A Constitutional Standoff?

[georgephillip]

Oh brother.

The mueller report confirms it. Let me guess….you only believe some of the Mueller findings, right?

You mean like how you only believe none of the Mueller findings? No collusion and No Obstruction is the findings.

Those were not his conclusions.

Yes they were HE STATED FOR THE RECORD he did not find Collusion and he stated FOR THE RECORD he did not find Obstruction.

Yes they were HE STATED FOR THE RECORD he did not find Collusion and he stated FOR THE RECORD he did not find Obstruction.

Mueller's Volume 2 conclusion makes no such claim regarding Trump's multiple obstruction of justice actions:

Read the Mueller Report: Searchable Document and Index (Vol. II, P. 182)

"Because 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 the President’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 state1.

"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."

The President Is Not Above the Law

From your post:
"Accordingly, while this report does not conclude that the President committed a crime, it also does not exonerate him."
1. Prosecutors do not "exonerate", they charge with crimes based on the evidence, or not. Mueller didn't.
2. The prosecutors did not charge Trump with a crime. Of the potential "obstruction" cases Barr did not see any obstruction. What Barr saw was illegal spying on the Trump campaign, an attempted coup by the deep state, misconduct by the top level of the FBI and DOJ, illegal FISA warrants, deliberate disruption of an elected president of the US, and Mueller's report that did not find any conspiracy.

Prosecutors do not "exonerate", they charge with crimes based on the evidence, or not. Mueller didn't.
2. The prosecutors did not charge Trump with a crime. Of the potential "obstruction" cases Barr did not see any obstruction.

Prosecutors did not charge Trump because they believed a sitting president can not be indicted not because they lacked evidence of criminal conduct.

Read the Mueller Report: Searchable Document and Index (Vol. II, P. 182)

"...(I)f we had confidence after a thorough investigation of the facts that the President clearly did not commit obstruction of justice, we would so state..."

" Discussing whether the president could have obstructed justice while exercising his constitutional authority, such as by firing James B. Comey as the director of the F.B.I., the report notes that Congress is empowered to step in to stop the corrupt use of presidential power."

 

[georgephillip]

Oh brother.

The mueller report confirms it. Let me guess….you only believe some of the Mueller findings, right?

You mean like how you only believe none of the Mueller findings? No collusion and No Obstruction is the findings.

Those were not his conclusions.

Yes they were HE STATED FOR THE RECORD he did not find Collusion and he stated FOR THE RECORD he did not find Obstruction.

Yes they were HE STATED FOR THE RECORD he did not find Collusion and he stated FOR THE RECORD he did not find Obstruction.

Mueller's Volume 2 conclusion makes no such claim regarding Trump's multiple obstruction of justice actions:

Read the Mueller Report: Searchable Document and Index (Vol. II, P. 182)

"Because 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 the President’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 state1.

"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."

The President Is Not Above the Law

From your post:
"Accordingly, while this report does not conclude that the President committed a crime, it also does not exonerate him."
1. Prosecutors do not "exonerate", they charge with crimes based on the evidence, or not. Mueller didn't.
2. The prosecutors did not charge Trump with a crime. Of the potential "obstruction" cases Barr did not see any obstruction. What Barr saw was illegal spying on the Trump campaign, an attempted coup by the deep state, misconduct by the top level of the FBI and DOJ, illegal FISA warrants, deliberate disruption of an elected president of the US, and Mueller's report that did not find any conspiracy.

What Barr saw was illegal spying on the Trump campaign, an attempted coup by the deep state, misconduct by the top level of the FBI and DOJ, illegal FISA warrants, deliberate disruption of an elected president of the US, and Mueller's report that did not find any conspiracy

Where did you get the idea Barr claimed to see illegal spying on the Trump campaign, in a 2020 fundraising email from the "Red Don"?

AP fact check: Trump camp suggests AG William Barr found illegal spying

"Barr never said there was illegal spying.

"During a Senate hearing Wednesday, the attorney general actually made clear he had no specific evidence to cite that any surveillance was illegal or improper.

"'I think spying did occur,' Barr told lawmakers. 'But the question is whether it was adequately predicated and I’m not suggesting it wasn’t adequately predicated, but I need to explore that.'

"He later added: 'I am not saying that improper surveillance occurred. I am saying that I am concerned about it and looking into it.'"

 

[candycorn]

Oh brother.

The mueller report confirms it. Let me guess….you only believe some of the Mueller findings, right?

You mean like how you only believe none of the Mueller findings? No collusion and No Obstruction is the findings.

Mueller did find 10 cases (documented) where OOJ was indicated.
The 10 times Trump may have obstructed justice, according to Mueller

Mueller found 10 instances where OOJ was a POSSIBLE INTERPRETATION. Read your link: Trump MAY have . . . .

Big difference, Candydandy.

