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.
There is certainly plenty of information from the prior indictments and news coverage to believe that there was reason to believe crimes were committed. Just Trumps statements alone and the firing of Comey, connections to the Russians and the constant lies that delayed the completion of the investigation.
He probably will not be impeached or indicted but if you can read through that report and claim that the bin is empty you are being dishonest.
Mueller had access to everything and found nothing.
Somehow, you - who has investigated nothing - has more knowledge than Mueller that crimes were committed.
So whilst not actively coordinating there was acceptance of some help from a foreign agency during the Campaign. As the report states "the foreign contribution ban is not limited to contribution of money. It expressly prohibits "a contribution or donation of money or other thing of value"." (The emphasis is from the report, just differently formatted here.) So this is still pretty damning, as is the rest of the report.
The way I see it, the Special Counsel's Office had the power to "prosecute federal crimes arising from [its] investigation". However, they were aware that they could not indict a sitting President. So they assessed their evidence and purposefully "determined not to apply an approach that could potentially result in a judgement that the President committed crimes"; that way individuals may stand a much better chance of "effective prosecution in another jurisdiction". Thus the Office passed the not-so-subtle baton to Congress, where "there [exists] an adequate non-criminal alternative to prosecution."
The report further acknowledges Congress' "authority to prohibit a President's corrupt use of his authority in order to protect the integrity of the administration of justice."
Looks like Congress is gonna have their work cut out for them.
Yes Congress Is going to be able to prove obstruction when Mueller couldn’t did it despite unlimited resources and time. But let them try. I implore then to waste their time with this and show the American people all the care about is removing strung. Not in policies that help them
I asked this question earlier, but still not clear on the Republican position here..
So, just to be clear, is it okay for presidential candidates to get campaign support from foreign governments, and for their campaign manager to share polling data and campaign strategies with agents of foreign governments?
The unredacted portions of the report document 10 instances of attempts to obstruct justice, influence witnesses. So is this okay now?
No need to repost the BS about how obstruction of justice doesn't count if there is no criminal conviction. We all know this is bogus. And what-about-Clinton/Obama/etc. are just feeble attempts to avoid a straight answer.
But is it okay for a POTUS to obstruct justice? Is it okay get help from agents of foreign governments?
What is your theory why there was a need for the Trump Tower meeting in June if Papadopolous and Page were in bed with the Russians?
I’m also trying to understand the long standing theory that these gentleman were approached about dirt already possessed versus a conspiracy to work together to illegally obtain dirt, there is a difference. After reading the two sections about Papadopolous and Page, the two persons who started the entire investigation, I see not one mention of a shred of evidence of a conspiracy. Why was this investigation allowed to go on after they found zero evidence from the two individuals that prompted the investigation, that’s a question that deserves an answer.
Start here p81-88. Mueller spells it out clearly.
Quote:
In late April 2016, Papadopoulos was told by London-based professor Joseph Mifsud, immediately after Mifsud's return from a trip to Moscow, that the Russian government had obtained "dirt” on candidate Clinton in the form of thousands of emails. One week later, on May 6, 2016, Papadopoulos suggested to a representative of a foreign government that the Trump Campaign had received indications from the Russian government that it could assist the Campaign through the anonymous release of information that would be damaging to candidate Clinton.
I asked this question earlier, but still not clear on the Republican position here..
So, just to be clear, is it okay for presidential candidates to get campaign support from foreign governments, for their campaign manager to share polling data and campaign strategies with agents of foreign governments?
The unredacted portions of the report document 10 instances of attempts to obstruct justice, influence witnesses. So is this okay now?
No need to repost the BS about how obstruction of justice doesn't count if there is no criminal conviction. We all know this is bogus. But is it fine for a POTUS to obstruct justice? Is that okay now?
Weird as it may seem to you, we would rather lean on the report by Mueller and the summary by the Attorney General than we would on your reassessment of the issues.
I asked this question earlier, but still not clear on the Republican position here..
So, just to be clear, is it okay for presidential candidates to get campaign support from foreign governments, for their campaign manager to share polling data and campaign strategies with agents of foreign governments?
The unredacted portions of the report document 10 instances of attempts to obstruct justice, influence witnesses. So is this okay now?
No need to repost the BS about how obstruction of justice doesn't count if there is no criminal conviction. We all know this is bogus. But is it fine for a POTUS to obstruct justice? Is that okay now?
Since NO obstruction was found your question is a waste of time. Got it!
Since NO obstruction was found your question is a waste of time. Got it!
You apparently do not comprehend the questions.
Mueller's report, at least the unredacted portions, documented 10 instances of evidence of obstruction of justice. Barr made it clear that as AG he was not going to charge Trump with obstruction of justice. So there could have been 1000 instances, it would have made no difference.
These are straightforward questions, so no need to thrash trying to change the subject.
Is it okay for presidential candidates to get campaign help from foreign governments?
Is it okay for future presidents to obstruct justice?
Mueller's report, at least the unredacted portions, documented 10 instances of evidence of obstruction of justice. Barr made it clear that as AG he was not going to charge Trump with obstruction of justice. So there could have been 1000 instances, it would have made no difference.
These are straightforward questions, so no need to thrash trying to change the subject.
Is it okay for presidential candidates to get campaign help from foreign governments?
Is it okay for future presidents to obstruct justice?
Trump didn’t obstruct justice. He was rightfully angry he was being smeared as a traitor who committed treason with no evidence.
Trump and his campaign didn’t work with the Russians to win the election
Since NO obstruction was found your question is a waste of time. Got it!
That's not true Mueller laid out 10 episodes of possible obstruction of justice but concluded it wasn't his role to determine if Trump had broken the law. It's not over yet.
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.
