up to her now to see if she can use today to move the Dems back to issues their left wing base is really interested in. I hope the House continues down impeachment, and Trump needs to move on and ignore it, allow the DOJ IG investigation to take on the worthiness of the Mueller investigation and further win the already unpopular view among a majority of voters that impeachment is a waste of time. Getting charges and then convictions would really help Trump, we will not have convictions before the election but charges would be great.
Trump needs to start campaigning on his accomplishments and get on point and let the Dems roll in the mud with pigs.
Trump needs to start campaigning on his accomplishments and get on point and let the Dems roll in the mud with pigs.
You can't formulate an argument against it? This is all you have?
blink once if you understand how utterly your narrative was destroyed beyond repair today.
How did Rosenstein hire Mueller...?? After a 15 second interview I think you could figure out he would be way behind the power curve and would be a horrible choice. Weissman is the guy who wrote that 400 page sack of $hit. Him and his cronies. That's why mueller did not have a grasp of 75% of what was in it. There was no indictment because Weissman knew there wasn't enough info to indict...and he should know since he was the main culprit in destroying arthur anderson accounting firm and 85,000 jobs...supreme court reversed the decision 12-0 on his obstruction of justice ruling. So, he knows all about obstruction of justice and what will stick and what won't. Intent is a big word. He's a slim ball maggot. Mueller should have known better than to accept that deal from Rosenstein, his family should have known and told him NO. You look at that whole crew of cronies, all trump haters and donaters to clinton and obama. If there was any way to get trump they would have found it...and maybe they thought they did. Good god...I sound like Levin....and he's right. Mueller is more of an innocent bystander than having a real role in most of this. Weekend at bernie's comes to mind.
Last edited:
When given the opportunity to wow us with your own independent take, you did as we expected...
Toon is proud of you.
Similar threads
Latest posts
-
-
-
-
-
Canton Ohio Black Man dies while handcuffed on floor. Here we go again
- Latest: iasooner2000