Follow along with the video below to see how to install our site as a web app on your home screen.
Note: This feature may not be available in some browsers.
Yes the do react like that. We all knew that Mueller would conduct a witch hunt. We saw that with previous such "investigations." Unlike you, we aren't required to pretend that there's anything fair or just about spending millions of dollars to investigate a single person.STFU, you looney tooney motherfucker! It didn't go your way. Can we bring you back to a peaceful reality, or no?You do realize it has already been turned over, right, fuckstick?
What exactly is your retarded ass on about? No, bitch, you ain't got Trump. You ain't got a damn thing, Fuck You, idiot.
It's over, motherfucker! Mueller investigation is over! Done! No Trump collusion, no impeachment, dumbass! For being a member of "Moveon.org", you damn sure ain't moving on, but I'm here to tell ya: It's time to.
What in the fuck are you talking about? Moveon.org? Are you drinking again? If so you should probably get out of the forum before you make a stupid comment again.
Hey dumbass! Hey you! All the things you see and say about these things are solely in your mind, and personally I think you should be in a Sanitarium, you batshit crazy stupid motherfucker.
So you got talking out of your ass, and that's the best you can follow up with?
Even Lindsey Graham has stepped back on Barr and written a letter to Mueller to see if he wants to testify to the Senate, just days after saying they were finished.
It's a beautiful day, bro. Yes, Trump is your president, what he he done to harm you? He's not like that, and it's not like that.
He volunteered for the job to try and do good for us, and so far he's the best president in my lifetime.
Wtf are you on about?
The bottom line is that you're asking for something you're not entitled to, and have no right to.
You're outta gas bro, deal with it.
View attachment 259421
You by far have no room to question anyone's sanity.
There were 2 years of investigations, why are people so scared to hear what is really in the report from the man that supervised it?
Innocent people don't react like this:
"When then-Attorney General Jeff Sessions informed Trump of Mueller’s appointment in May 2017, the report said, Trump slumped back in his chair and said: “Oh my God. This is terrible. This is the end of my presidency. I’m fucked.”"
Wrong. He didn't say that.It was improper, unprofessional and perhaps even unethical for Mueller to attempt to control the political aspects of the release of the report. Mueller's job ended when he turned in his report to the AG, and unless asked by the AG, he has no further role in determining what happens to the report. Notice that Mueller has not contradicted anything Barr has said and only comments on the political impact, in his opinion, of the way the report was released. This is just one more bizarre act by Mueller who seems to have a very grandiose notion of his place in history.And YET Mueller was clear on the fact he was NOT reporting to Congress under the law NOTHING he wrote had to be delivered to CONGRESS. A Law the democrats created.What you don't seem to understand is that, even if true, the existence of that rule didn't prevent Mueller from rendering a decision on obstruction.
Yes, it does, because it isn't MUELLER'S job to decide guilt. That's up to Congress.
That's not what he said at all. He had the report written specifically so that the overview of the report was already redacted and could be turned over without Barr making his own.
It literally says in his letter to Barr to give it to Congress. It is in the second paragraph.
That's not true whatsoever. He literally said in the letters to Barr that Barr did not give a true representation of the findings of the report.
Now you're just making things up.Irrelevant. Mueller could have stated that the evidence strongly indicates Trump is guilty of obstruction but he will not try to indict Trump while he is in office, but recommends the Justice Department indict him once he leaves office if he believed there was evidence to support such a statement. Obviously Mueller didn't believe there was evidence to support an indictment even after Trump left office.Everyone is innocent until proven guilty. That the fundamental principle of the American legal system, dumb fuck. Do you actually believe Trump has to prove his innocence? You're dumber than I ever imagined.You might be dumber than Bripat.
WillHaftawaite another idiot saying Trump is innocent because Mueller didn't recommend Trump be indicted...
Obviously I didn't spam enough.
Holy shit are you dumb.
