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.
From what I've seen so far, I would rather see everyone put this on the shelf and focus on a positive election campaign instead. I said I'd accept the Mueller report findings, and if that summary is accurate, I'm going to hold myself to that promise. Of course, that is a conditional decision, based on what the whole report says. If Barr is cherry picking Mueller's findings, hopefully we will find that out, too.Mueller didn't decide, so AG Barr did. And he decided there was not sufficient evidence to charge the President with obstruction of justice.No obstruction of justice.
No he said he didn't decide one way or another if he did or not.
Here are the excerpts from his summary, and a link to the whole thing.
After making a "thorough factual investigation" into these matters, the Special Counsel considered whether to evaluate the conduct under Department standards governing prosecution and declination decisions but ultimately determined not to make a traditional prosecutorial judgment. The Special Counsel therefore did not draw a conclusion -- one way or the other – as to whether the examined conducted constituted obstruction. Instead, for each of the relevant actions investigated , the report sets out evidence on both sides of the question and leaves unresolved what the Special Counsel views as "difficult issues" of law and fact concerning whether the President's actions and intent could be viewed as obstruction. The Special Counsel states that "while this report does not conclude that the President committed a crime, it also does not exonerate him."
The AG goes on to explain that since Mueller did not come to any legal conclusions on this, it is up to Barr himself to determine whether there was a crime. He determined there was not.
AG Barr quotes Mueller as saying "the evidence does not establish that the President wa involved in an underlying crime related to Russian election interference."
Read: Justice Department summary of Mueller report - CNNPolitics
No such determinations would EVER need to be given to the Obama administration, who wiretapped their political enemies for political gain.
If liberals have even half a brain left--which is doubtful--they will quit while they are ahead. But being liberals, I give that about a 10% chance. Good luck with winners like Adam Schiff, Eric Swalwell and Maxine Waters in your court.
No obstruction of justice.
No he said he didn't decide one way or another if he did or not.
He has no evidence of any obstruction, and there was no underlying crime committed in the first place.
Now go pound sand.
Not true at all. Mueller said he could not come up with a decision one way or another, and that his results do not exonerate Trump.
Investigators do not “exonerate”, they search for evidence of crimes.
He found zero evidence for collusion, period.
You lost. Have fun spinning it otherwise.
This is down right dense. Mueller's investigation had the ability to go in front of a grand jury and get indictments. Mueller clearly stated his results do not exonerate Trump when it comes to obstruction of justice. It's clear as day.
No he said he didn't decide one way or another if he did or not.
He has no evidence of any obstruction, and there was no underlying crime committed in the first place.
Now go pound sand.
Not true at all. Mueller said he could not come up with a decision one way or another, and that his results do not exonerate Trump.
Investigators do not “exonerate”, they search for evidence of crimes.
He found zero evidence for collusion, period.
You lost. Have fun spinning it otherwise.
This is down right dense. Mueller's investigation had the ability to go in front of a grand jury and get indictments. Mueller clearly stated his results do not exonerate Trump when it comes to obstruction of justice. It's clear as day.
Mueller said his investigation was not obstructed. There is no evidence of any obstruction which means he is exonerated.
No obstruction of justice.
No he said he didn't decide one way or another if he did or not.
He has no evidence of any obstruction, and there was no underlying crime committed in the first place.
Now go pound sand.
Not true at all. Mueller said he could not come up with a decision one way or another, and that his results do not exonerate Trump.
Getting rid of a pedophile is winning? Yeah I guess it is.How is no further indictments the same as no indictments?
Republicans don’t seem to be terribly bright
It's over dude YOU LOST
In my time here Dizzy Dean of Chi-town has never won anything I can remember but the railroading of Stone-Manafort he loves so much. Forgot: he won getting rid of Roy Moore.
He has no evidence of any obstruction, and there was no underlying crime committed in the first place.
Now go pound sand.
Not true at all. Mueller said he could not come up with a decision one way or another, and that his results do not exonerate Trump.
