re: Official From Mueller: Trump Campaign DID NOT COLLUDE With Russia

quote:

---

Low unemployment
Great market
More jobs

---

The economy is doing well, but I'm not convinced about the longer term.

quote:

---

Supreme Court Justices

---

Not a fan.

quote:

---

Destruction of ISIS

---

a bit of a selective overstatement, I'd say.Thank god North Korea has given up its nukes, right?

Nice take.....You Comey?

Wait so your defense of ISIS being neutered is to bring up North Korea?

quote:

---

VOR

---

Democrats just can’t admit they were wrong. Do they not realize on the long term this is going to frick them?

quote:

---

VOR

---

He has broken you beyond repair.

quote:

---

This report was the best result that Trumpkins could have hoped for, although the obstruction of justice question is left a little murky

---

Not to feed the fact that I think there was Obstruction, but I thought the wordage was interesting there.

quote:

---

In making this determination, we noted that the Special Counsel recognized that “the evidence does not establish that the President was involved in an underlying crime related to Russian election interference,” and that, while not determinative, the absence of such evidence bears upon the President’s intent with respect to obstruction. Generally speaking, to obtain and sustain an obstruction conviction, the government would need to prove beyond a reasonable doubt that a person, acting with corrupt intent, engaged in obstructive conduct with a sufficient nexus to a pending or contemplated proceeding. In cataloguing the President’s actions, many of which took place in public view, the report identifies no actions that, in our judgment, constitute obstructive conduct, had a nexus to a pending or contemplated proceeding, and were done with corrupt intent, each of which, under the Department’s principles of federal prosecution guiding charging decisions, would need to be proven beyond a reasonable doubt to establish an obstruction-of-justice offense.

---

To put in my own words for a paraphrase, “he didn’t do it from any evidence we’ve seen. His actions to defend himself were kinda sketchy, but the actions were consistent of somebody that was innocent of the charges. And his “obstruction” was done in plain sight.”



i.e. if he had done the crime, sure it would have been obstruction. But since we can’t prove he did it, we can’t charge him with obstruction.

Libs were furiously f5’ing trump’s twitter feed less than 24 hrs ago and counting that as a victory, now they are in full bargaining stage praying the SDNY will fix this( ), writing long effort post trying to convince themselves they were not owned (they were), and playing new word games that avoid saying “collusion” (it was obstruction all along!) while every sane person is not surprised in the least. They are still unable to accept they were wrong. It’s been funnier than election night.