When is Enough ,Enough?

[Giantone]

Originally Posted by mooby

So Barr is disputing Mueller's position that there is no point in even talking about charges because there is a direct order in that regards? AKA Mueller is lying?

I guess we just have to agree to disagree on this one. I stand with Mueller, you stand with Barr.

Of course he does he stands for anything that protects that scumbag in the WH .

[Chico23231]

Originally Posted by Giantone

Of course he does he stands for anything that protects that scumbag in the WH .

https://www.cbsnews.com/news/william...ice-exclusive/

The opinion says you cannot indict a president while he is in office, but he could've reached a decision as to whether it was criminal activity," Barr added. "But he had his reasons for not doing it, which he explained and I am not going to, you know, argue about those reasons."

let the bullshit go. Mueller, Barr, and Hot Rod all agree...


The interview CBS does is excellent and Barr comes off extremely well. This Mueller vs Barr is such bullshit...its clownish at this point. It comes off poor if you think these folks are at odds.

[Giantone]

Originally Posted by Chico23231

https://www.cbsnews.com/news/william...ice-exclusive/

The opinion says you cannot indict a president while he is in office, but he could've reached a decision as to whether it was criminal activity," Barr added. "But he had his reasons for not doing it, which he explained and I am not going to, you know, argue about those reasons."

let the bullshit go. Mueller, Barr, and Hot Rod all agree...


The interview CBS does is excellent and Barr comes off extremely well. This Mueller vs Barr is such bullshit...its clownish at this point. It comes off poor if you think these folks are at odds.

No, they don't agree, Chico ..........you're as bad as trump .Why do you hate America?

[Chico23231]

Originally Posted by Giantone

No, they don't agree, Chico ..........you're as bad as trump .Why do you hate America?

You're on some Alex Jones conspiracy theory shit G1...and that's everyone if you believe they don't agree. Mueller would have certainly said it at his presser. Barr has already stated multiple times, he would support Mueller testimony to congress.

There is nothing to hide

[Giantone]

Originally Posted by Chico23231

You're on some Alex Jones conspiracy theory shit G1...and that's everyone if you believe they don't agree. Mueller would have certainly said it at his presser. Barr has already stated multiple times, he would support Mueller testimony to congress.

There is nothing to hide

LOL, you need to look into a mirror if you're talking Alex Jones Chico . Mueller did say it Chico ...........you refuse to admit it.

Mueller: 'If we had confidence that the president had clearly not committed a crime, we would have said so'



He all so said,......."DOJ Policy "you can not charge a sitting President with a
Federal crime ",this is against our Constitution.


https://www.cbsnews.com/live-news/ro...dates-2019-05/

[mooby]

Originally Posted by Chico23231

https://www.cbsnews.com/news/william...ice-exclusive/

The opinion says you cannot indict a president while he is in office, but he could've reached a decision as to whether it was criminal activity," Barr added. "But he had his reasons for not doing it, which he explained and I am not going to, you know, argue about those reasons."

let the bullshit go. Mueller, Barr, and Hot Rod all agree...


The interview CBS does is excellent and Barr comes off extremely well. This Mueller vs Barr is such bullshit...its clownish at this point. It comes off poor if you think these folks are at odds.

Mueller seems to be saying there is no point in saying a President is engaging in criminal activity when he cannot be actively prosecuted for said activity. All it does is damage the title. And obviously he has no interest in helping Congress decide whether Trump committed impeachable offenses.

[Chico23231]

Originally Posted by mooby

Mueller seems to be saying there is no point in saying a President is engaging in criminal activity when he cannot be actively prosecuted for said activity. All it does is damage the title. And obviously he has no interest in helping Congress decide whether Trump committed impeachable offenses.

No I certainly think he gives a nod towards impeachment with the dems, but he signals he didn’t find criminal activity but leaves an opening for congress to pursue obstruction if other investigations provides info.

One thing not talked about is muller kept saying the olc couldn’t allow for the president to be charged....but those same protections don’t apply to any other in the administration...So NO one else was charged with obstructing. That’s big...but no one is bringing it up.

[Giantone]

Simply put.............

Mueller: 'If we had confidence that the president had clearly not committed a crime, we would have said so'.


.........................The END

[CRedskinsRule]

Originally Posted by Giantone

Simply put.............