Mueller did find 10 cases (documented) where OOJ was indicated.

Liar. We can read, unlike the typical TDS-suffering libtard!

No you get your directions from your blob ass pirate.

 

[Admiral Rockwell Tory]

You mean like how you only believe none of the Mueller findings? No collusion and No Obstruction is the findings.

Mueller did find 10 cases (documented) where OOJ was indicated.
The 10 times Trump may have obstructed justice, according to Mueller

Mueller found 10 instances where OOJ was a POSSIBLE INTERPRETATION. Read your link: Trump MAY have . . . .

Big difference, Candydandy.

Mueller did find 10 cases (documented) where OOJ was indicated.

Liar. We can read, unlike the typical TDS-suffering libtard!

No you get your directions from your blob ass pirate.

How do you obstruct justice by doing what is authorized in the Constitution? Can you answer that?

Of course you can't! The only thing you use the Constitution for is stocking the outhouse when you forget to buy toilet paper at Walmart when you go to town.

 

[WheelieAddict]

Trumps twitter and much of what he says means nothing.

 

[candycorn]

Mueller did find 10 cases (documented) where OOJ was indicated.
The 10 times Trump may have obstructed justice, according to Mueller

Mueller found 10 instances where OOJ was a POSSIBLE INTERPRETATION. Read your link: Trump MAY have . . . .

Big difference, Candydandy.

Mueller did find 10 cases (documented) where OOJ was indicated.

Liar. We can read, unlike the typical TDS-suffering libtard!

No you get your directions from your blob ass pirate.

How do you obstruct justice by doing what is authorized in the Constitution? Can you answer that?

Of course you can't! The only thing you use the Constitution for is stocking the outhouse when you forget to buy toilet paper at Walmart when you go to town.

Mueller did, ass pirate.

 

[Admiral Rockwell Tory]

Mueller found 10 instances where OOJ was a POSSIBLE INTERPRETATION. Read your link: Trump MAY have . . . .

Big difference, Candydandy.

Mueller did find 10 cases (documented) where OOJ was indicated.

Liar. We can read, unlike the typical TDS-suffering libtard!

No you get your directions from your blob ass pirate.

How do you obstruct justice by doing what is authorized in the Constitution? Can you answer that?

Of course you can't! The only thing you use the Constitution for is stocking the outhouse when you forget to buy toilet paper at Walmart when you go to town.

Mueller did, ass pirate.

If you have an point, why not explain it, because all you ever have is stupid insults?

Why can't you provide the wording in the Mueller Report to back up your stupid claims? We all know is because it does not exist. If it had existed, Mueller would have stated it. He could not prove it, therefore it did not exist.

 

[kyzr]

Its up to the States to protect their elections systems and voter databases. They know that Russia, China, and NK are going to attack their systems. For 2020 every precinct and every candidate needs to know that their online assets are susceptible to cyber-attack. Even if Trump doesn't personally grab the bull by the horns, everyone knows that good Spyware is a better buy than fireworks. They also know to report anything suspicious to the FBI. No one can say they had no idea that the Russians or Chinese could do cyber-attacks. Its up to those responsible to harden their election systems.
5 ways the Trump administration could prepare to thwart 2020 election meddling

Good to see Obama has zero blame for the 2016 hacking then...

No charges yet, but he hasn't been completely exonerated.

There is no such thing as "exonerated". Trump is innocent until proven guilty. OTOH, there will be some deep state folks wearing orange jump suits soon.

So look, another dumbass commenting on a report that you did NOT READ. LOFL ............

Volume II
IV. Conclusion
Because 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 the President'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.

You supposed to be in special ed class?
There is no such thing as "exonerated".
What part of "prosecutors don't exonerate" don't you understand? The lack of evidence of a crime means that Barr rightfully issued his memo declaring NO COLLUSION, NO OBSTRUCTION. It's over. All done. It was an illegal politically motivated investigation started by Trump haters in the FBI.

 

[caddo kid]

Its up to the States to protect their elections systems and voter databases. They know that Russia, China, and NK are going to attack their systems. For 2020 every precinct and every candidate needs to know that their online assets are susceptible to cyber-attack. Even if Trump doesn't personally grab the bull by the horns, everyone knows that good Spyware is a better buy than fireworks. They also know to report anything suspicious to the FBI. No one can say they had no idea that the Russians or Chinese could do cyber-attacks. Its up to those responsible to harden their election systems.
5 ways the Trump administration could prepare to thwart 2020 election meddling

Good to see Obama has zero blame for the 2016 hacking then...

No charges yet, but he hasn't been completely exonerated.

There is no such thing as "exonerated". Trump is innocent until proven guilty. OTOH, there will be some deep state folks wearing orange jump suits soon.

So look, another dumbass commenting on a report that you did NOT READ. LOFL ............

