Not a single Trumper here has read a word of the Mueller report.

[jc456]

Let me know when Mueller testifies in front of Congress

" Based on the facts and the applicable legal standards, we are unable to reach that judgment."

" Based on the facts and the applicable legal standards, we are unable to reach that judgment."

LOL...
That applies to clearing the president dope.

You are not competent in your representation of the report.

Now you're just another liar on the internet

Now you're just another liar on the internet

For the above posters.....both of whom obviously have not read the report.
Derp....

Vol.2, page 8
CONCLUSION
Because we determined not to make a traditional prosecutorial judgment, we did not draw ultimate conclusions about the President’s conduct. The evidence we obtained about the President’s actions and intent presents difficult issues that would need to be resolved if we were making a traditional prosecutorial judgment. At the same time, if we had confidence after a thorough investigation of the facts that the President clearly did not commit obstruction of justice, we would so state. Based on the facts and the applicable legal standards, we are unable to reach that judgment. Accordingly, while this report does not conclude that the President committed a crime, it also does not exonerate him.

funny shit dude. what was the crime? is there any open indictments or sealed ones? without that, the pres is exonerated. It doesn't matter what the report says beyond that.

Name the crime.

 

[jc456]

Let me know when Mueller testifies in front of Congress

" Based on the facts and the applicable legal standards, we are unable to reach that judgment."

" Based on the facts and the applicable legal standards, we are unable to reach that judgment."

LOL...
That applies to clearing the president dope.

You are not competent in your representation of the report.

well shit dude, then post the sentence or page that charged the president from the report.

A sitting president cannot be indicted, dope.
Therefore, there would be no charge in the report.

that's why they have sealed indictments fool. please understand the constitution. BTW, there were no sealed indictments.

 

[peach174]

Let me know when Mueller testifies in front of Congress

" Based on the facts and the applicable legal standards, we are unable to reach that judgment."

" Based on the facts and the applicable legal standards, we are unable to reach that judgment."

LOL...
That applies to clearing the president dope.

You are not competent in your representation of the report.

Now you're just another liar on the internet

Now you're just another liar on the internet

For the above posters.....both of whom obviously have not read the report.
Derp....

Vol.2, page 8
CONCLUSION
Because we determined not to make a traditional prosecutorial judgment, we did not draw ultimate conclusions about the President’s conduct. The evidence we obtained about the President’s actions and intent presents difficult issues that would need to be resolved if we were making a traditional prosecutorial judgment. At the same time, if we had confidence after a thorough investigation of the facts that the President clearly did not commit obstruction of justice, we would so state. Based on the facts and the applicable legal standards, we are unable to reach that judgment. Accordingly, while this report does not conclude that the President committed a crime, it also does not exonerate him.

In other words, based on the facts and laws in place they can't charge him with anything, but maybe something else, if we go on another witch hunt.

 

[Hutch Starskey]

Let me know when Mueller testifies in front of Congress

" Based on the facts and the applicable legal standards, we are unable to reach that judgment."

" Based on the facts and the applicable legal standards, we are unable to reach that judgment."

LOL...
That applies to clearing the president dope.

You are not competent in your representation of the report.

Now you're just another liar on the internet

Now you're just another liar on the internet

For the above posters.....both of whom obviously have not read the report.
Derp....

Vol.2, page 8
CONCLUSION
Because we determined not to make a traditional prosecutorial judgment, we did not draw ultimate conclusions about the President’s conduct. The evidence we obtained about the President’s actions and intent presents difficult issues that would need to be resolved if we were making a traditional prosecutorial judgment. At the same time, if we had confidence after a thorough investigation of the facts that the President clearly did not commit obstruction of justice, we would so state. Based on the facts and the applicable legal standards, we are unable to reach that judgment. Accordingly, while this report does not conclude that the President committed a crime, it also does not exonerate him.

funny shit dude. what was the crime? is there any open indictments or sealed ones? without that, the pres is exonerated. It doesn't matter what the report says beyond that.

Name the crime.

LOL...

Look at you claiming something that the report explicitly says is not the case.

I suggest you read what I posted several more times. I know there are a lot of big words but I'm confident you can do it, little buddy.