Investigators do not “exonerate”, they search for evidence of crimes.
He found zero evidence for collusion, period.
You lost. Have fun spinning it otherwise.
This is down right dense. Mueller's investigation had the ability to go in front of a grand jury and get indictments. Mueller clearly stated his results do not exonerate Trump when it comes to obstruction of justice. It's clear as day.
Mueller said his investigation was not obstructed. There is no evidence of any obstruction which means he is exonerated.
He did not say that. He said he couldn't decide either way and Trump was not exonerated from it. There is no mincing words, he flat out, clearly, said it.
2800 subpoenas
500 search warrants
50 pin registers
40 FBI agents
19 Attorneys
Two years of investigation
And in 48 hours, Attorney General Barr can create a summary about that.
No one believes this. It’s got a long way to go.
2800 subpoenas
500 search warrants
50 pin registers
40 FBI agents
19 Attorneys
Two years of investigation
And in 48 hours, Attorney General Barr can create a summary about that.
No one believes this. It’s got a long way to go.
18 U.S. Code § 1510.Obstruction of criminal investigation
(a)
Whoever willfully endeavors by means of bribery to obstruct, delay, or prevent the communication of information relating to a violation of any criminal statute of the United States by anyperson to a criminal investigator shall be fined under this title, or imprisoned not more than five years, or both.
There was no violation of any criminal statute.
No obstruction of justice.
No he said he didn't decide one way or another if he did or not.
He has no evidence of any obstruction, and there was no underlying crime committed in the first place.
Now go pound sand.
Not true at all. Mueller said he could not come up with a decision one way or another, and that his results do not exonerate Trump.
I'm not stupid, Lewdog. I am aware of what could have happened here, with Trump so openly declaring that he wanted an AG "protecting" him. So he fired Sessions, hired Barr and who knows what discussions took place, what agreements were made. I know all that.Mueller didn't decide, so AG Barr did. And he decided there was not sufficient evidence to charge the President with obstruction of justice.No obstruction of justice.
No he said he didn't decide one way or another if he did or not.
Here are the excerpts from his summary, and a link to the whole thing.
After making a "thorough factual investigation" into these matters, the Special Counsel considered whether to evaluate the conduct under Department standards governing prosecution and declination decisions but ultimately determined not to make a traditional prosecutorial judgment. The Special Counsel therefore did not draw a conclusion -- one way or the other – as to whether the examined conducted constituted obstruction. Instead, for each of the relevant actions investigated , the report sets out evidence on both sides of the question and leaves unresolved what the Special Counsel views as "difficult issues" of law and fact concerning whether the President's actions and intent could be viewed as obstruction. The Special Counsel states that "while this report does not conclude that the President committed a crime, it also does not exonerate him."
The AG goes on to explain that since Mueller did not come to any legal conclusions on this, it is up to Barr himself to determine whether there was a crime. He determined there was not.
AG Barr quotes Mueller as saying "the evidence does not establish that the President wa involved in an underlying crime related to Russian election interference."
Read: Justice Department summary of Mueller report - CNNPolitics
But just like I said, it is quite odd that Barr could make this decision in JUST 48 hours, after a 2 year long investigation and all the evidence. The man who wrote the rules for a special counsel is now on tv saying the exact same thing as I have. Barr rushed his decision, and wonders if he was doing something wrong.
Not true at all. Mueller said he could not come up with a decision one way or another, and that his results do not exonerate Trump.
Investigators do not “exonerate”, they search for evidence of crimes.
He found zero evidence for collusion, period.
You lost. Have fun spinning it otherwise.
This is down right dense. Mueller's investigation had the ability to go in front of a grand jury and get indictments. Mueller clearly stated his results do not exonerate Trump when it comes to obstruction of justice. It's clear as day.
Mueller said his investigation was not obstructed. There is no evidence of any obstruction which means he is exonerated.
He did not say that. He said he couldn't decide either way and Trump was not exonerated from it. There is no mincing words, he flat out, clearly, said it.
