Mueller makes statement about investigation, resigns from DOJ

[Petrichor 4,640]

6 minutes ago, Faysalaaa said:

 Mueller laid out over ten instances of POSSIBLE obstruction of justice. Why did you remove the possible part?

 Also, the report concluded there is no enough evidence.

The report concluded there is not enough evidence of collusion. Mueller's office was restricted from making a determination on obstruction, which is different from collusion. Mueller specifically stated today and in the report he is unable to make a determination on obstruction, privately or publicly.

The fact that he laid them out in the report means they’re probably obstruction. He wouldn’t have given examples of less important instances.

[Morphine Prince 109,896]

1 minute ago, Petrichor said:

The report concluded there is not enough evidence of collusion. Mueller's office was restricted from making a determination on obstruction, which is different from collusion. Mueller specifically stated today and in the report he is unable to make a determination on obstruction, privately or publicly. 

Mueller also said he couldn’t indict a president and that if they were confident Trump didn’t commit a crime they would have said so. 

It’s so clear.

Read between the lines, people. 

[TheQueenLG 2,469]

2 minutes ago, Faysalaaa said:

Congress should do their job and he did not say there is obstruction

Yes, he did. He just chose not to make the distinction of whether or not that Obstruction rose to the level of criminality. He chose to do this not because of a lack of evidence, but because of the DOJ guidance that he felt prevented him from charging the President. If he can't charge the President, he thought it was unfair to declare him indicted. Therefore, he decided just to turn over the evidence to Congress and let them do with it as they please. He did make it clear that Congress' handling of the evidence should include certain constitutional mechanisms (IMPEACHMENT, hint, hint!). 

[Morphine Prince 109,896]

This issue could not be any more straightforward. Anyone denying the facts is acting as a political hack.

Both parties have politicized this to no end. Justice is the victim here. 

Republicans don’t want to impeach a Republican president and Democrats don’t want to fail at removing the president and don’t want to risk political leverage. 

 

[Morphine Prince 109,896]

 

[TheQueenLG 2,469]

@Morphine Prince

@Petrichor

For the sake of being completely accurate, the question of collusion was not addressed by Mueller's inquiry at all. Mueller was operating his investigation under a narrow scope of criminal conspiracy. Collusion is defined as "secret or illegal cooperation or conspiracy, especially in order to cheat or deceive others."

When Trump asked Russia, jokingly or not, to find Hillary Clinton's emails, while at the same time directing Roger Stone's pursuit of those illegally stolen emails, that's collusion. Russia illegally hacked and stole Clinton's emails, Trump had someone on his team, under his direction, working to get those emails released to the benefit of Trump's political chances in the upcoming election. Mueller determined that this collusion did not rise to the level of conspiracy. But, nonetheless, this collusion still happened. Don't get it twisted. 

[TheQueenLG 2,469]

2 minutes ago, Morphine Prince said:

 

God, I love her. I would love nothing more than a Warren/Haris 2020 ticket for the democratic party. 

[DeleteMyAccount 11,881]

And remember, Mueller can't risk leaning left or right in the way that he words his report and his latest press meeting. Doing so would make the investigation bias. Furthermore, he HAS to speak in vague terms but also in a way that, like Morphine said, can be read between the lines. Add that to already existing evidence in the report. Boom. It all comes down to whether or not you want justice or not. Party over country?

[Morphine Prince 109,896]

Only Republican with a spine 

 

[Morphine Prince 109,896]

 

[Morphine Prince 109,896]

 

 

[Morphine Prince 109,896]

LMAO basically this thread  

[TheQueenLG 2,469]

5 minutes ago, Morphine Prince said:

This issue could not be any more straightforward. Anyone denying the facts is acting as a political hack.

Both parties have politicized this to no end. Justice is the victim here. 

Republicans don’t want to impeach a Republican president and Democrats don’t want to fail at removing the president and don’t want to risk political leverage. 

