Mueller talking to congress

[ivwshane]

"If we had confidence that the President did not commit a crime, we would have said so."

Don't bother. He lives in a bubble and no amount of factual information can penetrate it if it goes against his feels. He's a lost cause. Just treat him like the hypocritical piece of shit he is.

 

[Vic]

And?

And you're pathetic. You'd rather support a criminal in the White House than face being wrong to strangers on an anonymous internet forum.

 

[Vic]

I only quoted what the Mueller report said. Make of it what you will.

And I quoted Mueller.

"If we had confidence that the President did not commit a crime, we would have said so."

 

[pcgeek11]

Stop lying you fucking piece of shit!

This is what I mean. I can Quote directly from a document we all have access to and this is what I get. LOL what a joke.

 

[JEDIYoda]

I only quoted what the Mueller report said. Make of it what you will.

That is what you do all the time...….

 

[Vic]

This is what I mean. I can Quote directly from a document we all have access to and this is what I get. LOL what a joke.

Yes, you are.

"If we had confidence that the President did not commit a crime, we would have said so."

 

[JEDIYoda]

I disagree, it is basically the same, granted I didn't quote nor did I say I was in my original statement.

What Mueller did say was quoted in my correction. They found No Evidence of ...

Without a shadow of doubt? Really?

So you want Mueller to prove a negative?

Meuller himself said -- "If we had confidence that the President did not commit a crime, we would have said so."
he did not say -- We did not charge Trump because he was NOT guilty... think about that...

 

[ivwshane]

That is what you do all the time...….

All the fucking time.

 

[pcgeek11]

And I quoted Mueller.

"If we had confidence that the President did not commit a crime, we would have said so."

What legally does that weight? Nothing.

But when he said that the investigation did not identify evidence that any U.S. persons knowingly and intentionally coordinated with the IRA’s interference operations.

Well you are bright, figure it out.

If you don't like what Mueller said take it up with him.

 

[pcgeek11]

Meuller himself said -- "If we had confidence that the President did not commit a crime, we would have said so."
he did not say -- We did not charge Trump because he was NOT guilty... think about that...

He also said he didn't have evidence. Think about that.

 

[ivwshane]

https://www-m.cnn.com/2019/04/19/politics/mueller-investigation-encryption/index.html?r=https://www.google.com/

(S)ome of the individuals we interviewed or whose conduct we investigated -- including some associated with the Trump Campaign -- deleted relevant communications or communicated during the relevant period using applications that feature encryption or that do not provide for long-term retention of data or communications records," the report says.

"In such cases, the Office was not able to corroborate witness statements through comparison to contemporaneous communications or fully question witnesses about statements that appeared inconsistent with other known facts."

https://www.theatlantic.com/ideas/archive/2019/05/mueller/590467/

There is insufficient evidence to accuse the Trump campaign of criminal conspiracy with its Russian benefactors. However, “the social media campaign and the GRU hacking operations coincided with a series of contacts between Trump Campaign officials and individuals with ties to the Russian government.”

Read Mueller’s first public comments on the Russia investigation

These contacts were covered up by a series of lies, both to the special counsel and to Congress. Lying by the Trump campaign successfully obscured much of what happened in 2016. The special counsel in some cases “was not able to corroborate witness statements through comparison to contemporaneous communications or fully question witnesses about statements that appeared inconsistent with other known facts.” In particular, the investigation never did determine what happened to proprietary Trump-campaign polling data shared with the Russians.

 

[pcgeek11]

You guys are really locked into proving a negative aren't you. I don't know if Trumps Campaign did or didn't conspire with Russia for a fact. All I know is that 2.5 years of the Mueller investigation didn't find any evidence of it. I don't know why you're arguing with me about that. Those are Mueller's words.

I guess it is your frustration of Mueller not being your hero today during his press conference.

 

[Vic]

What legally does that weight? Nothing.

But when he said that the investigation did not identify evidence that any U.S. persons knowingly and intentionally coordinated with the IRA’s interference operations.

Well you are bright, figure it out.

If you don't like what Mueller said take it up with him.

I like what Mueller said tremendously. He understands the law, unlike you, and that he understands that he is not the final judge of the President's criminal behavior.

 

[Vic]

You guys are really locked into proving a negative aren't you. I don't know if Trumps Campaign did or didn't conspire with Russia for a fact. All I know is that 2.5 years of the Mueller investigation didn't find any evidence of it. I don't know why you're arguing with me about that. Those are Mueller's words.

I guess it is your frustration of Mueller not being your hero today during his press conference.

Your feelings have clouded your reason, just like your fear of being wrong to strangers on an anonymous internet forum has clouded your judgment, and led you to support a criminal as President.

