Lies. Barr's letter specifically lays it all out, the evidence of potential obstruction, the special council unable to reach a judgment and he literally quoted from the report the is not exonoration part. Except what you and Mr Mueller fail to understand is its not the job of a prosecutor to prove innocence, it is to prove a crime occurred. Mueller failed in that respect, and this new statement and the entire report is him covering his ass, to justify $40 million spent on a hoax as he knew early on there was no conspiracy.
Mueller Statement
- Thread starter Brian4Liberty
- Start date
Lies. Barr's letter specifically lays it all out, the evidence of potential obstruction, the special council unable to reach a judgment and he literally quoted from the report the is not exonoration part. Except what you and Mr Mueller fail to understand is its not the job of a prosecutor to prove innocence, it is to prove a crime occurred. Mueller failed in that respect, and this new statement and the entire report is him covering his ass, to justify $40 million spent on a hoax as he knew early on there was no conspiracy.
Danke
Top Rated Influencer
- Joined
- Nov 6, 2007
- Messages
- 44,263
I heard from many news outlets that the speed the files were transfered would be impossible unless it was to a flash drive by an insider.
nikcers
Member
- Joined
- Feb 1, 2015
- Messages
- 14,426
America is responsbile for the murder of Seth Rich because we let it go unpunished. Just like if they murder Assange it will be on our souls and St. Peter will ask you why you willingly participated.
Swordsmyth
Member
- Joined
- Apr 14, 2016
- Messages
- 74,737
That's all anyone has.
"I don't like what you did" isn't an impeachable offense to anyone with any brains or honor but TDS victims don't care.
Wooden Indian
Banned
- Joined
- Feb 10, 2012
- Messages
- 909
I can't say he did commit a crime.
I cant say he didn't commit a crime.
Doesnt matter because a rule that may not be a rule says we cant charge.
Don't ask me to testify.
I resign.
BRAVO GOOD SIR!
I cant say he didn't commit a crime.
Doesnt matter because a rule that may not be a rule says we cant charge.
Don't ask me to testify.
I resign.
BRAVO GOOD SIR!
Swordsmyth
Member
- Joined
- Apr 14, 2016
- Messages
- 74,737
[h=1]Bob Mueller Misstates Law & Resigns[/h]
angelatc
Member
- Joined
- May 15, 2007
- Messages
- 50,703
The entire second half of Mueller's report *is* the list of infractions. Is it too long? Too complicated? Too mant big words? What? What keeps people from actually reading the report?
Last edited:
angelatc
Member
- Joined
- May 15, 2007
- Messages
- 50,703
Mueller essentially said a crime occurred, but he didn't have the authority to prosecute due to the longstanding policy of not indicting a sitting president. That's a pretty significant difference. He went on TV to beg people to read the darned report.
And this investigation was technically about Russian interference in our elections, which so far has resulted in the indictment of 12 Russian intelligence agents, 13 Russian nationals and 3 Russian companies. So the "fruit of the poisonous tree" exemption won't apply here.
ATruepatriot
Member
- Joined
- Dec 16, 2009
- Messages
- 2,403
How can I read it through the eyes of Justin Amash and understand what his personal perspective and interpretation is? How could anyone?
Pauls' Revere
Member
- Joined
- Nov 15, 2007
- Messages
- 11,347
+rep
It all begins here when/how/why Seth Rich leaked the emails about Hillary and how the 2016 election was rigged to her favor. If this truth ever got out or understood I would hope more Americans would scream for revolution.
nikcers
Member
- Joined
- Feb 1, 2015
- Messages
- 14,426
if you are saying its the half of the report, a 300 page report, its a little long in the sense that I can write a 300 page essay that says NOTHING what so ever, it was something they taught me in public schools. Can you tell me one of them, like the worse one, in your opinon? 300 pages is a little TLDR can you give me just one that warrants impeachment that was proven absolutely?
ATruepatriot
Member
- Joined
- Dec 16, 2009
- Messages
- 2,403
Not even the media with paid armies of researchers have done this yet, and they have had plenty of time. Why? because there just is no smoking gun.
Swordsmyth
Member
- Joined
- Apr 14, 2016
- Messages
- 74,737
He has nothing which is why he and all the people parroting him never give any details.
Garbage indictments that are the fruit of a poisonous tree don't heal the tree.
Pauls' Revere
Member
- Joined
- Nov 15, 2007
- Messages
- 11,347
https://news.yahoo.com/it-was-a-cou...-investigation-obama-testimony-202827569.html
WASHINGTON — An hour before Robert Mueller prepared to give his one — and apparently only — public statement on the findings of his investigation into Russian electoral interference, calls for a very different sort of probe were taking place at an event organized by a conservative organization closely aligned with President Trump.
There were calls for President Obama to testify before Congress, as well as suspicions about FBI Director Christopher Wray. Trump, meanwhile, was a “crime victim,” while alleged spying on the Trump campaign by law enforcement entities in the Obama administration was nothing short of “terrorism.”
These were some of the assertions made during a panel hosted on Wednesday morning by Judicial Watch titled “Investigating the Investigators,” an evident reference to Mueller, who was appointed by the Department of Justice to investigate allegations that the Trump presidential campaign may have worked with Russia to defeat Hillary Clinton in 2016.
“It is time to look into the politicization of the DOJ and the intelligence community in their effort to undermine the president,” said a press release for the event, which took place at the studio of One America News, a conservative media outlet.
With the Mueller report now a public document — and a highly contentious one at that — the event was a window into how Trump’s supporters plan to reframe the debate over the president’s possible wrongdoing into an attack on the origins of the investigation. That approach appears to be directed by the White House, with Trump last week authorizing Attorney General William Barr to declassify documents related to potential surveillance on the Trump campaign. Barr has previously expressed concerns that the FBI may have conducted unauthorized “spying” during the 2016 election.
“Something very horrible went terribly wrong,” said another of the panelists, Christopher J. Farrell, also of Judicial Watch. “A hoax has been perpetrated upon” the American people, Farrell said, speaking of the Mueller report.
“It was a coup,” Farrell went on to say, albeit one without tanks in the streets. “It was an effort to unseat or destabilize the Trump administration.”
He said that that effort — much of it overseen by Trump’s own Department of Justice — was a worse abuse of power than Watergate or any other presidential scandal.
Victoria Toensing, a conservative lawyer, meanwhile accused FBI Director Wray of “stonewalling.” Wray was virtually the only Trump administration official to be criticized by the Judicial Watch panelists, who charged that he was more interested in protecting the FBI’s credibility than he was in letting Barr conduct a full investigation into “spying” by the bureau into the Trump campaign.
The most notable of the panelists was Carter Page, a foreign policy expert with the Trump campaign who authorities believed was trying to make contacts with Russia during the 2016 campaign. The FBI in 2016 obtained a Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Act warrant to surveil Page, who has been largely unrepentant about his role in the Trump campaign. On Wednesday, he said he was the victim of “civil rights abuses.”
Sitting before a poster board that listed the priorities of the FBI, Page said he was less concerned with issues of spying — on him and the Trump campaign — than with “literally the terrorism associated with this.” He then proceeded to argue that what he called “false reports” and “attacks” against him and the Trump campaign met the definition of terrorism.
“We’re really all victims in this,” Page said, seeming to refer to the broader Trump movement and its affiliates.
Tom Fitton, the Judicial Watch head, who regularly defends Trump on Fox News, blasted the “dishonesty of the Mueller report.” A press release sent ahead of the panel said that same report “has exonerated President Trump of the false accusations of collusion and obstruction.”
Trump himself has claimed such exoneration, an apparent reference to a lack of new indictments stemming from Mueller’s findings. The Mueller report did not find evidence the Trump campaign conspired with Russia, and did not draw conclusions about whether the president should be charged with obstruction of justice.
Whatever the interpretation of the Mueller report, the panelists focused on attacking the investigation itself, and suggested that former Democratic officials need to now be investigated, some three years after the activity in question may have taken place.
Trump’s foe in the 2016 election, Hillary Clinton, remained a primary target. At one point, Fitton said that she was “working directly with Russian intelligence,” referring to the dossier compiled by former British intelligence officer Christopher Steele.
Though the Steele dossier was commissioned by the Democratic National Committee, the initial investigation into Trump's business dealings was paid for by a Republican publisher and donor, Paul Singer.
And while Democrats in the House of Representatives would like Mueller to testify, the Judicial Watch panelists wanted to see another former public servant troop up Capitol Hill.
“I want to know: What did Obama know? What did he approve? What did he tacitly nod his head for? What did he explicitly authorize?” Farrell wondered. “Let’s get Mr. Obama under oath.”
