Toggle sidebar

Mueller to testify May 15th

T

TarHeelEer

Freshman
Dec 15, 2002
89,304
53
48
"The White House has so far indicated they would not interfere with Mr. Mueller's attempt to testify; we hope that won't change."

LOL. No, don't throw me in the briar patch.
 
bornaneer

bornaneer

All-Conference
Jan 23, 2014
30,948
1,662
113
tjebarr said:
Trump is shitting his depends
Click to expand...
Not so fast.....If you think Mueller is going to come to different conclusions if he testifies......you are wrong.....Mueller is not as stupid as many are who are on this board.
 
atlkvb

atlkvb

All-American
Jul 9, 2004
82,615
6,217
113
I don't have a problem having Mueller testify but what exactly is it the Democrats want him now to admit?

Dems: "Why didn't you find Trump guilty of collusion?"

Mueller: "Because there wasn't enough evidence to prove it"

Dems "So why didn't you just create some?"

Mueller;"We tried that, and we still couldn't prove it"
 
C

countryroads89_rivals

Sophomore
Sep 6, 2013
27,594
120
0
bornaneer said:
Not so fast.....If you think Mueller is going to come to different conclusions if he testifies......you are wrong.....Mueller is not as stupid as many are who are on this board.
Click to expand...

You’re a special kind of stupid.

Remember that time all the board right wingers came all over themselves all weekend long when they thought the report actually said something that it didn’t?

Yeah, I do. It was hilarious.
 
S

Shirley Knott

Redshirt
May 26, 2017
12,831
0
0
atlkvb said:
I don't have a problem having Mueller testify but what exactly is it the Democrats want him now to admit?

Dems: "Why didn't you find Trump guilty of collusion?"

Mueller: "Because there wasn't enough evidence to prove it"

Dems "So why didn't you just create some?"

Mueller;"We tried that, and we still couldn't prove it"
Click to expand...
Dems praying for Trump's destruction.... Don't realize Mueller is not GOD !!!!
 
atlkvb

atlkvb

All-American
Jul 9, 2004
82,615
6,217
113
Shirley Knott said:
Dems praying for Trump's destruction.... Don't realize Mueller is not GOD !!!!
Click to expand...

I am simply at a loss Shirley Knott understanding why they (Dems) think Mueller is going to tell them something he hasn't already or can't prove? "No collusion"---well Trump actually "colluded" but Mueller just missed it or forgot to tell them how?

"No obstruction"--well Mueller didn't specify exactly what part of his 2 year investigation was "obstructed" however Trump often called it a 'witch hunt' and wasn't exactly Mueller's ace Broski... so that made things harder on him (Mueller) than they really needed to be which could be considered a form of "obstruction". [eyeroll]
 
atlkvb

atlkvb

All-American
Jul 9, 2004
82,615
6,217
113
countryroads89 said:
You’re a special kind of stupid.

Remember that time all the board right wingers came all over themselves all weekend long when they thought the report actually said something that it didn’t?

Yeah, I do. It was hilarious.
Click to expand...

I remember the time the board voted more than 2-to-1 that you were a racist. That was a classic scientifically sampled poll that stands as True even today thanks to @wvu2007.
 
bornaneer

bornaneer

All-Conference
Jan 23, 2014
30,948
1,662
113
countryroads89 said:
You’re a special kind of stupid.

Remember that time all the board right wingers came all over themselves all weekend long when they thought the report actually said something that it didn’t?

Yeah, I do. It was hilarious.
Click to expand...
You are setting yourself up for a big letdown.
 
K

Keyser76

Freshman
Apr 7, 2010
11,912
58
0
Why even argue with donnies lil fanboys defending his latest reversal? He is terrified of Mueller testifying and their being a reality show he can't control. Meanwhile his lil girls on here defend him as totally innocent because he said so, you know these clowns ain't read that report. Intelligent folks know that if it totally exonerated him he would have released it immediately and be thrilled with Mueller testifying, but that ain't the deal is it? lmfao.
 
