Release of the Mueller report is imminent, AG Barr has in-hand, judiciary committees being briefed

VartioArtel · Mar 24, 2019

SG854 said:
The Muller Report says the Russia narrative is dead. It’s done.

Just let his conspiracy theory die already. They just don’t want to let this narrative die. It’s going to be a never ending investigation because they don’t want to let it go.

I'm politically neutral, when Republicans do stuff right, I'd praise it.

This however? This only protects Trump from Russian Collusion. The long of it is that yes, Trump's innocent of collusion, but that he still has countless other potential charges he can be impeached over. The government has the **duty** (I emphasize that word) to keep corruption out. It doesn't matter how politically minded it is to pursue it, but it's the job of each party, and their own members, to constantly pursue a clean government free of corruption. If Trump has done anything impeachable, it is our government's duty to get rid of him and any accomplices.

Of course, I don't expect them to do it, but this is what I would hope any non-emotionally driven individual would desire as well.

Xzi · Mar 24, 2019

SG854 said:
The Muller Report says the Russia narrative is dead. It’s done.

This isn't even the report, just Barr's summary. And it absolutely does not say anything like that.

Lacius · Mar 24, 2019

Xzi said:
This isn't even the report, just Barr's summary. And it absolutely does not say anything like that.

In fairness, based on the summary, the topic of Russia collusion is probably dead. There are plenty of very real scandals that Trump still has to deal with, such as his demonstrable attempts to break campaign finance law.

Xzi · Mar 24, 2019

Lacius said:
In fairness, based on the summary, the topic of Russia collusion is probably dead. There are plenty of very real scandals that Trump still has to deal with, such as his demonstrable attempts to break campaign finance law.

True. Worth noting however that the report concludes there WAS interference by Russia in the 2016 US election. They just couldn't find evidence of contacts between the group that executed the interference and members of the Trump cabinet.

You're right that this will likely be the only investigation into collusion, but hopefully it provides some useful evidence for the other 9+ ongoing criminal investigations involving Trump.

Lacius · Mar 24, 2019

Xzi said:
True. Worth noting however that the report concludes there WAS interference by Russia in the 2016 US election. They just couldn't find evidence of contacts between the group that executed the interference and members of the Trump cabinet.

You're right that this will likely be the only investigation into collusion, but hopefully it provides some useful evidence for the other 9+ ongoing criminal investigations involving Trump.

Lacius said:
The report also reiterated that Russia did indeed meddle with the election; they just can't prove they worked with Trump's campaign when doing so.

Also, it is worth noting that we probably haven't heard the last of Trump's alleged obstruction of justice. It may be included in articles of impeachment (a la Nixon and Clinton) if/when he is impeached for this and/or something else. Whether or not an attorney general chose to pursue obstruction of justice charges against the sitting president who nominated them has always been irrelevant.

VartioArtel · Mar 24, 2019

Xzi said:
You're right that this will likely be the only investigation into collusion, but hopefully it provides some useful evidence for the other 9+ ongoing criminal investigations involving Trump.

There's no way that Mueller hasn't gotten evidence towards countless other issues involving Trump. While there may be no proof of COLLUSION, I wonder if there's proof of bribery (aka paying him from an oligarch and that lead to 'favorable' but not definitely biased treatment).

Lacius · Mar 24, 2019

VartioArtel said:
There's no way that Mueller hasn't gotten evidence towards countless other issues involving Trump. While there may be no proof of COLLUSION, I wonder if there's proof of bribery (aka paying him from an oligarch and that lead to 'favorable' but not definitely biased treatment).

Mueller's scope was very narrow. As soon as his investigation treaded on something outside his scope, he threw it to someone else (e.g. Michael Cohen's crimes).

