Mueller investigation was the biggest Democrat farce in history.
- Thread starter BombadEER
- Start date
Just curious how you would classify the Benghazi investigations?.....the multiple ones that yielded almost nothing.
If he was not exonerated, you think Mueller would not state otherwise publicly? There is absolutely no way Mueller would be silent if Trump was not stating the essence of the Mueller report. Mueller is well aware that AG is under no obligation to share the report in it’s entirety to Congress.
Look, I don’t think Barr would be so brash and foolish to mischaracterize the essence of the report.....but.....
- Mueller hasn’t stated anything publically
- Wouldn’t Mueller be breaking the law by making any statements on the investigation publicly?
There are very specific procedures for a SC investigation. The SC has no obligation to seek an indictment. The SC is only obligated to prepare a report and turn it in to the AG. The AG only has to provide his or her own summary. That’s it. It doesn’t have to be made public. I’m not saying this because of this particular investigation but the whole process is a farce. The only way Mueller talks is if he is subpoenaed.
Let me explain something to you on a eighth grade level so you have a chance of understanding. Prosecutors investigate charges and prosecute crimes. They do not exonerate anyone. Everyone is innocent until proven guilty. If no charges are made then you (anyone) is innocent. Trump is innocent in the eyes of the law. Completely. 100%.
Deal with that.
Mueller absolutely has freedom of speech as every other American has, and there is no order whatsoever that prevents him from speaking publicly. If he feels his finding are being misrepresented in any way, there is absolutely nothing that would prevent him from speaking out publicly.
No ****. SC is a farce now. Couple days ago it was Mueller time. Moron thinks he can talk his way out.
Right. He doesnt want to testify publically though. He would be required to answer all questions about what he did investigate and also what he did not and why.
Point being, if he felt his findings were being misconstrued, he has every right to bring it to attention, publicly or otherwise.
The Special Counsel speaks to that as well, .........
No further indictments recommended
I thought Hillary turned her server over after she bleached and beat the **** out of it with a sledge hammer.
This is history revisionism. Yes the Russians "attempted" to influence the election. It's not been precisely determined if or when they "hacked" the DNC servers. Even if they did, it didn't change results the election. Obama said that, Congress said that, and the IC said that. Democrats have NEVER explained what the "security risk" was that required spying on the Trump campaign. Mueller never found any "collusion" even with all of the eavesdropping that went on illegally. What we do now know, is the entire DOJ was weaponized and engaged in an illegal attempt to overturn the results of a duly elected President. Why that fact seems to escape you, or why you remain indifferent about organized attempts from within our Government to undermine our Constitution scares the Hell out of me.
The entire FISA warrant application and process was an abuse of Trump's rights, and several others! Who illegally "unmasked" the names released during that illegal snooping? Who ordered the lies told to the FISA court to get the permission to spy on innocent Americans?
You can't answer, yet you are indifferent to the questions.
Hillary's server was the one she abused like an unwanted child who survived an abortion. The DNC servers were the ones Dems never allowed any forensics investigation into, or took precautions to protect against hacking.
"Democrats early 2016: Trump must accept the results of the election.
Democrats late 2016: We do not accept the results of the election.
Democrats 2017: Trump must accept Mueller’s report.
Democrats 2019: We do not accept Mueller's report.
It’s a sickness ... it has to be".
kay:This profundity is only surpassed by its absurdity.
Ok so Barr lays down a summary of the TWO YEAR LONG investigation in 4 pages of basically 3 bullet points: 1) no collusion 2) no evidence for obstruction 3) Russia hacked the DNC and shared with Wikileaks
To which all the loyalists and their big butt haircut leader bounce around singing “told ya so” to the first two points. But the third, you guys need to actually see the evidence?
I’m excepting that Barr read the report, and the evidence compiled by Mueller and his team (they didn’t just play golf and tweet for the last two years) and honestly condensed the information into the summary. Why would Mueller say it, if it wasn’t proven?
Last edited: