What will/did Mueller say?

[_Doctor CamNC4Me]

Lieu just got the best admission yet. He asked Mueller that the only reason why he didn't indict Trump for obstruction of justice, is that the OLC (?) prevents him from indicting a sitting President.

That's it.

The President obstructed justice.

- Doc

[_subgenius]

The report has a section where it says, in essence, that conspiracy is the the version of collusion that exists in legal statue.

Oh, ok...so people are using "collusion" colloquially.

It does not say that collusion is colloquially synonymous with conspiracy.

Oh, ok....so "collusion" is being used literally.

It says it conspiracy is the closet legal equivalent of collusion.

Oh, ok...so people are using "collusion" colloquially.

colloquially synonymous

Oh, ok.....so....um...

closet legal equivalent

I never knew someone could split hairs where no hairs existed.

For what it is worth, I've read the Mueller Report...

turns out, its not worth anything.

[_Kevin Graham]

Lieu just got the best admission yet. He asked Mueller that the only reason why he didn't indict Trump for obstruction of justice, is that the OLC (?) prevents him from indicting a sitting President.

That's it.

The President obstructed justice.

- Doc

Lesko is grilling Mueller on that for supposedly contradicting himself.

[_EAllusion]

The report has a section where it says, in essence, that conspiracy is the the version of collusion that exists in legal statue.

Oh, ok...so people are using "collusion" colloquially.

It does not say that collusion is colloquially synonymous with conspiracy.

Oh, ok....so "collusion" is being used literally.

It says it conspiracy is the closet legal equivalent of collusion.

Oh, ok...so people are using "collusion" colloquially.

colloquially synonymous

Oh, ok.....so....um...

closet legal equivalent

I never knew someone could split hairs where no hairs existed.

For what it is worth, I've read the Mueller Report...

turns out, its not worth anything.

The President and/or his team colluded with Russia in the colloquial sense meaning something like, "attempted to work together on election strategy." The President and/or his team could not be charged with conspiracy because there is not sufficient evidence of an explicit agreement between parties to conspire to commit illegal acts. The Mueller report makes it clear that is focusing on the specific legal issue of conspiracy that can be thought to match the idea of collusion in a colloquial sense, but not necessarily collusion in the all general colloquial senses that the public might care about or Congress might consider worth impeaching over. Collins deliberately tries to conflate these two by misrepresenting what's in the Mueller report to imply that Mueller is contradicting himself when when he says that the criminal conspiracy statue they looked at and collusion in the colloquial sense are not necessarily the same thing.

[_Dr Exiled]

Lieu just got the best admission yet. He asked Mueller that the only reason why he didn't indict Trump for obstruction of justice, is that the OLC (?) prevents him from indicting a sitting President.

That's it.

The President obstructed justice.

- Doc

An indictment doesn't equal a proven fact in the legal world, much less a conviction of a crime. It is merely the initial stage in the proceedings and only one side of the story, the prosecutor's side. Indictment is a ways away from proving obstruction. Sure, a Judge/jury may find obstruction ultimately but the other side needs a chance to be heard prior to making the determination.

[_Doctor CamNC4Me]

Lieu just got the best admission yet. He asked Mueller that the only reason why he didn't indict Trump for obstruction of justice, is that the OLC (?) prevents him from indicting a sitting President.

That's it.

The President obstructed justice.

- Doc

An indictment doesn't equal a proven fact in the legal world, much less a conviction of a crime. It is merely the initial stage in the proceedings and only one side of the story, the prosecutor's side. Indictment is a ways away from proving obstruction. Sure, a Judge/jury may find obstruction ultimately but the other side needs a chance to be heard prior to making the determination.

Who's saying otherwise? It's a formal charge. In this case, the Special Counsel for the United States Department of Justice is saying he has enough evidence to formally charge the President of the United States of America, but he can't because Mr. Trump is the President.

Doesn't that concern you?

- Doc

[_Dr Exiled]

Lieu just got the best admission yet. He asked Mueller that the only reason why he didn't indict Trump for obstruction of justice, is that the OLC (?) prevents him from indicting a sitting President.

That's it.

The President obstructed justice.

- Doc

Who's saying otherwise? It's a formal charge. In this case, the Special Counsel for the United States Department of Justice is saying he has enough evidence to formally charge the President of the United States of America, but he can't because Mr. Trump is the President.

Doesn't that concern you?

- Doc[/quote]

The allegations are concerning but you seemed to be getting ahead of yourself by saying the president obstructed justice as a final statement, when we've only heard one side to this. The president hasn't had a chance to defend himself for fear of being accused of further obstruction. Witnesses haven't been cross examined, etc. Prosecutors sometimes get caught up in politics and make mistakes or exaggerate allegations in order to get a plea bargain. This is a highly politicized matter and all the investigators leaned Democrat or are ardently so. This doesn't mean that they didn't do a good job and that the president didn't obstruct justice. But, bias can lead to sloppy work or misleading work.

[_Bach]

DISASTER FOR Democrats!!!


Are all liberals this inept?

[_Kevin Graham]

DISASTER FOR Democrats!!!


Are all liberals this inept?

We just learned from Mueller's own words that the only reason he didn't indict Trump was because he was a sitting President. This means Bill Barr's claims were horse crap.

Yeah, terrible for the Democrats.

[_Doctor CamNC4Me]

The allegations are concerning but you seemed to be getting ahead of yourself by saying the president obstructed justice as a final statement, when we've only heard one side to this. The president hasn't had a chance to defend himself for fear of being accused of further obstruction. Witnesses haven't been cross examined, etc. Prosecutors sometimes get caught up in politics and make mistakes or exaggerate allegations in order to get a plea bargain. This is a highly politicized matter and all the investigators leaned Democrat or are ardently so. This doesn't mean that they didn't do a good job and that the president didn't obstruct justice. But, bias can lead to sloppy work or misleading work.

Again. The only reason why the Republican Robert Mueller didn't indict was because Mr. Trump is a sitting President.

If you want to believe that Mr. Trump could defend himself in court, go ahead. However, the Republican Robert Mueller would indict if he could. If the Republican Robert Mueller would indict, don't you think he thinks he has enough rock solid evidence to get a conviction? Otherwise, why indict?

- Doc