Indictments coming...

[soundforbjt]

Do you have a link stating that the OLC memo was the reason why Trump wasn't indicted? I'm not doing the googling for you. Try researching for once and maybe you'll discover something called "facts".

You made the claim, therefore you need to back it up with facts, not me.
You said:

And Mueller stating that memo/rule/policy/suggestion/idea didn't factor.

 

[Greenman]

A link would do, make sure it has Mueller stating the OLC memo had no influence on whether he could indict.

Sidestep Bob would never answer that question.

 

[MomentsofSanity]

Sidestep Bob would never answer that question.

Actually it was fully answered in the report. He, at no time ever, said it didn't influence his decision. Barr said it didn't and, well, he's lied about pretty much every aspect of the report so...

Mueller has said, repeatedly, that because of the OLC opinion he never made a determination on whether or not he should be charged. That is influence.

 

[brandonbull]

Actually it was fully answered in the report. He, at no time ever, said it didn't influence his decision. Barr said it didn't and, well, he's lied about pretty much every aspect of the report so...

Mueller has said, repeatedly, that because of the OLC opinion he never made a determination on whether or not he should be charged. That is influence.

Mueller: "Now, before we god to questions I want to add one correction to my testimony this morning. I wanted to go back to one thing that was said this morning by Mr. Lieu. It was said, and I quote, "you didn't charge the president because of the OLC opinion." That is not the correct way to say it. "

https://www.nbcnews.com/politics/co...rt-mueller-house-committee-testimony-n1033216

 

[MomentsofSanity]

Mueller: "Now, before we god to questions I want to add one correction to my testimony this morning. I wanted to go back to one thing that was said this morning by Mr. Lieu. It was said, and I quote, "you didn't charge the president because of the OLC opinion." That is not the correct way to say it. "

https://www.nbcnews.com/politics/co...rt-mueller-house-committee-testimony-n1033216

Jesus Christ what is the rest of that quote? Go ahead, post it.

As we say in the report and as I said in the opening, we did not reach a determination as to whether the president committed a crime. And with that, Mr. Chairman, I'm ready to answer questions.

And what did he say in the opening?

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.

 

[trenchfoot]

Getting irritated by witnessing Trump's blatant lying being defended by drowning them out with a flood of nonsensical semantics, injecting divertive minutiae and plain flat out lying to cover Trump's fvck-ups is for me no big deal because the entertainment value I get from watching Trump's overworked crisis management team (you know those folks, most of whom are either lawyers or accomplished liars themselves ie - Rudy Giuliani etc.) more than makes up for it.

Too bad that in the alternate reality Trump has built in which to survive in, there's millions of folks that see his personality disorders and the crimes he's being rightfully accused of as, for some illogical reason or another, something to admire and be in awe about.

I wonder how far these folks tolerance of Trump's dangerously threatening liabilities can be stretched before it snaps, crackles and pops.

I mean, hey, even Mister Fantastic has got his limits too, right?

 

[Jhhnn]

Trump's great, huh? He went from "I alone can fix it" (actual quote) To "go back home & fix your shithole districts yourself" (paraphrase). He went from bad mouthing the corrupt system to corrupting it even more. Don't like it? Fuck you. Love it or leave it.

 

[brandonbull]

Jesus Christ what is the rest of that quote? Go ahead, post it.



And what did he say in the opening?

Do you know why they didn't make a determination? Hint: has something to do with a thing called evidence and how much you have. The DOJ guideline say you can't go around trying to state guilt or innocence in a report. So in keeping with those guidelines, the report didn't make a determination about him committing a crime because they weren't suppose to. Nice little way to wordsmithing.

 

[MomentsofSanity]

Do you know why they didn't make a determination? Hint: has something to do with a thing called evidence and how much you have. The DOJ guideline say you can't go around trying to state guilt or innocence in a report. So in keeping with those guidelines, the report didn't make a determination about him committing a crime because they weren't suppose to. Nice little way to wordsmithing.

Bull shit. It's his actual words you lying piece of shit. His exact words were due to the DOJ policy they did not make a determination. Jesus Christ it's in the actual quote I gave you. There is nothing in the report, his testimony or anything else that claims it was due to a lack of evidence. They have said, repeatedly, they did not even consider it because they couldn't due to the OLC policy.

Are you completely fucking illiterate? Is there a ten year old in the house that can help explain it to you?

 

[soundforbjt]

Bull shit. It's his actual words you lying piece of shit. His exact words were due to the DOJ policy they did not make a determination. Jesus Christ it's in the actual quote I gave you. Are you completely fucking illiterate? Is there a ten year old in the house that can help explain it to you?

He's a lost cause, a true deplorable. He probably watches the Three Stooges (Tucker, Hannity, & Ingrahm) every night.

 

[zinfamous]

Do you know why they didn't make a determination? Hint: has something to do with a thing called evidence and how much you have. The DOJ guideline say you can't go around trying to state guilt or innocence in a report. So in keeping with those guidelines, the report didn't make a determination about him committing a crime because they weren't suppose to. Nice little way to wordsmithing.

lol, why are you tossing about such obvious lies? Do you think the rest of us are as blind and deaf as you are?

 

[Jhhnn]

lol, why are you tossing about such obvious lies? Do you think the rest of us are as blind and deaf as you are?

It's his job.

 

[SMOGZINN]

Do you know why they didn't make a determination?

Yes.

Hint: has something to do with a thing called evidence and how much you have.

Nope, and you even say you are wrong about that in the next sentence, even though you have the details of that part a bit wrong.

The DOJ guideline say you can't go around trying to state guilt or innocence in a report.

That is not exactly what it says. It says that you can't accuse someone of a crime (you could state innocence) in a report if you can not then charge them with the crime so that they can defend themselves in a court. That realistically only applies to the President because the DOJ has also said that you can't charge a sitting President with a crime. The DOJ's position is that the President is literally above the law, because only Congress can hold him accountable, so you can't even talk about if he has committed a crime or not, even to Congress.

 

[soundforbjt]

Yes.



Nope, and you even say you are wrong about that in the next sentence, even though you have the details of that part a bit wrong.



That is not exactly what it says. It says that you can't accuse someone of a crime (you could state innocence) in a report if you can not then charge them with the crime so that they can defend themselves in a court. That realistically only applies to the President because the DOJ has also said that you can't charge a sitting President with a crime. The DOJ's position is that the President is literally above the law, because only Congress can hold him accountable, so you can't even talk about if he has committed a crime or not, even to Congress.

They don't explain things like facts on Fox News, so you'll have to excuse his ignorance.

 

[Victorian Gray]

Sidestep Bob would never answer that question.

Your slip is showing.

 

[TheVrolok]

Do you know why they didn't make a determination? Hint: has something to do with a thing called evidence and how much you have. The DOJ guideline say you can't go around trying to state guilt or innocence in a report. So in keeping with those guidelines, the report didn't make a determination about him committing a crime because they weren't suppose to. Nice little way to wordsmithing.

LOL, you really don't understand it, do you? You really should leave the conclusions to people who understand the content.

 

[brandonbull]

Now that AG Barr has made the review of the Russia probe a criminal investigation, it seems like this thread should be revived. Going to be some unhappy campers once his indictments start coming, and I predict there is going to be more flipping than at an all you can eat pancake breakfast.

 

[Homerboy]

Now that AG Barr has made the review of the Russia probe a criminal investigation, it seems like this thread should be revived. Going to be some unhappy campers once his indictments start coming, and I predict there is going to be more flipping than at an all you can eat pancake breakfast.

Sure.

 

[fskimospy]

Now that AG Barr has made the review of the Russia probe a criminal investigation, it seems like this thread should be revived. Going to be some unhappy campers once his indictments start coming, and I predict there is going to be more flipping than at an all you can eat pancake breakfast.

lol, out of this whole thing I would say the person most likely to be indicted is Barr himself. After Trump is out of office one of the most important things the next president can do is notify federal law enforcement that they should pursue any and all criminal cases they believe have merit which involve the previous administration from Trump on down.

Ironically I suspect you will not be nearly as excited about that sort of internal DOJ review if/when it happens, haha.

 

[[DHT]Osiris]

lol, out of this whole thing I would say the person most likely to be indicted is Barr himself. After Trump is out of office one of the most important things the next president can do is notify federal law enforcement that they should pursue any and all criminal cases they believe have merit which involve the previous administration from Trump on down.

Ironically I suspect you will not be nearly as excited about that sort of internal DOJ review if/when it happens, haha.

No doubt that will be projected as another 'witch hunt', which invariably finds absolute troves of witches.

 

[Perknose]

Now that AG Barr has made the review of the Russia probe a criminal investigation, it seems like this thread should be revived. Going to be some unhappy campers once his indictments start coming, and I predict there is going to be more flipping than at an all you can eat pancake breakfast.

When the fox gets in the hen house, farmers tend to flip out. When the fox has the keys to the hen house, doubly so.

 

[fskimospy]

No doubt that will be projected as another 'witch hunt', which invariably finds absolute troves of witches.

Yes, the people who had no problem with the president and political appointees directly ordering criminal and foreign investigations into their political opponents will declare that the government has been corrupted when a future politician tells law enforcement to do what they think is right.

This is because they are the ultimate ends justify the means people. Prosecuting conservatives is wrong because they are conservatives, not because of whether or not the case has merit.

 

[hal2kilo]

Now that AG Barr has made the review of the Russia probe a criminal investigation, it seems like this thread should be revived. Going to be some unhappy campers once his indictments start coming, and I predict there is going to be more flipping than at an all you can eat pancake breakfast.

I say bring it on. Just to show what idiots you deplorables are. This will go no where.

 

[Perknose]

I say bring it on. Just to show what idiots you deplorables are. This will go no where.

Except on Fox News et. al.

 

[outriding]

Dumb/serious question. If someone is indicted. Wouldn’t the complete contents of the Muller investigation be revealed. Eg interviews. GJ. And etc?