MUELLER SAID HE WOULD FOLLOW DOJ GUIDELINES THAT A SITTING PRESIDENT CANNOT BE INDICTED
No, that wasn't Mueller's job and since Comey's fiasco before the election, they agreed that his investigation would not be handled that way. He would investigate and turn over the evidence.
Robert S. Mueller III, the special counsel, has marshaled prosecutors, F.B.I. agents and other lawyers to investigate Russia’s 2016 election interference and whether any Trump associates conspired. The team has secured indictments against dozens of people and three companies, one trial conviction and a handful of guilty pleas in the highest-profile political inquiry in a generation.
Robert Mueller and His Prosecutors: Who They Are and What They’ve Done
Clearly, Mueller's team did conclude some people were guilty of crimes and prosecuted them. He could have done the same thing by stating that the evidence indicated Trump was guilty of obstruction but he was delaying an indictment until Trump was out of office, but he knew the evidence was not strong enough for an indictment.
Wrong. He didn't say that.It was improper, unprofessional and perhaps even unethical for Mueller to attempt to control the political aspects of the release of the report. Mueller's job ended when he turned in his report to the AG, and unless asked by the AG, he has no further role in determining what happens to the report. Notice that Mueller has not contradicted anything Barr has said and only comments on the political impact, in his opinion, of the way the report was released. This is just one more bizarre act by Mueller who seems to have a very grandiose notion of his place in history.And YET Mueller was clear on the fact he was NOT reporting to Congress under the law NOTHING he wrote had to be delivered to CONGRESS. A Law the democrats created.Yes, it does, because it isn't MUELLER'S job to decide guilt. That's up to Congress.
That's not what he said at all. He had the report written specifically so that the overview of the report was already redacted and could be turned over without Barr making his own.
It literally says in his letter to Barr to give it to Congress. It is in the second paragraph.
That's not true whatsoever. He literally said in the letters to Barr that Barr did not give a true representation of the findings of the report.
Wrong. He didn't say that.It was improper, unprofessional and perhaps even unethical for Mueller to attempt to control the political aspects of the release of the report. Mueller's job ended when he turned in his report to the AG, and unless asked by the AG, he has no further role in determining what happens to the report. Notice that Mueller has not contradicted anything Barr has said and only comments on the political impact, in his opinion, of the way the report was released. This is just one more bizarre act by Mueller who seems to have a very grandiose notion of his place in history.And YET Mueller was clear on the fact he was NOT reporting to Congress under the law NOTHING he wrote had to be delivered to CONGRESS. A Law the democrats created.
That's not what he said at all. He had the report written specifically so that the overview of the report was already redacted and could be turned over without Barr making his own.
It literally says in his letter to Barr to give it to Congress. It is in the second paragraph.
That's not true whatsoever. He literally said in the letters to Barr that Barr did not give a true representation of the findings of the report.
"The summary letter the Department sent to Congress and released to the public late in the afternoon of March 24 did not fully capture the context, nature, and substance of this Office’s work and conclusions. We communicated that concern to the Department on the morning of March 25. There is now public confusion about critical aspects of the results of our investigation. This threatens to undermine a central purpose for which the Department appointed the Special Counsel: to assure full public confidence in the outcome of the investigations. See Department of Justice, Press Release (May 17, 2017)."
Read Robert Mueller’s Private Letter to William Barr Objecting to His Summary of Special Counsel’s Investigation
He didn't?
Wrong. He didn't say that.It was improper, unprofessional and perhaps even unethical for Mueller to attempt to control the political aspects of the release of the report. Mueller's job ended when he turned in his report to the AG, and unless asked by the AG, he has no further role in determining what happens to the report. Notice that Mueller has not contradicted anything Barr has said and only comments on the political impact, in his opinion, of the way the report was released. This is just one more bizarre act by Mueller who seems to have a very grandiose notion of his place in history.That's not what he said at all. He had the report written specifically so that the overview of the report was already redacted and could be turned over without Barr making his own.
