So Mueller says Trump isn’t not guilty, but he is also not not guilty.

[ColonelAngus]

Mueller is such a partisan hack and a piece of deep state shit.

We can’t indict Trump, but we ALSO can’t prove he didn’t break the law.

This is NOT the prosecutorial standard in any municipality in the USA.

One investigating either claims there is enough evidence to indict or not.

One investigating doesn’t conclude.......we can’t prove he didn’t do it.

Mueller knows this standard and he is a POS for ignoring it....just like Comey changed the law to include INTENT to not get HIllary on classified information misuse.


This is a low low low low point in our Democracy, holy shit.

 

[Justin Richardson]

Mueller is such a partisan hack and a piece of deep state shit.

We can’t indict Trump, but we ALSO can’t prove he didn’t break the law.

This is NOT the prosecutorial standard in any municipality in the USA.

One investigating either claims there is enough evidence to indict or not.

One investigating doesn’t conclude.......we can’t prove he didn’t do it.

Mueller knows that he has investigated for the past 2 years and wasted $38M of the taxpayer's just to come to a conclusion we already knew from the beginning. And the fact Trump was never guilty of anything.
He (Mueller) is just throwing himself under the bus.

 

[task0778]

This is what AG Barr said in a CBS interview last week:

“[H]e also said that he could not say that the president clearly did not violate the law, which of course is not the standard we use at the department. We have to determine whether there is clear violation of the law, and so we applied the standards we would normally apply. We analyzed the law and the facts and a group of us spent a lot of time doing that and determined that both as a matter of law, many of the instances would not amount to obstruction,” Barr said.

Further:

Barr said the legal analysis in the special counsel’s obstruction report “did not reflect the views of the department” and were the “views of a particular lawyer or lawyers.” He went on to explain that firing James Comey, for example, is a “facially valid exercise of core presidential authority.”

Even if you don’t accept that presidents have the right to fire incompetent employees, to show obstruction the firing would have to have the probable effect of sabotaging a proceeding and be done with corrupt intent.

“[T]he report itself points out that one of the likely motivations here was the president’s frustration with Comey saying something publicly and saying a different thing privately and refusing to correct the record. So that would not have been a corrupt intent. So for each of these episodes we thought long and hard about it, we looked at the facts and we didn’t feel the government could establish obstruction in these cases,” Barr explained.


Bottom line, it wasn't Mueller's job to prove Trump not guilty, that is supposed to be the default position going into any investigation. Such was not the case in this instance though. I don't know if there will be an investigation into the Mueller investigation, most people are getting tired of all these investigations. BUT - we can't have federal gov't agencies being used for political purposes.

 

[ColonelAngus]

The very first line in the Mueller investigation report is a lie.



No wonder Mueller doesn’t want to answer any questions about his investigation? If he stands by his work, why won’t he answer questions?

We all know the answer....it’s because it’s bullshit.

 

[kyzr]

I'm waiting patiently for the Barr Report, the Huber Report, the Durham Report, and the Horowitz Report, as to the legality and basis of the Mueller Investigation, as well as the excusing of Hillary Clinton for he crimes.