Um i think there has to actually be a crime in order to convict anyone of it "no where man".
No where man, please listen, you don't know what you're missing.....
Mueller is a complete Buffoon.....
- Thread starter bornaneer
- Start date
Um i think there has to actually be a crime in order to convict anyone of it "no where man".
No where man, please listen, you don't know what you're missing.....
Eerily looks like he and Nancy partied together recently....er..ahhh, cough....could you repeat the question....I don't recall ****...I'm actually having a blast. Mueller is unglued, says he can't remember what's in his own report. Never heard of Fusion GPS. Lied about why he couldn't charge Trump, and generally is making an *** of himself.
But you keep hope alive he's going to nail Trump.
The Dimms needed a distraction from the beatings Trump is giving the "SQUAT" team...
Anyone that watched Mueller saw what transpired. No doubt Mueller believes Trump obstructed....but he slipped up about his reason for not recommending indictment....even though he could have stated in the report that he thought Trump did obstruct. If you read the report......he gave OTHER reasons beside DOJ policy for NOT making that declaration.
The Demorats tried to point out the many connections that Mueller had to the Bush's.......BUT....I'm sure you know how the Bush's feel about Donald Trump.
I don't blame Trump for trying to obstruct this witch hunt....I would have done the same......A witch hunt for a non crime as per the final report on collusion.
Anyway...life is to short....enjoy your vacation.
David Axelrod, a former senior adviser to President Barack Obama, said Wednesday that Robert Mueller did not look as "sharp" as he used to during a House Judiciary Committee hearing, calling the performance "painful."
Reacting on Twitter to Mueller's flustered answers to House lawmakers, Axelrod pointed to the former special counsel's decision to have a top aide accompany him at the hearing,
"This is delicate to say, but Mueller, whom I deeply respect, has not publicly testified before Congress in at least six years. And he does not appear as sharp as he was then," Axelrod wrote.
Reacting on Twitter to Mueller's flustered answers to House lawmakers, Axelrod pointed to the former special counsel's decision to have a top aide accompany him at the hearing,
"This is delicate to say, but Mueller, whom I deeply respect, has not publicly testified before Congress in at least six years. And he does not appear as sharp as he was then," Axelrod wrote.
I think a case can be made for that. But....that case could be made for anyone that is fighting against a proven falsehood that led to obstruction charges. The Mueller Report strongly stated that team Trump did not "collude" with the Russians.
You forgot "corruptly or by threats or force, or by any threatening letter or communication"
The President is within his legal right to ask for the firing (a case could even be made he could fire himself) and to prove Obstruction you'll need to prove "corruptly or by threats or force, or by any threatening letter or communication".
He also made the case today that conspiracy is basically collusion so he admitted Trump was right.
The funny thing is no one will remember nor give a **** about Mueller's spectacle by the weekend. The media cycles will take care of it.
It’s pretty easy to apply a realistic context to this situation and see it’s nothing significant. For instance, I’m having a conversation with my counsel, we’ll call them Legal and HR. “I want to fire this person. Please execute it immediately.” Legal and HR confer and determine too much liability exists which could negatively impact the overall company and open us up to litigation for wrongful termination, and they don’t execute the termination.
Am I guilty of wrongful termination? Or the laughable, attempted wrongful termination?
You all feel free to die on this hill, it’s a loser and not the smoking gun you think it is. You can apply this to any executive of any industry who confers with internal counsel and is not versed in the ins and outs of legal code. I do it on a daily basis and I’m overruled all of the time. It’s why the position of “counsel” exists, to provide counsel so you don’t do something stupid.
Also, bottom line, Mueller was allowed to complete his investigation unobstructed. Says so in the report. It does speculate, about what might have been, but without proof, you’re up shitscreek.
POTUS interfering in a federal investigation isn't quite the same as your small counsel of idiots and false equivalencies.
Holy **** that was bottom of the barrel. :joy::joy::joy::joy: Can't wait to see you people defend President Lib doing the same ****.
Hence the entire f'n reason we have obstruction laws. :joy::joy::joy::joy:
This has to be an act. Well done on this troll. You had me believing you.
With these incompetent democrats? I'll guess never. Should have started as soon as members had a chance to read the report. Today is nothing more than a dog and pony show, ie - the House of Representatives.
Maybe after Horowitz's and Durham's investigation.
You know because they are Investigatiing Trump.
:joy::joy::joy::joy::joy:
Well at least we know now how Trump "colluded" and "obstructed". He sure laid it all out didn't he Gunny?
@Boomerwv sure seems to think so. Says he "won" our bet that Muelller would do exactly that. [eyeroll]