- My Forums
- Tiger Rant
- LSU Recruiting
- SEC Rant
- Saints Talk
- Pelicans Talk
- More Sports Board
- Fantasy Sports
- Golf Board
- Soccer Board
- O-T Lounge
- Tech Board
- Home/Garden Board
- Outdoor Board
- Health/Fitness Board
- Movie/TV Board
- Book Board
- Music Board
- Political Talk
- Money Talk
- Fark Board
- Gaming Board
- Travel Board
- Food/Drink Board
- Ticket Exchange
- TD Help Board
Customize My Forums- View All Forums
- Show Left Links
- Topic Sort Options
- Trending Topics
- Recent Topics
- Active Topics
Started By
Message
Repeat after me, NO COLLUSION & NO OBSTRUCTION!
Posted on 5/29/19 at 5:03 pm
Posted on 5/29/19 at 5:03 pm
This is what Total Vindication and Total Exoneration look like
14
Posted on 5/29/19 at 5:06 pm to Seldom Seen
weird melt
Posted on 5/29/19 at 5:10 pm to bmy
quote:
weird melt
Repeat after me,
NO COLLUSION !!
NO OBSTRUCTION!!
Posted on 5/29/19 at 5:10 pm to bmy
Soon
Posted on 5/29/19 at 5:11 pm to Seldom Seen
Save it for the Trump pep rally.
Posted on 5/29/19 at 5:15 pm to Spirit Of Aggieland
LOCK THEM UP!
Posted on 5/29/19 at 5:18 pm to Seldom Seen
no collusion. no obstruction. tariffs ( even though we pay for the taxes and farmer subsidies—-u trumpsters didnt know that, did u—-so, u guys forget the facts and go back to grazing the sheepland blind to the facts
Posted on 5/29/19 at 5:20 pm to AlceeFortier
quote:
no collusion. no obstruction.
Thank You!
Posted on 5/29/19 at 5:29 pm to Seldom Seen
Posted on 5/29/19 at 5:30 pm to Seldom Seen
NO COLLUSION & NO OBSTRUCTION!
Posted on 5/29/19 at 5:31 pm to Seldom Seen
Posted on 5/29/19 at 6:02 pm to Seldom Seen
quote:Proves Trump obstructed justice and ran a cover-up!!
Repeat after me, NO COLLUSION & NO OBSTRUCTION!
Posted on 5/29/19 at 6:56 pm to Taxing Authority
Love trump so much. More than a president a father to our country. A savior.
Posted on 5/29/19 at 7:03 pm to GumboPot
You really don’t understand, do you?
The comprehension.... my god. I sometimes give too much credit here, the little I do, that you bunch just have a different view point. And then you just go and show that you don’t understand words.
The comprehension.... my god. I sometimes give too much credit here, the little I do, that you bunch just have a different view point. And then you just go and show that you don’t understand words.
Posted on 5/29/19 at 7:05 pm to mettematt9
quote:
The comprehension.... my god.
What is it you think he did not comprehend?
Posted on 5/29/19 at 9:58 pm to BBONDS25
Alright. I’m actually wasting my time to explain this. Here goes nothing.
Per the transcript
He “clears” the president of conspiracy, saying there isn’t sufficient evidence. Congrats.
But then he doesn’t say that for obstruction. He goes out of his way to say that if he could clear him, he would. THINK ABOUT THAT - HE SAYS HE CANT CHARGE, BUT CAN CLEAR AND HE CHOSE NOT TO DO SO BASED ON EVIDENCE. Immediately followed by the reason he can’t charge or indict the president, why he won’t, and lays out who can, and what they would need to look at to do so.
Please freaking read the transcript. He came out to the open to say the opposite of All of you and Barr.