Volume II
IV. Conclusion
Because 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 the President'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.

You supposed to be in special ed class?
There is no such thing as "exonerated".
What part of "prosecutors don't exonerate" don't you understand? The lack of evidence of a crime means that Barr rightfully issued his memo declaring NO COLLUSION, NO OBSTRUCTION. It's over. All done. It was an illegal politically motivated investigation started by Trump haters in the FBI.

Sorry RETARD but you FAILED to see where Mueller stated, Accordingly, while this report does not conclude that the President committed a crime, it also does not exonerate him.

You have a problem with that then take that up with Mueller, not me dumb ass.

 

[kyzr]

Good to see Obama has zero blame for the 2016 hacking then...

No charges yet, but he hasn't been completely exonerated.

There is no such thing as "exonerated". Trump is innocent until proven guilty. OTOH, there will be some deep state folks wearing orange jump suits soon.

So look, another dumbass commenting on a report that you did NOT READ. LOFL ............

Volume II
IV. Conclusion
Because 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 the President'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.

You supposed to be in special ed class?
There is no such thing as "exonerated".
What part of "prosecutors don't exonerate" don't you understand? The lack of evidence of a crime means that Barr rightfully issued his memo declaring NO COLLUSION, NO OBSTRUCTION. It's over. All done. It was an illegal politically motivated investigation started by Trump haters in the FBI.

Sorry RETARD but you FAILED to see where Mueller stated, Accordingly, while this report does not conclude that the President committed a crime, it also does not exonerate him.

You have a problem with that then take that up with Mueller, not me dumb ass.

Barr exonerated him, you have a problem with that, tough shit.
The take-away is NO COLLUSION, NO OBSTRUCTION.

 

[caddo kid]

No charges yet, but he hasn't been completely exonerated.

There is no such thing as "exonerated". Trump is innocent until proven guilty. OTOH, there will be some deep state folks wearing orange jump suits soon.

So look, another dumbass commenting on a report that you did NOT READ. LOFL ............

Volume II
IV. Conclusion
Because 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 the President'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.

You supposed to be in special ed class?
There is no such thing as "exonerated".
What part of "prosecutors don't exonerate" don't you understand? The lack of evidence of a crime means that Barr rightfully issued his memo declaring NO COLLUSION, NO OBSTRUCTION. It's over. All done. It was an illegal politically motivated investigation started by Trump haters in the FBI.

Sorry RETARD but you FAILED to see where Mueller stated, Accordingly, while this report does not conclude that the President committed a crime, it also does not exonerate him.

You have a problem with that then take that up with Mueller, not me dumb ass.

Barr exonerated him, you have a problem with that, tough shit.
The take-away is NO COLLUSION, NO OBSTRUCTION.

Barr is nothing more than Trump's fat assed lap dog; Mueller & his team performed the investigation & wrote the report.

No one exonerated shit; even that Trump turd.

 

[Justin Richardson]

Barr is nothing more than Trump's fat assed lap dog; Mueller & his team performed the investigation & wrote the report.

No one exonerated shit; even that Trump turd.

If you seriously believe that, why would the New York Times (of all MSM) "admit" to this?

WHERE IS JOSEPH MIFSUD? Has he been “suicided”?

admitted there was at least one additional spy surveilling the Trump campaign, a woman named Azra Turk (alias no doubt). She spied on Trump campaign adviser George Papadopoulos.

Another spy, Joseph Mifsud was described as a Russian spy offering Papadopoulos connections in Russia. However, that might not be true. He might have spied on Papadopoulos for the West.

Papadopoulos claims that Hillary Clinton was seen dining with Joseph Mifsud and Italian Secret Service in 2016.

Mifsud ignited the probe allegedly, and, although he was portrayed as a Russian spy, he has a lot of connections to Western intelligence.

Devin Nunes is scrutinizing the findings in Special Counsel Robert Mueller’s report about Joseph Mifsud.

In a letter to the State Department, FBI, CIA, and NSA, Nunes presents photographic evidence of Mifsud in close proximity to influential Western political and government officials, Fox News reported.

He is requesting information on Mifsud and suspects the FBI or CIA sent Mifsud to spy on Papadopoulos, not Russia. The fact is, Mueller did ignore Mifsud’s ties to Western intelligence in his report.

Nunes accused the Mueller team of lying about Joseph Mifsud. Nunes says Misfud worked with Western operatives.

That means Mueller and his team lied in the 448-page report.

Mifsud is suspected of being an FBI trainer and an FBI asset.

According to Nunes, Mifsud visited the State Department in Washington DC in 2017, probably after Trump was inaugurated. This is quite an omission by Robert Mueller and his angry Democrats.

Rep. Nunes said, “ We spent $30 million on this as taxpayers and they can’t even tell us who Joseph Mifsud is? So we’re getting to the bottom of this. We believe he has ties to the State Department. Actually, our State Department had him in the United States capital in 2017!”