It literally says in his letter to Barr to give it to Congress. It is in the second paragraph.
That's not true whatsoever. He literally said in the letters to Barr that Barr did not give a true representation of the findings of the report.
"The summary letter the Department sent to Congress and released to the public late in the afternoon of March 24 did not fully capture the context, nature, and substance of this Office’s work and conclusions. We communicated that concern to the Department on the morning of March 25. There is now public confusion about critical aspects of the results of our investigation. This threatens to undermine a central purpose for which the Department appointed the Special Counsel: to assure full public confidence in the outcome of the investigations. See Department of Justice, Press Release (May 17, 2017)."
Read Robert Mueller’s Private Letter to William Barr Objecting to His Summary of Special Counsel’s Investigation
He didn't?
You still gonna be crying about this in 2021, after Hillary and Barry are yesterday's news?
I’m good with that. Now let’s get Hillary, Clapper, Brennan, and Lynch indicted. Maybe BO and Biden too.In another thread that was closed, uncertain on why, Nat4900
Posted this:
For the many of us who want justice, accountability and transparency, from what the Mueller team investigated, reported on and concluded, the Mueller testimony is a MUST.
The stakes are high for both sides of the aisle.
But, in my opinion, Mueller is such a "straight shooter" that to presume that he will side with democrats.....even after the Trump WH and the leadership in the DOJ have derided him........may be wrong.
The efficacy of Mueller's testimony will depend on the simple and direct questions posed to him without necessarily asking him to arrive at any new decisions.
Mueller should be asked:
1. Given the findings listed in your report......and placing aside the current DOJ policy that a sitting president cannot be indicted.........would a prosecutor like yourself indict ANYONE based on the reported obstruction findings?
2. Once AG Barr took charge of your investigation, was any pressure made upon your team to wrap up the inquiry? If such pressure was placed on you, is THAT the reason why you did not subpoena Me. Trump to openly testify before a grand jury?
3. Given the number of "I don't recall" responses to your written questions to the WH, why did you not further request follow-up questions?............What stopped you from making such requests?
4. In your through investigation, did you request and were given information from the Deutsche Bank regarding Trump's dealings with that Bank?
5. In your inquiry, did you request and were given copies of Trump's tax returns? If you were given such access, how many years were made available to your team?
6. Mr. Mueller, could you name any and ALL other witnesses who were requested but refused to appear before your team or grand juries?
7. Mr. MUeller, have you had any opposition placed upon your team in sharing your team's findings with other federal prosecutorial districts that are continuing their separate inquiries on topics beyond your scope of work as a special counsel?
With the exception of the first question, the rest should be direct to elicit clear-cut and not opinionated responses.
And I wanted to tell Nat4900 that it would be a great mistake to not cover part one of his investigation and not just part two....
Part two, the obstruction of an Official Investigation, means nothing to anyone that does not know the details of the Investigation that was obstructed!!!
It's important for uninformed people to be informed about the EXTENSIVE Russian Interference in our last election, the means they did it, and the Trump Campaign connection to it....
THIS CAN NOT AND SHOULD NOT be skipped, and if there is not enough time to do both, it is more important to go over Part one vs 2..... honest to goodness it is.....
People need to know what a great job the Mueller team did in tracing down what they could, people need to know the darn facts of the investigation, the obstruction of justice can then follow.... without knowing the facts of what was found in the investigation, how are people going to get upset or understand the urgency of protecting ourselves or even understand it... when the admin, is playing like the whole interference by Russians and his team's readiness to work with them, is some every day thing that anybody would do, or some made up hoax as our dearest president claims.... securing our elections from future attack is the most important thing to do....
Informing people, is arming people...
All those questions you have above, can wait.... people need to be informed, on the Trump side as well....
President Trump obstructing can follow....