 

[jc456]

" Based on the facts and the applicable legal standards, we are unable to reach that judgment."

LOL...
That applies to clearing the president dope.

You are not competent in your representation of the report.

Now you're just another liar on the internet

Now you're just another liar on the internet

For the above posters.....both of whom obviously have not read the report.
Derp....

Vol.2, page 8
CONCLUSION
Because we determined not to make a traditional prosecutorial judgment, we did not draw ultimate conclusions about the President’s conduct. The evidence we obtained about the President’s actions and intent presents difficult issues that would need to be resolved if we were making a traditional prosecutorial judgment. At the same time, if we had confidence after a thorough investigation of the facts that the President clearly did not commit obstruction of justice, we would so state. Based on the facts and the applicable legal standards, we are unable to reach that judgment. Accordingly, while this report does not conclude that the President committed a crime, it also does not exonerate him.

funny shit dude. what was the crime? is there any open indictments or sealed ones? without that, the pres is exonerated. It doesn't matter what the report says beyond that.

Name the crime.

LOL...

Look at you claiming something that the report explicitly says is not the case.

I suggest you read what I posted several more times. I know there are a lot of big words but I'm confident you can do it, little buddy.

name the crime. why did you avoid telling us the crime? why?

And I don't need the report to tell me trump was exonerated, the lack of a crime tells me that.

I also find it odd you're pissed because the president was found exonerated. Did you want him to have conspired with a foreign government? I'm perplexed at your thought process.

 

[Hutch Starskey]

Let me know when Mueller testifies in front of Congress

" Based on the facts and the applicable legal standards, we are unable to reach that judgment."

" Based on the facts and the applicable legal standards, we are unable to reach that judgment."

LOL...
That applies to clearing the president dope.

You are not competent in your representation of the report.

Now you're just another liar on the internet

Now you're just another liar on the internet

For the above posters.....both of whom obviously have not read the report.
Derp....

Vol.2, page 8
CONCLUSION
Because we determined not to make a traditional prosecutorial judgment, we did not draw ultimate conclusions about the President’s conduct. The evidence we obtained about the President’s actions and intent presents difficult issues that would need to be resolved if we were making a traditional prosecutorial judgment. At the same time, if we had confidence after a thorough investigation of the facts that the President clearly did not commit obstruction of justice, we would so state. Based on the facts and the applicable legal standards, we are unable to reach that judgment. Accordingly, while this report does not conclude that the President committed a crime, it also does not exonerate him.

In other words, based on the facts and laws in place they can't charge him with anything, but maybe something else, if we go on another witch hunt.

IOW, he did indeed commit obstruction but we can't officially say that.

 

[jc456]

" Based on the facts and the applicable legal standards, we are unable to reach that judgment."

LOL...
That applies to clearing the president dope.

You are not competent in your representation of the report.

Now you're just another liar on the internet

Now you're just another liar on the internet

For the above posters.....both of whom obviously have not read the report.
Derp....

Vol.2, page 8
CONCLUSION
Because we determined not to make a traditional prosecutorial judgment, we did not draw ultimate conclusions about the President’s conduct. The evidence we obtained about the President’s actions and intent presents difficult issues that would need to be resolved if we were making a traditional prosecutorial judgment. At the same time, if we had confidence after a thorough investigation of the facts that the President clearly did not commit obstruction of justice, we would so state. Based on the facts and the applicable legal standards, we are unable to reach that judgment. Accordingly, while this report does not conclude that the President committed a crime, it also does not exonerate him.

In other words, based on the facts and laws in place they can't charge him with anything, but maybe something else, if we go on another witch hunt.

IOW, he did indeed commit obstruction but we can't officially say that.

why?

 

[Hutch Starskey]

LOL...
That applies to clearing the president dope.

You are not competent in your representation of the report.

Now you're just another liar on the internet

Now you're just another liar on the internet

For the above posters.....both of whom obviously have not read the report.
Derp....

Vol.2, page 8
CONCLUSION
Because we determined not to make a traditional prosecutorial judgment, we did not draw ultimate conclusions about the President’s conduct. The evidence we obtained about the President’s actions and intent presents difficult issues that would need to be resolved if we were making a traditional prosecutorial judgment. At the same time, if we had confidence after a thorough investigation of the facts that the President clearly did not commit obstruction of justice, we would so state. Based on the facts and the applicable legal standards, we are unable to reach that judgment. Accordingly, while this report does not conclude that the President committed a crime, it also does not exonerate him.

funny shit dude. what was the crime? is there any open indictments or sealed ones? without that, the pres is exonerated. It doesn't matter what the report says beyond that.

Name the crime.

LOL...

Look at you claiming something that the report explicitly says is not the case.

I suggest you read what I posted several more times. I know there are a lot of big words but I'm confident you can do it, little buddy.

name the crime. why did you avoid telling us the crime? why?

And I don't need the report to tell me trump was exonerated, the lack of a crime tells me that.

name the crime. why did you avoid telling us the crime? why?

And I don't need the report to tell me trump was exonerated, the lack of a crime tells me that.

It's ironic that you're asking such a dopey question about the report in a thread about how none of you dopes have read the report.
Too funny.

Volume 2 covers obstruction.

The report says very clearly that he was not exonerated, dope.

 

[Hutch Starskey]

LOL...
That applies to clearing the president dope.

You are not competent in your representation of the report.

Now you're just another liar on the internet

Now you're just another liar on the internet

For the above posters.....both of whom obviously have not read the report.
Derp....

Vol.2, page 8
CONCLUSION
Because we determined not to make a traditional prosecutorial judgment, we did not draw ultimate conclusions about the President’s conduct. The evidence we obtained about the President’s actions and intent presents difficult issues that would need to be resolved if we were making a traditional prosecutorial judgment. At the same time, if we had confidence after a thorough investigation of the facts that the President clearly did not commit obstruction of justice, we would so state. Based on the facts and the applicable legal standards, we are unable to reach that judgment. Accordingly, while this report does not conclude that the President committed a crime, it also does not exonerate him.

In other words, based on the facts and laws in place they can't charge him with anything, but maybe something else, if we go on another witch hunt.

IOW, he did indeed commit obstruction but we can't officially say that.

why?

LOL...you dopes can't even read it when it's posted for you right in your face.
Read the freaking conclusion, dope.

 

[jc456]

Now you're just another liar on the internet

Now you're just another liar on the internet

For the above posters.....both of whom obviously have not read the report.
Derp....

Vol.2, page 8
CONCLUSION
Because we determined not to make a traditional prosecutorial judgment, we did not draw ultimate conclusions about the President’s conduct. The evidence we obtained about the President’s actions and intent presents difficult issues that would need to be resolved if we were making a traditional prosecutorial judgment. At the same time, if we had confidence after a thorough investigation of the facts that the President clearly did not commit obstruction of justice, we would so state. Based on the facts and the applicable legal standards, we are unable to reach that judgment. Accordingly, while this report does not conclude that the President committed a crime, it also does not exonerate him.

funny shit dude. what was the crime? is there any open indictments or sealed ones? without that, the pres is exonerated. It doesn't matter what the report says beyond that.

Name the crime.

LOL...

Look at you claiming something that the report explicitly says is not the case.

I suggest you read what I posted several more times. I know there are a lot of big words but I'm confident you can do it, little buddy.

name the crime. why did you avoid telling us the crime? why?

And I don't need the report to tell me trump was exonerated, the lack of a crime tells me that.

name the crime. why did you avoid telling us the crime? why?

And I don't need the report to tell me trump was exonerated, the lack of a crime tells me that.

It's ironic that you're asking such a dopey question about the report in a thread about how none of you dopes have read the report.
Too funny.

Volume 2 covers obstruction.

The report says very clearly that he was not exonerated, dope.

no it doesn't. that's false. I'm still waitingon the crime. What was the crime that he committed that he's not exonerated from? come on, man up!!!

 

[jc456]

Now you're just another liar on the internet

Now you're just another liar on the internet

For the above posters.....both of whom obviously have not read the report.
Derp....

