The Mueller report

[gnadfly]

Originally Posted by eccieuser9500

Just review the evidence in the report. He didn't. It's a report. Not an evidentiary file. Not a conclusion.

He subverts and misleads the public, in his preemptive press conference, revealing his bias. Without reviewing the evidence, he has failed to bring confidence in his abilities as the top law enforcement officer of the land.

You keep saying it but don't give any specifics.

Nice Grubering.

[I B Hankering]

Originally Posted by eccieuser9500

hildebeest was the candidate championing her following of blind and ignorant minions.

[eccieuser9500]

Originally Posted by gnadfly

You keep saying it but don't give any specifics.

Nice Grubering.

Article 1, Section 3, Clauses 6 and 7

The Senate shall have the sole Power to try all Impeachments. When sitting for that Purpose, they shall be on Oath or Affirmation. When the President of the United States is tried the Chief Justice shall preside; And no Person shall be convicted without the Concurrence of two thirds of the Members present.

Judgement in Cases of Impreachment shall not extend further than to removal from Office, and disqualification to hold and enjoy any Office of honor, Trust or Profit under the United States: but the Party convicted shall nevertheless be liable and subject to Indictment, Trial, Judgement and Punishment, according to Law.

Indictment

[I B Hankering]

Originally Posted by eccieuser9500

Indictment

Congress doesn't have the Constitutional authority to "indict" a ham sandwich, let alone the president of the United States.

[dilbert firestorm]

Originally Posted by eccieuser9500

Indictment

ur mis-reading that clause.


Senate can't indict, just removal from office. that is all they are allowed to do.


After removal from office, the former may be subject indictment by DOJ and trial by court according to law.

[Jaxson66]

Originally Posted by eccieuser9500

https://static.c-span.org/files/pres...er_+Report.pdf

I wonder how many of former federal prosecutors will have signed the letter to the DOJ by the end of the week, 700 have concluded that if trump wasn’t president he would have been charged with Obstruction.

[I B Hankering]

Originally Posted by Jaxson66

I wonder how many of former federal prosecutors will have signed the letter to the DOJ by the end of the week, 700 have concluded that if trump wasn’t president he would have been charged with Obstruction.

All of those jackasses are Odumbo, hildebeest and Soros confederates; so, their opinion doesn't mean shit: they can't pass the Barr!

[The_Waco_Kid]

Originally Posted by Jaxson66

I wonder how many of former federal prosecutors will have signed the letter to the DOJ by the end of the week, 700 have concluded that if trump wasn’t president he would have been charged with Obstruction.

i have bad news. the only prosecutor who's opinion matters didn't recommend charges. Bobby Swan Mueller, 3rd of his name.

BAHHAAAAA had to work some GOT in there!

so which do you think is more likely .. that Mueller as an "Establishment Republican" has such disdain for Trump that after he could not find solid evidence of obstruction he exceeded his mandate to "indict or decline to indict" and threw the "Establishment Democrats" a bone to impeach on a nothing burger or Mueller like Barr is a Trump operative and he is intentionally baiting the Democrats to impeach Trump to destroy them?

there is a third option if you want to consider it ... Mueller's report doesn't have evidence to impeach and you should just accept the truth and move on.


#MoveOn2020!!!

[Jaxson66]

Originally Posted by The_Waco_Kid

i have bad news. the only prosecutor who's opinion matters didn't recommend charges. Bobby Swan Mueller, 3rd of his name.

BAHHAAAAA had to work some GOT in there

#MoveOn2020!!!

And that’s your personal opinion, I seriously doubt 100% of the DOJ rank and file agrees with Barr’s summary. Files have a habit of leaking in the current administration. Maybe you missed the news about ten years of trump’s taxes being sent to the NYT....stand by for a tweet storm.

I would post links but I can’t seem to get my iPad to cooperate with the platform. I’ll have it figured out soon

[gnadfly]

Originally Posted by Jaxson66

And that’s your personal opinion, I seriously doubt 100% of the DOJ rank and file agrees with Barr’s summary. Files have a habit of leaking in the current administration. Maybe you missed the news about ten years of trump’s taxes being sent to the NYT....stand by for a tweet storm.

I would post links but I can’t seem to get my iPad to cooperate with the platform. I’ll have it figured out soon

More poor trolling. Reminiscent of a Sistine Chapel post.

