It's Mueller Time!

[AzogtheDefiler]

Post up the transcript.

One last time, and then I am just going to ignore you because, as I stated, you are living proof you can't fix stupid when it's combined with a denial of reality:

"I want to add one correction to my testimony this morning," Mueller said. "I want to go back to one thing that was said this morning by Mr. Lieu, who said and I quote, ‘You didn’t charge the President because of the OLC opinion.' That is not the correct way to say it. As we say in the report and as I said at the opening, we did not reach a determination as to whether the President committed a crime.”

Robert Mueller hearings: 5 big takeaways | Fox News

.

No shit. I posted the video, dope.

Now where does he say this

Could” doesn’t mean should. He told him that if he were not president he still would not have been charged.

He says “we did not reach the determination whether the President committed a crime” LOL. Nothing to do with OLC. He could have been a cashier at WalMart and still have the same outcome. You’re dumb and a Leftist

Respond to this one, Hutch. LMAO. Dumbass.

LOL...
No

The only reason they could not is precisely because he is the president. If he worked at walmart he could have been indicted.

A president cannot be indicted.
If a he cannot be indicted then he cannot be accused either. Hence, "we did not reach a determination as to whether the President committed a crime”

Mueller can't say it was due only to the OLC rule because that would imply the president committed a crime.

Listen to him explain starting at the 4min mark.

Nope. English is not your strong suit. If Trump were a dog catcher there would still be no crime

 

[AzogtheDefiler]

Post up the transcript.

One last time, and then I am just going to ignore you because, as I stated, you are living proof you can't fix stupid when it's combined with a denial of reality:

"I want to add one correction to my testimony this morning," Mueller said. "I want to go back to one thing that was said this morning by Mr. Lieu, who said and I quote, ‘You didn’t charge the President because of the OLC opinion.' That is not the correct way to say it. As we say in the report and as I said at the opening, we did not reach a determination as to whether the President committed a crime.”

Robert Mueller hearings: 5 big takeaways | Fox News

.

No shit. I posted the video, dope.

Now where does he say this

Could” doesn’t mean should. He told him that if he were not president he still would not have been charged.

He says “we did not reach the determination whether the President committed a crime” LOL. Nothing to do with OLC. He could have been a cashier at WalMart and still have the same outcome. You’re dumb and a Leftist

Dayum, you're one stupid cultist.

That sentence does not stand on it's own. It's to correct just a portion of Mr. Lieu's question....

Lieu: “I’d like to ask you the reason, again, that you [did not reach a determination as to whether the President committed a crime] was because of OLC opinion stating that you cannot indict a sitting president, correct?”

Mueller: “That is correct.”​

And he took it back. Dummy. Fawn is embarrassing himself.

More smileys ha ha ha. Poor Fawn.

 

[Hutch Starskey]

Post up the transcript.

One last time, and then I am just going to ignore you because, as I stated, you are living proof you can't fix stupid when it's combined with a denial of reality:

"I want to add one correction to my testimony this morning," Mueller said. "I want to go back to one thing that was said this morning by Mr. Lieu, who said and I quote, ‘You didn’t charge the President because of the OLC opinion.' That is not the correct way to say it. As we say in the report and as I said at the opening, we did not reach a determination as to whether the President committed a crime.”

Robert Mueller hearings: 5 big takeaways | Fox News

.

No shit. I posted the video, dope.

Now where does he say this

Could” doesn’t mean should. He told him that if he were not president he still would not have been charged.

Facts mean nothing to the voices in the heads of these cultists.

It's funny as hell though to watch them scramble for any narrative they can get their hands on no matter how stupid.

Did not reach determination that the President committed a crime. What does that mean to you?

It means they didn't say one way or the other, dope.

 

[AzogtheDefiler]

One last time, and then I am just going to ignore you because, as I stated, you are living proof you can't fix stupid when it's combined with a denial of reality:

"I want to add one correction to my testimony this morning," Mueller said. "I want to go back to one thing that was said this morning by Mr. Lieu, who said and I quote, ‘You didn’t charge the President because of the OLC opinion.' That is not the correct way to say it. As we say in the report and as I said at the opening, we did not reach a determination as to whether the President committed a crime.”

