Trump "exoneration" ...was it possible? "What happened to "innocent till proven guilty"?

[healthmyths]

Exoneration
Exoneration occurs when the conviction for a [[crime]is reversed, either through demonstration of innocence, a flaw in the conviction, or otherwise. Attempts to exonerate convicts are particularly controversial in death penalty cases, especially where new evidence is put forth after the execution has taken place. The transitive verb, "to exonerate" can also mean to informally absolve one from blame.
Exoneration - Wikipedia

Explain to me then how could Mueller make this statement

The Mueller Report is available in PDF from this site... https://assets.documentcloud.org/documents/5955997/Muellerreport.pdf

Not Exonerated’ Is Not a Standard Any Free Country Should Accept
“If we had had confidence that the president had clearly not committed a crime we would have said so.” Mueller

— David M. Drucker (@DavidMDrucker) May 29, 2019
That’s not how it works in America. Investigators are supposed to look for evidence that a crime was committed, and, if they don’t find enough to contend that a crime was a committed, they are supposed to say “We didn’t find enough to contend that a crime was committed.” They are not supposed to look for evidence that a crime was not committed and then say, “We couldn’t find evidence of innocence.”

Robert Mueller's Statement: 'Not Exonerated' Not Acceptable Standard | National Review

So please explain why ONE person in the USA is declared "guilty " until proven "guilty"?

All the Democrats and MSM have declared Trump still "Guilty" !

 

[ColonelAngus]

Dimms turned the DOJ rules on their ears because they wanted so badly for Trump to be removed from office.

Obama administration is Fascist and his foot soldiers like Comey, McCabe and Brennan and Clapper are fucking Nazis.

 

[Penelope]

Exoneration
Exoneration occurs when the conviction for a [[crime]is reversed, either through demonstration of innocence, a flaw in the conviction, or otherwise. Attempts to exonerate convicts are particularly controversial in death penalty cases, especially where new evidence is put forth after the execution has taken place. The transitive verb, "to exonerate" can also mean to informally absolve one from blame.
Exoneration - Wikipedia

Explain to me then how could Mueller make this statement

The Mueller Report is available in PDF from this site... https://assets.documentcloud.org/documents/5955997/Muellerreport.pdf

Not Exonerated’ Is Not a Standard Any Free Country Should Accept
“If we had had confidence that the president had clearly not committed a crime we would have said so.” Mueller

— David M. Drucker (@DavidMDrucker) May 29, 2019
That’s not how it works in America. Investigators are supposed to look for evidence that a crime was committed, and, if they don’t find enough to contend that a crime was a committed, they are supposed to say “We didn’t find enough to contend that a crime was committed.” They are not supposed to look for evidence that a crime was not committed and then say, “We couldn’t find evidence of innocence.”

Robert Mueller's Statement: 'Not Exonerated' Not Acceptable Standard | National Review

So please explain why ONE person in the USA is declared "guilty " until proven "guilty"?

All the Democrats and MSM have declared Trump still "Guilty" !

That wasn't a courtroom as Mueller said if any one other than the Potus , he should have been indicted.

 

[DGS49]

There is no logical reason why a DOJ policy of not indicting a sitting President would prevent the Mueller team from concluding that the President had been guilty of Obstruction of Justice. Grand juries do it all the time. But they DIDN'T DO THAT.

Instead, they declined to draw that conclusion and created a new NON-FINDING, a bullshit conclusion of "not exonerated."

This is why people hate lawyers. This is why normal Americans were disgusted at this whole charade. This is why Trump will win in 2020.

 

[busybee01]

Exoneration
Exoneration occurs when the conviction for a [[crime]is reversed, either through demonstration of innocence, a flaw in the conviction, or otherwise. Attempts to exonerate convicts are particularly controversial in death penalty cases, especially where new evidence is put forth after the execution has taken place. The transitive verb, "to exonerate" can also mean to informally absolve one from blame.
Exoneration - Wikipedia

Explain to me then how could Mueller make this statement

The Mueller Report is available in PDF from this site... https://assets.documentcloud.org/documents/5955997/Muellerreport.pdf

Not Exonerated’ Is Not a Standard Any Free Country Should Accept
“If we had had confidence that the president had clearly not committed a crime we would have said so.” Mueller

— David M. Drucker (@DavidMDrucker) May 29, 2019
That’s not how it works in America. Investigators are supposed to look for evidence that a crime was committed, and, if they don’t find enough to contend that a crime was a committed, they are supposed to say “We didn’t find enough to contend that a crime was committed.” They are not supposed to look for evidence that a crime was not committed and then say, “We couldn’t find evidence of innocence.”

Robert Mueller's Statement: 'Not Exonerated' Not Acceptable Standard | National Review

So please explain why ONE person in the USA is declared "guilty " until proven "guilty"?