WASHINGTON — An hour before Robert Mueller prepared to give his one — and apparently only — public statement on the findings of his investigation into Russian electoral interference, calls for a very different sort of probe were taking place at an event organized by a conservative organization closely aligned with President Trump.
There were calls for President Obama to testify before Congress, as well as suspicions about FBI Director Christopher Wray. Trump, meanwhile, was a “crime victim,” while alleged spying on the Trump campaign by law enforcement entities in the Obama administration was nothing short of “terrorism.”
These were some of the assertions made during a panel hosted on Wednesday morning by Judicial Watch titled “Investigating the Investigators,” an evident reference to Mueller, who was appointed by the Department of Justice to investigate allegations that the Trump presidential campaign may have worked with Russia to defeat Hillary Clinton in 2016.
“It is time to look into the politicization of the DOJ and the intelligence community in their effort to undermine the president,” said a press release for the event, which took place at the studio of One America News, a conservative media outlet.
With the Mueller report now a public document — and a highly contentious one at that — the event was a window into how Trump’s supporters plan to reframe the debate over the president’s possible wrongdoing into an attack on the origins of the investigation. That approach appears to be directed by the White House, with Trump last week authorizing Attorney General William Barr to declassify documents related to potential surveillance on the Trump campaign. Barr has previously expressed concerns that the FBI may have conducted unauthorized “spying” during the 2016 election.
“Something very horrible went terribly wrong,” said another of the panelists, Christopher J. Farrell, also of Judicial Watch. “A hoax has been perpetrated upon” the American people, Farrell said, speaking of the Mueller report.
“It was a coup,” Farrell went on to say, albeit one without tanks in the streets. “It was an effort to unseat or destabilize the Trump administration.”
He said that that effort — much of it overseen by Trump’s own Department of Justice — was a worse abuse of power than Watergate or any other presidential scandal.
Victoria Toensing, a conservative lawyer, meanwhile accused FBI Director Wray of “stonewalling.” Wray was virtually the only Trump administration official to be criticized by the Judicial Watch panelists, who charged that he was more interested in protecting the FBI’s credibility than he was in letting Barr conduct a full investigation into “spying” by the bureau into the Trump campaign.
The most notable of the panelists was Carter Page, a foreign policy expert with the Trump campaign who authorities believed was trying to make contacts with Russia during the 2016 campaign. The FBI in 2016 obtained a Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Act warrant to surveil Page, who has been largely unrepentant about his role in the Trump campaign. On Wednesday, he said he was the victim of “civil rights abuses.”
Sitting before a poster board that listed the priorities of the FBI, Page said he was less concerned with issues of spying — on him and the Trump campaign — than with “literally the terrorism associated with this.” He then proceeded to argue that what he called “false reports” and “attacks” against him and the Trump campaign met the definition of terrorism.
“We’re really all victims in this,” Page said, seeming to refer to the broader Trump movement and its affiliates.
Tom Fitton, the Judicial Watch head, who regularly defends Trump on Fox News, blasted the “dishonesty of the Mueller report.” A press release sent ahead of the panel said that same report “has exonerated President Trump of the false accusations of collusion and obstruction.”
Trump himself has claimed such exoneration, an apparent reference to a lack of new indictments stemming from Mueller’s findings. The Mueller report did not find evidence the Trump campaign conspired with Russia, and did not draw conclusions about whether the president should be charged with obstruction of justice.
Whatever the interpretation of the Mueller report, the panelists focused on attacking the investigation itself, and suggested that former Democratic officials need to now be investigated, some three years after the activity in question may have taken place.
Trump’s foe in the 2016 election, Hillary Clinton, remained a primary target. At one point, Fitton said that she was “working directly with Russian intelligence,” referring to the dossier compiled by former British intelligence officer Christopher Steele.
Though the Steele dossier was commissioned by the Democratic National Committee, the initial investigation into Trump's business dealings was paid for by a Republican publisher and donor, Paul Singer.
And while Democrats in the House of Representatives would like Mueller to testify, the Judicial Watch panelists wanted to see another former public servant troop up Capitol Hill.
“I want to know: What did Obama know? What did he approve? What did he tacitly nod his head for? What did he explicitly authorize?” Farrell wondered. “Let’s get Mr. Obama under oath.”
Last edited:
Similar threads
