Are no democrats smart enough too...

Nope. No charges or indictments were recommended, because of current policy that a sitting president can’t be charged. It’s specifically stated in the report.

If you guys would just read it, you could stop being wrong.

 

Of course they exonerate. I’ve already shown how.

 

I never said Mueller report, i said Barr, who is mueller’s boss. You lose.

 

It specifically states he is not cleared, and why no charges/indictments were given. Sitting presidents can’t be indicted.

 

The OLC OPINION is not law and is about indicting. Suggested charges would not violate that.

 

I win. Your legal ignorance doesn’t change reality.

 

Suggested charges would be pointless, since they can’t indict.

But you knew that.

 

I win, you lose. You ignore facts...

 

No charges means cleared. You know, a prosecutors job. Suggesting charges is not the same as filing indictments.

Man, some people have thick skulls.

 

Why do Trump's fans support Trump? They avoid everything he does and says. Oh, maybe that's why. That's true of most of Trump's fans. Take a look at the threads they start or that interest them most. Are there any about Trump? I don't think so. Trump's fans avoid Trump.

Most of the threads they start or are interested in concern Democrats, socialism, and young female progressives.

 

They can indict since the OLC is opinion and not law. Even one of the democrats in Congress was smart enough to know that.

 

Just because others do not suffer sever TDS does not make your opinion valid.

 

You were given the facts. Lol

 

It does not, as the report states.

Correct. Charges need filed before an indictment.

Tell me about it. All you guys need to do is read the report, and you could stop being wrong.

It is intentional at this point.

 

They can’t indict, as spelled out in the report. Pretending you don’t know that makes you look silly.

 

The far right can deny it until the cows come home but the Mueller report's conclusion is that trump could not be cleared of any crime.

Anybody tells you that prosecutors ever exonerate suspects, laugh them for such foolishness.

 

Barr concluded there was insufficient evidence to support obstruction of justice. He publicly stated this, it is fact. Since Mueller was too much of a coward to make a conclusion, he left it to his boss and his boss determined not enough to pursue an obstruction case. It’s the end, game over.

 

Which. besides being an invalid conclusion because of what I explained earlier (Mueller explicitly distanced himself from any conclusion that included the word "collusion"), is also an amazing conclusion given that Mueller did find collusion to commit crimes.

This series of events could implicate the federal election-law ban on contributions and donations by foreign nationals , 52 U.S.C. § 3012 l(a)(l )(A). Specifically, Goldstone passed along an offer purportedly from a Russian government official to provide "official documents and information" to the Trump Campaign for the purposes of influencing the presidential election. Trump Jr. appears to have accepted that offer and to have arranged a meeting to receive those materials. Documentary evidence in the form of email chains supports the inference that Kushner and Manafort were aware of that purpose and attended the June 9 meeting anticipating the receipt of helpful information to the Campaign from Russian sources. (p185)
​

The fact that this did not raise to the level of "conspiracy" only because the legal requirements may not be met, does not draw away from the fact that there was a collusion (in the colloquial sense of the word, as Barr used it) to commit a crime.

More and more facts stand in your way....

 

It is the law!!!

§ 600.7 Conduct and accountability.
(a) A Special Counsel shall comply with the rules, regulations, procedures, practices and policies of the Department of Justice. He or she shall consult with appropriate offices within the Department for guidance with respect to established practices, policies and procedures of the Department, including ethics and security regulations and procedures...

Why is it you're always the one who makes the uninformed comment? You guys draw straws and you always get the short one?

 

Stop posting the same gibberish. It doesn’t matter if Mueller didn’t use word collusion, Barr is saying there was no collusion to commit crimes. He’s right and you can’t stand it. You keep pointing to the words Mueller used but still fail to get the point - it doesn’t matter.

The fact is that nothing in the Mueller report shows evidence of Trump colluding to commit crimes, nothing so you simply cannot conclude that what Barr stated is false, you can’t. Colluding to commit a crime is criminal and mueller would’ve pointed to it, irrespective of what words he would’ve chosen to use. Are you basically claiming Mueller didn’t care if trump commited crimes? Then his report is garbage, colluding to commit crimes IS criminal.

Barr is right, no collusion to commit crimes.

 

And you are factually incorrect. Obtaining info from (like dirt) is not a crime so this is NOT colluding to commit a crime. The democrats colluded with russia to obtain dirt on trump, it wasn’t a crime. You know the difference between colluding to do something non-criminal to colluding to commit a crime? Apparently not!

Barr specifically mentioned 3 statements of not colluding to commit specific crimes, which he enumerated. He was right! Nothing in mueller report refutes it.

You keep being wrong, time and time again.

 

"Gibberish"? Now I understand why you keep posting the same thing over and over! I'm posting quotes from Mueller's report. So I see you're not understanding them.

Yeah.... Now I see why you're confused. You're obviously not understanding any of it. Mueller did use the word collusion. He used it to distance himself from it. So Barr bringing it back is deceitful. Because, unlike you, Barr did understand this.

Now, of course, if you didn't understand that, it's obvious you wouldn't understand the second part of my post. Which simply says that if we were to accept the use of the word "collusion". Even the expression "collusion to commit crimes".. Barr would still be lying. Because Mueller shows (on the quote about the Trump Tower meeting) that they did, in fact, "collude to commit crimes".

So I guess the problem is that this just got too complex for you.

 

Wrong! Hacking a server is a crime!!!!! Email hacking is a crime!!!

Doesn't matter if the information obtained is "dirt", financial information, or the menu to be served in the next fundraiser.

See how completely lost you are?

 

Hillary caused her own defeat. She was lazy, she didn't inspire her base, she had one of most inept campaign strategies I ever seen along with many more things directly under her control.

 

It sure seemed to me she thought the election was in the bag. She showed very little enthusiasm for campaigning. She let Trump out work and out campaign her from 1 Sep 2016 through 8 Nov 2016 by a huge 116 campaign visits, stops, appearances, rallies to her 71. Even that 71 is smaller than it seems as it includes fund raisers in deep blue California and New York.