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.
We all knew he would. I've predicted this from the beginning. The evidentiary bar is too high and Trump is too slippery and has a lot of buffers.
First you believe in collusion without a single piece of evidence, now you refuse to believe there was no collusion even when confirmation is released.
Lack of evidence doesn't prove innocence. Barr says there's no evidence of collusion; but Trump and his team could have colluded, but were careful to cover their tracks. This would explain why so many of Trump's people lied to Congress and Trump obstructed.
Barr's letter doesn't say that. It quotes the report: "This investigation did not establish that members of the Trump campaign conspired or coordinated with the Russian government in its election interference activities".
Which means they didn't find *sufficient* evidence to establish it.
In his letter, Barr tries to soften that statement in his letter by preceding it with his (Barr's) own paraphrase: "The Special Counsel did not find that the Trump campaign or anyone associated with coordinated with the Russian government in its efforts to influence [the election].
Which noticeably dilutes Mueller's statement but it still doesn't say there's NO evidence.
Trump supporters seem to forget that the reason there was so much focus on Mueller was because Trump himself couldn't shut up about it. His entire course of conduct was one of a guilty party..bashing Mueller, calling it a "hoax", stonewalling, refusing to testify, shifting excuses, etc.
In another time, Trump's words and actions would have been considered obstruction of justice. I don't know what a president can now do that would be considered obstructio0n of justice.
Trump's off the hook on obstruction and collusion.
Lack of evidence doesn't prove innocence. Barr says there's no evidence of collusion; but Trump and his team could have colluded, but were careful to cover their tracks. This would explain why so many of Trump's people lied to Congress and Trump obstructed.
In other words... you will perpetually consider Trump and others you don't like as guilty.
Barr's letter doesn't say that. It quotes the report: "This investigation did not establish that members of the Trump campaign conspired or coordinated with the Russian government in its election interference activities".
Which means they didn't find *sufficient* evidence to establish it.
In his letter, Barr tries to soften that statement in his letter by preceding it with his (Barr's) own paraphrase: "The Special Counsel did not find that the Trump campaign or anyone associated with coordinated with the Russian government in its efforts to influence [the election].
Which noticeably dilutes Mueller's statement but it still doesn't say there's NO evidence.
From Barr's letter:
Quote:
The Special Counsel's decision to describe the facts of his obstruction investigation without reaching any legal conclusions leaves it to the Attorney General to determine whether the conduct described in the report constitutes a crime. Over the course of the investigation, the Special Counsel's office engaged in discussions with certain Department officials regarding many of the legal and factual matters at issue in the Special Counsel's obstruction investigation. After reviewing the Special Counsel's final report on these issues; consulting with Department officials, including the Office of Legal Counsel; and applying the principles of federal prosecution that guide our charging decisions, Deputy Attorney General Rod Rosenstein and I have concluded that the evidence developed during the Special Counsel's investigation is not sufficient to establish that the President committed an obstruction-of-justice offense. Our determination was made without regard to, and is not based on, the constitutional considerations that surround the indictment and criminal prosecution of a sitting president.
Our determination was made without regard to, and is not based on, the constitutional considerations that surround the indictment and criminal prosecution of a sitting president.
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.