Plus, informing people with the actual Mueller FACTS, will help combat all the FAKE stories the Republicans are trying to deflect with...
Wrong. He didn't say that.It was improper, unprofessional and perhaps even unethical for Mueller to attempt to control the political aspects of the release of the report. Mueller's job ended when he turned in his report to the AG, and unless asked by the AG, he has no further role in determining what happens to the report. Notice that Mueller has not contradicted anything Barr has said and only comments on the political impact, in his opinion, of the way the report was released. This is just one more bizarre act by Mueller who seems to have a very grandiose notion of his place in history.
That's not true whatsoever. He literally said in the letters to Barr that Barr did not give a true representation of the findings of the report.
"The summary letter the Department sent to Congress and released to the public late in the afternoon of March 24 did not fully capture the context, nature, and substance of this Office’s work and conclusions. We communicated that concern to the Department on the morning of March 25. There is now public confusion about critical aspects of the results of our investigation. This threatens to undermine a central purpose for which the Department appointed the Special Counsel: to assure full public confidence in the outcome of the investigations. See Department of Justice, Press Release (May 17, 2017)."
Read Robert Mueller’s Private Letter to William Barr Objecting to His Summary of Special Counsel’s Investigation
He didn't?
You still gonna be crying about this in 2021, after Hillary and Barry are yesterday's news?
Once again you got me fucked up with someone else. I've never supported either of them. Lay off the sauce, it is killing your brain cells.
NO, he didn't. "Did not fully capture" is something entirely different from "not a true representation of the findings" are two entirely different things. Barr gave Mueller a chance to make changes to the summary, and Mueller turned it down. He's only crying now because he's no longer the hero of the left.Wrong. He didn't say that.It was improper, unprofessional and perhaps even unethical for Mueller to attempt to control the political aspects of the release of the report. Mueller's job ended when he turned in his report to the AG, and unless asked by the AG, he has no further role in determining what happens to the report. Notice that Mueller has not contradicted anything Barr has said and only comments on the political impact, in his opinion, of the way the report was released. This is just one more bizarre act by Mueller who seems to have a very grandiose notion of his place in history.And YET Mueller was clear on the fact he was NOT reporting to Congress under the law NOTHING he wrote had to be delivered to CONGRESS. A Law the democrats created.
That's not what he said at all. He had the report written specifically so that the overview of the report was already redacted and could be turned over without Barr making his own.
It literally says in his letter to Barr to give it to Congress. It is in the second paragraph.
That's not true whatsoever. He literally said in the letters to Barr that Barr did not give a true representation of the findings of the report.
"The summary letter the Department sent to Congress and released to the public late in the afternoon of March 24 did not fully capture the context, nature, and substance of this Office’s work and conclusions. We communicated that concern to the Department on the morning of March 25. There is now public confusion about critical aspects of the results of our investigation. This threatens to undermine a central purpose for which the Department appointed the Special Counsel: to assure full public confidence in the outcome of the investigations. See Department of Justice, Press Release (May 17, 2017)."
Read Robert Mueller’s Private Letter to William Barr Objecting to His Summary of Special Counsel’s Investigation
He didn't?
NO, he didn't. "Did not fully capture" is something entirely different from "not a true representation of the findings" are two entirely different things. Barr gave Mueller a chance to make changes to the summary, and Mueller turned it down. He's only crying now because he's no longer the hero of the left.Wrong. He didn't say that.It was improper, unprofessional and perhaps even unethical for Mueller to attempt to control the political aspects of the release of the report. Mueller's job ended when he turned in his report to the AG, and unless asked by the AG, he has no further role in determining what happens to the report. Notice that Mueller has not contradicted anything Barr has said and only comments on the political impact, in his opinion, of the way the report was released. This is just one more bizarre act by Mueller who seems to have a very grandiose notion of his place in history.That's not what he said at all. He had the report written specifically so that the overview of the report was already redacted and could be turned over without Barr making his own.
