Started By
Message

re: *Mueller Corrects* We did not reach a determination as to whether POTUS committed a crime

Posted on 7/28/19 at 9:43 am to
Posted by Meauxjeaux
98836 posts including my alters
Member since Jun 2005
40493 posts
Posted on 7/28/19 at 9:43 am to
Must be nice to be able to correct your testimony.

Someone should ask him if Flynn or PapaD or Stone could correct theirs?
Posted by TrueTiger
Chicken's most valuable
Member since Sep 2004
68932 posts
Posted on 7/28/19 at 9:44 am to
quote:

we did not reach a determination as to whether the President committed a crime


that determination would be for a judge or jury anyway

the only determination for a prosecutor is whether or not to allege a crime was committed

Posted by Meauxjeaux
98836 posts including my alters
Member since Jun 2005
40493 posts
Posted on 7/28/19 at 9:46 am to
Also, I would like to point out that,

“not reach a determination as to whether the President committed a crime” = he determined the President did not commit a crime.
Posted by Screaming Viking
Member since Jul 2013
4540 posts
Posted on 7/28/19 at 9:49 am to
Bmy, i understand that you may be blinded by TDS, but see reality.

No prosecutor in the world (outside of mueller) completes an investigation, does not bring charges, but then argues that the individual is not “exonerated”.

So i do not care what the opinion said, nor the context in which you took mueller statements. It is all BS.

You would be pissed if you were the one being investigated by the feds, and you were being dealt with like this. Every American should be scared sh!tless of this scenario.
Posted by bmy
Nashville
Member since Oct 2007
48203 posts
Posted on 7/28/19 at 9:49 am to
quote:


Someone should ask him if Flynn or PapaD or Stone could correct theirs?


They absolutely could have. They chose not to.
Posted by bmy
Nashville
Member since Oct 2007
48203 posts
Posted on 7/28/19 at 9:51 am to
quote:

Bmy, i understand that you may be blinded by TDS, but see reality.

No prosecutor in the world (outside of mueller) completes an investigation, does not bring charges, but then argues that the individual is not “exonerat


How many prosecutors have formally investigated whether or not a sitting president committed a crime?

It's quite simple.. in matters related to the presidents conduct Mueller and his team were not acting as prosecutors. They were fact finders.
This post was edited on 7/28/19 at 9:53 am
Posted by gthog61
Irving, TX
Member since Nov 2009
71001 posts
Posted on 7/28/19 at 9:52 am to
quote:

They absolutely could have. They chose not to.



You do not know that.

You are reduced to pulling shite out of your arse.
Posted by goatmilker
Castle Anthrax
Member since Feb 2009
64690 posts
Posted on 7/28/19 at 9:52 am to
Posted by cwill
Member since Jan 2005
54754 posts
Posted on 7/28/19 at 9:53 am to
quote:

he determined the President did not commit a crime.


He was never going to make a determination as clearly laid out in the report. His clarifying statement now matches the report.
Posted by Buckeye Jeaux
Member since May 2018
17756 posts
Posted on 7/28/19 at 9:54 am to
quote:

3) 'Because of the opinion our investigation into the presidents conduct was limited to a fact finding investigation and we made no attempt to determine whether the president committed a crime'

This is the reality and what Mueller says in the report.
Please. What a load of crap.

The Special Council was a far-left lynch mob hell-bent to hang Trump. They looked everywhere, and found NOTHING chargeable.
Posted by bmy
Nashville
Member since Oct 2007
48203 posts
Posted on 7/28/19 at 9:54 am to
quote:

You do not know that.

You are reduced to pulling shite out of your arse.


Anyone can correct their testimony
Posted by Taxing Authority
Houston
Member since Feb 2010
57517 posts
Posted on 7/28/19 at 9:55 am to
quote:

2) 'They did not make a determination as to whether the president committed a crime because of the opinion'

Sentence is factully accurate and is much less misleading.
Nope. If this were the case, no one would ever investigate a sitting president.
Posted by davyjones
NELA
Member since Feb 2019
30546 posts
Posted on 7/28/19 at 9:55 am to
quote:

How many prosecutors have ever been charged with investigating whether or not a sitting president committed a crime?