Robert Mueller hearings: 5 big takeaways | Fox News

.

No shit. I posted the video, dope.

Now where does he say this

Could” doesn’t mean should. He told him that if he were not president he still would not have been charged.

Facts mean nothing to the voices in the heads of these cultists.

It's funny as hell though to watch them scramble for any narrative they can get their hands on no matter how stupid.

Did not reach determination that the President committed a crime. What does that mean to you?

It means they didn't say one way or the other, dope.

So in America that means innocent. You fat idiot.

 

[Hutch Starskey]

One last time, and then I am just going to ignore you because, as I stated, you are living proof you can't fix stupid when it's combined with a denial of reality:

"I want to add one correction to my testimony this morning," Mueller said. "I want to go back to one thing that was said this morning by Mr. Lieu, who said and I quote, ‘You didn’t charge the President because of the OLC opinion.' That is not the correct way to say it. As we say in the report and as I said at the opening, we did not reach a determination as to whether the President committed a crime.”

Robert Mueller hearings: 5 big takeaways | Fox News

.

No shit. I posted the video, dope.

Now where does he say this

Could” doesn’t mean should. He told him that if he were not president he still would not have been charged.

He says “we did not reach the determination whether the President committed a crime” LOL. Nothing to do with OLC. He could have been a cashier at WalMart and still have the same outcome. You’re dumb and a Leftist

Respond to this one, Hutch. LMAO. Dumbass.

LOL...
No

The only reason they could not is precisely because he is the president. If he worked at walmart he could have been indicted.

A president cannot be indicted.
If a he cannot be indicted then he cannot be accused either. Hence, "we did not reach a determination as to whether the President committed a crime”

Mueller can't say it was due only to the OLC rule because that would imply the president committed a crime.

Listen to him explain starting at the 4min mark.

Nope. English is not your strong suit. If Trump were a dog catcher there would still be no crime

You didn't watch it.

You've been exposed as a liar.

 

[Foxfyre]

I don't believe 800 prosecutors are that ignorant of the law. You can indict a ham sandwich if you want to, but there has to be evidence of obstruction in order to convict of obstruction. Any judge worth his salt would have thrown any case out of court based on the 'possible but not conclusive' incidents that could have been obstruction described in Mueller's report--could have been obstruction only if they conclusively could have been interpreted as obstruction. In no place in the Mueller report is anything interpreted conclusively as obstruction.

Since Mueller himself stated that there was no conclusive evidence that any obstruction occurred--he was denied no document and received quickly and efficiently 1.4 million of them--and he was denied no witness--500+ subpoenas and hundreds and hundreds of hours of testimony--where did the President obstruct?

Also it is pretty hard to make a case that somebody obstructed justice when there was no crime to obstruct.

Quote Mueller saying there was no conclusive evidence of obstruction....

Here you go. Happy reading:
https://www.justice.gov/storage/report.pdf

Oh and here too:
"I want to add one correction to my testimony this morning," Mueller said. "I want to go back to one thing that was said this morning by Mr. Lieu, who said and I quote, ‘You didn’t charge the President because of the OLC opinion.' That is not the correct way to say it. As we say in the report and as I said at the opening, we did not reach a determination as to whether the President committed a crime.”

Robert Mueller hearings: 5 big takeaways | Fox News

That doesn't say there was no conclusive evidence. In fact, I can only hope you're capable of noticing that neither word, "conclusive" or "evidence" can be found in that quote. He said he didn't determine if a crime was committed because of the OLC's opinion that a sitting president can't be indicted. He never said he didn't determine if a crime was committed due to lack of evidence.

Want even more proof you don't understand what he said...?

There was no conclusive evidence on the charges of conspiracy -- and Mueller said that. He never said that on the charges of obstruction.

If he truly believed there was no conclusive evidence on the charge of obstruction, he would have said so, just like he did about conspiracy.

It says it again and again and again and again. I don't expect you to see or admit that. But the whole report is a statement that they could identify no crime committed by the President for which there was any conclusive evidence. If they had conclusive evidence that the President had committed a crime, they absolutely would have said so. They didn't.

They did word Part Two of the report in a way to obfusicate and provide unsupported innuendo to feed the conspiracy and hopes of the radical left and those who wanted to use it to continue to accuse and denigrate the President. And a whole bunch in that group--all those who are so full of hate they are incapable of any kind of objectivity, intellectual honesty, or fair play--certainly have taken advantage of that.

That's not true. Volume one exonerated trump on conspiracy. Volume two did not exonerate trump on obstruction.

Show me the line in the first volume that exonerates President Trump on anything.

 

[Hutch Starskey]

No shit. I posted the video, dope.

Now where does he say this

Facts mean nothing to the voices in the heads of these cultists.

It's funny as hell though to watch them scramble for any narrative they can get their hands on no matter how stupid.

Did not reach determination that the President committed a crime. What does that mean to you?

It means they didn't say one way or the other, dope.

So in America that means innocent. You fat idiot.

No. It means exactly what is says. They didn't make a determination.

 

[Faun]

Mueller testified that his investigation was not impeded.

It’s gonna be a tough sell to a jury to convict Trump of obstructing Justice.

Nah, not really.

Nah, not really,
.

Play that video to a jury,,,no obstruction. Mueller admitted as much.

Thanks for your fact filled post,

Where did I deny Mueller said that? What I'm saying is it doesn't matter if trump was successful or not at obstructing the investigation ... just trying to obstruct it is still a crime.

If I tell my pal I want to rob a bank and he tells me I should not rob a bank, and I do not rob a bank, there is no fucking crime.

Do you even law?

Then you didn't even attempt to rob the bank.

Jeez, you cultists are fucking brain-dead.

Walk into a bank, point a gun at a teller and demand money .... then run out of the bank ......

Guess where you end up if the police catch you even though your attempt to rob the bank failed you.

 

[AzogtheDefiler]

No shit. I posted the video, dope.

Now where does he say this

He says “we did not reach the determination whether the President committed a crime” LOL. Nothing to do with OLC. He could have been a cashier at WalMart and still have the same outcome. You’re dumb and a Leftist

Respond to this one, Hutch. LMAO. Dumbass.

LOL...
No

The only reason they could not is precisely because he is the president. If he worked at walmart he could have been indicted.

A president cannot be indicted.
If a he cannot be indicted then he cannot be accused either. Hence, "we did not reach a determination as to whether the President committed a crime”

Mueller can't say it was due only to the OLC rule because that would imply the president committed a crime.

Listen to him explain starting at the 4min mark.

Nope. English is not your strong suit. If Trump were a dog catcher there would still be no crime

You didn't watch it.

You've been exposed as a liar.

Bullshit. You’re not a liar you’re just stupid.

 

[AzogtheDefiler]

Facts mean nothing to the voices in the heads of these cultists.

It's funny as hell though to watch them scramble for any narrative they can get their hands on no matter how stupid.

Did not reach determination that the President committed a crime. What does that mean to you?

It means they didn't say one way or the other, dope.

So in America that means innocent. You fat idiot.

No. It means exactly what is says. They didn't make a determination.

Which in America means innocent. Idiot. Are you even American?

 

[Hutch Starskey]

It's funny as hell though to watch them scramble for any narrative they can get their hands on no matter how stupid.

Did not reach determination that the President committed a crime. What does that mean to you?

It means they didn't say one way or the other, dope.

So in America that means innocent. You fat idiot.

No. It means exactly what is says. They didn't make a determination.

Which in America means innocent. Idiot. Are you even American?

No. It means he can be cuffed and perp walked as he steps out of the WH on Jan 21, 2021. That isn't innocent, dope.

 

[FA_Q2]

Mueller testified that his investigation was not impeded.

It’s gonna be a tough sell to a jury to convict Trump of obstructing Justice.

Nah, not really.

Nah, not really,
.

Play that video to a jury,,,no obstruction. Mueller admitted as much.

Thanks for your fact filled post,

Where did I deny Mueller said that? What I'm saying is it doesn't matter if trump was successful or not at obstructing the investigation ... just trying to obstruct it is still a crime.