It’s not his job to “exonerate” anyone from crimes, it’s his job to find evidence of crimes. He has none.
Whine about it all you want. There is zero evidence of “obstruction”.
You need evidence to charge someone with a crime. There will be no charges based on this report.
Investigators do not “exonerate”, they search for evidence of crimes.
He found zero evidence for collusion, period.
You lost. Have fun spinning it otherwise.
This is down right dense. Mueller's investigation had the ability to go in front of a grand jury and get indictments. Mueller clearly stated his results do not exonerate Trump when it comes to obstruction of justice. It's clear as day.
Mueller said his investigation was not obstructed. There is no evidence of any obstruction which means he is exonerated.
He did not say that. He said he couldn't decide either way and Trump was not exonerated from it. There is no mincing words, he flat out, clearly, said it.
It’s not his job to “exonerate” anyone from crimes, it’s his job to find evidence of crimes. He has none.
Whine about it all you want. There is zero evidence of “obstruction”.
You need evidence to charge someone with a crime. There will be no charges based on this report.
Do you know what exonerate means? If there were ZERO evidence of obstruction of justice Mueller would have said so.
Someone on this forum was very correct when he stated "Democrats are going to overreach on this and it's going to backfire". Based on Trumps comments just now that "nobody has looked at the other side, someone should do that" regarding the source and basis of this investigation.
The DNC will be damaged without repair for years if it was proven that Obama admin, was working to ensure Clinton won, and the Russia hoax was designed to prevent this from being known, among other issues.
I'm not stupid, Lewdog. I am aware of what could have happened here, with Trump so openly declaring that he wanted an AG "protecting" him. So he fired Sessions, hired Barr and who knows what discussions took place, what agreements were made. I know all that.Mueller didn't decide, so AG Barr did. And he decided there was not sufficient evidence to charge the President with obstruction of justice.No obstruction of justice.
No he said he didn't decide one way or another if he did or not.
Here are the excerpts from his summary, and a link to the whole thing.
After making a "thorough factual investigation" into these matters, the Special Counsel considered whether to evaluate the conduct under Department standards governing prosecution and declination decisions but ultimately determined not to make a traditional prosecutorial judgment. The Special Counsel therefore did not draw a conclusion -- one way or the other – as to whether the examined conducted constituted obstruction. Instead, for each of the relevant actions investigated , the report sets out evidence on both sides of the question and leaves unresolved what the Special Counsel views as "difficult issues" of law and fact concerning whether the President's actions and intent could be viewed as obstruction. The Special Counsel states that "while this report does not conclude that the President committed a crime, it also does not exonerate him."
The AG goes on to explain that since Mueller did not come to any legal conclusions on this, it is up to Barr himself to determine whether there was a crime. He determined there was not.
AG Barr quotes Mueller as saying "the evidence does not establish that the President wa involved in an underlying crime related to Russian election interference."
Read: Justice Department summary of Mueller report - CNNPolitics
But just like I said, it is quite odd that Barr could make this decision in JUST 48 hours, after a 2 year long investigation and all the evidence. The man who wrote the rules for a special counsel is now on tv saying the exact same thing as I have. Barr rushed his decision, and wonders if he was doing something wrong.
I hope that we will have the opportunity to read Mueller's points on this matter, pro and con, in detail. I predict that the Democrats will all decide that Trump was guilty and the Republicans will decide that Trump is innocent. It will accomplish nothing and get us no further. The Special Counsel did what he could. A decision has been lawfully made. I don't support another year and a half of this ripping and tearing.
We have more important things to do.
So Mueller made no decision on obstruction, but suddenly Barr is making the decision there is no obstruction. How odd.
Tough day??
Nope. Trump doesn't have much longer to serve as President. Regardless of Mueller's findings, we learned quite clearly that Russians have interfered with our election process, and now we can work on ways to prevent that in the future. That is the most important outcome from this.
