Page 5 of 20 FirstFirst ... 3456715 ... LastLast
Results 61 to 75 of 287

Thread: Mueller...

  1. #61

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Blizzard View Post
    From Lawrence Tribe one of the biggest never Trumpers on the planet:

    "Much as I hate to say it, this morning’s hearing was a disaster. Far from breathing life into his damning report, the tired Robert Mueller sucked the life out of it. The effort to save democracy and the rule of law from this lawless president has been set back, not advanced."

    https://twitter.com/tribelaw/status/1154066227549089792
    But howie says it’s a Republican talking point


  2. #62
    Join Date
    Nov 2008
    Posts
    34,536
    Blog Entries
    2

    Default

    Star Tribune Headline: Mueller: I did not clear Trump of obstruction of justice

    CBS News Headline: Mueller tells Congress his report did not exonerate Trump

    KGF/InfoWars/Fox News Headline: Mueller looks old! What a victory for Trump!

  3. #63

    Default

    I haven't been watching and I'm not sure much productive will come out of this.
    "Do Not Be Afraid to Be A Legend"

  4. #64

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by howeda7 View Post
    Star Tribune Headline: Mueller: I did not clear Trump of obstruction of justice

    CBS News Headline: Mueller tells Congress his report did not exonerate Trump

    KGF/InfoWars/Fox News Headline: Mueller looks old! What a victory for Trump!
    Neither Fox News or I said that Trump was exonerated by the Mueller report. I don’t know about InfoWars b/c I’ve never seen it.

    I’m glad you acknowledge that “exoneration” was a legal standard that Mueller used, even if it’s never been the US legal standard before or ever will be.

  5. #65
    Join Date
    Feb 2011
    Location
    Windom, MN
    Posts
    7,619

    Default

    I find it amusing that, when the Mueller report came out, conservatives were generally complimenting the results because the report did not have any smoking gun against Trump.

    But now, the narrative is that Mueller is old and incompetent. So what changed? The conservative message seems to be - no smoking gun, nothing to talk about - but the person who led the investigation is old and incompetent. Why would you want to discredit someone who produced a report that you generally find to be favorable.

    and - if it is a biased report, then why isn't it more damning against Trump. for a biased report, it falls short of the mark if the goal was to pin something on Trump.

    I'm not trying to make a partisan point here. I genuinely cannot figure out what the conservative message is - because they seem to contradict themselves. And - for the record - the Dems are not covering themselves in glory, either.

  6. #66
    Join Date
    Nov 2008
    Posts
    34,536
    Blog Entries
    2

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by KillerGopherFan View Post
    Neither Fox News or I said that Trump was exonerated by the Mueller report. I don’t know about InfoWars b/c I’ve never seen it.

    I’m glad you acknowledge that “exoneration” was a legal standard that Mueller used, even if it’s never been the US legal standard before or ever will be.
    Trump has said it. Repeatedly. Which was a lie. Did you call him out on it? No. Of course not. Did Fox News? Probably one anchor did one time and you were watching it live. But in general, no they did not.

  7. #67
    Join Date
    Nov 2008
    Posts
    34,536
    Blog Entries
    2

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by short ornery norwegian View Post
    I find it amusing that, when the Mueller report came out, conservatives were generally complimenting the results because the report did not have any smoking gun against Trump.

    But now, the narrative is that Mueller is old and incompetent. So what changed? The conservative message seems to be - no smoking gun, nothing to talk about - but the person who led the investigation is old and incompetent. Why would you want to discredit someone who produced a report that you generally find to be favorable.

    and - if it is a biased report, then why isn't it more damning against Trump. for a biased report, it falls short of the mark if the goal was to pin something on Trump.

    I'm not trying to make a partisan point here. I genuinely cannot figure out what the conservative message is - because they seem to contradict themselves. And - for the record - the Dems are not covering themselves in glory, either.
    They loved Lyin' Bill Barr's made up version of the report. "Total Exoneration!" Once it became clear that Barr's version was a lie, it switched back to "biased witch hunt" etc.

  8. #68

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by howeda7 View Post
    Trump has said it. Repeatedly. Which was a lie. Did you call him out on it? No. Of course not. Did Fox News? Probably one anchor did one time and you were watching it live. But in general, no they did not.
    Iíve never disputed it in the many many times that it has been said here. What point would it serve to say it one more time? Iíve never believe it exonerated him on obstruction though I believe Mueller has not proven or even suggested that Trump should be indicted on obstruction.