If I tell my pal I want to rob a bank and he tells me I should not rob a bank, and I do not rob a bank, there is no fucking crime.

Do you even law?

Then you didn't even attempt to rob the bank.

Jeez, you cultists are fucking brain-dead.

Walk into a bank, point a gun at a teller and demand money .... then run out of the bank ......

Guess where you end up if the police catch you even though your attempt to rob the bank failed you.

Trump tells McGhan to fire Muller. McGhan refuses to. Trump had the full authority to fire Muller (and this is not in dispute). Trump does not fire Muller or McGhan.

So why is this scenario equal to the running into the bank and pointing a gun at the teller rather than telling your friend that you want to rob a bank, him refusing and then not robbing the bank?

 

[AzogtheDefiler]

Did not reach determination that the President committed a crime. What does that mean to you?

It means they didn't say one way or the other, dope.

So in America that means innocent. You fat idiot.

No. It means exactly what is says. They didn't make a determination.

Which in America means innocent. Idiot. Are you even American?

No. It means he can be cuffed and perp walked as he steps out of the WH on Jan 21, 2021. That isn't innocent, dope.

Can but won’t as there is not enough evidence whether he is POTUS or the dog catcher. Dope.

 

[bripat9643]

Post up the transcript.

One last time, and then I am just going to ignore you because, as I stated, you are living proof you can't fix stupid when it's combined with a denial of reality:

"I want to add one correction to my testimony this morning," Mueller said. "I want to go back to one thing that was said this morning by Mr. Lieu, who said and I quote, ‘You didn’t charge the President because of the OLC opinion.' That is not the correct way to say it. As we say in the report and as I said at the opening, we did not reach a determination as to whether the President committed a crime.”

Robert Mueller hearings: 5 big takeaways | Fox News

.

So replace Mr Lieu's question with Mueller's correction and you'll get:

Lieu: “I’d like to ask you the reason, again, that you [did not reach a determination as to whether the President committed a crime] was because of OLC opinion stating that you cannot indict a sitting president, correct?”

Mueller: “That is correct.”​

Wrong.

Oh look, the fucking moron doesn't understand English.

I understand English perfectly. I also understand abject stupidity when I see it. Mueller has come down on both sides of that issue. When he's in front of Democrats, he says it was because of the OLC opinion. When he has to report to his superiors and risks being charged with perjury, then he says the opposite. What he says when he's threatened with a perjury charge is the only thing that matters.

 

[FA_Q2]

Did not reach determination that the President committed a crime. What does that mean to you?

It means they didn't say one way or the other, dope.

So in America that means innocent. You fat idiot.

No. It means exactly what is says. They didn't make a determination.

Which in America means innocent. Idiot. Are you even American?

No. It means he can be cuffed and perp walked as he steps out of the WH on Jan 21, 2021. That isn't innocent, dope.

Never going to happen at the very least because of how damaging to the country this would be. Using the government to go after your political rivals was rightly feared and viciously attacked when Trump was ranting about locking Hillary up.

Now it is being lauded as a valuable course of action when the democrats refuse to impeach Trump now. It is disgusting. The ball is in the dems court - they either impeach him or accept there will be no legal recourse.

 

[Foxfyre]

One last time, and then I am just going to ignore you because, as I stated, you are living proof you can't fix stupid when it's combined with a denial of reality:

"I want to add one correction to my testimony this morning," Mueller said. "I want to go back to one thing that was said this morning by Mr. Lieu, who said and I quote, ‘You didn’t charge the President because of the OLC opinion.' That is not the correct way to say it. As we say in the report and as I said at the opening, we did not reach a determination as to whether the President committed a crime.”

Robert Mueller hearings: 5 big takeaways | Fox News

.

No shit. I posted the video, dope.

Now where does he say this

Could” doesn’t mean should. He told him that if he were not president he still would not have been charged.

Facts mean nothing to the voices in the heads of these cultists.

It's funny as hell though to watch them scramble for any narrative they can get their hands on no matter how stupid.

Did not reach determination that the President committed a crime. What does that mean to you?

