Don't make a Mistake...

[Auld Phart]

You're all something but it isn't brains. The things he passed off were a distraction from his real objective. Using your logic Rump is "exonerated" because Mueller didn't "pass off" anything concerning Rump.

No... because

MUELLER SAID HE WOULD FOLLOW DOJ GUIDELINES THAT A SITTING PRESIDENT CANNOT BE INDICTED

MUELLER SAID HE WOULD FOLLOW DOJ GUIDELINES THAT A SITTING PRESIDENT CANNOT BE INDICTED

MUELLER SAID HE WOULD FOLLOW DOJ GUIDELINES THAT A SITTING PRESIDENT CANNOT BE INDICTED

MUELLER SAID HE WOULD FOLLOW DOJ GUIDELINES THAT A SITTING PRESIDENT CANNOT BE INDICTED

MUELLER SAID HE WOULD FOLLOW DOJ GUIDELINES THAT A SITTING PRESIDENT CANNOT BE INDICTED

MUELLER SAID HE WOULD FOLLOW DOJ GUIDELINES THAT A SITTING PRESIDENT CANNOT BE INDICTED

I really do think some of you people are mentally retarded.

<YAWN!>

How does that stop him from saying whether Trump is guilty of obstruction?

Because it isn't his job to do that. Congress is the only people who can do anything about it... basic civics.

It's his job to decide whether there's enough evidence to prosecute. That's what he did.

No it isn't. When it comes to the President, CONGRESS decides whether to punish him or not through censure or impeachment.

Can you read?

MUELLER SAID HE WOULD FOLLOW DOJ GUIDELINES THAT A SITTING PRESIDENT CANNOT BE INDICTED

MUELLER SAID HE WOULD FOLLOW DOJ GUIDELINES THAT A SITTING PRESIDENT CANNOT BE INDICTED

MUELLER SAID HE WOULD FOLLOW DOJ GUIDELINES THAT A SITTING PRESIDENT CANNOT BE INDICTED

MUELLER SAID HE WOULD FOLLOW DOJ GUIDELINES THAT A SITTING PRESIDENT CANNOT BE INDICTED

MUELLER SAID HE WOULD FOLLOW DOJ GUIDELINES THAT A SITTING PRESIDENT CANNOT BE INDICTED

MUELLER SAID HE WOULD FOLLOW DOJ GUIDELINES THAT A SITTING PRESIDENT CANNOT BE INDICTED

Lewdog Starting to look like Spam. Cut it down to one paragraph

 

[Lewdog]

No... because

MUELLER SAID HE WOULD FOLLOW DOJ GUIDELINES THAT A SITTING PRESIDENT CANNOT BE INDICTED

MUELLER SAID HE WOULD FOLLOW DOJ GUIDELINES THAT A SITTING PRESIDENT CANNOT BE INDICTED

MUELLER SAID HE WOULD FOLLOW DOJ GUIDELINES THAT A SITTING PRESIDENT CANNOT BE INDICTED

MUELLER SAID HE WOULD FOLLOW DOJ GUIDELINES THAT A SITTING PRESIDENT CANNOT BE INDICTED

MUELLER SAID HE WOULD FOLLOW DOJ GUIDELINES THAT A SITTING PRESIDENT CANNOT BE INDICTED

MUELLER SAID HE WOULD FOLLOW DOJ GUIDELINES THAT A SITTING PRESIDENT CANNOT BE INDICTED

I really do think some of you people are mentally retarded.

<YAWN!>

How does that stop him from saying whether Trump is guilty of obstruction?

Because it isn't his job to do that. Congress is the only people who can do anything about it... basic civics.

It's his job to decide whether there's enough evidence to prosecute. That's what he did.

No it isn't. When it comes to the President, CONGRESS decides whether to punish him or not through censure or impeachment.

Can you read?

MUELLER SAID HE WOULD FOLLOW DOJ GUIDELINES THAT A SITTING PRESIDENT CANNOT BE INDICTED

MUELLER SAID HE WOULD FOLLOW DOJ GUIDELINES THAT A SITTING PRESIDENT CANNOT BE INDICTED

MUELLER SAID HE WOULD FOLLOW DOJ GUIDELINES THAT A SITTING PRESIDENT CANNOT BE INDICTED

MUELLER SAID HE WOULD FOLLOW DOJ GUIDELINES THAT A SITTING PRESIDENT CANNOT BE INDICTED

MUELLER SAID HE WOULD FOLLOW DOJ GUIDELINES THAT A SITTING PRESIDENT CANNOT BE INDICTED

MUELLER SAID HE WOULD FOLLOW DOJ GUIDELINES THAT A SITTING PRESIDENT CANNOT BE INDICTED

Lewdog Starting to look like Spam. Cut it down to one paragraph

I wouldn't even need to say it, if some of the dipshits on here could understand a simple principle.