It literally says in his letter to Barr to give it to Congress. It is in the second paragraph.
That's not true whatsoever. He literally said in the letters to Barr that Barr did not give a true representation of the findings of the report.
"The summary letter the Department sent to Congress and released to the public late in the afternoon of March 24 did not fully capture the context, nature, and substance of this Office’s work and conclusions. We communicated that concern to the Department on the morning of March 25. There is now public confusion about critical aspects of the results of our investigation. This threatens to undermine a central purpose for which the Department appointed the Special Counsel: to assure full public confidence in the outcome of the investigations. See Department of Justice, Press Release (May 17, 2017)."
Read Robert Mueller’s Private Letter to William Barr Objecting to His Summary of Special Counsel’s Investigation
He didn't?
That's all irrelevant eyewash. Barr gave him the opportunity to make changes to his summary, and Mueller turned it down. The stuff you listed all came after Barr's summary was released. A dollar short and a day late.NO, he didn't. "Did not fully capture" is something entirely different from "not a true representation of the findings" are two entirely different things. Barr gave Mueller a chance to make changes to the summary, and Mueller turned it down. He's only crying now because he's no longer the hero of the left.Wrong. He didn't say that.It was improper, unprofessional and perhaps even unethical for Mueller to attempt to control the political aspects of the release of the report. Mueller's job ended when he turned in his report to the AG, and unless asked by the AG, he has no further role in determining what happens to the report. Notice that Mueller has not contradicted anything Barr has said and only comments on the political impact, in his opinion, of the way the report was released. This is just one more bizarre act by Mueller who seems to have a very grandiose notion of his place in history.
That's not true whatsoever. He literally said in the letters to Barr that Barr did not give a true representation of the findings of the report.
"The summary letter the Department sent to Congress and released to the public late in the afternoon of March 24 did not fully capture the context, nature, and substance of this Office’s work and conclusions. We communicated that concern to the Department on the morning of March 25. There is now public confusion about critical aspects of the results of our investigation. This threatens to undermine a central purpose for which the Department appointed the Special Counsel: to assure full public confidence in the outcome of the investigations. See Department of Justice, Press Release (May 17, 2017)."
Read Robert Mueller’s Private Letter to William Barr Objecting to His Summary of Special Counsel’s Investigation
He didn't?
Mueller did not "turn it down." He clearly states in the letter that his team had already produced true summaries that had already been redacted following DOJ guidelines, that could be released to Congress and the public.
It's stated quite clearly in the letter. At this point you are either illiterate or a troll.
"I previously sent you a letter dated March 25, 2019, that enclosed the introduction and executive summary for each volume of the Special Counsel’s report marked with redactions to remove any information that potentially could be protected by the Federal Rule of Criminal Procedure 6(e); that concerned declination decisions; or that related to a charged case. We also had marked an additional two sentences for review and have now confirmed that these sentences can be released publicly.
Accordingly, the enclosed documents are in a form that can be released to the public consistent with legal requirements and Department policies. I am requesting that you provide these materials to Congress and authorize their public release at this time."
Read Robert Mueller’s Private Letter to William Barr Objecting to His Summary of Special Counsel’s Investigation
That's all irrelevant eyewash. Barr gave him the opportunity to make changes to his summary, and Mueller turned it down. The stuff you listed all came after Barr's summary was released. A dollar short and a day late.NO, he didn't. "Did not fully capture" is something entirely different from "not a true representation of the findings" are two entirely different things. Barr gave Mueller a chance to make changes to the summary, and Mueller turned it down. He's only crying now because he's no longer the hero of the left.Wrong. He didn't say that.That's not true whatsoever. He literally said in the letters to Barr that Barr did not give a true representation of the findings of the report.
