Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
Nonsense you and I are not and should not be privy to what evidence exists, that is a matter for the courts.
Our job is to keep out of the way and let Mueller do his job just like we stayed out of the way and let Ken Starr spend year after year after year after year doing his job of investigating Bill Clinton.
when the time comes you will learn what evidence really exists, that time has not come yet. It took Ken 4-6 years to finish his work, let's give Mueller the same room we gave Ken.
So, the Obama administration and DOJ have been listening in on Trump and his staff since 2016 at least, and somehow they don’t have enough evidence to bring charges yet, and it’s going to take years and years to gather it all? I find that hard to believe.
I'm no lawyer, but I think it was my grand daddy that said "You can't give what you ain't got". Mueller shouda talked to grand daddy before he went down this path,
Discovery is a beech, when you didn't expect the other party to actually show up to clear their name.
You cannot have it both ways Mueller. You cannot create law, by requesting censorship of government transparency.
They work for you, they work for me. They are not Kings.
National security issues are certainly kept under wraps. There’s an entire CFR that covers it. Look it up.
How are they going to help Trump, the Russian company in this case is only entitled to the evidence against them.
Put up, or shut up Bob.
Exactly
Many believe Mueller only indicted some of these Russians to give credibility to the notion that they were involved with Trump and he was closing in.
He never thought they would answer the charges, and would just camp out in Russia, thus making his case look fruitful.
But they apparently hired an attorney, called his bluff and showed up demanding whatever evidence he has as part of discovery. Now he must do so, assuming he really has anything.
This should all prove to be very interesting, because if he doesn't have squat, it will show he indicted them without credible evidence.
There will be no way to salvage his reputation (what little is left) if that comes to pass.
I mean come on. Don't indict what you can't prove just to justify your existence.
Even Russians get to see the "evidence" to be used against them in US courts to convict them of a crime.
Restated again for jurisprudence-
Quote:
Originally Posted by Threerun
National security issues are certainly kept under wraps. There’s an entire CFR that covers it. Look it up.
Ignorantia juris non excusat.
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.
Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
I can't turn over evidence cuz muh Russians...
