DawgTalkers.net Forums DawgTalk Palus Politicus Mueller Objected to Barr’s Description of Russia Investigation’s Findings

You keep repeating that same lie over and over again just your idol Trump does.

I said all along let's wait to see what the report and Mueller has to say.

Now that he has, you refuse to admit what he actually said.

I watched it and heard it but somehow many of us are not comprehending it the same as you comprehend it.

If you comprehend a crime then by all means, impeach.
Otherwise, save the tears for something important.

j/c

This is a time for real american patriots to defend the country from enemies within... Trump, the crooked illegitimate lying President, must be removed.

Any and every man lending support to this criminal should also be held accountable to the highest degree allowed by law.

Wait just a minute, aren't you a Socialist?

When did I ever say that? Show me. You are trolling me because Trump is a crook and you have nowhere to hide from your shame.

Well you don't need to be so dramatic, just impeach him if he is guilty of a crime.

“We did not make a determination as to whether” Trump “did commit a crime,”

“That is unconstitutional,” Mueller said. “Charging the president with a crime was, therefore, not an option we could consider.”

But he also noted, “if we had had confidence that the president clearly did not commit a crime, we would have said so.”

“The matters we investigated were of paramount importance. It was critical for us to obtain full and accurate information from every person we questioned,” Mueller said. “When a subject of an investigation obstructs that investigation or lies to investigators, it strikes at the core of the government’s effort to find the truth and hold wrongdoers accountable.”



Mueller pointed out 10 instances of obstruction in his report.

It's the job of congress to investigate whether impeachment is called for or not. But so far Trump has refused to cooperate with that and is actively obstructing witnesses from testifying.

If you fail to comprehend these things, the fault lays squarely on your shoulders.

Just like with Nixon, your house of cards will crumble in the end. And you will be kicking and screaming the entire way.

You tell lies about and then act as though it's others being dramatic when they respond. Are you Don Jr.?

Ok, so take your 10 points, charge Trump with Obstruction and impeach him.

It is what Congress is supposed to do when they have proof of a crime.

Not so hard.

Congress is supposed to investigate those assertions before coming to a conclusion. Trump is purposefully stopping them from doing their job.

That's why Trump and Barr are keeping the entire investigation from being revealed, because Dems would then have everything they needed to impeach with the evidence and proof of the crimes. That information would then become part of the very public Senate hearings on impeachment. Conviction becomes a coin toss. Trump is avoiding that by obstructing congressional oversight.

Quality contribution bro.

I love leaving GOPers speechless.

$35 million bucks spent.
500 witnesses interrogated.
The top Hillary supporting Prosecutors in the Nation.

And still you guys make excuses for not charging Trump because you need to investigate?

Yea, we are speechless.

Well no one that's paying attention is surprised. But proof positive of two things if nothing else.

1. Trump not exonerated by the report.
2. Barr lied and misrepresented the tone and findings of Mueller's team.

Impeach?? Not really worth it. The Senate won't do squat... There is literally no point. Those that want to pay attention know Trump is guilty of obstruction. But there is no benefit to getting distracted by that. Investigate, expose the truth but focus on winning the election. History will judge Trump and the cronies in the Senate and in Trump's circle.

You make less and less sense with each post. Inventing alternative facts and randomly sprouting them is very Trumpesque but does not win you any credibility or debates.

I see that innocent until proven guilty still means nothing to you.

Accusation, Innuendo and Character assassination is not the law.

You are ridiculous. The whole point of obstruction is to prevent the proof of your guilt from being discovered/proven. Chime back in when you've matured a bit.

So you have proof of Obstruction?

Well then you should charge and Impeach!

No - those are all in the Trump Play Book - 101

What I was referring to are all the facts Mueller found where Trump is documented as having tried to obstruct the investigation.

Your deflection and loud noise doesn't stop reality. Your parroting of Trump and proclamation that he's the victim of a deep state sting also don't deflect from reality.