Mueller: 'If we had confidence that the president had clearly not committed a crime, we would have said so'.





.........................The END

So for you - our justice system is guilty until proven innocent (especially if we dont like you)

Fact is that while Mueller could not indict, he could have laid out the equivalent of proof beyond a reasonable doubt of every fact necessary to constitute a crime and handed that to Congress for impeachment. There is no limit that says he could not lay bare evidence that proved beyond a reasonable doubt that Trump broke such and such law, and the fact that he did not means that Trump like every US Citizen should therefore receive the innocent until proven guilty nod.



Sent from my SM-G973U using Tapatalk

[sdskinsfan2001]

I'd say around 111 pages. Send this thread to hell.

[Chico23231]

Originally Posted by sdskinsfan2001

I'd say around 111 pages. Send this thread to hell.

Nope...enough isn’t enough

Welcome back to winning CRed.

[Giantone]

Originally Posted by CRedskinsRule

So for you - our justice system is guilty until proven innocent (especially if we dont like you)

Fact is that while Mueller could not indict, he could have laid out the equivalent of proof beyond a reasonable doubt of every fact necessary to constitute a crime and handed that to Congress for impeachment. There is no limit that says he could not lay bare evidence that proved beyond a reasonable doubt that Trump broke such and such law, and the fact that he did not means that Trump like every US Citizen should therefore receive the innocent until proven guilty nod.

Sent from my SM-G973U using Tapatalk

Proof was laid out,DOJ polocies say you can not indite a sitting President . Spin all you want ,the man said he can not say he did not commit a crime !

[Giantone]

No he isn't bilking the US tax payers at all......................


https://www.yahoo.com/entertainment/...224536672.html



The president is rarely in a building, save for the White House, that doesn’t have his name on it. And that is costing the American taxpayer more than $100 million, according to HuffPost. Trump’s recent visit to his golf course in Doonbeg, Ireland, contributed $3.6 million to that total.

The expenses for Trump’s trip included $1,023,940 for car and limo rentals, $10,866 to install temporary phone lines and an astounding $16,325 for the Secret Service to rent golf carts to follow the president while he played the links. And according to HuffPost, the jaunt to Ireland cost the State Department $1.5 million in contracts for the trip.

[Giantone]

Originally Posted by CRedskinsRule

So for you - our justice system is guilty until proven innocent (especially if we dont like you)

Fact is that while Mueller could not indict, he could have laid out the equivalent of proof beyond a reasonable doubt of every fact necessary to constitute a crime and handed that to Congress for impeachment. There is no limit that says he could not lay bare evidence that proved beyond a reasonable doubt that Trump broke such and such law, and the fact that he did not means that Trump like every US Citizen should therefore receive the innocent until proven guilty nod.



Sent from my SM-G973U using Tapatalk

https://www.yahoo.com/news/former-u-...185812955.html


Former U.S. Attorney Tells Congress Trump Committed ‘Multiple Crimes’

Politics
Former U.S. Attorney Tells Congress Trump Committed ‘Multiple Crimes’
The Daily Beast By Barbara McQuade,The Daily Beast Mon, Jun 10 2:58 PM EDT
Reactions Reblog on Tumblr Share Tweet Email

Andrew Harnik/AP
Statement as prepared for testimony before the House Judiciary Committee.

Chairman Nadler, Ranking Member Collins, and distinguished members of the Committee: Thank you for inviting me to speak with you today about lessons from the Mueller Report regarding obstruction of justice.

Overview of Testimony
The most significant finding in the Special Counsel’s Report is that Russia interfered with our election in “sweeping and systematic fashion.”

Through that lens, I will share 2 observations about the report—

What happened and why it matters.

First, the conduct described in the report constitutes multiple crimes of obstruction of justice, supported by evidence of guilt beyond a reasonable doubt.

If anyone other than a sitting president had committed this conduct, I am confident that he would be charged with crimes.

One thousand former federal prosecutors signed a letter agreeing that the president committed crimes.

Second, why it matters.

The obstruction described in the report created a risk to our national security because it was designed to prevent investigators from learning all of the facts about an attack on our country by a hostile foreign adversary.

hit the link to read more.............................

[Chico23231]

Lol g1....