"The summary letter the Department sent to Congress and released to the public late in the afternoon of March 24 did not fully capture the context, nature, and substance of this Office’s work and conclusions. We communicated that concern to the Department on the morning of March 25. There is now public confusion about critical aspects of the results of our investigation. This threatens to undermine a central purpose for which the Department appointed the Special Counsel: to assure full public confidence in the outcome of the investigations. See Department of Justice, Press Release (May 17, 2017)."
Read Robert Mueller’s Private Letter to William Barr Objecting to His Summary of Special Counsel’s Investigation
He didn't?
Mueller did not "turn it down." He clearly states in the letter that his team had already produced true summaries that had already been redacted following DOJ guidelines, that could be released to Congress and the public.
It's stated quite clearly in the letter. At this point you are either illiterate or a troll.
"I previously sent you a letter dated March 25, 2019, that enclosed the introduction and executive summary for each volume of the Special Counsel’s report marked with redactions to remove any information that potentially could be protected by the Federal Rule of Criminal Procedure 6(e); that concerned declination decisions; or that related to a charged case. We also had marked an additional two sentences for review and have now confirmed that these sentences can be released publicly.
Accordingly, the enclosed documents are in a form that can be released to the public consistent with legal requirements and Department policies. I am requesting that you provide these materials to Congress and authorize their public release at this time."
Read Robert Mueller’s Private Letter to William Barr Objecting to His Summary of Special Counsel’s Investigation
Mueller was part of a coverup of criminal activity by the Obama Administration......and his team destroyed evidence....the fact to which was uncovered in a report by Bre Payton, who quickly died of a strange disease in San Diego. Journalist Bre Payton, 26, dies in San Diego after sudden illnessIn another thread that was closed, uncertain on why, Nat4900
Posted this:
For the many of us who want justice, accountability and transparency, from what the Mueller team investigated, reported on and concluded, the Mueller testimony is a MUST.
The stakes are high for both sides of the aisle.
But, in my opinion, Mueller is such a "straight shooter" that to presume that he will side with democrats.....even after the Trump WH and the leadership in the DOJ have derided him........may be wrong.
The efficacy of Mueller's testimony will depend on the simple and direct questions posed to him without necessarily asking him to arrive at any new decisions.
Mueller should be asked:
1. Given the findings listed in your report......and placing aside the current DOJ policy that a sitting president cannot be indicted.........would a prosecutor like yourself indict ANYONE based on the reported obstruction findings?
2. Once AG Barr took charge of your investigation, was any pressure made upon your team to wrap up the inquiry? If such pressure was placed on you, is THAT the reason why you did not subpoena Me. Trump to openly testify before a grand jury?
3. Given the number of "I don't recall" responses to your written questions to the WH, why did you not further request follow-up questions?............What stopped you from making such requests?
4. In your through investigation, did you request and were given information from the Deutsche Bank regarding Trump's dealings with that Bank?
5. In your inquiry, did you request and were given copies of Trump's tax returns? If you were given such access, how many years were made available to your team?
6. Mr. Mueller, could you name any and ALL other witnesses who were requested but refused to appear before your team or grand juries?
7. Mr. MUeller, have you had any opposition placed upon your team in sharing your team's findings with other federal prosecutorial districts that are continuing their separate inquiries on topics beyond your scope of work as a special counsel?
With the exception of the first question, the rest should be direct to elicit clear-cut and not opinionated responses.
And I wanted to tell Nat4900 that it would be a great mistake to not cover part one of his investigation and not just part two....
Part two, the obstruction of an Official Investigation, means nothing to anyone that does not know the details of the Investigation that was obstructed!!!
It's important for uninformed people to be informed about the EXTENSIVE Russian Interference in our last election, the means they did it, and the Trump Campaign connection to it....
THIS CAN NOT AND SHOULD NOT be skipped, and if there is not enough time to do both, it is more important to go over Part one vs 2..... honest to goodness it is.....