 

[percysunshine]

I think we should all drink a mint julep and watch horses race in Kentucky.

 

[Auld Phart]

<YAWN!>

How does that stop him from saying whether Trump is guilty of obstruction?

Because it isn't his job to do that. Congress is the only people who can do anything about it... basic civics.

It's his job to decide whether there's enough evidence to prosecute. That's what he did.

No it isn't. When it comes to the President, CONGRESS decides whether to punish him or not through censure or impeachment.

Can you read?

MUELLER SAID HE WOULD FOLLOW DOJ GUIDELINES THAT A SITTING PRESIDENT CANNOT BE INDICTED

MUELLER SAID HE WOULD FOLLOW DOJ GUIDELINES THAT A SITTING PRESIDENT CANNOT BE INDICTED

MUELLER SAID HE WOULD FOLLOW DOJ GUIDELINES THAT A SITTING PRESIDENT CANNOT BE INDICTED

MUELLER SAID HE WOULD FOLLOW DOJ GUIDELINES THAT A SITTING PRESIDENT CANNOT BE INDICTED

MUELLER SAID HE WOULD FOLLOW DOJ GUIDELINES THAT A SITTING PRESIDENT CANNOT BE INDICTED

MUELLER SAID HE WOULD FOLLOW DOJ GUIDELINES THAT A SITTING PRESIDENT CANNOT BE INDICTED

Lewdog Starting to look like Spam. Cut it down to one paragraph

I wouldn't even need to say it, if some of the dipshits on here could understand a simple principle.

The sledgehammer action works on NO ONE on this board.

 

[Lewdog]

Because it isn't his job to do that. Congress is the only people who can do anything about it... basic civics.

It's his job to decide whether there's enough evidence to prosecute. That's what he did.

No it isn't. When it comes to the President, CONGRESS decides whether to punish him or not through censure or impeachment.

Can you read?

MUELLER SAID HE WOULD FOLLOW DOJ GUIDELINES THAT A SITTING PRESIDENT CANNOT BE INDICTED

MUELLER SAID HE WOULD FOLLOW DOJ GUIDELINES THAT A SITTING PRESIDENT CANNOT BE INDICTED

MUELLER SAID HE WOULD FOLLOW DOJ GUIDELINES THAT A SITTING PRESIDENT CANNOT BE INDICTED

MUELLER SAID HE WOULD FOLLOW DOJ GUIDELINES THAT A SITTING PRESIDENT CANNOT BE INDICTED

MUELLER SAID HE WOULD FOLLOW DOJ GUIDELINES THAT A SITTING PRESIDENT CANNOT BE INDICTED

MUELLER SAID HE WOULD FOLLOW DOJ GUIDELINES THAT A SITTING PRESIDENT CANNOT BE INDICTED

Lewdog Starting to look like Spam. Cut it down to one paragraph

I wouldn't even need to say it, if some of the dipshits on here could understand a simple principle.

The sledgehammer action works on NO ONE on this board.

It is quite simple and concise. There is nothing difficult to understand about it, yet so many people on this forum don't get it after 2 years. There is a DOJ policy to not indict a sitting President, because it is Congress's job to provide oversight. Mueller was quite clear he would follow that policy, yet here we are, 2 years later and Trump supporter after Trump supporter continue to say Trump is innocent because Mueller didn't recommend charges.

Feel free to explain to me why that is so difficult to understand, and why the repetition of correcting posters here works on no one. Repetition is exactly what Trump has done with "No collusion, no obstruction" over and over and over and over... to get his supporters to believe it.

 

[Auld Phart]

It's his job to decide whether there's enough evidence to prosecute. That's what he did.

No it isn't. When it comes to the President, CONGRESS decides whether to punish him or not through censure or impeachment.

Can you read?