All the Democrats and MSM have declared Trump still "Guilty" !

This is not a criminal proceeding so innocent until proven guilty is not the standard. The fact is that DOJ policy says a sitting President cannot be indicted. No one in the US has that.

 

[MAGAman]

That wasn't a courtroom as Mueller said if any one other than the Potus , he should have been indicted.

Mueller's report and sworn testimony both report no crimes committed by Trump.

Mueller clearly stated there was no collusion and no interference.

Fascism and Democrats lost. Trump and America won.

Grow up. Move on.

 

[MAGAman]

This is not a criminal proceeding so innocent until proven guilty is not the standard. The fact is that DOJ policy says a sitting President cannot be indicted. No one in the US has that.

Poor baby.

That darned Constitution getting in your way again.

 

[healthmyths]

Exoneration
Exoneration occurs when the conviction for a [[crime]is reversed, either through demonstration of innocence, a flaw in the conviction, or otherwise. Attempts to exonerate convicts are particularly controversial in death penalty cases, especially where new evidence is put forth after the execution has taken place. The transitive verb, "to exonerate" can also mean to informally absolve one from blame.
Exoneration - Wikipedia

Explain to me then how could Mueller make this statement

The Mueller Report is available in PDF from this site... https://assets.documentcloud.org/documents/5955997/Muellerreport.pdf

Not Exonerated’ Is Not a Standard Any Free Country Should Accept
“If we had had confidence that the president had clearly not committed a crime we would have said so.” Mueller

— David M. Drucker (@DavidMDrucker) May 29, 2019
That’s not how it works in America. Investigators are supposed to look for evidence that a crime was committed, and, if they don’t find enough to contend that a crime was a committed, they are supposed to say “We didn’t find enough to contend that a crime was committed.” They are not supposed to look for evidence that a crime was not committed and then say, “We couldn’t find evidence of innocence.”

Robert Mueller's Statement: 'Not Exonerated' Not Acceptable Standard | National Review

So please explain why ONE person in the USA is declared "guilty " until proven "guilty"?

All the Democrats and MSM have declared Trump still "Guilty" !

This is not a criminal proceeding so innocent until proven guilty is not the standard. The fact is that DOJ policy says a sitting President cannot be indicted. No one in the US has that.

SO... by declaring "Trump NOT exonerated" the MSM shows their extreme bias and hatred of millions of people like me, a person that believes "Everyone charged with a criminal offense shall be presumed innocent until proved guilty according to law"

"To be fair to the MSM, the report did show Donald Trump in an unflattering light as a loud-mouthed, over-emotional and rash Donald Trump-like figure who has repaired the economy, defeated ISIS, and appointed great judges just like he said he would. So bite me."
MSM Declares Non Indictment Of Trump An Indictment Of Trump [Satire] – Pelt The Pundits

 

[ColonelAngus]

Mueller:

“I didn’t recommend indictment because the OLC guidelines recommend against it.”

“Wait, no I didn’t”

“Sorry, yes I did.”

Jesus Christ. What a fucking joke. He is a worse flip flopper than Kamala Harris and Christine Gillibrand combined!

 

[BlindBoo]

There is no "innocent till proven guilty" in the court of public opinion. Just ask Hillary! (lock her up?)

But it's a good thing that courts don't exonerate people. Was Trumpybear exonerated?

 

[bendog]

There is no "innocent till proven guilty" in the court of public opinion. Just ask Hillary! (lock her up?)

But it's a good thing that courts don't exonerate people. Was Trumpybear exonerated?

Exactly, both Hillary and Trump are guilty of sin in selling out America to foreign despots. JMO And I think most people agree with me on that.

 

[Norman]

Innocent until proven guilty... that's not something the left has believed for a long while.

But it doesn't matter because Trump is simply guilty, there is no need for evidence, because.... ORANGE MAN BAD!!!

 

[BlindBoo]

Exactly, both Hillary and Trump are guilty of sin in selling out America to foreign despots.

Lock them up
Lock them up
Lock them up

In the same cell. Muh-haha. Sell PPV tickets.

 

[Jets]

Unfortunately, partisan blinders tend to make one forget that EVERYONE is entitled to the presumption of innocence.

 

[bendog]

Exactly, both Hillary and Trump are guilty of sin in selling out America to foreign despots.

Lock them up
Lock them up
Lock them up

In the same cell. Muh-haha. Sell PPV tickets.

I'd be happy if both were retired

 

[healthmyths]

There is no "innocent till proven guilty" in the court of public opinion. Just ask Hillary! (lock her up?)

But it's a good thing that courts don't exonerate people. Was Trumpybear exonerated?