Vol.2, page 8
CONCLUSION
Because we determined not to make a traditional prosecutorial judgment, we did not draw ultimate conclusions about the President’s conduct. The evidence we obtained about the President’s actions and intent presents difficult issues that would need to be resolved if we were making a traditional prosecutorial judgment. At the same time, if we had confidence after a thorough investigation of the facts that the President clearly did not commit obstruction of justice, we would so state. Based on the facts and the applicable legal standards, we are unable to reach that judgment. Accordingly, while this report does not conclude that the President committed a crime, it also does not exonerate him.

In other words, based on the facts and laws in place they can't charge him with anything, but maybe something else, if we go on another witch hunt.

IOW, he did indeed commit obstruction but we can't officially say that.

why?

LOL...you dopes can't even read it when it's posted for you right in your face.
Read the freaking conclusion, dope.

sealed indictment? open indictment to act on? if the answer to those two questions is no, trump is exonerated. What else is there? please explain the alternative that you think exists.

 

[Hutch Starskey]

For the above posters.....both of whom obviously have not read the report.
Derp....

Vol.2, page 8
CONCLUSION
Because we determined not to make a traditional prosecutorial judgment, we did not draw ultimate conclusions about the President’s conduct. The evidence we obtained about the President’s actions and intent presents difficult issues that would need to be resolved if we were making a traditional prosecutorial judgment. At the same time, if we had confidence after a thorough investigation of the facts that the President clearly did not commit obstruction of justice, we would so state. Based on the facts and the applicable legal standards, we are unable to reach that judgment. Accordingly, while this report does not conclude that the President committed a crime, it also does not exonerate him.

funny shit dude. what was the crime? is there any open indictments or sealed ones? without that, the pres is exonerated. It doesn't matter what the report says beyond that.

Name the crime.

LOL...

Look at you claiming something that the report explicitly says is not the case.

I suggest you read what I posted several more times. I know there are a lot of big words but I'm confident you can do it, little buddy.

name the crime. why did you avoid telling us the crime? why?

And I don't need the report to tell me trump was exonerated, the lack of a crime tells me that.

name the crime. why did you avoid telling us the crime? why?

And I don't need the report to tell me trump was exonerated, the lack of a crime tells me that.

It's ironic that you're asking such a dopey question about the report in a thread about how none of you dopes have read the report.
Too funny.

Volume 2 covers obstruction.

The report says very clearly that he was not exonerated, dope.

no it doesn't. that's false. I'm still waitingon the crime. What was the crime that he committed that he's not exonerated from? come on, man up!!!

I just told you, dope. Obstruction.

Do you not see the conclusion on obstruction that I posted in this very conversation?

Open the quote boxes and read it, dope.

 

[Hutch Starskey]

For the above posters.....both of whom obviously have not read the report.
Derp....

Vol.2, page 8
CONCLUSION
Because we determined not to make a traditional prosecutorial judgment, we did not draw ultimate conclusions about the President’s conduct. The evidence we obtained about the President’s actions and intent presents difficult issues that would need to be resolved if we were making a traditional prosecutorial judgment. At the same time, if we had confidence after a thorough investigation of the facts that the President clearly did not commit obstruction of justice, we would so state. Based on the facts and the applicable legal standards, we are unable to reach that judgment. Accordingly, while this report does not conclude that the President committed a crime, it also does not exonerate him.

In other words, based on the facts and laws in place they can't charge him with anything, but maybe something else, if we go on another witch hunt.

IOW, he did indeed commit obstruction but we can't officially say that.

why?

LOL...you dopes can't even read it when it's posted for you right in your face.
Read the freaking conclusion, dope.

sealed indictment? open indictment to act on? if the answer to those two questions is no, trump is exonerated. What else is there? please explain the alternative that you think exists.

Read the report, dope.

 

[Ambivalent1]

" Based on the facts and the applicable legal standards, we are unable to reach that judgment."

LOL...
That applies to clearing the president dope.

You are not competent in your representation of the report.

Now you're just another liar on the internet

Now you're just another liar on the internet

For the above posters.....both of whom obviously have not read the report.
Derp....

