Welcome to City-Data.com Forum!
U.S. CitiesCity-Data Forum Index
Go Back   City-Data Forum > General Forums > Politics and Other Controversies
 [Register]
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.
View detailed profile (Advanced) or search
site with Google Custom Search

Search Forums  (Advanced)
 
Old 05-29-2019, 09:52 AM
 
14,489 posts, read 6,098,111 times
Reputation: 6842

Advertisements

The great news is now Dems will spend 100% of their time chasing this “obstruction” dragon. A nice way to keep them occupied
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message

 
Old 05-29-2019, 09:52 AM
 
45,676 posts, read 24,012,426 times
Reputation: 15559
Quote:
Originally Posted by Cruithne View Post
LOL, looks like Trump was tuned into Newt Gingrich on Fox the same time I was.


God the guy is SO predicable:


https://twitter.com/realDonaldTrump/...59237136494592




Funny how he uses 'insufficient evidence' and not 'no evidence'.


Tripping over yourself a bit there Trump. I'd delete that one if I were you.
What happened to 'exonerated'.....oops
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 05-29-2019, 09:52 AM
 
Location: Kansas City, MISSOURI
20,872 posts, read 9,536,978 times
Reputation: 15591
Quote:
Originally Posted by dashrendar4454 View Post
Wrong. He was not charged because he found no evidence he committed any crime. That’s the standard we operate in America
This is your fantasy. Did you not read or hear the part where Mueller said charging him with a crime was not an option, only because he was the president?

He could have committed murder, and Mueller could not have charged him. And people like you would be saying, "Oh, he's innocent because he wasn't charged!"

No, sorry. He wasn't charged only because he's the president, since presidents can commit crimes and not be charged. He wasn't not charged because he was innocent.

Trump fans refuse to understand that distinction, because it's inconvenient for them to do so.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 05-29-2019, 09:53 AM
 
1,134 posts, read 404,885 times
Reputation: 912
Apparently he just couldn't find the crime, but thinks there might have been one. Otherwise it most likely would have been described in the report. So now, I'm under the impression members of Congress think they can find it.

But will they find it before the 2020 election? Will they spend all their time and effort on that? If they find it, it's a huge success for them. But if they don't........
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 05-29-2019, 09:53 AM
 
Location: Honolulu/DMV Area/NYC
30,636 posts, read 18,227,675 times
Reputation: 34509
Quote:
Originally Posted by Enigma777 View Post
Barr flat-out lied to the public. He should be removed. No way the report exonerates Trump.
Another loony response.

Firstly, Barr and former Deputy AG Rod Rosenstein came to such a legal conclusion on their own. The fact that Mueller felt that he couldn't make a determination one way or the other doesn't foreclose the authority of other justice department officials from making such a determination.

Secondly, Mueller is an unethical fool. And, yes, it violates legal ethnics to do what he is doing. You are presumed innocent under law unless convicted of a crime. You do not attempt to drag someone's name under the rug when you don't even have enough evidence to recommend an indictment one way or the other. Yes, I get that Mueller also felt that he could not charge POTUS with a crime even if he wanted to, but the point here is that he couldn't even conclude whether he thought obstructed occurred one way or the other.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 05-29-2019, 09:53 AM
 
14,489 posts, read 6,098,111 times
Reputation: 6842
Quote:
Originally Posted by Elliott_CA View Post
You could tell Mueller REALLY REALLY wanted to indict Trump for obstructed but that DOJ policy got in the way.

His bold statement "If we had confidence that the president clearly did not commit a crime, we would have said so" is a softball pitch to Nancy Pelosi. Very strong evidence in the report he obstructed justice.

It's over to you, Nancy. Begin an impeachment inquiry. Duty calls.
And he said if he had committed a crime he would have said so


So there is no crime and there is no exoneration required
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 05-29-2019, 09:54 AM
 
45,676 posts, read 24,012,426 times
Reputation: 15559
Quote:
Originally Posted by dashrendar4454 View Post
The great news is now Dems will spend 100% of their time chasing this “obstruction” dragon. A nice way to keep them occupied
This is hilarious,

We have come to think that the govt, our politicians can only do one thing at a time.
These folks are all multi-taskers.

They can focus on a whole bunch of stuff at the same time (that goes for the Republicans elected as well).
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 05-29-2019, 09:55 AM
 
52,431 posts, read 26,628,813 times
Reputation: 21097
ya ya ya ya ya ya ya.



But.



Trump was found innocent of collusion.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 05-29-2019, 09:55 AM
 
Location: The Republic of Texas
78,863 posts, read 46,624,265 times
Reputation: 18521
Quote:
Originally Posted by craigiri View Post
If you feel this way can you convince the senate GOP to Impeach (you know, actually say they would vote to do so if the evidence points) and then we can all actually listen to the evidence?
Just the record, “if we had confidence the president didn’t commit a crime we would have said so” is a ridiculous statement. He sure said he didn't have enough evidence to do so. (That was so Comey-ish)

1) That’s not a prosecutors job, Bob. Stay in your lane, or it become political, not criminal.

2) Did Mueller say that about anyone else smeared with Collusion innuendo in the report? Carter Page? Sam Clovis?
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 05-29-2019, 09:56 AM
 
Location: Somewhere out there.
10,531 posts, read 6,165,986 times
Reputation: 6570
Quote:
Originally Posted by dashrendar4454 View Post
And he said if he had committed a crime he would have said so


So there is no crime and there is no exoneration required



Absolutely NOT what Mueller said AT ALL. Your statement is completely false.


He specifically said:


"If we had confidence that the President clearly did not commit a crime, we would have said so."
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
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.


Reply
Please update this thread with any new information or opinions. This open thread is still read by thousands of people, so we encourage all additional points of view.

Quick Reply
Message:


Over $104,000 in prizes was already given out to active posters on our forum and additional giveaways are planned!

Go Back   City-Data Forum > General Forums > Politics and Other Controversies

All times are GMT -6.

© 2005-2024, Advameg, Inc. · Please obey Forum Rules · Terms of Use and Privacy Policy · Bug Bounty

City-Data.com - Contact Us - Archive 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9, 10, 11, 12, 13, 14, 15, 16, 17, 18, 19, 20, 21, 22, 23, 24, 25, 26, 27, 28, 29, 30, 31, 32, 33, 34, 35, 36, 37 - Top