Nunes did include photographic evidence in his letter to the various executive agencies.

The fact that Robert Mueller and his team painted Joseph Mifsud as a Russian spy appears to be a lie if Nunes’ report is true.
Bombshell! Mueller & His Angry Democrats Might Have LIED in the Report

 

[Claudette]

Its up to the States to protect their elections systems and voter databases. They know that Russia, China, and NK are going to attack their systems. For 2020 every precinct and every candidate needs to know that their online assets are susceptible to cyber-attack. Even if Trump doesn't personally grab the bull by the horns, everyone knows that good Spyware is a better buy than fireworks. They also know to report anything suspicious to the FBI. No one can say they had no idea that the Russians or Chinese could do cyber-attacks. Its up to those responsible to harden their election systems.
5 ways the Trump administration could prepare to thwart 2020 election meddling

Good to see Obama has zero blame for the 2016 hacking then...

Not hardly. His intelligence and cyber people were aware of the hack but did nothing. Hell the FBI warned the DNC IT people of a possible hack and they did nothing.

I'm wondering why Mueller didn't investigate Barry. He was POTUS. Not Trump.

Perhaps Barr's investigation will shed some light on the whole thing.

 

[dudmuck]

Its up to the States to protect their elections systems and voter databases. They know that Russia, China, and NK are going to attack their systems. For 2020 every precinct and every candidate needs to know that their online assets are susceptible to cyber-attack. Even if Trump doesn't personally grab the bull by the horns, everyone knows that good Spyware is a better buy than fireworks. They also know to report anything suspicious to the FBI. No one can say they had no idea that the Russians or Chinese could do cyber-attacks. Its up to those responsible to harden their election systems.
5 ways the Trump administration could prepare to thwart 2020 election meddling

Good to see Obama has zero blame for the 2016 hacking then...

Not hardly. His intelligence and cyber people were aware of the hack but did nothing. Hell the FBI warned the DNC IT people of a possible hack and they did nothing.

I'm wondering why Mueller didn't investigate Barry. He was POTUS. Not Trump.

Perhaps Barr's investigation will shed some light on the whole thing.

Thats your excuse for doing nothing about it for 2020?

 

[hadit]

Its up to the States to protect their elections systems and voter databases. They know that Russia, China, and NK are going to attack their systems. For 2020 every precinct and every candidate needs to know that their online assets are susceptible to cyber-attack. Even if Trump doesn't personally grab the bull by the horns, everyone knows that good Spyware is a better buy than fireworks. They also know to report anything suspicious to the FBI. No one can say they had no idea that the Russians or Chinese could do cyber-attacks. Its up to those responsible to harden their election systems.
5 ways the Trump administration could prepare to thwart 2020 election meddling

Good to see Obama has zero blame for the 2016 hacking then...

No charges yet, but he hasn't been completely exonerated.

Exoneration is not a prosecutor's responsibility. He can only say there is enough evidence to prosecute or there is not.

 

[Claudette]

Its up to the States to protect their elections systems and voter databases. They know that Russia, China, and NK are going to attack their systems. For 2020 every precinct and every candidate needs to know that their online assets are susceptible to cyber-attack. Even if Trump doesn't personally grab the bull by the horns, everyone knows that good Spyware is a better buy than fireworks. They also know to report anything suspicious to the FBI. No one can say they had no idea that the Russians or Chinese could do cyber-attacks. Its up to those responsible to harden their election systems.
5 ways the Trump administration could prepare to thwart 2020 election meddling

Good to see Obama has zero blame for the 2016 hacking then...

Not hardly. His intelligence and cyber people were aware of the hack but did nothing. Hell the FBI warned the DNC IT people of a possible hack and they did nothing.

I'm wondering why Mueller didn't investigate Barry. He was POTUS. Not Trump.

Perhaps Barr's investigation will shed some light on the whole thing.

Thats your excuse for doing nothing about it for 2020?

Damned good reason. Ask Barry why his intelligence and cyber people did nothing.

I'm sure he'll be delighted to tell you.

 

[RealDave]

Its up to the States to protect their elections systems and voter databases. They know that Russia, China, and NK are going to attack their systems. For 2020 every precinct and every candidate needs to know that their online assets are susceptible to cyber-attack. Even if Trump doesn't personally grab the bull by the horns, everyone knows that good Spyware is a better buy than fireworks. They also know to report anything suspicious to the FBI. No one can say they had no idea that the Russians or Chinese could do cyber-attacks. Its up to those responsible to harden their election systems.
5 ways the Trump administration could prepare to thwart 2020 election meddling

So, each state has a bureau as good as the FBI & its makes a lot of sense to have 50 organizations working on in instead of just one,.. Especially when Red States would be asking Putin for help.