Vol.2, page 8
CONCLUSION
Because we determined not to make a traditional prosecutorial judgment, we did not draw ultimate conclusions about the President’s conduct. The evidence we obtained about the President’s actions and intent presents difficult issues that would need to be resolved if we were making a traditional prosecutorial judgment. At the same time, if we had confidence after a thorough investigation of the facts that the President clearly did not commit obstruction of justice, we would so state. Based on the facts and the applicable legal standards, we are unable to reach that judgment. Accordingly, while this report does not conclude that the President committed a crime, it also does not exonerate him.

funny shit dude. what was the crime? is there any open indictments or sealed ones? without that, the pres is exonerated. It doesn't matter what the report says beyond that.

Name the crime.

LOL...

Look at you claiming something that the report explicitly says is not the case.

I suggest you read what I posted several more times. I know there are a lot of big words but I'm confident you can do it, little buddy.

Hacks are hacks kid, it says what it says

 

[Hutch Starskey]

LOL...
That applies to clearing the president dope.

You are not competent in your representation of the report.

Now you're just another liar on the internet

Now you're just another liar on the internet

For the above posters.....both of whom obviously have not read the report.
Derp....

Vol.2, page 8
CONCLUSION
Because we determined not to make a traditional prosecutorial judgment, we did not draw ultimate conclusions about the President’s conduct. The evidence we obtained about the President’s actions and intent presents difficult issues that would need to be resolved if we were making a traditional prosecutorial judgment. At the same time, if we had confidence after a thorough investigation of the facts that the President clearly did not commit obstruction of justice, we would so state. Based on the facts and the applicable legal standards, we are unable to reach that judgment. Accordingly, while this report does not conclude that the President committed a crime, it also does not exonerate him.

funny shit dude. what was the crime? is there any open indictments or sealed ones? without that, the pres is exonerated. It doesn't matter what the report says beyond that.

Name the crime.

LOL...

Look at you claiming something that the report explicitly says is not the case.

I suggest you read what I posted several more times. I know there are a lot of big words but I'm confident you can do it, little buddy.

Hacks are hacks kid, it says what it says

Yes you are indeed.
Only a true hack could respond to a post with an exerpt of Mueller report that says Trump was not exonerated by saying he was exonerated. Truly dopey.

 

[Bootney Lee Farnsworth]

I am not really a "Trump Supporter" (more of a "anybody-but-that-evil-bitch" supporter) but I promise to read the report once the democrats have voted to impeach.

Until then...it's a non-issue.

.

 

[peach174]

" Based on the facts and the applicable legal standards, we are unable to reach that judgment."

LOL...
That applies to clearing the president dope.

You are not competent in your representation of the report.

Now you're just another liar on the internet

Now you're just another liar on the internet

For the above posters.....both of whom obviously have not read the report.
Derp....

Vol.2, page 8
CONCLUSION
Because we determined not to make a traditional prosecutorial judgment, we did not draw ultimate conclusions about the President’s conduct. The evidence we obtained about the President’s actions and intent presents difficult issues that would need to be resolved if we were making a traditional prosecutorial judgment. At the same time, if we had confidence after a thorough investigation of the facts that the President clearly did not commit obstruction of justice, we would so state. Based on the facts and the applicable legal standards, we are unable to reach that judgment. Accordingly, while this report does not conclude that the President committed a crime, it also does not exonerate him.

In other words, based on the facts and laws in place they can't charge him with anything, but maybe something else, if we go on another witch hunt.

IOW, he did indeed commit obstruction but we can't officially say that.

" Based on the facts and the applicable legal standards, we are unable to reach that judgment."

LOL...
That applies to clearing the president dope.

You are not competent in your representation of the report.

Now you're just another liar on the internet

Now you're just another liar on the internet

For the above posters.....both of whom obviously have not read the report.
Derp....

Vol.2, page 8
CONCLUSION
Because we determined not to make a traditional prosecutorial judgment, we did not draw ultimate conclusions about the President’s conduct. The evidence we obtained about the President’s actions and intent presents difficult issues that would need to be resolved if we were making a traditional prosecutorial judgment. At the same time, if we had confidence after a thorough investigation of the facts that the President clearly did not commit obstruction of justice, we would so state. Based on the facts and the applicable legal standards, we are unable to reach that judgment. Accordingly, while this report does not conclude that the President committed a crime, it also does not exonerate him.

In other words, based on the facts and laws in place they can't charge him with anything, but maybe something else, if we go on another witch hunt.

