gipper
Diamond Member
- Jan 8, 2011
- 67,183
- 35,787
They will not. They have too much invested.There were two parts to Mueller's report. I wonder how many folks actually took time to read just those four short pages. Take some time, just read them. Please.
https://games-cdn.washingtonpost.co...note/6f3248a4-4d94-4d5f-ad42-8ff6ccb1a89e.pdf
There is pretty much NO argument, NONE, the debate is over, there is no conspiracy, no collusion. Can we just drop this? If you have any delusions at this point, you are just being stupid.
Now, to the second point, the reason the DNC still believes they can nail Trump if they can just get the full report released, is if, maybe, just maybe, there was a subjective opinion on whether there was an opinion on whether their was "obstruction."
It's over those lines, it was teased out, obviously to keep this going, so that the public would fight to see the report;
"while this report does not conclude that the president committed a crime, it also does not exonerate him."
The simple fact, for those who had the decision to prosecute was probably this; If you had two years chasing shadows, if there was no crime, how on Earth can someone obstruct the investigation of a non-existent crime?
The only probably crime was a frame up. So why on Earth would they prosecute "obstruction?" of. . . nothing?
How Did the Mueller Report Show Up on Amazon When It Hasn’t Been Made Public?
How Did the Mueller Report Show Up on Amazon When It Hasn’t Been Made Public?
". . . . According to federal guidelines, “The Attorney General may determine that public release of these reports would be in the public interest, to the extent that release would comply with applicable legal restrictions.”
“The regulations speak of the public interest, and I can’t imagine anything more in the public interest than the release of this report,” Alonso says. “On the other hand, prosecutors generally charge people or don’t. When they don’t, they are discouraged from speaking about the evidence they had, which might have come close to being sufficient for a criminal charge, but was ultimately not.”
Alonso adds that even Barr “can’t authorize the public release of (1) Grand Jury information, or (2) classified information. I expect that, if the AG releases the report, those items would be redacted,” he says. “Additionally, some information may pertain to ongoing investigations, which could be damaged if the information were made public.”
Court TV anchor and former prosecutor and State and Federal Defense Attorney, Seema Iyer agrees. She says Barr “doesn’t have to disclose more than the summary he wrote.” But Barr can release more or all of it, if he chooses, she says, subject to redactions. “Anything redacted would be to protect witnesses, grand jury and other investigations, classified material, as well as ongoing prosecutions,” Iyer explains.
There is another way in which the full report could see the light of day. Rep. Jerrold Nadler (D-N.Y.), chairman of the House Judiciary Committee, said in a tweet late Sunday that he would call on Barr to testify “in the near future,” intimating that the committee will use its subpoena power to obtain the full Mueller report. “Mueller could also be called to testify,” Iyer says. “This fight could go to the Supreme Court, with Congress boasting its investigative powers, and the Justice Department arguing that confidentiality must be maintained.” . . . . "
You may have taken the time to read it but you obviously didn't understand it.
Not having enough evidence to prove conspiracy beyond a reasonable doubt is not the same thing as none, fool.
Bullshit.
I QUOTE;
"But as noted above, the Special Counsel did not find that the Trump campaign, or anyone associated with it, conspired or coordinated with the Russian government in these efforts, despite multiple offers from Russian-affiliated individuals to assist the Trump campaign."
IOW, NONE.
Damn you folks will not be deterred, will you?
