Mueller just dumped on Trump , clear as mud

[IndySteel]

“Mr. Mueller, who colluded with Russia to generate the fake Steele Dossier?”
“Mr. Mueller, who paid for the fake Steele Dossier?”
“Mr. Mueller, who authorized the fake Steele Dossier to be used as evidence in obtaining FISA warrants to spy on the Trump Campaign?”
“Mr. Mueller, why are you a corrupt Communist c #nt?”

 

[Tibs]

still no there there.

For a lawyer, you sure have a superficial grasp of what was - and what wasn't - in the Mueller report. Maybe you should read it first, then spread your all-knowing expertise and wisdom on it.

 

[CharlesDavenport]

Stop swallowing that liberal garbage

What part of what I said are you saying is liberal garbage? That the questions won't be limited (what do you think a friendly subpoena means?) or that the Republicans won't get **** done ?(thats all me) I don't buy tough talk to the media from the Republicans. Seen the movie too many times. I never got excited by a scowling Trey Gowdy or a serious and concerned looking Darrell Issa either.

 

[Spike]

What part of what I said are you saying is liberal garbage? That the questions won't be limited (what do you think a friendly subpoena means?) or that the Republicans won't get **** done ?(thats all me) I don't buy tough talk to the media from the Republicans.

politico

and it wasn't a "friendly subpoena"



Not a 'Friendly Subpoena': Mueller Will Testify July 17 in US House

https://www.law.com/nationallawjour...ena-mueller-will-testify-july-17-in-us-house/


ROBERT MUELLER 'DID NOT WANT TO TESTIFY,' THIS IS NOT A 'FRIENDLY SUBPOENA'

https://www.newsweek.com/robert-mueller-testify-congress-friendly-subpoena-schiff-1445924

 

[CharlesDavenport]

politico

and it wasn't a "friendly subpoena"



Not a 'Friendly Subpoena': Mueller Will Testify July 17 in US House

https://www.law.com/nationallawjour...ena-mueller-will-testify-july-17-in-us-house/


ROBERT MUELLER 'DID NOT WANT TO TESTIFY,' THIS IS NOT A 'FRIENDLY SUBPOENA'

https://www.newsweek.com/robert-mueller-testify-congress-friendly-subpoena-schiff-1445924

I got that from your link - https://www.mediaite.com/trump/gop-...rks-at-mueller-hearing-he-better-be-prepared/

Meadows is the chair of the conservative House Freedom Caucus and sits on the House Oversight Committee. He also accused Mueller of being friendly with Democrats because he got a “friendly subpoena.”

“It is a friendly subpoena and that should not surprise your viewers,” Meadows said.

“This particular special counsel, Bob Mueller, has been friendly to the cause from day one. What I find so disheartening is that Bob Mueller said it all, 445 pages, that is all I’m going to say and what has he been doing? He’s been courted by the other side so they can harass the president and keep all this narrative but honestly, there is nothing there,” Meadows continued.

 

[IndySteel]

politico

and it wasn't a "friendly subpoena"



Not a 'Friendly Subpoena': Mueller Will Testify July 17 in US House

https://www.law.com/nationallawjour...ena-mueller-will-testify-july-17-in-us-house/


ROBERT MUELLER 'DID NOT WANT TO TESTIFY,' THIS IS NOT A 'FRIENDLY SUBPOENA'

https://www.newsweek.com/robert-mueller-testify-congress-friendly-subpoena-schiff-1445924

Yeah, he doesn’t want to testify because his whole investigation was full of ****, a witch hunt hoax. And now he has to face the music. Nads is a libtard dumbass for carrying on this charade.

 

[Steeltime]

For a lawyer, you sure have a superficial grasp of what was - and what wasn't - in the Mueller report. Maybe you should read it first, then spread your all-knowing expertise and wisdom on it.

So which Trump campaign official colluded with Russia to affect the 2016 election, and how? That was the only ******* crime subject to the special counsel appointment.

I'll wait.

 

[Sarge]

I'm with Charles on this one. To me, whether or not it is a friendly subpoena is irrelevant to what Republicans do or don't do. Republicans have run to the media so many times talking tough about whatever the hot button issue is at the time, and when it comes time to act, they shrivel in the face of their duties. It has played out over and over. When they actually do what they say, there may be some hope. Until then, I will remain a skeptic.

 

[IndySteel]

So which Trump campaign official colluded with Russia to affect the 2016 election, and how? That was the only ******* crime subject to the special counsel appointment.

I'll wait.

Keep up on current events, Steeltime. It’s all about made up Obstruction of the non collusion now.

 

[Tibs]

So which Trump campaign official colluded with Russia to affect the 2016 election, and how? That was the only ******* crime subject to the special counsel appointment.

This isn't - and never was - a criminal case. The Mueller report is an impeachment referral for Congress. It is on them to act upon the information uncovered in the report. And there's plenty of meat on the bone there. Trump and Barr's hasty - and dishonest - dismissal of Mueller's findings is irrelevant at this point.

 

[IndySteel]

This isn't - and never was - a criminal case. The Mueller report is an impeachment referral for Congress. It is on them to act upon the information uncovered in the report. And there's plenty of meat on the bone there. Trump and Barr's hasty - and dishonest - dismissal of Mueller's findings is irrelevant at this point.

Tidy up your safe space. You’ll be needing it soon. Stock it with extra cookies. This one’s going to leave a mark.

 

[oneforthebus]

I expect a lot of "I will refer you back to what I said about that in my report' and "That is not something that was in the scope of my investigation". He'll say nothing new or noteworthy but CNN will be acting like every word out of his mouth is some devastating bombshell.

