|
|
I agree that the Republicans won’t hold Trump accountable for his crimes. That is why the House hasn’t done anything YET but attempt more investigation.Originally Posted by FriscoDog
But why you think that is a good thing is beyond me. It makes you come across as being against the rule of law and the idea that no one is above the law.
And most Republicans won’t read the report and just go with the party spin, so until they realize what Trump actually did and what their party is trying to hide, they won’t hold their Senators accountable.
You guys are 100% correct!
Go back and reread Barr’s statement.
"I will say that when we met with (Mueller) ... we specifically asked him about the OLC opinion and whether or not he was taking the position that he would have found a crime but for the existence of the OLC opinion," Barr told reporters. "And he made it very clear several times that that was not his position. He was not saying that but for the OLC opinion he would have found a crime. He made it clear that he had not made the determination that there was a crime."
In the light of day for reading the report OR hearing Mueller’s statement, we know that statement was deliberately misleading. That is why you can’t trust what Barr says.
No we don't!
It will probably be proven that Mueller is the one lying today about the OLC opinion.
You wouldn’t know because you haven’t read the report. The OLC opinion says what Mueller says it says and has been in place since 2000. You can read it. There is no need to speculate.
Are you saying Mueller lied to Barr about what the OLC opinion said and then told the truth about what the OLC opinion said in the report? That makes no sense.
What happened is Barr was a wiling part of a disinformation campaign designed to set the narrative on the Mueller report ahead of the report being published knowing full well that none of you guys would read the report after you heard the spin.
Barr knew what he was doing, and I am sure that while he knew he was misleading people he felt like he wasn’t telling an explicit lie that he could be impeached for. Some people might reasonably conclude that given the context of the misleading statement that it crossed the line into being a “lie.” The AG, as an officer of the court, certainly should be held to the highest standards of candor and truthfulness. This AG is a partisan hack and that is precisely why he was chosen - he got the job on the strength of the memo he sent explaining why he was of the opinion that Trump could not commit an obstruction by firing Comey.
You all should read the recently completed D80 Report. Well, no need to read the 1,000+ pages, I can summarize it for you.
Trump did nothing wrong.
Krooked Killary, in league with others: obummer, lynch, schumer, Pelosi, comey, mueller, clapper, Brennen, etc...are guilty as Hell of treason.
Next issue!
Mueller did not find Trump innocent correct? When a jury returns a "not guilty" verdict it doesn't mean that the accused is innocent. That's not how our laws work. It means that there was not enough evidence to support a guilty verdict and thus the presumption of innocence stands. The standard of law and presumption of innocence and burden of proof were upheld IMO. People may not like the outcome i.e. OJ Simpson, Jesse Smullet, etc. but that's how our system works.
Many on the left now want to convict just based upon accusations.. see Kavanaugh. Yet when it happens to democrats (i.e. LT Gov Virginia, Gov Virginia, etc.) crickets. Double standard and media pushes it to the wall.
I can’t speak for the left, but if you read the report you would know there is sufficient evidence to support a finding of obstruction of justice. If impeachment hearings were instituted, I agree Trump should be presumed innocent until we not only see the evidence of guilt (much of which is already of public record) but also any further evidence he wants to bring forward to exonerate himself. I think Congress needs to do their job now and that has been my position. The case made in the report is very strong but Trump should get a chance to offer evidence to contradict it.
Mueller would have exonerated Trump for obstruction (like he did for conspiracy) if he could have. He said that in the report and again today. He is presumed innocent at law, but has not been determined to be innocent. Congress, not AG Barr, is the only one with the constitutional power to hold a president to account to the law. If Republicans won’t play, then they don’t believe in this fundamental anti-authoritarian principle.
Mueller didn't have enough evidence period; so he couldn't if he wanted to.
Actually the thought floated on TV today was Trump, on purpose giving up some of the privileges of the Presidency, moving to have a trial by jury of his peers per his innocence or guilt of obstruction. They thought Trump would stand a better against a bunch of upright citizens vs. TDS democrats in swampy DC. Interesting thought.
If he didn’t have enough evidence he would have exonerated him. Period. That is what he said when it came to conspiracy - not enough evidence.
But you could have all this information, too, if you simply read the Mueller report.
Plus you wouldn’t have been caught off guard today when Mueller essentially restated the part of the report that Barr and Trump administration have been misrepresenting.
That's BS. He has to have enough evidence to prosecute/indict; not to exonerate. All judges and AGs must have enough evidence to prosecute/indict or they walk and the individual is considered innocent.
He did have enough. You would know this if you read the report. No reason to remain ignorant. If he didn’t have enough evidence he would have just exonerated Trump like he did for conspiracy.
My friend, it's Mueller case closed and over. Trump will serve his term out in total and be in the Oval Office another 4 years.
And you have been wrong every step of the way.
So there is hope to "Make America Great Again".
Posting Permissions
Reply With Quote