Dominator211 · Mar 24, 2019

Ladies and Gentlemen, we got em.
This may very well be the end of the United States as we know it. (I'm only half JK)

Xzi · Mar 24, 2019

Lacius said:
Also, it is worth noting that we probably haven't heard the last of Trump's alleged obstruction of justice. It may be included in articles of impeachment (a la Nixon and Clinton) if/when he is impeached for this and/or something else. Whether or not an attorney general chose to pursue obstruction of justice charges against the sitting president who nominated them has always been irrelevant.

I feel like impeachment just got a lot less likely with this report, given how gun-shy Pelosi was already being about the topic. She's worried that the political fallout would give Trump a boost for 2020, and it's hard to blame her. Still, Trump could end up crossing the line in more ways than one now that he feels like the pressure is off, and add more fuel to the impeachment fire as a result.

Lacius · Mar 24, 2019

Xzi said:
I feel like impeachment just got a lot less likely with this report, given how gun-shy Pelosi was already being about the topic. She's worried that the political fallout would give Trump a boost for 2020, and it's hard to blame her. Still, Trump could end up crossing the line in more ways than one now that he feels like the pressure is off, and add more fuel to the impeachment fire as a result.

You are right. It's going to take a "smoking gun" that doesn't require too much thought on the part of the American public to get Trump successfully impeached, let alone starting mere impeachment proceedings in the House. I don't expect him to be impeached at all, and I don't think I'd want it anyway.

However, it's all on the table if/when more evidence of his other alleged crimes are presented, particularly with regard to his alleged campaign finance crimes.

VartioArtel · Mar 24, 2019

Lacius said:
Mueller's scope was very narrow. As soon as his investigation treaded on something outside his scope, he threw it to someone else (e.g. Michael Cohen's crimes).

Yes, but that's for stuff that was EXCLUSIVELY non-linked to Russian Collusion for Trump. There's still plenty that could still be deemed 'potential links', and link him to a large variety of crimes.

Him being gifted a Condo for example in Ukraine could be seen as a Bribe.

It's REALLY hard to get a bead on the law, so it's hard to say what Mueller DOES have evidence of regarding Trump (or colleagues) that isn't explicitly linked to the Russian Collusion front, but COULD have been depending on how things ended.

This can go a handful of ways. What remains is Trump is clear of collusion. We'll just have to wait for the rest.

Hanafuda · Mar 24, 2019

What a bombshell! The beginning of the end.

The walls are closing in.

SG854 · Mar 24, 2019

Xzi said:
True. Worth noting however that the report concludes there WAS interference by Russia in the 2016 US election. They just couldn't find evidence of contacts between the group that executed the interference and members of the Trump cabinet.

You're right that this will likely be the only investigation into collusion, but hopefully it provides some useful evidence for the other 9+ ongoing criminal investigations involving Trump.

There was interference by Russia but that happens all the time other countries interfere with U.S. elections all the time. You can find dozens of countries doing this. And we interfere with other countries. Noam Chomsky has said that Israel interference in U.S. elections is way worse then what Russia has ever done. And Russia is small fry compared to Israel.

Xzi · Mar 24, 2019

SG854 said:
There was interference by Russia but that happens all the time other countries interfere with U.S. elections all the time.

So if we already knew about it, then the question becomes: why isn't the president taking election security more seriously? Why has he been lifting sanctions on Russian oligarchs instead of implementing new sanctions for their role in the interference?

SG854 · Mar 24, 2019

Lacius said:
Also, it is worth noting that we probably haven't heard the last of Trump's alleged obstruction of justice. It may be included in articles of impeachment (a la Nixon and Clinton) if/when he is impeached for this and/or something else. Whether or not an attorney general chose to pursue obstruction of justice charges against the sitting president who nominated them has always been irrelevant.

With Clinton it boosted his popularity. This is why Pelosi isn’t wanting impeachment.

--------------------- MERGED ---------------------------

Xzi said:
So if we already knew about it, then the question becomes: why isn't the president taking election security more seriously? Why has he been lifting sanctions on Russian oligarchs instead of implementing new sanctions for their role in the interference?