 

[JEDIYoda]

Rule #1 -- When arguing on the internet never ever ever admit your wrong even when you know your wrong!
Rule #2 -- If you are wrong it is OK to adapt history to your reality!
It is futile to argue this with PCGeek11 -- Geek will just keep doubling down even though the key phrase in this whole Meuller things is --
"If we had confidence that the President did not commit a crime, we would have said so."
he did not say -- We did not charge Trump because he was NOT guilty... think about that..
the4n you say it was because they had no evidence?? I don`t see that stated anywhere and you would have to be a fool or just plain blind to interpret what he said in that manner!

 

[pcgeek11]

I like what Mueller said tremendously. He understands the law, unlike you, and that he understands that he is not the final judge of the President's criminal behavior.

You like that he said he has no evidence of collusion between Trump and Russia?

And neither are you or I

 

[pcgeek11]

Your feelings have clouded your reason, just like your fear of being wrong to strangers on an anonymous internet forum has clouded your judgment, and led you to support a criminal as President.

Fear. Indeed.

My feelings have nothing to do with the fact that I quoted. Sorry Mueller didn't validate your feelings in his report or his press conference.

I hope that the house does invoke impeachment proceedings. Then maybe they can get over it regardless of how it turns out.

 

[pcgeek11]

Rule #1 -- When arguing on the internet never ever ever admit your wrong even when you know your wrong!
Rule #2 -- If you are wrong it is OK to adapt history to your reality!
It is futile to argue this with PCGeek11 -- Geek will just keep doubling down even though the key phrase in this whole Meuller things is --
"If we had confidence that the President did not commit a crime, we would have said so."
he did not say -- We did not charge Trump because he was NOT guilty... think about that..
the4n you say it was because they had no evidence?? I don`t see that stated anywhere and you would have to be a fool or just plain blind to interpret what he said in that manner!

You don't see where he stated that in the report? Go back and read.

I think you are talking about Obstruction and I'm talking about Collusion/conspiracy.

 

[DrDoug]

I see pcgeek is back to his goat-roping tonight. When are you peeps going to figure out that's all he is, out to get your goat and rope you in to waste your time. Partisan weiner goat-roping, who ever knew?

I've written my congresscritters, DeFazio & Wyden, pushing for them to start talking impeachment. I would ask DeFazio to club Nancy until she agrees to move on impeachment but then I'm not a conservative, so I guess I'll have to settle for pushing the congresscritters in to action.

 

[DarthKyrie]

I see pcgeek is back to his goat-roping tonight. When are you peeps going to figure out that's all he is, out to get your goat and rope you in to waste your time. Partisan weiner goat-roping, who ever knew?

I've written my congresscritters, DeFazio & Wyden, pushing for them to start talking impeachment. I would ask DeFazio to club Nancy until she agrees to move on impeachment but then I'm not a conservative, so I guess I'll have to settle for pushing the congresscritters in to action.

Why is it that I read that as goat raping?

 

[ch33zw1z]

Why is it that I read that as goat raping?

Cause people are saying.

 

[JEDIYoda]

You don't see where he stated that in the report? Go back and read.

I think you are talking about Obstruction and I'm talking about Collusion/conspiracy.

Your a real piece of art!! More deflection on your part. The bottom lin is this is what Meuller said about his report --- we will go slowly so that you understand --- "If-- we--had-- confidence --that-- the-- President-- did --not commit --a-- crime,-- we-- would-- have --said --so."
As such if I twist this in the same way you twist this it would read -- President Trump committed a crime! We are confident that he did!!
But -- as Meuller stated that is for another branch of government to get involved !! The rules that the DOJ have to adhere to say we cannot charge a sitting presindent with a crime!
That`s all folks!!

 

[fskimospy]

You don't see where he stated that in the report? Go back and read.

I think you are talking about Obstruction and I'm talking about Collusion/conspiracy.

Mueller very clearly shows how Trump’s campaign colluded with the Russians repeatedly, he just says he couldn’t charge anyone with crimes beyond who he already did.

Glad to see you’re open to discussing whether or not crimes were committed now though so let’s get to it! The evidence Mueller presented in his report is very strong showing that Trump committed multiple felonies. Do you now accept that?

 

[Bitek]

You don't see where he stated that in the report? Go back and read.

I think you are talking about Obstruction and I'm talking about Collusion/conspiracy.

The silver lining you are pushing here is that Mueller didn't find sufficient evidence of conspiracy ..... but because of the the rampant obstruction the Trump admin engaged in that limited the integrity of the investigation.

He also detailed how the Russian government stole emails and other information and distributed their propaganda and misinformation through WikiLeaks.
Who loves WikiLeaks again?

At best we have immoral opportunism and being aided by a hostile foreign power.

How actively Trump was engaged with Russia is indeterminate due to the lies and cover up.

That's what Mueller said.

You have to wonder why so much lying, regardless, the lies and cover up itself is a serious felony and an impeachable offense.

 

[Bitek]

I'm starting to feel we are close to where impeachment hearings should start.

March was too early, but events and momentum are moving quickly imo.

Mueller needs to be called to testify, even if it's just to read the report out loud. That's the only way many millions will ever hear it.