Mueller didn't say whether Trump obstructed Justice and the AG suddenly decided in two days that Trump didn't obstruct justice. That is quite odd. You are talking about a quite serious issue, and he didn't take very long to finish things. Mueller himself said that his findings did not exonerate Trump.
This is down right dense. Mueller's investigation had the ability to go in front of a grand jury and get indictments. Mueller clearly stated his results do not exonerate Trump when it comes to obstruction of justice. It's clear as day.
Mueller said his investigation was not obstructed. There is no evidence of any obstruction which means he is exonerated.
He did not say that. He said he couldn't decide either way and Trump was not exonerated from it. There is no mincing words, he flat out, clearly, said it.
It’s not his job to “exonerate” anyone from crimes, it’s his job to find evidence of crimes. He has none.
Whine about it all you want. There is zero evidence of “obstruction”.
You need evidence to charge someone with a crime. There will be no charges based on this report.
Do you know what exonerate means? If there were ZERO evidence of obstruction of justice Mueller would have said so.
Mueller should be able to tell us if his own investigation was obstructed or not. Try to think about it.
So Mueller made no decision on obstruction, but suddenly Barr is making the decision there is no obstruction. How odd.
Tough day??
Nope. Trump doesn't have much longer to serve as President. Regardless of Mueller's findings, we learned quite clearly that Russians have interfered with our election process, and now we can work on ways to prevent that in the future. That is the most important outcome from this.
Mueller didn't say whether Trump obstructed Justice and the AG suddenly decided in two days that Trump didn't obstruct justice. That is quite odd. You are talking about a quite serious issue, and he didn't take very long to finish things. Mueller himself said that his findings did not exonerate Trump.
Damn but you people are stupid. He doesn't have to be exonerated. We have presumption of innocence in this country, and the burden of proof is on the accuser. In the absence of evidence to the contrary, innocence is sustained. No exoneration is necessary.
I'm not stupid, Lewdog. I am aware of what could have happened here, with Trump so openly declaring that he wanted an AG "protecting" him. So he fired Sessions, hired Barr and who knows what discussions took place, what agreements were made. I know all that.Mueller didn't decide, so AG Barr did. And he decided there was not sufficient evidence to charge the President with obstruction of justice.No obstruction of justice.
No he said he didn't decide one way or another if he did or not.
Here are the excerpts from his summary, and a link to the whole thing.
After making a "thorough factual investigation" into these matters, the Special Counsel considered whether to evaluate the conduct under Department standards governing prosecution and declination decisions but ultimately determined not to make a traditional prosecutorial judgment. The Special Counsel therefore did not draw a conclusion -- one way or the other – as to whether the examined conducted constituted obstruction. Instead, for each of the relevant actions investigated , the report sets out evidence on both sides of the question and leaves unresolved what the Special Counsel views as "difficult issues" of law and fact concerning whether the President's actions and intent could be viewed as obstruction. The Special Counsel states that "while this report does not conclude that the President committed a crime, it also does not exonerate him."
The AG goes on to explain that since Mueller did not come to any legal conclusions on this, it is up to Barr himself to determine whether there was a crime. He determined there was not.
AG Barr quotes Mueller as saying "the evidence does not establish that the President wa involved in an underlying crime related to Russian election interference."
Read: Justice Department summary of Mueller report - CNNPolitics
But just like I said, it is quite odd that Barr could make this decision in JUST 48 hours, after a 2 year long investigation and all the evidence. The man who wrote the rules for a special counsel is now on tv saying the exact same thing as I have. Barr rushed his decision, and wonders if he was doing something wrong.
I hope that we will have the opportunity to read Mueller's points on this matter, pro and con, in detail. I predict that the Democrats will all decide that Trump was guilty and the Republicans will decide that Trump is innocent. It will accomplish nothing and get us no further. The Special Counsel did what he could. A decision has been lawfully made. I don't support another year and a half of this ripping and tearing.
We have more important things to do.
I never called you stupid, and in fact my post pretty much agrees with you. Trump's next biggest hurdle to overcome is the emoluments cases where it seems he and his family have complete several quid pro quo deals.