M

moe

Junior
May 29, 2001
32,863
284
83
bornaneer said:
NO collusion by Trump and NO charge of obstruction.
Click to expand...
He made no conclusion regarding obstruction but provided evidence of obstruction to be considered by Congress. Trump and his supporters shouldn't cheer an appearance in either the house or Senate by Mueller.
 
T

TarHeelEer

Freshman
Dec 15, 2002
89,304
53
48
moe said:
He made no conclusion regarding obstruction but provided evidence of obstruction to be considered by Congress. Trump and his supporters shouldn't cheer an appearance in either the house or Senate by Mueller.
Click to expand...

LOL
 
bornaneer

bornaneer

All-Conference
Jan 23, 2014
30,948
1,662
113
moe said:
He made no conclusion regarding obstruction but provided evidence of obstruction to be considered by Congress. Trump and his supporters shouldn't cheer an appearance in either the house or Senate by Mueller.
Click to expand...
He NEVER charged Trump. Mueller's team investigated Trump for almost two years and could not conclude that Trump obstructed. The House Dems disagree.....but Mueller never said he did. You folks are going to be very disappointed with what Mueller has to say. But...it will be fun to watch how Mueller's words will be spun.
 
C

countryroads89_rivals

Sophomore
Sep 6, 2013
27,594
120
0
bornaneer said:
He NEVER charged Trump. Mueller's team investigated Trump for almost two years and could not conclude that Trump obstructed. The House Dems disagree.....but Mueller never said he did. You folks are going to be very disappointed with what Mueller has to say. But...it will be fun to watch how Mueller's words will be spun.
Click to expand...

That’s not what the report said. Thanks for playing.
 
M

moe

Junior
May 29, 2001
32,863
284
83
bornaneer said:
Mueller's team investigated Trump for almost two years and they did not charge Trump with Obstruction of Justice.
Click to expand...
FIFY and I agree with that. They concluded that they could not charge Trump with anything since the DOJ says you can't indict a sitting POTUS but Mueller provided lots of evidence of obstruction for Congress to evaluate. Mueller can explain all of this on the 15th.
 
bornaneer

bornaneer

All-Conference
Jan 23, 2014
30,948
1,662
113
moe said:
FIFY and I agree with that. They concluded that they could not charge Trump with anything since the DOJ says you can't indict a sitting POTUS but Mueller provided lots of evidence of obstruction for Congress to evaluate. Mueller can explain all of this on the 15th.
Click to expand...
Mueller could have said Trump colluded without indicting him......Mueller NEVER said Trump colluded. There’s no law saying a president can’t be indicted......just a couple of Justice Department memos.
 
M

moe

Junior
May 29, 2001
32,863
284
83
bornaneer said:
Mueller could have said Trump obstructed without indicting him......Mueller NEVER said Trump obstructed. There’s no law saying a president can’t be indicted......just a couple of Justice Department memos.
Click to expand...
FIFY and No not really. Do you follow this story anywhere but on this board? It doesn't seem so.
 
atlkvb

atlkvb

All-American
Jul 9, 2004
82,615
6,217
113
The easy answer will come when Mueller testifies that he personally thinks Congress should indict Trump for "obstruction". Then one of the committee members can ask him to explain why? He either then will explain all of his evidence gathered leading him to that conclusion, or he can explain why he's incompetent and didn't recommend this to them before? We won't have long to wait and see what his answer to that question is, and if he stands behind his own investigation or is incompetent?

They may ask him the same thing about "collusion", and why he didn't recommend indictment on that either?
 
T

TarHeelEer

Freshman
Dec 15, 2002
89,304
53
48
atlkvb said:
The easy answer will come when Mueller testifies that he personally thinks Congress should indict Trump for "obstruction". Then one of the committee members can ask him to explain why? He either then will explain all of his evidence gathered leading him to that conclusion, or he can explain why he's incompetent and didn't recommend this to them before? We won't have long to wait and see what his answer to that question is, and if he stands behind his own investigation or is incompetent?

They may ask him the same thing about "collusion", and why he didn't recommend indictment on that either?
Click to expand...