Well you are so right about Hillary...but there was never any Federal investigation regarding her breaking these laws:

• The Federal Records Act requires agencies hold onto official communications, including all work-related emails, and government employees cannot destroy or remove relevant records.
• FOIA is designed to "improve public access to agency records and information."
• The NARA regulations dictate how records should be created and maintained. They stress that materials must be maintained "by the agency," that they should be "readily found" and that the records must "make possible a proper scrutiny by the Congress."
• Section 1924 of Title 18 has to do with deletion and retention of classified documents. "Knowingly" removing or housing classified information at an "unauthorized location" is subject to a fine or a year in prison.

Clinton did not use an official government email account while serving as the country's top diplomat. Instead, she used a private email account and kept all of her emails on a private server in her home. The server has been wiped clean, according to the Republican-led Benghazi committee.
At a news conference last month, she cited "convenience" as the reason. She said she did not want to carry around two mobile devices, though she acknowledged it "might have been smarter" to have done so.
In Clinton's case, she says she turned over some 30,000 relevant emails, totaling 55,000 pages, and wants those all made public. "I took the unprecedented step of asking that the State Department make all my work-related emails public for everyone to see," Clinton said at her news conference on the emails last month. (Gawker Media and The Associated Press have announced they are suing to have a Clinton spokesman's and Clinton's emails released.)
Clinton was the filter for what was relevant to work and what was not. Of course, before electronic communication, federal records were routinely filtered by individuals, who sorted their papers before handing over boxes to archivists. And, many federal workers, Capitol Hill staff, etc., use personal email accounts — in addition to their official accounts — and choose what, if anything, is turned over from those.
But here is the conclusive statement regarding Hillary's destruction of 33,000 records...
The bottom line is this: No one will likely ever know what was deleted from Clinton's server. Barring one of the 30,000 emails Clinton turned over to the State Department being deemed "classified," it's also unlikely she will ever be found to have violated the letter of the law.

Fact Check: Hillary Clinton, Those Emails And The Law

 

[bendog]

Unfortunately, partisan blinders tend to make one forget that EVERYONE is entitled to the presumption of innocence.

No presumption of innocence in the "court of public opinion" no matter who anyone is.

 

[BlindBoo]

There is no "innocent till proven guilty" in the court of public opinion. Just ask Hillary! (lock her up?)

But it's a good thing that courts don't exonerate people. Was Trumpybear exonerated?

Well you are so right about Hillary...but there was never any Federal investigation regarding her breaking these laws:

• The Federal Records Act requires agencies hold onto official communications, including all work-related emails, and government employees cannot destroy or remove relevant records.
• FOIA is designed to "improve public access to agency records and information."
• The NARA regulations dictate how records should be created and maintained. They stress that materials must be maintained "by the agency," that they should be "readily found" and that the records must "make possible a proper scrutiny by the Congress."
• Section 1924 of Title 18 has to do with deletion and retention of classified documents. "Knowingly" removing or housing classified information at an "unauthorized location" is subject to a fine or a year in prison.

Clinton did not use an official government email account while serving as the country's top diplomat. Instead, she used a private email account and kept all of her emails on a private server in her home. The server has been wiped clean, according to the Republican-led Benghazi committee.
At a news conference last month, she cited "convenience" as the reason. She said she did not want to carry around two mobile devices, though she acknowledged it "might have been smarter" to have done so.
In Clinton's case, she says she turned over some 30,000 relevant emails, totaling 55,000 pages, and wants those all made public. "I took the unprecedented step of asking that the State Department make all my work-related emails public for everyone to see," Clinton said at her news conference on the emails last month. (Gawker Media and The Associated Press have announced they are suing to have a Clinton spokesman's and Clinton's emails released.)
Clinton was the filter for what was relevant to work and what was not. Of course, before electronic communication, federal records were routinely filtered by individuals, who sorted their papers before handing over boxes to archivists. And, many federal workers, Capitol Hill staff, etc., use personal email accounts — in addition to their official accounts — and choose what, if anything, is turned over from those.
But here is the conclusive statement regarding Hillary's destruction of 33,000 records...
The bottom line is this: No one will likely ever know what was deleted from Clinton's server. Barring one of the 30,000 emails Clinton turned over to the State Department being deemed "classified," it's also unlikely she will ever be found to have violated the letter of the law.

Fact Check: Hillary Clinton, Those Emails And The Law

The court of public opinion rules: Guilty.

#Lockumup

 

[bendog]

There is no "innocent till proven guilty" in the court of public opinion. Just ask Hillary! (lock her up?)

But it's a good thing that courts don't exonerate people. Was Trumpybear exonerated?

