Mueller report delivered

[indiucky]

 

[Hatin Since 87]

You're a Trump supporter, so it's not exactly shocking that you believe that. On the reverse of that coin the anti-Trump crowd does believe it. I need to find someone who hasn't committed to a side who watched the testimony and figure out what they think.

You mean the people who have been dying for a reason to impeach him, think something was incriminating enough to impeach him?

Shocked. Shocked I tell ya!

 

[Hatin Since 87]

My question is, when he wins again, are they gonna claim the Russians helped a second time?

 

[KG1]

Mueller’s assement that they could not exonerate Trump on obstruction was out of line resulting in taking away presumption of innocence. They had no business even going there.

The issue of exoneration was not within your purview Mr. Mueller.

 

[Alamo]

This pretty much sums up the whole deal:

SEEN ON FACEBOOK: “The only thing more enjoyable than seeing your opponent lose an election they rigged is seeing them lose an investigation they rigged.”

 

[ATOMonkey]

I was expecting Mueller to drop dead at any moment. That guy looks like he is running on borrowed time.

 

[BobDaniels]

I absolutely LOVE watching the manifestation of TDS and the way it leads its sufferers to be completely detached from reality.

 

[Doug]

This is a post modern world in which every individual has his or her own reality.
Trump supporters hear, "There was not enough evidence to file charges; Trump is innocent."
Trump opponents hear, "There was not evidence to prove Trump did no wrong; Trump is guilty."

The law says innocent until proven guilty, but many people believe their opinion is more important than the law.

 

[Phase2]

This is a post modern world in which every individual has his or her own reality.
Trump supporters hear, "There was not enough evidence to file charges; Trump is innocent."
Trump opponents hear, "There was not evidence to prove Trump did no wrong; Trump is guilty."

The law says innocent until proven guilty, but many people believe [STRIKE]their opinion is more important than the law[/STRIKE] guilty until proven innocent.

FTFY

 

[ATOMonkey]

This is a post modern world in which every individual has his or her own reality.
Trump supporters hear, "There was not enough evidence to file charges; Trump is innocent."
Trump opponents hear, "There was not evidence to prove Trump did no wrong; Trump is guilty."

The law says innocent until proven guilty, but many people believe their opinion is more important than the law.

Show me the man and I'll show you the crime...
-Beria

You tell me who is more involved with the Russians.

 

[IndyDave1776]

This is a post modern world in which every individual has his or her own reality.
Trump supporters hear, "There was not enough evidence to file charges; Trump is innocent."
Trump opponents hear, "There was not evidence to prove Trump did no wrong; Trump is guilty."

The law says innocent until proven guilty, but many people believe their opinion is more important than the law.

I find this particularly interesting when one takes on one hand that our legal standard is that of innocent until proven guilty no matter your personal opinion of the accused and on the other hand there is enough evidence already made public that there is not a chance in the universe Hillary Clinton could survive a trial, yet she walks on with her middle finger on the air.

 

[ATOMonkey]

As an avid fan of history and the study of cultures, I find it really really disturbing how closely our country is mimicking pre-soviet Russia at this point. It even mimics pre National Socialist Germany.

From the post modernism to the adversarial stance toward organized religion to the prosecution of political dissidents. It's really quite extraordinary.

The wheels of history are turning and I think we're standing in the squish zone.

 

[IndyDave1776]

How you see this is of course your opinion. All I saw was a stammering buffoon who had zero clue what was in the damned report.
No knock but I am confused.

Well said. He couldnt even give correct answers to softball questions from Democrats like which presidents had appointed him to various DoJ positions.

 

[churchmouse]

You're a Trump supporter, so it's not exactly shocking that you believe that. On the reverse of that coin the anti-Trump crowd does believe it. I need to find someone who hasn't committed to a side who watched the testimony and figure out what they think.

I am not what you would actually call a supporter. I am in line with the good I see coming from all of the things his people are putting in place.
I would love to start the list.....again but you have already read it so I will not waste the forum real estate on it.

The very same could be said of you in that you hear what you want to hear in all of the blithering dribble and Bravo Sierra spewing forth from the left. This entire thing was started by -0 when he weaponized the FBI against the Trump campaign and was fueled by a dossier fabricated at the behest of Billery and her Ilk. These are not daydreams. They have been proven but ignored as the progressives march forth on a carpet woven of untruths and idiocy. Even if I did not approve of the work he does I would find so much wrong in this fabrication.

Again, I want those responsible for wasting 3 years and millions to find nothing held accountable. The babbling buffoon they put on stage yesterday is a solid start.

Politics and religion.......Tough topics to discuss.

 

[Doug]

The law says innocent until proven guilty, but many people believe [STRIKE]their opinion is more important than the law[/STRIKE] guilty until proven innocent.

The people to whom I refer do not believe "guilty until proven innocent" for everyone; they believe "guilty until proven innocent" for the people they believe are guilty. Therefore, they believe their opinion is more important than the law.

