FBI storms Mar a Lago

Dog 2.0

Super Anarchist
3,925
592
Let's play your game for just one second.

Did they or did they not state “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.”

Play what game, stating a fact? The fact is that Mueller and Co. did not conclude that Trump committed obstruction. They simply did not. Why will certain people not acknowledge that truth?

There appears to be a case of obstruction being built against him now that may well succeed so there is that.
 
Looks like we'll have to wait a bit for details from hearing.

Screen Shot 2022-09-01 at 10.40.58 AM.png
 

Remodel

Super Anarchist
10,387
959
None
Play what game, stating a fact? The fact is that Mueller and Co. did not conclude that Trump committed obstruction. They simply did not. Why will certain people not acknowledge that truth?

There appears to be a case of obstruction being built against him now that may well succeed so there is that.
The game where you claim that they cleared him. They did not. They simply did not. Why will you not acknowledge that truth?
 

Bus Driver

Bacon Quality Control Specialist
You purport to be all about facts, yet you seem to be avoiding one here.
Mr. Mueller listed the many ways in which the defeated ex-President obstructed the investigation. I quoted that, so you didn't need to do too much reading.

He then detailed why he could not recommend charges.

I guess you feel a diplomat that kills an American, then runs back to their home country and avoids prosecution because of Diplomatic Immunity, has not committed a crime because they weren't charged.
 
Last edited:

Chris in Santa Cruz CA

Super Anarchist
6,676
1,553
earths surface
As opposed to obtaining them illegally and then leaving them around an unsecure domain where known foreign agents (as well as rich drunks, underpaid illegal immigrants and wannabe players) have likely access?
dont get me wrong, he should be prosecuted just like Snowden and Assange. Regardless of their individual reasons for breaking the law, the law is the law
 
I've been away for a couple days, but did read all the filings. Did I miss something, or didn't the DOJ and Amicus both assert improper venue? That it should be heard in DC District, not Fla.

Is that not a thing? Or is it simply being ignored?
 


Latest posts





Top