[The_Waco_Kid]

Originally Posted by Jaxson66

And that’s your personal opinion, I seriously doubt 100% of the DOJ rank and file agrees with Barr’s summary. Files have a habit of leaking in the current administration. Maybe you missed the news about ten years of trump’s taxes being sent to the NYT....stand by for a tweet storm.

I would post links but I can’t seem to get my iPad to cooperate with the platform. I’ll have it figured out soon

the rank and file has no say at all. they are worker bees. is it my personal opinion that Mueller did not recommend any charges? that was his call and he made it. actually he politicized his "decline to indict" part of his mandate which violates his mandate. but that's another matter yeah?

i don't give a rat's ass about Trump's taxes. he's been audited forever. and this time there is no reason to accuse him of lying yeah? so let's give the Donald a TRUE on that eh?


there isn't going to be any evidence in his returns that the IRS hasn't already seen or found, no smoking gun that once again shows some Russian money laundering. like Jackie said before, the only bad thing for Trump is it likely shows he's simply not as rich as he claims.

[bambino]

Originally Posted by The_Waco_Kid

the rank and file has no say at all. they are worker bees. is it my personal opinion that Mueller did not recommend any charges? that was his call and he made it. actually he politicized his "decline to indict" part of his mandate which violates his mandate. but that's another matter yeah?

i don't give a rat's ass about Trump's taxes. he's been audited forever. and this time there is no reason to accuse him of lying yeah? so let's give the Donald a TRUE on that eh?


there isn't going to be any evidence in his returns that the IRS hasn't already seen or found, no smoking gun that once again shows some Russian money laundering. like Jackie said before, the only bad thing for Trump is it likely shows he's simply not as rich as he claims.

I would say Trumps net worth fluctuates depending on what real estate appraisals are. Much like people that are heavily invested in the market.

[Jaxson66]

Originally Posted by The_Waco_Kid

the rank and file has no say at all. they are worker bees. is it my personal opinion that Mueller did not recommend any charges? that was his call and he made it. actually he politicized his "decline to indict" part of his mandate which violates his mandate. but that's another matter yeah?

i don't give a rat's ass about Trump's taxes. he's been audited forever. and this time there is no reason to accuse him of lying yeah? so let's give the Donald a TRUE on that eh?


there isn't going to be any evidence in his returns that the IRS hasn't already seen or found, no smoking gun that once again shows some Russian money laundering. like Jackie said before, the only bad thing for Trump is it likely shows he's simply not as rich as he claims.

I don’t know if a vote of no confidence can be taken in the DOJ but I’d bet against him. Mueller states in the report that the Russians interfered in 2016 with sweeping and systematic attacks against democracy. In volume two there are separate incidents of trump’s behavior regarding Comey, Sessions and Mcgahn that is what me and 700 former prosecutors consider obstruction.

I don’t think it’s asking to much to see the underlying evidence of those ten incidents. Private notes were taken by Mcgahn, Comey, and McDonald that should be questioned. I doubt a court will side with trump because Ty Cobb, trump’s lawyer at the time sent memos to everyone to cooperate with the SC.

Mnuchin is obstructing Justice by denying Congress trump’s tax returns but they will be leaked by a patriot before the courts have time to read the complaints.
I’m no Edgar Casey but I’d bet on that too.

[bambino]

Originally Posted by Jaxson66

I don’t know if a vote of no confidence can be taken in the DOJ but I’d bet against him. Mueller states in the report that the Russians interfered in 2016 with sweeping and systematic attacks against democracy. In volume two there are separate incidents of trump’s behavior regarding Comey, Sessions and Mcgahn that is what me and 700 former prosecutors consider obstruction.

I don’t think it’s asking to much to see the underlying evidence of those ten incidents. Private notes were taken by Mcgahn, Comey, and McDonald that should be questioned. I doubt a court will side with trump because Ty Cobb, trump’s lawyer at the time sent memos to everyone to cooperate with the SC.

Mnuchin is obstructing Justice by denying Congress trump’s tax returns but they will be leaked by a patriot before the courts have time to read the complaints.
I’m no Edgar Casey but I’d bet on that too.

Would you wanted to be treated by the justice system as you propose. If you had a good attorney, I doubt it.

[eccieuser9500]

Is the president a private citizen?