 

[madinsomniac]

This isn't - and never was - a criminal case. The Mueller report is an impeachment referral for Congress. It is on them to act upon the information uncovered in the report. And there's plenty of meat on the bone there. Trump and Barr's hasty - and dishonest - dismissal of Mueller's findings is irrelevant at this point.

Sorry Tibs, but unfortunately neither your nor the conservatives in here opinions ultimately mean a damn in this issue. Impeachment is a political issue and it’s heavily driven by local polling because as the Republicans learned with Clinton, impeaching a president over what moderates find tacky is political suicide. The house might get away with it. The senate will never ever vote to remove a guy until guys like me are on board... and ive read it... and I think it’s exactly the fishing expedition the conservatives say it is...

Its done. You are being led on by house members trying to thrash up excitement for their base in hopes they won’t take out the loss on them next election....

Just move on. Pick the best guy or gal out of the fifty people running and take him down in the next election

 

[Steelworth]

I expect a lot of "I will refer you back to what I said about that in my report' and "That is not something that was in the scope of my investigation". He'll say nothing new or noteworthy but CNN will be acting like every word out of his mouth is some devastating bombshell.

Spot-the-****-on.

 

[Steeltime]

This isn't - and never was - a criminal case. The Mueller report is an impeachment referral for Congress. It is on them to act upon the information uncovered in the report. And there's plenty of meat on the bone there. Trump and Barr's hasty - and dishonest - dismissal of Mueller's findings is irrelevant at this point.

Great answer.

To a question I did not ask, and having nothing whatsoever to do with the question I DID ask, but hey, great answer.

 

[Vader]

Mueller doesn't have to testify. The house subpoena could easily be challenged in court and won easily. Mueller was under the authority of the DOJ. He isn't subject to house oversight. The reason he didn't take it to court is because he isn't going to say anything anyway. He'll continue to reference his report or say he doesn't know or it wasn't part of his investigation. It will be a borefest.

 

[Steeltime]

Oh, and Tibs, you REALLY need to get news from somewhere other than liberal blogs.

Representatives from the Justice Department and Mueller's office issued a joint statement Wednesday evening. It came after Mueller publicly discussed his final report.

"The Attorney General has previously stated that the special counsel repeatedly affirmed that he was not saying that, but for the (Office of Legal Counsel) opinion, he would have found the president obstructed justice," the statement said.

"The special counsel's report and his statement [Wednesday] made clear that the office concluded it would not reach a determination – one way or the other – about whether the president committed a crime. There is no conflict between these statements."

"If we had confidence that the president clearly did not commit a crime, we would have said that. We did not, however, make a determination as to whether the president did commit a crime."

https://www.newsmax.com/newsfront/r...arr-obstruction-justice/2019/05/30/id/918154/

So you are grossly misreading and misstating what Mueller actually said.

Jesus, if you earned $1 for every false claim you made about Trump and the investigation, you would have a lot of dollars by now.

 

[Steeltime]

When suspects are charged with lesser crimes (such as misdemeanors or lower-level felonies), the process generally begins with the prosecutor filing a criminal complaint, often following an arrest and only when there is probable cause for the charges.

https://criminal.findlaw.com/criminal-procedure/what-is-an-indictment.html

Mueller could not find even "probable cause" for a crime, Tibs. How low is that standard? The joke in law school is, "A prosecutor can indict a bologna sandwich."

The fact that Mueller could not find evidence that rose to the "probable cause" level means a finding that is more favorable to Trump than a jury finding of not guilty. A jury finding of not guilty means that the prosecutor had "probable cause" of criminal activity by the defendant, and the judge believed there was sufficient evidence for the case to go to the jury.

A failure to find even "probable cause" of criminal activity by Trump is a vastly more favorable determination, Tibs.

This legal lesson brought to you for free. I really should start charging you people.

 

[ZonaBurgh]

This isn't - and never was - a criminal case. The Mueller report is an impeachment referral for Congress. It is on them to act upon the information uncovered in the report. And there's plenty of meat on the bone there. Trump and Barr's hasty - and dishonest - dismissal of Mueller's findings is irrelevant at this point.

Wow, I'm dizzy from all that spinning.

 

[Spike]

I know how it will go and its really going to piss off the Dems


To every question:

"Its in the report"


Hahahahahahahaha

 

[Steeltime]

I know how it will go and its really going to piss off the Dems


To every question:

"Its in the report"


Hahahahahahahaha

They can just have John Dean act as a translator.

Mueller: "It's in the report."

Translator: "Trump is a traitor who is an active Russian agent!! Lock him up!! Ahhhhhhhhhh ..."

 

[Tibs]

I know how it will go and its really going to piss off the Dems

To every question:

"Its in the report"

Why would that piss anybody off? He's right. It is all in the report.

 

[Steeltime]

Why would that piss anybody off? He's right. It is all in the report.

 

[CharlesDavenport]

The little hand is not close enough to the 12. Looks weird.

 

[Tibs]

Gee, I wonder why? Shocking, I tell you, shocking....

<blockquote class="twitter-tweet" data-lang="en"><p lang="en" dir="ltr">184 House Republicans just voted against securing elections <a href="https://t.co/zdi1PJXSeu">https://t.co/zdi1PJXSeu</a> via <a href="https://twitter.com/thinkprogress?ref_src=twsrc%5Etfw">@thinkprogress</a> | They know they lose fair elections.</p>— Rick Cooley (@rcooley123) <a href="https://twitter.com/rcooley123/status/1144724774456897536?ref_src=twsrc%5Etfw">June 28, 2019</a></blockquote>
<script async src="https://platform.twitter.com/widgets.js" charset="utf-8"></script>