People need to know what a great job the Mueller team did in tracing down what they could, people need to know the darn facts of the investigation, the obstruction of justice can then follow.... without knowing the facts of what was found in the investigation, how are people going to get upset or understand the urgency of protecting ourselves or even understand it... when the admin, is playing like the whole interference by Russians and his team's readiness to work with them, is some every day thing that anybody would do, or some made up hoax as our dearest president claims.... securing our elections from future attack is the most important thing to do....
Informing people, is arming people...
All those questions you have above, can wait.... people need to be informed, on the Trump side as well....
President Trump obstructing can follow....
Plus, informing people with the actual Mueller FACTS, will help combat all the FAKE stories the Republicans are trying to deflect with...
In another thread that was closed, uncertain on why, Nat4900
Posted this:
For the many of us who want justice, accountability and transparency, from what the Mueller team investigated, reported on and concluded, the Mueller testimony is a MUST.
The stakes are high for both sides of the aisle.
But, in my opinion, Mueller is such a "straight shooter" that to presume that he will side with democrats.....even after the Trump WH and the leadership in the DOJ have derided him........may be wrong.
The efficacy of Mueller's testimony will depend on the simple and direct questions posed to him without necessarily asking him to arrive at any new decisions.
Mueller should be asked:
1. Given the findings listed in your report......and placing aside the current DOJ policy that a sitting president cannot be indicted.........would a prosecutor like yourself indict ANYONE based on the reported obstruction findings?
2. Once AG Barr took charge of your investigation, was any pressure made upon your team to wrap up the inquiry? If such pressure was placed on you, is THAT the reason why you did not subpoena Me. Trump to openly testify before a grand jury?
3. Given the number of "I don't recall" responses to your written questions to the WH, why did you not further request follow-up questions?............What stopped you from making such requests?
4. In your through investigation, did you request and were given information from the Deutsche Bank regarding Trump's dealings with that Bank?
5. In your inquiry, did you request and were given copies of Trump's tax returns? If you were given such access, how many years were made available to your team?
6. Mr. Mueller, could you name any and ALL other witnesses who were requested but refused to appear before your team or grand juries?
7. Mr. MUeller, have you had any opposition placed upon your team in sharing your team's findings with other federal prosecutorial districts that are continuing their separate inquiries on topics beyond your scope of work as a special counsel?
With the exception of the first question, the rest should be direct to elicit clear-cut and not opinionated responses.
And I wanted to tell Nat4900 that it would be a great mistake to not cover part one of his investigation and not just part two....
Part two, the obstruction of an Official Investigation, means nothing to anyone that does not know the details of the Investigation that was obstructed!!!
It's important for uninformed people to be informed about the EXTENSIVE Russian Interference in our last election, the means they did it, and the Trump Campaign connection to it....
THIS CAN NOT AND SHOULD NOT be skipped, and if there is not enough time to do both, it is more important to go over Part one vs 2..... honest to goodness it is.....
People need to know what a great job the Mueller team did in tracing down what they could, people need to know the darn facts of the investigation, the obstruction of justice can then follow.... without knowing the facts of what was found in the investigation, how are people going to get upset or understand the urgency of protecting ourselves or even understand it... when the admin, is playing like the whole interference by Russians and his team's readiness to work with them, is some every day thing that anybody would do, or some made up hoax as our dearest president claims.... securing our elections from future attack is the most important thing to do....
Informing people, is arming people...
All those questions you have above, can wait.... people need to be informed, on the Trump side as well....
President Trump obstructing can follow....
Plus, informing people with the actual Mueller FACTS, will help combat all the FAKE stories the Republicans are trying to deflect with...
In another thread that was closed, uncertain on why, Nat4900
Posted this:
For the many of us who want justice, accountability and transparency, from what the Mueller team investigated, reported on and concluded, the Mueller testimony is a MUST.
The stakes are high for both sides of the aisle.
But, in my opinion, Mueller is such a "straight shooter" that to presume that he will side with democrats.....even after the Trump WH and the leadership in the DOJ have derided him........may be wrong.
