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 have read it and have come to the same conclusion as barr...
You see there is a thing called a threshold or beyond a reasonable doubt that has to be met for there to be a crime. Now, you can say well because he did not met that threshold or beyond reasonable doubt does not mean he did not do anything....well, that's why we have the beyond a reasonable doubt and threshold....
You’re moving the goalposts. You asked where the Trump campaign sought to accept help from the Russians, not whether they engaged in a criminal conspiracy to do so. There is a difference. And Muller detailed evidence of the former and explained why he couldn’t prove the latter.
Wrong from those who have read the report. The radical right who support the mob boss is a complete joke. They support a president that most Americans including some Republicans and Independents don't support. That's the real joke.
"Wrong from those who have read the report" right back at you.
The radical left who DON'T support the findings of NO INDICTMENT against Trump are a complete joke.
I suspect the limited response to such RW lies and nonsense might be a function of the C-D ignore function.
The limited responses are due to, if you did answer, you'd have to be honest with yourselves...and well, we all know better, we've read post like yours and those that you agree with and well.......
You’re moving the goalposts. You asked where the Trump campaign sought to accept help from the Russians, not whether they engaged in a criminal conspiracy to do so. There is a difference. And Muller detailed evidence of the former and explained why he couldn’t prove the latter.
Post 492, in which I respond to, stated he "accepted"...not sought to accept...go back and read it, then get back with us.
Again, Mueller didn’t mention the media in his letter. He took issue with Barr’s selective summary made up of quotes taken out of context to make it appear to say something it did not. People need to stop pretending that the letter isn’t there for all of us to read. Telling us it says one thing when it plainly says another won’t convince anyone who read the letter it says something other than what it actually says. It just ruins your credibility.
You do know they had a 10 to 15 minute conversation on the phone, right? Haven't checked but IF it is not in the letter, pretty sure he heard it in the phone conversation. Also, there were 2 letters, did you read both? BUT...The man was so sickened by the grandstanding, he deserves a medal for staying, I would have walked out and let the chips fall where they may.
No evidence that they fully conspired but evidence that Trump obstructed justice and also thought he would benefit from Russia and Wikileaks. As much as I personally disagree with Wikileaks, I hope something incriminating against Trump comes out from it. Just to see Trump full-time yet again on his love of Wikileaks and "no knowledge of it."
"but evidence that Trump obstructed justice" Were are the indictments for "obstruction of justice"
" I hope"
As they say, "Hope in one hand and s..t in the other!"
You LOST the election you were guaranteed to win and went bawling and screaming in the streets, went your safe places with your crayons and called your therapists because you CAN'T HANDLE NOT getting your way, like little spoiled brats.
You were SO SURE Trump would be found guilty because the LAM 24/7 told you so, Congressmen LIED to you daily and guaranteed the outcome you took it hook, line and sinker and AGAIN you CAN'T HANDLE IT.
Shiff and others SAID, "I have seen the evidence" where is it?
NO INDICTMENTS by the Mueller Special Counsel asked for But YOU all know better then the 16 dem hillary lawyers on Mueller's team.
I hope you still have your therapist's phone number, you NEED IT!
How do both democrats and republicans feel about campaigns accepting help from foreign governments moving forward??
Russian intelligence officers contacted Trump campaign members, telling them that they had dirt on Clinton. Trump's campaign was very eager to get this dirt and accept their help. That happened, that is a fact. Bill Barr, the Attorney General, did not consider that unlawful.
So setting that precedent, moving forward to 2020 and beyond, how does everybody feel about US politicians running for president knowingly and happily accepting oppo research from foreign governments?
Would Trump voters here on City-Data have a problem if Joe Biden's campaign employees accepted dirt from Russian Intel officers that would hurt Trump in the election?
"Russian intelligence officers contacted Trump campaign members, telling them that they had dirt on Clinton."
hillary PAID for "dirt" on Trump obtained through ""Russian intelligence" and "eagerly" passed it to the obama run CIA, FDoJ and FBI, hence the FISA warrants.
"Would Trump voters here on City-Data have a problem if Joe Biden's campaign employees accepted dirt from Russian Intel officers that would hurt Trump in the election?"
You spend your time on "what if" INSTEAD of what ACTUALLY happened.
Why HAVEN'T ANY hillary supporter, which INCLUDES the LSM, shown a problem with THAT?
I note that no one has come up with a plausible reason as to why Barr refused to release Mueller’s “executive summary” which we now know could have been released without redaction, other than to mislead the public.
As Ted Cruz noted....
That Entire Summary was released with the Report. The only parts redacted were the parts required by law to be redacted.
What part of that do YOU not understand.
It is available for you to read. I'll bet you've not taken the time to read it either.
That Entire Summary was released with the Report. The only parts redacted were the parts required by law to be redacted.
What part of that do YOU not understand.
It is available for you to read. I'll bet you've not taken the time to read it either.
Yeah, his argument is that Barr wanted to mislead the public by making public the full 400 pages report minus the less than 10% redaction required by law.
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.