MUELLER SAID HE WOULD FOLLOW DOJ GUIDELINES THAT A SITTING PRESIDENT CANNOT BE INDICTED

MUELLER SAID HE WOULD FOLLOW DOJ GUIDELINES THAT A SITTING PRESIDENT CANNOT BE INDICTED

MUELLER SAID HE WOULD FOLLOW DOJ GUIDELINES THAT A SITTING PRESIDENT CANNOT BE INDICTED

MUELLER SAID HE WOULD FOLLOW DOJ GUIDELINES THAT A SITTING PRESIDENT CANNOT BE INDICTED

MUELLER SAID HE WOULD FOLLOW DOJ GUIDELINES THAT A SITTING PRESIDENT CANNOT BE INDICTED

MUELLER SAID HE WOULD FOLLOW DOJ GUIDELINES THAT A SITTING PRESIDENT CANNOT BE INDICTED

Lewdog Starting to look like Spam. Cut it down to one paragraph

I wouldn't even need to say it, if some of the dipshits on here could understand a simple principle.

The sledgehammer action works on NO ONE on this board.

It is quite simple and concise. There is nothing difficult to understand about it, yet so many people on this forum don't get it after 2 years. There is a DOJ policy to not indict a sitting President, because it is Congress's job to provide oversight. Mueller was quite clear he would follow that policy, yet here we are, 2 years later and Trump supporter after Trump supporter continue to say Trump is innocent because Mueller didn't recommend charges.

Feel free to explain to me why that is so difficult to understand, and why the repetition of correcting posters here works on no one. Repetition is exactly what Trump has done with "No collusion, no obstruction" over and over and over and over... to get his supporters to believe it.

you don't seem to understand the problem.

you keep cutting and pasting the same paragraph, in large letters, and bright red, a half dozen times in one post.

Once will do.

 

[bripat9643]

<YAWN!>

How does that stop him from saying whether Trump is guilty of obstruction?

Because it isn't his job to do that. Congress is the only people who can do anything about it... basic civics.

It's his job to decide whether there's enough evidence to prosecute. That's what he did.

No it isn't. When it comes to the President, CONGRESS decides whether to punish him or not through censure or impeachment.

Can you read?

MUELLER SAID HE WOULD FOLLOW DOJ GUIDELINES THAT A SITTING PRESIDENT CANNOT BE INDICTED

MUELLER SAID HE WOULD FOLLOW DOJ GUIDELINES THAT A SITTING PRESIDENT CANNOT BE INDICTED

MUELLER SAID HE WOULD FOLLOW DOJ GUIDELINES THAT A SITTING PRESIDENT CANNOT BE INDICTED

MUELLER SAID HE WOULD FOLLOW DOJ GUIDELINES THAT A SITTING PRESIDENT CANNOT BE INDICTED

MUELLER SAID HE WOULD FOLLOW DOJ GUIDELINES THAT A SITTING PRESIDENT CANNOT BE INDICTED

MUELLER SAID HE WOULD FOLLOW DOJ GUIDELINES THAT A SITTING PRESIDENT CANNOT BE INDICTED

Lewdog Starting to look like Spam. Cut it down to one paragraph

I wouldn't even need to say it, if some of the dipshits on here could understand a simple principle.

Here's a simple principle you need to understand: No collusion. No obstruction. Your coup failed.

 

[bripat9643]

It's his job to decide whether there's enough evidence to prosecute. That's what he did.

No it isn't. When it comes to the President, CONGRESS decides whether to punish him or not through censure or impeachment.

Can you read?

MUELLER SAID HE WOULD FOLLOW DOJ GUIDELINES THAT A SITTING PRESIDENT CANNOT BE INDICTED

MUELLER SAID HE WOULD FOLLOW DOJ GUIDELINES THAT A SITTING PRESIDENT CANNOT BE INDICTED

MUELLER SAID HE WOULD FOLLOW DOJ GUIDELINES THAT A SITTING PRESIDENT CANNOT BE INDICTED

MUELLER SAID HE WOULD FOLLOW DOJ GUIDELINES THAT A SITTING PRESIDENT CANNOT BE INDICTED

MUELLER SAID HE WOULD FOLLOW DOJ GUIDELINES THAT A SITTING PRESIDENT CANNOT BE INDICTED

MUELLER SAID HE WOULD FOLLOW DOJ GUIDELINES THAT A SITTING PRESIDENT CANNOT BE INDICTED

Lewdog Starting to look like Spam. Cut it down to one paragraph

I wouldn't even need to say it, if some of the dipshits on here could understand a simple principle.

The sledgehammer action works on NO ONE on this board.

It is quite simple and concise. There is nothing difficult to understand about it, yet so many people on this forum don't get it after 2 years. There is a DOJ policy to not indict a sitting President, because it is Congress's job to provide oversight. Mueller was quite clear he would follow that policy, yet here we are, 2 years later and Trump supporter after Trump supporter continue to say Trump is innocent because Mueller didn't recommend charges.