 

I think you're letting Dems off a little easy here. Democrats know that a successful impeachment in the House, and a failed impeachment conviction in the Senate, is not politically damaging. Republicans impeached Clinton in the House over a bl*wjob but failed to convict him in the Senate. Then, guess what happened next? Republicans won the next election. The evidence is public on the internet, and the Dem leadership's political calculations are bogus. And I think they're smart enough to realize that. This raises another important question: If not a lack of evidence and if not political calculations, what is stopping Democrats & Republicans in the House and Republicans in the Senate from doing their jobs? I want to see this question answered, like now. I think we are seeing severe derelictions of duty by nearly everyone. Abdication by both parties of Congress, in both chambers of Congress. Our legislative branch is failing us. They need to do better if we are to survive this administration. 

[Morphine Prince 109,896]

Just now, TheQueenLG said:

I think you're letting Dems off a little easy here. Democrats know that a successful impeachment in the House, and a failed impeachment conviction in the Senate, is not politically damaging. Republicans impeached Clinton in the House over a bl*wjob but failed to convict him in the Senate. Then, guess what happened next? Republicans won the next election. The evidence is public on the internet, and the Dem leadership's political calculations are bogus. And I think they're smart enough to realize that. This raises another important question: If not a lack of evidence and if not political calculations, what is stopping Democrats & Republicans in the House and Republicans in the Senate from doing their jobs? I want to see this question answered, like now. I think we are seeing severe derelictions of duty by nearly everyone. Abdication by both parties of Congress, in both chambers of Congress. Our legislative branch is failing us. They need to do better if we are to survive this administration. 

I agree! But I’m only saying what Dems are CLAIMING is the issue. 

Honestly, we don’t know what will happen unless they do it. 

The people gave Dems the House because we wanted actual accountability. They will fail if they don’t go further into this issue. 

They’ve done a good job at highlighting certain things but it’s not enough. 

[Guest]

28 minutes ago, Petrichor said:

The report concluded there is not enough evidence of collusion. Mueller's office was restricted from making a determination on obstruction, which is different from collusion. Mueller specifically stated today and in the report he is unable to make a determination on obstruction, privately or publicly.

The fact that he laid them out in the report means they’re probably obstruction. He wouldn’t have given examples of less important instances.

 

25 minutes ago, TheQueenLG said:

Yes, he did. He just chose not to make the distinction of whether or not that Obstruction rose to the level of criminality. He chose to do this not because of a lack of evidence, but because of the DOJ guidance that he felt prevented him from charging the President. If he can't charge the President, he thought it was unfair to declare him indicted. Therefore, he decided just to turn over the evidence to Congress and let them do with it as they please. He did make it clear that Congress' handling of the evidence should include certain constitutional mechanisms (IMPEACHMENT, hint, hint!). 

 

34 minutes ago, Morphine Prince said:

Jesus..... Mueller clearly laid out obstruction but he can’t indict the president.

Mueller is CLEARLY telling Congress to do their jobs. 

CONGRESS is to decide on obstruction. We have known this for 2 months. But this time it came literally directly from Mueller’s mouth. 

So you will come after him for obstruction when the report also definitively found that no evidence of collusion? So you are saying Trump obstructed justice but there was no original crime so how can you obstruct if there is no original crime? If you really wanted to impeach Donald trump, why are you using the flimsiest argument of all argument and the flimsiest issue of all issues? what you should impeach him over is:

1. Yemen: There is no declaration of war for what Trump is doing in Yemen, yet America is in Yemen. They are using the old authorization for use of military force from the Bush era to be involved in Yemen. Donald Trump is illegally and offensively starving and bombing a poor country with no approval from congress. The constitution is crystal clear that congress has to declare a war. That is 100% impeachable.

2. Emoluments clause of the constitution: Which means the president cant accept money. and cannot have businesses where foreign government are giving him money and business.

But Democrats agree with Trump on these issues so they wont use it because it will expose themselves. Mueller also investigated Hilary campaign manager and found out he was lobbying the United States gov on behalf on a pro Russian political party in Ukrine. Clinton foundation got over 140 million dollars from Russia. Hilary sold Americn Uranium to Russia while personally enriching herself. We have official sources showing evidence Clinton Campaign Invented Trump/Russia Story To Cover Their Failures and colluded with Russia to smear Trump.