Drip Drip Drip

V21

Member
354
79
GA
It was a double negative. "I am not saying the president is not a criminal". Well OK then.........
I might be wrong, but I didn't catch a conclusion that stated the "president committed X crime and here is the evidence" or "we found no evidence of a crime therefore he is innocent." I for one find that slightly ambiguous, I doubt I'm the only one so seeking clarification seems reasonable.

 

d'ranger

Super Anarchist
29,477
4,543
I hear you , but there are plenty of people who can't or won't read the whole 400 page report. They might be too busy, not sufficiently literate, intelligent, maybe english isn't their first language. I guess my point is that we the people seemingly want further clarification we should get it because we paid him.

As for the conclusion that the POTUS can't be charged, when did he realize that bit right at the end or when he got started ? I feel like that could have been mentioned earlier.
There are a number of excellent summaries - Cliff Notes if you will.

As to the not being indicted,  GIYF

 

Raz'r

Super Anarchist
63,076
5,827
De Nile
I hear you , but there are plenty of people who can't or won't read the whole 400 page report. They might be too busy, not sufficiently literate, intelligent, maybe english isn't their first language. I guess my point is that we the people seemingly want further clarification we should get it because we paid him.

As for the conclusion that the POTUS can't be charged, when did he realize that bit right at the end or when he got started ? I feel like that could have been mentioned earlier.
You do know the target of the investigation was Russian interference and possible campaign coordination, right? The president was not named in the charter. And Mueller caught a bunch of scurrying cockroaches.

 

Raz'r

Super Anarchist
63,076
5,827
De Nile
I might be wrong, but I didn't catch a conclusion that stated the "president committed X crime and here is the evidence" or "we found no evidence of a crime therefore he is innocent." I for one find that slightly ambiguous, I doubt I'm the only one so seeking clarification seems reasonable.
Nope, he said “we can’t indict, but congress can and here are 12 crimes”

 

V21

Member
354
79
GA
There are a number of excellent summaries - Cliff Notes if you will.

As to the not being indicted,  GIYF
Right, but given that this is important, and that there are a huge number of citizens that get their information in all manner of formats and from many different sources. one more set off cliff notes, straight from Mueller, on TV seems like it might clear things up a bit for a lot of people.

 

V21

Member
354
79
GA
You do know the target of the investigation was Russian interference and possible campaign coordination, right? The president was not named in the charter. And Mueller caught a bunch of scurrying cockroaches.
Yeah, but it's easy to forget that, I guess because there is some inherent disappointment that the day after the report came out Trump wasn't in an orange jumpsuit.

 

Sol Rosenberg

Girthy Member
95,229
12,481
Earth
Welcome to Congress, Robert Mueller.

We’ve got questions for you.

But before we begin, the most important questions are for House Republicans.

Why are you so upset about having Mr. Mueller here?

President Trump says the Mueller report cleared him, so why don’t you want to hear from its author?

...

And you all know that your fellow conservative, Rep. Justin Amash of Michigan, took the time to read the Mueller report. He concluded it was time to begin impeachment proceedings.
https://thehill.com/opinion/white-house/452993-juan-williams-gop-in-a-panic-over-mueller

He's right, but unfortunately there are too many people who cannot read or be bothered to do so.  The GOP Bumper Nutz coalition. 

 

hermetic

Super Anarchist
4,418
190
now set for the 24th, with an hour added before each committee so that each member gets a chance to ask a stupid question.

 

hermetic

Super Anarchist
4,418
190
now set for the 24th, with an hour added before each committee so that each member gets a chance to ask a stupid question.
Ignorance to a large degree has been your choice.  Revel in it like a dog that takes a shit and rolls in it.  
your child like belief in congress is touching

who do you think will come out looking better - a bunch of rabid politicians in full election mode, or the guy that took down gotti?

 

Sean

Super Anarchist
15,419
2,578
Sag Harbor, NY
Criminal contempt that is.......

[SIZE=17pt]House Holds Barr and Ross in Contempt Over Census Dispute[/SIZE]

Excerpt -

Wednesday’s contempt vote formally authorized the Oversight Committee to take Mr. Barr and Mr. Ross to federal court to seek judicial enforcement of subpoenas for the material in question. A lawsuit is expected in the coming weeks, and the administration has maintained it is on firm legal footing in its position.

It also leveled a stinging personal rebuke to Mr. Barr and Mr. Ross by formally referring them to the Justice Department for criminal prosecution. There is no real risk the department will pursue the case — Mr. Barr is the head of the Justice Department — but only once before has Congress held in contempt a sitting member of a presidential cabinet: Eric H. Holder Jr., President Barack Obama’s first attorney general.

 
Last edited by a moderator:

Mrleft8

Super Anarchist
27,365
4,034
Suwanee River
Criminal contempt that is.......

[SIZE=17pt]House Holds Barr and Ross in Contempt Over Census Dispute[/SIZE]

Excerpt -

Wednesday’s contempt vote formally authorized the Oversight Committee to take Mr. Barr and Mr. Ross to federal court to seek judicial enforcement of subpoenas for the material in question. A lawsuit is expected in the coming weeks, and the administration has maintained it is on firm legal footing in its position.

It also leveled a stinging personal rebuke to Mr. Barr and Mr. Ross by formally referring them to the Justice Department for criminal prosecution. There is no real risk the department will pursue the case — Mr. Barr is the head of the Justice Department — but only once before has Congress held in contempt a sitting member of a presidential cabinet: Eric H. Holder Jr., President Barack Obama’s first attorney general.
But he was from another nationality.... Not a real American.

 




Top