Per the transcript
quote:
The report has two parts, addressing the two main issues we were asked to investigate. The first volume of the report details numerous efforts emanating from Russia to influence the election. This volume includes a discussion of the Trump campaign’s response to this activity, as well as our conclusion that there was insufficient evidence to charge a broader conspiracy. And in the second volume, the report describes the results and analysis of our obstruction of justice investigation involving the president. And as set forth in the report, after that investigation, if we had had confidence that the president clearly did not commit a crime, we would have said so. We did not, however, make a determination as to whether the president did commit a crime. The introduction to the Volume II of our report explains that decision. It explains that under longstanding department policy, a president cannot be charged with a federal crime while he is in office. That is unconstitutional. Even if the charge is kept under seal and hidden from public view, that, too, is prohibited. A special counsel’s office is part of the Department of Justice, and by regulation, it was bound by that department policy. Charging the president with a crime was therefore not an option we could consider. The opinion says that the Constitution requires a process other than the criminal justice system to formally accuse a sitting president of wrongdoing. And beyond department policy, we were guided by principles of fairness. It would be unfair to potentially — it would be unfair to potentially accuse somebody of a crime when there can be no court resolution of the actual charge. So that was Justice Department policy. Those were the principles under which we operated. And from them, we concluded that we would not reach a determination one way or the other about whether the president committed a crime.
He “clears” the president of conspiracy, saying there isn’t sufficient evidence. Congrats.
But then he doesn’t say that for obstruction. He goes out of his way to say that if he could clear him, he would. THINK ABOUT THAT - HE SAYS HE CANT CHARGE, BUT CAN CLEAR AND HE CHOSE NOT TO DO SO BASED ON EVIDENCE. Immediately followed by the reason he can’t charge or indict the president, why he won’t, and lays out who can, and what they would need to look at to do so.
Please freaking read the transcript. He came out to the open to say the opposite of All of you and Barr.
Posted on 5/29/19 at 10:22 pm to mettematt9
quote:
But then he doesn’t say that for obstruction.
1) Is this what you think a prosecutors job is?
2) From your quoted post:
quote:
And from them, we concluded that we would not reach a determination one way or the other about whether the president committed a crime.
Combine this single sentence with the presumption of innocence and tell me what you think it means?
You read the transcript...but you didn’t comprehend what it was saying. If you think what Mueller said in any way indicates guilt, you are just wrong.
quote:
Please freaking read the transcript. He came out to the open to say the opposite of All of you and Barr.
Talk about lack of comprehension. It appears you suffer from an extraordinary ignorance of how the system works. You also must have missed his most recent joint statement. Perhaps instead of opining with such hubris from a place of ignorance, you should work on learning the basics. This post was edited on 5/29/19 at 10:42 pm
Posted on 5/29/19 at 10:25 pm to mettematt9
Then what was the point of the investigation. There was no crime so there was no obstruction. Yes, a lot of bitching about it (what innocent person wouldn’t?), no one was stopped from testifying, no documents were denied, no one was fired except Comey, at the written recommendation of Rosenstein, and with good reason, so I ask again, where was the crime?
Posted on 5/30/19 at 12:05 am to mettematt9
There is no “reading of quality journalistic material” on this board. A bunch of ill informed cucks who get sidetracked by a major headline and don’t follow due diligence to make a well informed decisions about the direction and future of their “beloved” country.
Put a Democrat in this same situation and they are sharpening their pitch forks and yelling some quip they heard multiple times on the one network they follow religiously.
The way the majority of this country is affected by media coverage is absurd and will continue to get worse, unfortunately.
Educate yourself without opinion pieces. Think for yourselves and stop blindly agreeing with pundits who are part of the political machine.
Challenge yourselves to do better. That way the country can incrementally get better.
Put a Democrat in this same situation and they are sharpening their pitch forks and yelling some quip they heard multiple times on the one network they follow religiously.
The way the majority of this country is affected by media coverage is absurd and will continue to get worse, unfortunately.
Educate yourself without opinion pieces. Think for yourselves and stop blindly agreeing with pundits who are part of the political machine.
Challenge yourselves to do better. That way the country can incrementally get better.
Posted on 5/30/19 at 1:58 am to mettematt9
quote:Being unable to charge or indict the president doesn’t prevent Muller from presenting evidence of a crime—if he has it.
HE SAYS HE CANT CHARGE, BUT CAN CLEAR AND HE CHOSE NOT TO DO SO BASED ON EVIDENCE. Immediately followed by the reason he can’t charge or indict the president
He doesn’t have it. Or he would have provided it.
Again, if DOJ policy prevented disclosures of criminal activity, there’d be no purpose to the special council. Or any investigation for that matter.
Good grief.
This post was edited on 5/30/19 at 2:00 am
Page 1 of 4
Popular
Back to top
Follow TigerDroppings for LSU Football News