  9. #69

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by short ornery norwegian View Post
    I find it amusing that, when the Mueller report came out, conservatives were generally complimenting the results because the report did not have any smoking gun against Trump.

    But now, the narrative is that Mueller is old and incompetent. So what changed? The conservative message seems to be - no smoking gun, nothing to talk about - but the person who led the investigation is old and incompetent. Why would you want to discredit someone who produced a report that you generally find to be favorable.

    and - if it is a biased report, then why isn't it more damning against Trump. for a biased report, it falls short of the mark if the goal was to pin something on Trump.

    I'm not trying to make a partisan point here. I genuinely cannot figure out what the conservative message is - because they seem to contradict themselves. And - for the record - the Dems are not covering themselves in glory, either.
    Not really. Both can be true at the same time.

    The biased investigators did their best to make case that smeared Trump and the campaign.

    The AG provided the final conclusions that the investigation did not find a case for conspiracy (or collusion) with the Russians and made no decision to indict on obstruction.

    Pretty simple really.

  10. #70

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by howeda7 View Post
    They loved Lyin' Bill Barr's made up version of the report. "Total Exoneration!" Once it became clear that Barr's version was a lie, it switched back to "biased witch hunt" etc.
    I don’t believe Barr ever said that the report was “total exoneration”, but you’re free to prove me wrong by providing that quote.

  11. #71
    Join Date
    Feb 2011
    Location
    Windom, MN
    Posts
    7,619

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by KillerGopherFan View Post
    I’ve never disputed it in the many many times that it has been said here. What point would it serve to say it one more time? I’ve never believe it exonerated him on obstruction though I believe Mueller has not proven or even suggested that Trump should be indicted on obstruction.
    that is the heart of the matter. If Trump was not exonerated - but if the evidence does not rise to the level needed for an indictment, then what did Trump do? The report - whether it meant to or not - leaves him in this weird limbo. He's not 100% innocent -but he's not guilty either. He's something in between. he apparently did something. but we don't know what that something is. which leaves both sides unsatisfied.

  12. #72
    Join Date
    Nov 2008
    Posts
    34,536
    Blog Entries
    2

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by KillerGopherFan View Post
    I don’t believe Barr ever said that the report was “total exoneration”, but you’re free to prove me wrong by providing that quote.
    It allowed Trump and his minnions to lie and say that.

  13. #73

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by short ornery norwegian View Post
    that is the heart of the matter. If Trump was not exonerated - but if the evidence does not rise to the level needed for an indictment, then what did Trump do? The report - whether it meant to or not - leaves him in this weird limbo. He's not 100% innocent -but he's not guilty either. He's something in between. he apparently did something. but we don't know what that something is. which leaves both sides unsatisfied.
    He didnít conspire or collude with Russians. If he did things, often in full view of the public, that were being considered for obstruction, he did so with the knowledge that he was totally innocent of the charge of conspiracy. In other words, he was defending himself against injustice.

  14. #74

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by short ornery norwegian View Post
    I find it amusing that, when the Mueller report came out, conservatives were generally complimenting the results because the report did not have any smoking gun against Trump.

    But now, the narrative is that Mueller is old and incompetent. So what changed? The conservative message seems to be - no smoking gun, nothing to talk about - but the person who led the investigation is old and incompetent. Why would you want to discredit someone who produced a report that you generally find to be favorable.

    and - if it is a biased report, then why isn't it more damning against Trump. for a biased report, it falls short of the mark if the goal was to pin something on Trump.

    I'm not trying to make a partisan point here. I genuinely cannot figure out what the conservative message is - because they seem to contradict themselves. And - for the record - the Dems are not covering themselves in glory, either.
    I thought highly of the man based on his service to this country, but after today Iím just embarrassed for him. Nadler didnít do him any favors.
    Last edited by Angry; 07-24-2019 at 11:46 AM.

  15. #75
    Join Date
    Nov 2008
    Posts
    34,536
    Blog Entries
    2

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by KillerGopherFan View Post
    He didn’t conspire or collude with Russians. If he did things, often in full view of the public, that were being considered for obstruction, he did so with the knowledge that he was totally innocent of the charge of conspiracy. In other words, he was defending himself against injustice.
    The fact that you didn't commit the crime (even if true), doesn't allow you obstruct justice. If the IRS is investigating you for tax fraud, and you are innocent, but you burn all of your files so they can't investigate, you still committed obstruction of justice. That is such a BS twisted excuse.

    Also, they didn't conclude that he didn't conspire. They said that had insufficient evidence to prosecute.

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •