No. Mueller was the prosecutor and brought no case because he had no case. No matter how many times you try and twist it, it's still the same answer and you're still wrong.
McCabe is just one step short of being indicted
- Thread starter TreeFrogTrader
- Start date
Are you living in a fantasy world?Mueller said he made no judgement of Trumps guilt.
https://www.factcheck.org/2019/05/what-mueller-barr-say-about-obstruction-of-justice/
On the issue of obstruction, theMueller report, which was released in redacted form on April 18, “found multiple acts by the President that were capable of exerting undue influence over law enforcement investigations, including the Russian-interference and obstruction investigations.” But the report said it could not make a “traditional prosecutorial judgment,” because the department’s Office of Legal Counsel had issued an opinion that states an “indictment or criminal prosecution of a sitting President” would be unconstitutional.
“Because we determined not to make a traditional prosecutorial judgment, we did not draw ultimate conclusions about the President’s conduct,” the Mueller report said. “The evidence we obtained about the President’s actions and intent presents difficult issues that would need to be resolved if we were making a traditional prosecutorial judgment. At the same time, if we had confidence after a thorough investigation of the facts that the President clearly did not commit obstruction of justice, we would so state.”
In his April 18 press conference and in his May 1 testimony, Barr described meeting with Mueller on March 5 to discuss the special counsel’s findings. Mueller told him at that meeting that the special counsel’s office would not make a determination on obstruction of justice.
What a fool you are. If they could have made a case, they would have regardless of OLC opinions etc.----Prosecutors make judgements--they don't leave it to others. They had nothing and so tried to induce impeachment.
Except Mueller himself said it was because of the OLC that he did not pursue. Are you playing stupid or just are?
"Based on Justice Department policy and principles of fairness, we decided we would not make a determination as to whether the President committed a crime. That was our decision then and it remains our decision today."
Last edited:
Play Mueller's first statement after lunch break. Get back to us then.
corrected for the record. His statement is often misconstrued:
“I want to go back to one thing that was said this morning by [Representative Ted] Lieu who said, and I quote, ‘You didn’t charge the President because of the [Office of Legal Counsel] opinion.’ That is not the correct way to say it,” Mueller said. “As we say in the report, and as I said at the opening, we did not reach a determination as to whether the President committed a crime."--(because of OLC)
From opening statement:
"Finally, as described in Volume 2 of our report, we investigated a series of actions by the President towards the investigation. Based on Justice Department policy and principles of fairness, we decided we would not make a determination as to whether the President committed a crime. That was our decision then and it remains our decision today".
Last edited:
They did make a case.Barr wouldn't put it in front of a grand jury.It doesn't take a genius to figure out why.
While Barr didn't put it in front of a grand jury,the next AG can.
Last edited:
Blahahaha. Are you still waiting for Mueller to indict Don jr for payment-in-kind?
Waiting for Jan 2021/ a new AG.We'll see how DOJ investigations go once Barr is gone.
It will be entertaining watching your hope getting crushed again.
What you can't seem to understand is that the new ag bullshit is just politics. If a den does when, at that time they will shift the political talking points to say it is time to move forward and to forget that part of history.
Guilabilty is clearly your strong suit.