I wouldn’t know how you would fight that off. These are many countries involved in interference.

Fugelmir · Mar 24, 2019

I am satisfied that this is the result because it damages TDS movement AND mainstream media credibility.

Taleweaver · Mar 24, 2019

Hmm... I admit I was hoping for a smoking gun, but this was somewhat within my line of expectation after Cohen's testimony. What I hate most is that Republicans make all sorts of logical errors in reading the result.

It did not conclude there was no collusion. It states that there is no evidence found for it. How this is seen as a victory is a problem in itself.

One : Russia did attempt to influence the election. Again: Russia did attempt to influence the election in terms favor. Is this somehow good news if it wasn't coordinated by Trump? I would think not.

Two : obstruction of justice by the president. This is pretty known by anyone not under a rock : trim constantly lying about everything doesn't make the job easier. This hasn't stopped, BTW. It's similar to intimidating the cop that attempts to check whether you were drunk driving : being sober doesn't make the intimidation okay. But as Bart points out it's not the intention of the investigation to focus on that aspect. That route may still be followed, but it's a completely different crime than the original one
Basically : if Trump had just let the team do his job, it would've been here much earlier and the USA wouldn't be so polarized. But he just HAD to post everything on Twitter...

Hanafuda · Mar 24, 2019

Taleweaver said:
It did not conclude there was no collusion. It states that there is no evidence found for it. How this is seen as a victory is a problem in itself.

Your post suggests that you assume something must have happened simply because you've heard the word so many times, or because you just want it to be true. 'No evidence was found to conclude the President colluded with Russians' says it all, unless you're just willing to convict on assumption.

I don't know if your legal system still abides by it, but the foundation of the criminal justice system in the US is innocent until proven guilty. No proof means no proof.

I see people here and elsewhere trying to make hay out of Barr's statement that Mueller found no evidence to conclude that the President committed crimes, but also did not exonerate him. That's because there's no need to exonerate when there's no evidence, nor would it be appropriate for Mueller to make such a declaration. Even a jury doesn't declare someone innocent. They either say "Guilty" or "Not guilty."

Xzi · Mar 24, 2019

Hanafuda said:
I see people here and elsewhere trying to make hay out of Barr's statement that Mueller found no evidence to conclude that the President committed crimes, but also did not exonerate him. That's because there's no need to exonerate when there's no evidence, nor would it be appropriate for Mueller to make such a declaration. Innocent until proven guilty.

If there was no evidence whatsoever, the report indeed would've exonerated him. There's obviously going to be some evidence in the full Mueller report, whether that be in the direction of obstruction of justice or collusion, just not enough evidence to pursue criminal charges.

Hanafuda · Mar 24, 2019

Xzi said:
If there was no evidence whatsoever, the report indeed would've exonerated him. There's obviously going to be some evidence in the full Mueller report, whether that be in the direction of obstruction of justice or collusion, just not enough evidence to pursue criminal charges.

You mean like Hillary and the secret server, i.e. 'her emails?' That's what Comey said, and that seemed to be good enough for Democrats.

But I disagree that there would have been a declaration of 'exoneration' under any circumstance. "No evidence to suggest" is as explicit a statement of innocence as an investigation like this will give. Like I said above, even a jury doesn't declare a defendant "innocent." It's either "Guilty" or "Not Guilty."

Release of the Mueller report is imminent, AG Barr has in-hand, judiciary committees being briefed

Well-Known Member

Time to fly, 621

Well-Known Member

Time to fly, 621

Well-Known Member

Well-Known Member

Well-Known Member

JFK's Jelly Donut

Time to fly, 621

Well-Known Member

Well-Known Member

Well-Known Member

Hail Mary

Time to fly, 621

Hail Mary

Well-Known Member

Storywriter

Well-Known Member

Time to fly, 621

Well-Known Member

Similar threads

Popular threads in this forum