Well you are so right about Hillary...but there was never any Federal investigation regarding her breaking these laws:

• The Federal Records Act requires agencies hold onto official communications, including all work-related emails, and government employees cannot destroy or remove relevant records.
• FOIA is designed to "improve public access to agency records and information."
• The NARA regulations dictate how records should be created and maintained. They stress that materials must be maintained "by the agency," that they should be "readily found" and that the records must "make possible a proper scrutiny by the Congress."
• Section 1924 of Title 18 has to do with deletion and retention of classified documents. "Knowingly" removing or housing classified information at an "unauthorized location" is subject to a fine or a year in prison.

Clinton did not use an official government email account while serving as the country's top diplomat. Instead, she used a private email account and kept all of her emails on a private server in her home. The server has been wiped clean, according to the Republican-led Benghazi committee.
At a news conference last month, she cited "convenience" as the reason. She said she did not want to carry around two mobile devices, though she acknowledged it "might have been smarter" to have done so.
In Clinton's case, she says she turned over some 30,000 relevant emails, totaling 55,000 pages, and wants those all made public. "I took the unprecedented step of asking that the State Department make all my work-related emails public for everyone to see," Clinton said at her news conference on the emails last month. (Gawker Media and The Associated Press have announced they are suing to have a Clinton spokesman's and Clinton's emails released.)
Clinton was the filter for what was relevant to work and what was not. Of course, before electronic communication, federal records were routinely filtered by individuals, who sorted their papers before handing over boxes to archivists. And, many federal workers, Capitol Hill staff, etc., use personal email accounts — in addition to their official accounts — and choose what, if anything, is turned over from those.
But here is the conclusive statement regarding Hillary's destruction of 33,000 records...
The bottom line is this: No one will likely ever know what was deleted from Clinton's server. Barring one of the 30,000 emails Clinton turned over to the State Department being deemed "classified," it's also unlikely she will ever be found to have violated the letter of the law.

Fact Check: Hillary Clinton, Those Emails And The Law

The court of public opinion rules: Guilty.

#Lockumup

Ah cudda swern that Misser Comee feller said he'd investahated her emails a bunch ah times.

 

[The Original Tree]

Exoneration
Exoneration occurs when the conviction for a [[crime]is reversed, either through demonstration of innocence, a flaw in the conviction, or otherwise. Attempts to exonerate convicts are particularly controversial in death penalty cases, especially where new evidence is put forth after the execution has taken place. The transitive verb, "to exonerate" can also mean to informally absolve one from blame.
Exoneration - Wikipedia

Explain to me then how could Mueller make this statement

The Mueller Report is available in PDF from this site... https://assets.documentcloud.org/documents/5955997/Muellerreport.pdf

Not Exonerated’ Is Not a Standard Any Free Country Should Accept
“If we had had confidence that the president had clearly not committed a crime we would have said so.” Mueller

— David M. Drucker (@DavidMDrucker) May 29, 2019
That’s not how it works in America. Investigators are supposed to look for evidence that a crime was committed, and, if they don’t find enough to contend that a crime was a committed, they are supposed to say “We didn’t find enough to contend that a crime was committed.” They are not supposed to look for evidence that a crime was not committed and then say, “We couldn’t find evidence of innocence.”

Robert Mueller's Statement: 'Not Exonerated' Not Acceptable Standard | National Review

So please explain why ONE person in the USA is declared "guilty " until proven "guilty"?

All the Democrats and MSM have declared Trump still "Guilty" !

That wasn't a courtroom as Mueller said if any one other than the Potus , he should have been indicted.

You are RIGHT. It was not a COURT ROOM.

THERE WAS NO OPPORTUNITY GIVEN for THE PRESIDENT TO EXERCISE HIS RIGHTS TO CROSS EXAMINE WITNESSES or DEFEND HIMSELF.

He was not allowed to present Exculpatory Evidence.

He was denied The Right to Call Witnesses to his Defense.

He was denied DUE PROCESS

He was denied The Presumption of Innocence!

He was denied a Trial by a Jury of his Peers

He was denied THE RIGHT TO PRIVACY

He was denied Protection FROM ILLEGAL SEARCH AND SEIZURE

He was denied the RIGHT TO ATTORNEY CLIENT PRIVILEGE

He was denied THE RIGHT to see Evidence Presented Against him, nor was he allowed to face his Accusers.

He fully cooperated and NEVER ONCE USED EXECUTIVE PRIVILEGE to protect him self from such a Witch Hunt.

Despite that, Weismann's Team despite their Hatred of President Trump still could not find a single crime to Recommend an Indictment for.

And while we are talking about this, Clinton did commit Crimes. Comey Clearly stated that, but he CHOSE not to Indict her.

HILLARY CLINTON WAS NEVER EXONERATED!

In fact, the opposite was true. She was found to have COMMITTED CRIMES, and Comey did what Lynch told him to do.....Make it Go Away.