Feel free to explain to me why that is so difficult to understand, and why the repetition of correcting posters here works on no one. Repetition is exactly what Trump has done with "No collusion, no obstruction" over and over and over and over... to get his supporters to believe it.

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.

 

[LA RAM FAN]

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......

Actually, that's not what they said.

They said they could not find definitive evidence to prove members of the Trump campaign conspired with the Russian GOVERNMENT. This is on top of the several cases that have been sent on by Mueller's team, but not made public.

They could not find definitive meaning there was not enough or not any evidence at all...

So in the end the Collusion argument is dead and should be dropped but alas the left need it Benghazi...

The left indeed are always desperate always desperatly trying to make the fake Russia collusion stick because of Obomination and clintons roles in Benghazi.


I am still curious why do liberals like you embarrass yourself on here ????????????????????

Obama signed obama care under three days and was still changing it on his own years latter and we all know Nancy...................

 

[Lewdog]

No it isn't. When it comes to the President, CONGRESS decides whether to punish him or not through censure or impeachment.

Can you read?

MUELLER SAID HE WOULD FOLLOW DOJ GUIDELINES THAT A SITTING PRESIDENT CANNOT BE INDICTED

MUELLER SAID HE WOULD FOLLOW DOJ GUIDELINES THAT A SITTING PRESIDENT CANNOT BE INDICTED

MUELLER SAID HE WOULD FOLLOW DOJ GUIDELINES THAT A SITTING PRESIDENT CANNOT BE INDICTED

MUELLER SAID HE WOULD FOLLOW DOJ GUIDELINES THAT A SITTING PRESIDENT CANNOT BE INDICTED

MUELLER SAID HE WOULD FOLLOW DOJ GUIDELINES THAT A SITTING PRESIDENT CANNOT BE INDICTED

MUELLER SAID HE WOULD FOLLOW DOJ GUIDELINES THAT A SITTING PRESIDENT CANNOT BE INDICTED

Lewdog Starting to look like Spam. Cut it down to one paragraph

I wouldn't even need to say it, if some of the dipshits on here could understand a simple principle.

The sledgehammer action works on NO ONE on this board.

It is quite simple and concise. There is nothing difficult to understand about it, yet so many people on this forum don't get it after 2 years. There is a DOJ policy to not indict a sitting President, because it is Congress's job to provide oversight. Mueller was quite clear he would follow that policy, yet here we are, 2 years later and Trump supporter after Trump supporter continue to say Trump is innocent because Mueller didn't recommend charges.

Feel free to explain to me why that is so difficult to understand, and why the repetition of correcting posters here works on no one. Repetition is exactly what Trump has done with "No collusion, no obstruction" over and over and over and over... to get his supporters to believe it.

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.

 

[bripat9643]

Lewdog Starting to look like Spam. Cut it down to one paragraph

I wouldn't even need to say it, if some of the dipshits on here could understand a simple principle.

The sledgehammer action works on NO ONE on this board.

It is quite simple and concise. There is nothing difficult to understand about it, yet so many people on this forum don't get it after 2 years. There is a DOJ policy to not indict a sitting President, because it is Congress's job to provide oversight. Mueller was quite clear he would follow that policy, yet here we are, 2 years later and Trump supporter after Trump supporter continue to say Trump is innocent because Mueller didn't recommend charges.

Feel free to explain to me why that is so difficult to understand, and why the repetition of correcting posters here works on no one. Repetition is exactly what Trump has done with "No collusion, no obstruction" over and over and over and over... to get his supporters to believe it.

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.

Who said anything about him deciding guilt? His job is to decide if there is enough evidence to prosecute. He decided there wasn't any. You Trump hating turds keep trying to imply we believe Mueller is authorized to determine somone's guilt. Only the left believes idiocies like that.

 

[Lewdog]

I wouldn't even need to say it, if some of the dipshits on here could understand a simple principle.

The sledgehammer action works on NO ONE on this board.

It is quite simple and concise. There is nothing difficult to understand about it, yet so many people on this forum don't get it after 2 years. There is a DOJ policy to not indict a sitting President, because it is Congress's job to provide oversight. Mueller was quite clear he would follow that policy, yet here we are, 2 years later and Trump supporter after Trump supporter continue to say Trump is innocent because Mueller didn't recommend charges.