The efficacy of Mueller's testimony will depend on the simple and direct questions posed to him without necessarily asking him to arrive at any new decisions.
Mueller should be asked:
1. Given the findings listed in your report......and placing aside the current DOJ policy that a sitting president cannot be indicted.........would a prosecutor like yourself indict ANYONE based on the reported obstruction findings?
2. Once AG Barr took charge of your investigation, was any pressure made upon your team to wrap up the inquiry? If such pressure was placed on you, is THAT the reason why you did not subpoena Me. Trump to openly testify before a grand jury?
3. Given the number of "I don't recall" responses to your written questions to the WH, why did you not further request follow-up questions?............What stopped you from making such requests?
4. In your through investigation, did you request and were given information from the Deutsche Bank regarding Trump's dealings with that Bank?
5. In your inquiry, did you request and were given copies of Trump's tax returns? If you were given such access, how many years were made available to your team?
6. Mr. Mueller, could you name any and ALL other witnesses who were requested but refused to appear before your team or grand juries?
7. Mr. MUeller, have you had any opposition placed upon your team in sharing your team's findings with other federal prosecutorial districts that are continuing their separate inquiries on topics beyond your scope of work as a special counsel?
With the exception of the first question, the rest should be direct to elicit clear-cut and not opinionated responses.
And I wanted to tell Nat4900 that it would be a great mistake to not cover part one of his investigation and not just part two....
Part two, the obstruction of an Official Investigation, means nothing to anyone that does not know the details of the Investigation that was obstructed!!!
It's important for uninformed people to be informed about the EXTENSIVE Russian Interference in our last election, the means they did it, and the Trump Campaign connection to it....
THIS CAN NOT AND SHOULD NOT be skipped, and if there is not enough time to do both, it is more important to go over Part one vs 2..... honest to goodness it is.....
People need to know what a great job the Mueller team did in tracing down what they could, people need to know the darn facts of the investigation, the obstruction of justice can then follow.... without knowing the facts of what was found in the investigation, how are people going to get upset or understand the urgency of protecting ourselves or even understand it... when the admin, is playing like the whole interference by Russians and his team's readiness to work with them, is some every day thing that anybody would do, or some made up hoax as our dearest president claims.... securing our elections from future attack is the most important thing to do....
Informing people, is arming people...
All those questions you have above, can wait.... people need to be informed, on the Trump side as well....
President Trump obstructing can follow....
Plus, informing people with the actual Mueller FACTS, will help combat all the FAKE stories the Republicans are trying to deflect with...
And I would like to inform you, that when the new, super duper, DUPE, (thank you Franco the FUNDIO) NEW SCOPE MEMO is released, along with Horwitz's report, you are a bunch of SCREWED bunnies.
But that is ok, rabbits are known to reproduce like crazy. And it appears the new bunny reproduction cycle includes massive amounts of TDS, lol!
That is ok there Boseaphus! We are gonna set you straight. I know, you hate taking anything from a conservative, but after all, SOMEBODY has to save you TDS incompetents from yourselves-) No worrys, we got the goods...……...unlike you dumbshi**! Your side will be on trial, and it is going to be EPIC!
Obstruction has nothing to do with collusion. But to the POINT Mueller SPECIFICALLY SAID NO COLLUSION. God you morons are dumb as rocks. Now be specific and show us where Trump Obstructed Mueller in any way......
Obstruction has nothing to do with collusion.
Actually it does if the obstruction was meant to conceal facts concerning collusion.
yes, but Mueller found none of that. If he did indictments would have been issued. but you are correct that its not over, Clinton, Comey, Lynch, McCabe, Strzok, Page, and possibly Barry himself are now the subjects of the investigation that they started.yes, but Mueller found none of that. If he did indictments would have been issued.
That's not what Mueller concluded. He concluded , and said so very clearly, that a sitting president cannot be indicted under DOJ rules, dope.