It means he decided not to determine guilt because of the OLC's opinion that a sitting president can't be indicted.

Had he believed trump was not guilty, he would have cleared him -- just as he did over collusion/conspiracy.

I'm still waiting for the specific line in the report which he cleared the President of collusion/conspiracy. Hint: it isn't there.

What is there is a report describing some of the exhaustive investigation done with a conclusion that no evidence was found that ANY AMERICAN had committed any crime related to collusion or conspiracy with the Russians.

My interpretation: There was strong evidence that the Clinton Campaign tried to use the Russians for their advantage but he chose not to look at that. And the only way to divert attention from her was to find no evidence that any American is guilty of that. Mueller didn't know who or what Fusion GPS is. Give me a break. 1.4 million documents, 500+ subpoenas, somewhere between $25 and $50 million dollars spent, and he didn't hear about Fusion GPS in any of that? The one entity deliberately and with foresight soliciting information from the Russians? Incredible. I'm hoping the IG or Durham will have no such inclination to refuse to look into that.

Nor did he find any evidence that the President obstructed justice. He cited a lot of instances that COULD BE INTERPRETED AS OBSTRUCTION IF THE INTENT WAS TO OBSTRUCT but he cites no shred of evidence that the intent was to obstruct.

 

[Hutch Starskey]

It means they didn't say one way or the other, dope.

So in America that means innocent. You fat idiot.

No. It means exactly what is says. They didn't make a determination.

Which in America means innocent. Idiot. Are you even American?

No. It means he can be cuffed and perp walked as he steps out of the WH on Jan 21, 2021. That isn't innocent, dope.

Can but won’t as there is not enough evidence whether he is POTUS or the dog catcher. Dope.

Half the report is evidence.
How do you reconcile the fact that Trump was cleared in one inststance but not the other?

They even said they would say if he was cleared. They determined they could not say that.

 

[bripat9643]

So replace Mr Lieu's question with Mueller's correction and you'll get:

Lieu: “I’d like to ask you the reason, again, that you [did not reach a determination as to whether the President committed a crime] was because of OLC opinion stating that you cannot indict a sitting president, correct?”

Mueller: “That is correct.”​

Replacing reality with fantasy is your bag ?

No, gramps, I'm replacing the words Mueller said Mr. Lieu got wrong with the words Mueller said should have been used. Didn't they teach you English in elementary school back in the 1700's?

Liar. Mueller retracted his statement that he declined to accuse Trump of obstruction because of the OLC opinion. What would be the point of revising his remarks if he was only going to confirm what he said previously?

It takes a special kind of stupid to swallow what you're serving.

 

[bripat9643]

So in America that means innocent. You fat idiot.

No. It means exactly what is says. They didn't make a determination.

Which in America means innocent. Idiot. Are you even American?

No. It means he can be cuffed and perp walked as he steps out of the WH on Jan 21, 2021. That isn't innocent, dope.

Can but won’t as there is not enough evidence whether he is POTUS or the dog catcher. Dope.

Half the report is evidence.
How do you reconcile the fact that Trump was cleared in one inststance but not the other?

They even said they would say if he was cleared. They determined they could not say that.

A prosecutor doesn't have the authority to "clear" anyone, dumbass. He either indicts or he doesn't.

 

[Hutch Starskey]

It means they didn't say one way or the other, dope.

So in America that means innocent. You fat idiot.

No. It means exactly what is says. They didn't make a determination.

Which in America means innocent. Idiot. Are you even American?

No. It means he can be cuffed and perp walked as he steps out of the WH on Jan 21, 2021. That isn't innocent, dope.

Never going to happen at the very least because of how damaging to the country this would be. Using the government to go after your political rivals was rightly feared and viciously attacked when Trump was ranting about locking Hillary up.

Now it is being lauded as a valuable course of action when the democrats refuse to impeach Trump now. It is disgusting. The ball is in the dems court - they either impeach him or accept there will be no legal recourse.

I don't know if that would happen. I was making the point that Trump was not cleared of obstruction.

Political rivals didn't force Trump to commit multiple acts of felony obstruction of justice.