But isn't the goal to apply the law equally amongst those in positions of high power, same as the rest of us? That noble goal went real well.
Posted by bmy
Nashville
Member since Oct 2007
48203 posts
Posted on 7/28/19 at 9:56 am to
quote:

The Special Council was a far-left lynch mob hell-bent to hang Trump. They looked everywhere, and found NOTHING chargeable


Posted by Screaming Viking
Member since Jul 2013
4540 posts
Posted on 7/28/19 at 9:59 am to
quote:

It's quite simple.. in matters related to the presidents conduct Mueller and his team were not acting as prosecutors. They were fact finders.


We agree. Great. They found no convicting facts. And when you do not have convicting facts, by definition, you are innocent. And here we are agreeing. Isn’t this great!!
Posted by RockyMtnTigerWDE
War Damn Eagle Dad!
Member since Oct 2010
105553 posts
Posted on 7/28/19 at 10:01 am to
That’s not reality because in Muellers interview with Barr and Rosenstein he said the OLC played no part in his findings.

Posted by bmy
Nashville
Member since Oct 2007
48203 posts
Posted on 7/28/19 at 10:01 am to
quote:

But isn't the goal to apply the law equally amongst those in positions of high power, same as the rest of us? That noble goal went real well.


We agree. There is just one exception.

In 1973, in the midst of the Watergate scandal engulfing President Richard Nixon, the Justice Department's Office of Legal Counsel adopted in an internal memo the position that a sitting president cannot be indicted. Nixon resigned in 1974, with the House of Representatives moving toward impeaching him.

"The spectacle of an indicted president still trying to serve as Chief Executive boggles the imagination," the memo stated.

The department reaffirmed the policy in a 2000 memo, saying court decisions in the intervening years had not changed its conclusion that a sitting president is "constitutionally immune" from indictment and criminal prosecution. It concluded that criminal charges against a president would "violate the constitutional separation of powers" delineating the authority of the executive, legislative and judicial branches of the U.S. government.
Posted by The Boat
Member since Oct 2008
164646 posts
Posted on 7/28/19 at 10:02 am to
I haven’t really been paying attention. Was that line why all these idiots have been screaming about putting Trump in jail when he’s not President anymore?
Posted by cajunangelle
Member since Oct 2012
148131 posts
Posted on 7/28/19 at 10:30 am to
No, a democrat asked Mueller if Trump could be indicted after he is finished being President. Mueller of course replied Yes and the media went into full we got heeeem mode.

(You can indict anyone at anytime, being that SDNY closed the cases against Trump this is desperate)

How can the progressive democrats really think Trump belongs in jail? When anyone with a lick of common sense knows Obama and his administration belong in jail? If Trump used govt agencies including the FBI & DOJ to do oppo research and espionage on the Kamala Harris campaign, and if God forbid she won-Leak classified Presidential convos with world leaders and set up a Flynn, he would be under the jail.

If Trump gave Iran/Russia/China/ISIS- jets, uranium, money, gold, favors, Trump would be executed at dawn on CNN LIVE for aiding and abetting the enemy. Black jesus is above the law.
Posted by BamaScoop
Panama City Beach, Florida
Member since May 2007
53967 posts
Posted on 7/28/19 at 10:35 am to
quote:

Mueller is a mess.

He's flip flopped on this thing 10 times already.

Dude is legit senile.



He's not a mess. He went into this with an agenda and failed and now he has been caught and he is scared shitless over what is about to happen to him.

The old saying goes, if you come after the king you better not miss, this mother fricker missed and the shots are about to be coming back his way and he has no more ammo. He's fricked.
first pageprev pagePage 2 of 3Next pagelast page

Back to top
logoFollow TigerDroppings for LSU Football News
Follow us on Twitter, Facebook and Instagram to get the latest updates on LSU Football and Recruiting.

FacebookTwitterInstagram