Feel free to explain to me why that is so difficult to understand, and why the repetition of correcting posters here works on no one. Repetition is exactly what Trump has done with "No collusion, no obstruction" over and over and over and over... to get his supporters to believe it.

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.

Who said anything about him deciding guilt? His job is to decide if there is enough evidence to prosecute. He decided there wasn't any. You Trump hating turds keep trying to imply we believe Mueller is authorized to determine somone's guilt. Only the left believes idiocies like that.

No, it isn't. It was his job to investigate and provide the final report. TWO YEARS and you still don't understand what the fuck is going on?

 

[toomuchtime_]

The sledgehammer action works on NO ONE on this board.

It is quite simple and concise. There is nothing difficult to understand about it, yet so many people on this forum don't get it after 2 years. There is a DOJ policy to not indict a sitting President, because it is Congress's job to provide oversight. Mueller was quite clear he would follow that policy, yet here we are, 2 years later and Trump supporter after Trump supporter continue to say Trump is innocent because Mueller didn't recommend charges.

Feel free to explain to me why that is so difficult to understand, and why the repetition of correcting posters here works on no one. Repetition is exactly what Trump has done with "No collusion, no obstruction" over and over and over and over... to get his supporters to believe it.

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.

Who said anything about him deciding guilt? His job is to decide if there is enough evidence to prosecute. He decided there wasn't any. You Trump hating turds keep trying to imply we believe Mueller is authorized to determine somone's guilt. Only the left believes idiocies like that.

No, it isn't. It was his job to investigate and provide the final report. TWO YEARS and you still don't understand what the fuck is going on?

It is Mueller's job to provide his final report to the AG, and it is the AG's job to decide if any of it should be released to Congress or the public.

 

[Lewdog]

It is quite simple and concise. There is nothing difficult to understand about it, yet so many people on this forum don't get it after 2 years. There is a DOJ policy to not indict a sitting President, because it is Congress's job to provide oversight. Mueller was quite clear he would follow that policy, yet here we are, 2 years later and Trump supporter after Trump supporter continue to say Trump is innocent because Mueller didn't recommend charges.

Feel free to explain to me why that is so difficult to understand, and why the repetition of correcting posters here works on no one. Repetition is exactly what Trump has done with "No collusion, no obstruction" over and over and over and over... to get his supporters to believe it.

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.

Who said anything about him deciding guilt? His job is to decide if there is enough evidence to prosecute. He decided there wasn't any. You Trump hating turds keep trying to imply we believe Mueller is authorized to determine somone's guilt. Only the left believes idiocies like that.

No, it isn't. It was his job to investigate and provide the final report. TWO YEARS and you still don't understand what the fuck is going on?

It is Mueller's job to provide his final report to the AG, and it is the AG's job to decide if any of it should be released to Congress or the public.

The AG doesn't have oversight of the President, Congress does. Congress will get the full report, otherwise they can decide to stop the funding of the DOJ until they do get it.

 

[toomuchtime_]

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.

Who said anything about him deciding guilt? His job is to decide if there is enough evidence to prosecute. He decided there wasn't any. You Trump hating turds keep trying to imply we believe Mueller is authorized to determine somone's guilt. Only the left believes idiocies like that.

No, it isn't. It was his job to investigate and provide the final report. TWO YEARS and you still don't understand what the fuck is going on?

It is Mueller's job to provide his final report to the AG, and it is the AG's job to decide if any of it should be released to Congress or the public.

The AG doesn't have oversight of the President, Congress does. Congress will get the full report, otherwise they can decide to stop the funding of the DOJ until they do get it.

Again, oversight is not an enumerated power of Congress and the SC has held its only legitimate use is to assist Congress in enacting legislation. Since these are criminal investigations and not efforts to enact legislation, Congress has no oversight power to compel the administration to do anything. If the Democrats are still in control of the House when the next budget negotiations come up, they could try to defund the DoJ.

 

[Lewdog]

Yes, it does, because it isn't MUELLER'S job to decide guilt. That's up to Congress.

Who said anything about him deciding guilt? His job is to decide if there is enough evidence to prosecute. He decided there wasn't any. You Trump hating turds keep trying to imply we believe Mueller is authorized to determine somone's guilt. Only the left believes idiocies like that.

No, it isn't. It was his job to investigate and provide the final report. TWO YEARS and you still don't understand what the fuck is going on?

It is Mueller's job to provide his final report to the AG, and it is the AG's job to decide if any of it should be released to Congress or the public.

The AG doesn't have oversight of the President, Congress does. Congress will get the full report, otherwise they can decide to stop the funding of the DOJ until they do get it.

