The Mueller Report - released -5- years ago: 4-19-2019

M14 Shooter

The Light of Truth
Sep 26, 2007
37,328
10,550
1,340
Bridge, USS Enterprise
If you recall, the report:
-Proved Trump committed 10 counts of felony obstruction.
-Stated the only reason Mueller did not seek indictments is he could not indict a sitting President.

If you further recall:
-Mueller was very clear that a President -can- be indicted once out of office.

Trump left office 39 months ago.
No grand jury, no indictments.
As desperate as the lunatic left is to convict Trump of something, you think they’d be all over this.
So.... why hasn't he been prosecuted for these slam-dunk cases of obstruction?
 
Last edited:
If you recall, the report:
-Proved that Trump committed 10 counts of felony obstruction.
-Stated the only reason Mueller did not seek indictments is he could not indict a sitting President.

If you further recall:
-Mueller was very clear that a President -can- be indicted once out of office.

Trump left office 39 months ago.
No grand jury, no indictments.
As desperate as the lunatic left is to convict Trump of something, you think they’d be all over this.
So.... why hasn't he been prosecuted for these slam-dunk cases of obstruction?
Yes, I do recall, the report:

-Proved that Trump committed 10 counts of felony obstruction.
-Stated the only reason Mueller did not seek indictments is he could not indict a sitting President.

If you further recall:
-Mueller was very clear that a President -can- be indicted once out of office.

Trump left office 39 months ago.
No grand jury, no indictments.
As desperate as the lunatic left is to convict Trump of something, you think they’d be all over this.
So.... why hasn't he been prosecuted for these slam-dunk cases of obstruction?

thank you
 
If you recall, the report:
-Proved that Trump committed 10 counts of felony obstruction.
-Stated the only reason Mueller did not seek indictments is he could not indict a sitting President.

If you further recall:
-Mueller was very clear that a President -can- be indicted once out of office.
I shall quote what you will not, the Muegular report

Mueller himself says they did find facts to convict Trump of any crime
IV. CONCLUSIONBecause we determined not to make a traditional prosecutorial judgment, we did not draw ultimate conclusions about the President’s conduct. The evidence we obtained about thePresident’s actions and intent presents difficult issues that would need to be resolved if we were making a traditional prosecutorial judgment. At the same time, if we had confidence after a thorough investigation of the facts that the President clearly did not commit obstruction of justice, we would so state. Based on the facts and the applicable legal standards, we are unable to reach that judgment. Accordingly, while this report does not conclude that the President committed a crime, it also does not exonerate him.
 
This is also where the liberal word change began so Happy 5 Years of Wishing It Were So. Lib loons were so invested in this that when Muller said”No” they insisted we read the words wrong and that he had said “Yes.. Trump colluded with Russians”
Since then the standard Webster definition of words have been changed or misapplied by liberals with a total very close to 100.
 
Could you please be consistent and link to it and quote it?
could you please consistent, link and quote, to the crime committed or do you always challenge others to do what you refuse.

But I will, here the report says Trump is innocent.

1713974223422.png
 
If you recall, the report:
-Proved Trump committed 10 counts of felony obstruction.
-Stated the only reason Mueller did not seek indictments is he could not indict a sitting President.

If you further recall:
-Mueller was very clear that a President -can- be indicted once out of office.

Trump left office 39 months ago.
No grand jury, no indictments.
As desperate as the lunatic left is to convict Trump of something, you think they’d be all over this.
So.... why hasn't he been prosecuted for these slam-dunk cases of obstruction?
Ironically the Mueller investigation is probably the most successful Republican investigation in the last 30 years, indicting more then 30 or so people if I remember right.

Not sure why Republicans are so quick to denigrate the Mueller report but seem to take pride in the multiple Benghazi or email investigations that lead nowhere.
 
Ironically the Mueller investigation is probably the most successful Republican investigation in the last 30 years, indicting more then 30 or so people if I remember right.

Not sure why Republicans are so quick to denigrate the Mueller report but seem to take pride in the multiple Benghazi or email investigations that lead nowhere.
Benghazi! Then they had "Better Call Durham!"
 
Not sure why Republicans are so quick to denigrate the Mueller report but seem to take pride in the multiple Benghazi or email investigations that lead nowhere.
Maybe it is because no crimes where found by Mueller whereas TERRORISTS MURDERED OUR AMBASSDOR ON THE ANNIVERSARY OF 9/11 obama-clinton-biden did nothing to increase security on the anniversary of 9/11, did not answer calls for help, and did not retaliate!
 
If you recall, the report:
-Proved Trump committed 10 counts of felony obstruction.
-Stated the only reason Mueller did not seek indictments is he could not indict a sitting President.

If you further recall:
-Mueller was very clear that a President -can- be indicted once out of office.

Trump left office 39 months ago.
No grand jury, no indictments.
As desperate as the lunatic left is to convict Trump of something, you think they’d be all over this.
So.... why hasn't he been prosecuted for these slam-dunk cases of obstruction?
You have unwittingly triggered one of the most infected loons here. :eusa_shhh:

Drag name: Elektra
 

Forum List

Back
Top