IOW, he did indeed commit obstruction but we can't officially say that.

Because of "'difficult issues' of law and fact" about whether Trump's actions and intent could amount to obstruction.

 

[Ambivalent1]

Now you're just another liar on the internet

Now you're just another liar on the internet

For the above posters.....both of whom obviously have not read the report.
Derp....

Vol.2, page 8
CONCLUSION
Because we determined not to make a traditional prosecutorial judgment, we did not draw ultimate conclusions about the President’s conduct. The evidence we obtained about the President’s actions and intent presents difficult issues that would need to be resolved if we were making a traditional prosecutorial judgment. At the same time, if we had confidence after a thorough investigation of the facts that the President clearly did not commit obstruction of justice, we would so state. Based on the facts and the applicable legal standards, we are unable to reach that judgment. Accordingly, while this report does not conclude that the President committed a crime, it also does not exonerate him.

funny shit dude. what was the crime? is there any open indictments or sealed ones? without that, the pres is exonerated. It doesn't matter what the report says beyond that.

Name the crime.

LOL...

Look at you claiming something that the report explicitly says is not the case.

I suggest you read what I posted several more times. I know there are a lot of big words but I'm confident you can do it, little buddy.

Hacks are hacks kid, it says what it says

Yes you are indeed.
Only a true hack could respond to a post with an exerpt of Mueller report that says Trump was not exonerated by saying he was exonerated. Truly dopey.

Son you are not very intelligent. Does the report say they could not establish that crimes had been committed? You are quite stupid.

 

[jc456]

For the above posters.....both of whom obviously have not read the report.
Derp....

Vol.2, page 8
CONCLUSION
Because we determined not to make a traditional prosecutorial judgment, we did not draw ultimate conclusions about the President’s conduct. The evidence we obtained about the President’s actions and intent presents difficult issues that would need to be resolved if we were making a traditional prosecutorial judgment. At the same time, if we had confidence after a thorough investigation of the facts that the President clearly did not commit obstruction of justice, we would so state. Based on the facts and the applicable legal standards, we are unable to reach that judgment. Accordingly, while this report does not conclude that the President committed a crime, it also does not exonerate him.

funny shit dude. what was the crime? is there any open indictments or sealed ones? without that, the pres is exonerated. It doesn't matter what the report says beyond that.

Name the crime.

LOL...

Look at you claiming something that the report explicitly says is not the case.

I suggest you read what I posted several more times. I know there are a lot of big words but I'm confident you can do it, little buddy.

Hacks are hacks kid, it says what it says

Yes you are indeed.
Only a true hack could respond to a post with an exerpt of Mueller report that says Trump was not exonerated by saying he was exonerated. Truly dopey.

Son you are not very intelligent. Does the report say they could not establish that crimes had been committed? You are quite stupid.

don't you know that, although... "the report say they could not establish that crimes had been committed?" it didn't say no crimes could be established. don't you know leftist doubletalk?

 

[Ambivalent1]

funny shit dude. what was the crime? is there any open indictments or sealed ones? without that, the pres is exonerated. It doesn't matter what the report says beyond that.

Name the crime.

LOL...

Look at you claiming something that the report explicitly says is not the case.

I suggest you read what I posted several more times. I know there are a lot of big words but I'm confident you can do it, little buddy.

name the crime. why did you avoid telling us the crime? why?

And I don't need the report to tell me trump was exonerated, the lack of a crime tells me that.

name the crime. why did you avoid telling us the crime? why?

And I don't need the report to tell me trump was exonerated, the lack of a crime tells me that.

It's ironic that you're asking such a dopey question about the report in a thread about how none of you dopes have read the report.
Too funny.

Volume 2 covers obstruction.

The report says very clearly that he was not exonerated, dope.

no it doesn't. that's false. I'm still waitingon the crime. What was the crime that he committed that he's not exonerated from? come on, man up!!!

I just told you, dope. Obstruction.

Do you not see the conclusion on obstruction that I posted in this very conversation?

Open the quote boxes and read it, dope.

Are you really that stupid? That's not what it says. You do know that one is innocent until proven guilty and that no "prosecutor" exonerates anyone.