So charge and Impeach already if you have proof of a crime.

By the way, "having tried to obstruct" is not Obstruction.

That would be attempting to obstruct.

Best get your facts straight before you Impeach.

Showing intent to obstruct is the same as obstruction. Congress can impeach for intent, but there is plenty of proof.

Fox News legal analyst: Mueller basically said Trump would have been indicted if not president

Video from article:



Fox News legal analyst Andrew Napolitano on Wednesday said special counsel Robert Mueller "basically" said in a public statement that his office would have indicted President Trump had he not been president.

“This is even stronger than the language in his report," Napolitano said on Fox Business Network after Mueller delivered his first public comments on the 22-month investigation into Russian interference in the 2016 election and whether Trump obstructed justice.

Napolitano added Mueller's comments also seemed like a "parting shot at his soon-to-be former boss," Attorney General William Barr.

"Because this statement is 180 degrees from the four-page statement that Bill Barr issued at the time he first saw the report," Napolitano said.

Asked by Fox Business host Stuart Varney if it was that bad, Napolitano replied, "I think so."

“Basically he’s saying the president can’t be indicted, otherwise we would have indicted him, and we’re not going to charge him with a crime because there’s no forum in which for him to refute the charges, but we could not say that he didn’t commit a crime — fill in the blank, because we believe he did," he said.

He later went on to say that the press conference from Mueller was bad for Trump and Barr, but "fodder" for Democratic lawmakers.

Mueller's investigation did not find sufficient evidence to conclude that the 2016 Trump campaign and Moscow conspired to influence the most recent presidential election. But his investigate report said that Mueller did not come to a conclusive determination on whether Trump obstructed justice.

Mueller said Wednesday that his office did not charge Trump with a crime because it “was not an option” under regulations from the Department of Justice about indicting a sitting president. He also said that "if we had confidence that the president clearly did not commit a crime, we would have said that.”

The comments were delivered about two months after Barr sent a four-page memo to Congress regarding Mueller's investigation. Barr wrote in the memo that Mueller did not establish that Trump's campaign conspired with Russia.

Barr also said that Mueller did not reach a conclusion regarding obstruction, but that he judged the evidence against Trump to be insufficient.

Napolitano has repeatedly weighed in on matters related to the investigation since Mueller's report was released. He said in April that the report contained "at least a half-dozen" instances of Trump committing obstruction of justice.


https://thehill.com/homenews/media/44601...e-been-indicted

Fox anchor: Mueller nowhere near as 'clear-cut' as Barr on obstruction, collusion


Fox News anchor Bret Baier said Wednesday that special counsel Robert Mueller’s public statements on the Russia investigation were not “anywhere near as clear-cut” as President Trump's and Attorney General William Barr’s pronouncements.

“This was not — as the president says time and time again — 'no collusion, no obstruction.' It was much more nuanced than that. He said specifically they couldn’t find evidence to move forward with the crime of collusion for the investigation of the Trump campaign,” Baier said. “It was not anywhere as clear-cut as Attorney General Bill Barr. In fact, it was almost exactly the opposite: not clear-cut.”

Fox News legal analyst Andrew Napolitano also reacted to Mueller’s remarks, telling the Fox Business Network that the special counsel's remarks were “even stronger than the language in his report” and that he had provided “remarkably similar” evidence to the kind cited against Presidents Nixon and Clinton.

Napolitano has criticized Trump’s handling of the Mueller probe, prompting Trump to claim Napolitano asked him for a job but was denied.

During Wednesday's statement, in which Mueller announced his resignation and the closure of the special counsel’s office, Mueller said his office did not have the authority to charge a sitting president with any crimes, while adding that “if we had had confidence that the president clearly did not commit a crime, we would have said so. We did not.”

Since the release of a summary by Barr at the end of Mueller’s 22-month probe, Trump has repeatedly declared full exoneration and that Mueller found no collusion with Russia or obstruction of justice. Mueller later wrote in a letter to Barr that the attorney general did not “fully capture the context” of his findings.

https://thehill.com/homenews/administrat...-on-obstruction

Looks like some on the right are waking up.

Andrew Napolitano and Bret Baier are not from the right...they are more from of the Shepard Smith and Juan Williams ilk. Hopefully, Fox will wake up and fire their arses!

j/c:

The result of the press conference was not ideal for Trump or Republicans, IMO. Whether there is anything substantive or not, the optics of it didn't look too good.

I don't think there will be any impeachment proceedings, but this will be used against Trump & Republicans from now until next November.

Fox News's Shep Smith: Mueller statement 'directly contradicted' Trump administration

Fox News host Shepard Smith said Wednesday that special counsel Robert Mueller "directly contradicted" the Trump administration while delivering a public statement about his investigation.

"He directly contradicted what we’ve heard from the White House," Smith said on his Fox News program. "The special counsel stated clearly that his findings do not exonerate the president."

Smith explained that Mueller's public comments appeared to contradict some of things President Trump has said in regard to the special counsel's investigation into Russian interference and obstruction of justice.

"The president has said there was no collusion. Robert Mueller says there was not enough evidence to bring charges," Smith said before transitioning to a clip of Mueller explaining his office’s "conclusion that there was insufficient evidence to charge a broader conspiracy."

Smith noted that Mueller stated that during his investigation he was bound by Department of Justice (DOJ) guidelines that prohibit indicting a sitting president.

Mueller on Wednesday delivered his first public comments about his 22-month investigation, speaking for about eight minutes on matters related to the probe. Among other things, Mueller said that his office did not bring charges against Trump because it “was not an option” under DOJ regulations.

He stated that if his team "had confidence that the president clearly did not commit a crime, we would have said that." Mueller also said that the Constitution requires a "process other than the criminal justice system" to take action against a president.

Mueller's report, which was released last month, explained that his office did not find sufficient evidence of a conspiracy between the Trump campaign and Moscow. The report did say that Mueller did not reach a conclusive determination in regard to obstruction.

Trump, who has repeatedly said that Mueller's report exonerated him, responded to Mueller's remarks by tweeting that "nothing" changed.

"There was insufficient evidence and therefore, in our Country, a person is innocent," he tweeted. "The case is closed!"

https://thehill.com/homenews/media/44603...tradicted-trump

Speaking of Shep...

Cracks me up that Clinton got impeached for a BJ, meanwhile Trump continually breaks the law, acts childish as if he is above the law, and seems to have worked with an enemy to take power yet the right is silent. The old good-ole-boy syndicate is in full force in the swamp protecting Trump; laws don't apply to elitist.

That would make you feel safer, wouldn't it?

Hilarious ! "Fair and Balanced" until someone offers a (realistic) opinion that doesn't tote the sycophantic Trump party line --- then it's "SILENCE THEM" ! You can't make this schtick up.

100%.

How many conservative commentators do you see on all the other liberal networks? They only hire liberal opinions!

Not true at all. They hire Republicans and conservatives, just not many crazy ass trumpians because they LIE.

what a snowflake response. so much for fair and balanced.

cnn and msnbc have conservative commentators on all. the. time.

Anyone know how much money was wasted on the Mueller investigation?

This is a perfect example of government waste, be it congress or the DOJ.

When is congress going to work on doing stuff for everyday people like me? Just asking.

Yes it's been brought up multiple times. It wasted 35 million and received 40 million. So they made 5 million dollars on this case.

This Congress? Work? BawHahahahahaha

How is it wasted money to know if your president is a traitor and a crook? IMHO those are very serious topics that Trump's own public actions made people question. If anybody should be blamed for "wasted money", it should be Trump and his campaign staff for being so slimy.

And don't forget how Mueller exposed the Russians. They attacked us! Trump won't admit it but they damn sure attacked us.