Again, oversight is not an enumerated power of Congress and the SC has held its only legitimate use is to assist Congress in enacting legislation. Since these are criminal investigations and not efforts to enact legislation, Congress has no oversight power to compel the administration to do anything. If the Democrats are still in control of the House when the next budget negotiations come up, they could try to defund the DoJ.

Yeah, no. It is literally called congressional oversight. The powers of oversight, even when not spelled out clearly in the Constitution, have been ruled by the Supreme Court to be implied. It is a vital piece to the separation of powers and the system of checks and balances.

Separation of Powers: System of Checks and Balances

 

[bripat9643]

The sledgehammer action works on NO ONE on this board.

It is quite simple and concise. There is nothing difficult to understand about it, yet so many people on this forum don't get it after 2 years. There is a DOJ policy to not indict a sitting President, because it is Congress's job to provide oversight. Mueller was quite clear he would follow that policy, yet here we are, 2 years later and Trump supporter after Trump supporter continue to say Trump is innocent because Mueller didn't recommend charges.

Feel free to explain to me why that is so difficult to understand, and why the repetition of correcting posters here works on no one. Repetition is exactly what Trump has done with "No collusion, no obstruction" over and over and over and over... to get his supporters to believe it.

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.

Who said anything about him deciding guilt? His job is to decide if there is enough evidence to prosecute. He decided there wasn't any. You Trump hating turds keep trying to imply we believe Mueller is authorized to determine somone's guilt. Only the left believes idiocies like that.

No, it isn't. It was his job to investigate and provide the final report. TWO YEARS and you still don't understand what the fuck is going on?

Oh puhleeze. If he wasn't supposed to prosecute, then why did he indict Manafort and Popodopulous?

Yes, I do understand what's going on. You're coup failed. No collusion. No obstruction.

You're the forum's biggest dumb fuck.

 

[bripat9643]

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.

Who said anything about him deciding guilt? His job is to decide if there is enough evidence to prosecute. He decided there wasn't any. You Trump hating turds keep trying to imply we believe Mueller is authorized to determine somone's guilt. Only the left believes idiocies like that.

No, it isn't. It was his job to investigate and provide the final report. TWO YEARS and you still don't understand what the fuck is going on?

It is Mueller's job to provide his final report to the AG, and it is the AG's job to decide if any of it should be released to Congress or the public.

The AG doesn't have oversight of the President, Congress does. Congress will get the full report, otherwise they can decide to stop the funding of the DOJ until they do get it.

They aren't entitled to the report, dumbfuck. You keep blubbering as if you know the law, but you keep proving you don't.

 

[toomuchtime_]

Who said anything about him deciding guilt? His job is to decide if there is enough evidence to prosecute. He decided there wasn't any. You Trump hating turds keep trying to imply we believe Mueller is authorized to determine somone's guilt. Only the left believes idiocies like that.

No, it isn't. It was his job to investigate and provide the final report. TWO YEARS and you still don't understand what the fuck is going on?

It is Mueller's job to provide his final report to the AG, and it is the AG's job to decide if any of it should be released to Congress or the public.

The AG doesn't have oversight of the President, Congress does. Congress will get the full report, otherwise they can decide to stop the funding of the DOJ until they do get it.

Again, oversight is not an enumerated power of Congress and the SC has held its only legitimate use is to assist Congress in enacting legislation. Since these are criminal investigations and not efforts to enact legislation, Congress has no oversight power to compel the administration to do anything. If the Democrats are still in control of the House when the next budget negotiations come up, they could try to defund the DoJ.

Yeah, no. It is literally called congressional oversight. The powers of oversight, even when not spelled out clearly in the Constitution, have been ruled by the Supreme Court to be implied. It is a vital piece to the separation of powers and the system of checks and balances.

Separation of Powers: System of Checks and Balances

It is a legitimate power only when it is used to help fashion legislation or in the case of an impeachment hearing.

 

[Marion Morrison]

I don't have time to read all that shit.

True, that's why it is important for congress to ask direct questions from Mueller about the Russian Interference etc, so he can explain things that happened that are in the report.

the Obstruction part is here nor there, when it is up to the Republican lead Senate to remove him from office... the only way that could happened is if the people in this Nation learn about the investigation Trump allegedly obstructed.

there are some obstruction questions asked of Mueller, but the whole darn hearing should not be about that... imho, that would be a mistake.

Art thou afflicted with teh TDS? Sad.