 

[SheepDog4Life]

You're a Trump supporter, so it's not exactly shocking that you believe that. On the reverse of that coin the anti-Trump crowd does believe it. I need to find someone who hasn't committed to a side who watched the testimony and figure out what they think.

I think you might be searching for the proverbial unicorn... doubt that anyone not already aligned with a "tribe" spent all day watching the testimony... the middle has moved on.

 

[mmpsteve]

You're a Trump supporter, so it's not exactly shocking that you believe that. On the reverse of that coin the anti-Trump crowd does believe it. I need to find someone who hasn't committed to a side who watched the testimony and figure out what they think.

Mr. K, I'm not exactly uncommitted; but left, right, or middle, when Mueller said he was not familiar with Fusion GPS, it told me everything I needed to know about this scam hearing, and this whole pile of **** investigation. I look forward to W. Barr putting some a**holes behind bars. Public hanging would be a better outcome, but alas, we're too 'civilized' for that.

.

.

 

[Doug]

While it is true that Trump was not exonerated of all wrong-doing, it is also true that JFK was never exonerated of buying the election by bribing Chicago voters.

 

[KG1]

Some takeaways from the hearing:
-the president was not exonerated as he stated
-Barr misrepesented the report in his brief
-the president's written responses to Muller's questions were generally untruthful
-The Trump campaign knew the Russians were assisting them, but failed to notify federal authorities
-indicting the president was never an option
-it is possible the president may face charges after he leaves office
-the Mueller team did not investigate collusion
-Trump was doing business with Russia during and after the campaign, contrary to what he has repeatedly stated in the past
-Mueller did not interview for the FBI Director position

That's what was said at the Mueller Congressional, and I'm just passing it along. I'm sure the competing tribes will make of it what they will. The question I'm more interested in, is if amongst the people in the middle that listened, are they now inclined to lean one way or the other?

My take is this is your takeaway from the hearing that you picked out to predicate your notion that the President is guilty of wrongdoing and should pay for it and you want to know if there are any middle of the road types that were swayed in the direction of your “tribe”

Not “one way or the other”

As far as the other “tribe” is concerned there is plenty of red meat to takeaway from the hearing to support thier position that this was a crooked baked up political investigation with a number of questionable actors and actions from the beginning and Trump, his family and certain associates that were set up to try and get Trump got a raw deal because of it. (not including Manafort. He had unrelated issues)

That’s my take.

 

[jamil]

Some takeaways from the hearing:
-the president was not exonerated as he stated
-Barr misrepesented the report in his brief
-the president's written responses to Muller's questions were generally untruthful
-The Trump campaign knew the Russians were assisting them, but failed to notify federal authorities
-indicting the president was never an option
-it is possible the president may face charges after he leaves office
-the Mueller team did not investigate collusion
-Trump was doing business with Russia during and after the campaign, contrary to what he has repeatedly stated in the past
-Mueller did not interview for the FBI Director position

That's what was said at the Mueller Congressional, and I'm just passing it along. I'm sure the competing tribes will make of it what they will. The question I'm more interested in, is if amongst the people in the middle that listened, are they now inclined to lean one way or the other?

I'm inclined to lean in the direction of just moving on. This was an incredible waste of time, money, and political capital on both sides.

But there are no new takeaways from the hearing. We didn't learn anything we didn't already know. Well, except that Mueller obviously didn't have first-hand knowledge about what was in the report. Some things I don't think on your list that established as factual:

• The president was not exonerated as he stated. True, but it's worth saying that in the same way Trump was not exonerated, neither was Hillary. And neither is any person under investigation ever, who was not charged with a crime for lack of evidence. It's not saying anything. It's just a way of saying, yeah, but he could have done it. This isn't a procecutor's job.
• Bar misrepresented the report in his brief. We don't know. The report didn't effectively say, but for the rules barring indicting a sitting president, Trump would have been charged with obstruction. Mueller said something like that after the fact in his press conference, which contradicts Barr's testimony that in a phone conversation Barr had with Mueller, Barr asked him about that point, and Mueller said no, that was not the reason charges weren't recommended. Barr could be lying about that phone conversation, and Mueller could be lying about it. Both parties have reasons to lie. But it's not established that Barr misrepresented the report. Nevertheless, the special council didn't have to indict the president if he thought he was guilty. He could have just stated which events broke which laws, if he had the evidence for that. And then Congress could act on that by impeaching the president. This is what happened with the star report.
• It is possible the president may face charges after he leaves office. It's also possible that unicorn **** contains gold dust. Doesn't mean it's likely, or appropriate, which is what the statement implies. The problem I had with the question was that it's too vague and the answer is too vague to have any meaning that's not a tautology. As a general statement, yes, any president could face criminal charges after they leave office. But, the question should have been, would charges against the president regarding what was uncovered by the investigation be legally appropriate once he leaves office? That question wasn't answered, but people are inferring that was the question being asked. It wasn't.