He won't. He will ask them to look at the evidence he collected in the report. The Senate will never convict on that, so if the House takes it up, it's a losing cause in 2020.
 
atlkvb

atlkvb

All-American
Jul 9, 2004
82,615
6,217
113
TarHeelEer said:
He won't. He will ask them to look at the evidence he collected in the report. The Senate will never convict on that, so if the House takes it up, it's a losing cause in 2020.
Click to expand...

I agree with this, but several Leftists are insisting it was Barr who "overlooked" all of the hard evidence or even refused to recommend indictment for Trump over "obstruction". We are also led to believe by the Left this was actually Mueller's conclusion, but it was buried by Barr against Mueller's wishes. So now he has a chance to say what he actually concluded, and in fact now recommends. (which he was never prevented from clearly stating anyway) Let's hear him recommend Congress indict Trump for prosecution of "obstruction". Let's hear the specific violations of the Law that led him to that conclusion?

Let's hear him cite the specific incidents of "obstruction" he thinks he found strong evidence for? That was his job, let's hear how well he did it? Or was he simply incompetent?

Barr's a Lawyer too...pretty darn good one. He looked at all of the evidence Mueller presented and concluded under the Law "no collusion" "no obstruction". Let's hear Mueller's legal analysis on why Barr got all that wrong?
 
Last edited:
B

boomerwv

Freshman
Jan 16, 2008
9,988
79
48
TarHeelEer said:
He won't. He will ask them to look at the evidence he collected in the report. The Senate will never convict on that, so if the House takes it up, it's a losing cause in 2020.
Click to expand...

That's not necessarily true. That depends on the public believing that the impeachment charges are unfounded as they did with Clinton.

If during the hearings they believe that Trump deserves to be removed and then the Senate Rs refuse to do so, that could go very badly for all of them.

Mueller testimony is likely the linchpin on voting to impeach or not.
 
M

moe

Junior
May 29, 2001
32,863
284
83
Boomerwv said:
That's not necessarily true. That depends on the public believing that the impeachment charges are unfounded as they did with Clinton.

If during the hearings they believe that Trump deserves to be removed and then the Senate Rs refuse to do so, that could go very badly for all of them.

Mueller testimony is likely the linchpin on voting to impeach or not.
Click to expand...
Tack on the WH ignoring all subpoenas and other requests for information.
 
atlkvb

atlkvb

All-American
Jul 9, 2004
82,615
6,217
113
moe said:
Tack on the WH ignoring all subpoenas and other requests for information.
Click to expand...

Yes I hope they do...then Barr will have the reason he needs to re-open Hillary's "non intentional" exonerated investigation of that illegal server on the part of Comey.
 
atlkvb

atlkvb

All-American
Jul 9, 2004
82,615
6,217
113
Boomerwv said:
If during the hearings they believe that Trump deserves to be removed and then the Senate Rs refuse to do so, that could go very badly for all of them.
Click to expand...

Suppose the public concludes the evidence for "obstruction" is bogus, yet the House indicts him anyway? Wouldn't that go very badly for the Dems, even before the case gets to the Senate to be easily dismissed because it is bogus?
 
atlkvb

atlkvb

All-American
Jul 9, 2004
82,615
6,217
113
moe said:
Are you sure that the report doesn't include evidence of Obstruction of Justice?
Click to expand...

Yes! 100% sure. Know why? (this is something you Leftists are missing) It wasn't all Mueller's call. He had a team of Lawyers who also gathered, compiled, and considered all the evidence. If they thought an indictment was required, Mueller would not have overruled them, in fact he would have supported them! He didn't. They didn't call for any indictments. He didn't even make a recommendation on it!

So now he's going to reveal all they missed? They're all upset he refused to consider their indictment recommendations in his final report? He's going to come clean now on how their views were sifted out from his final report, even ignored?

You folks on the Left are certainly delusional, certainly not grounded in reality, certainly deranged, but I at least figured you all still had some level of common sense left too?

Guess not.[eyeroll]
 
Last edited:
You must log in or register to reply here.
Top Bottom