Mueller report discussion thread

[RBP]

I think they are foolish to continue this, but they will. And to their detriment in 2020, let alone all of our detriment.

[Pony]

I think they are foolish to continue this, but they will. And to their detriment in 2020, let alone all of our detriment.

Yea, they are gonna push for full transparency and it will come out that a ton of people on the left conspired to unseat an elected president. If they want names a bunch will come out and burn down the entire house. Be careful what you wish for.

[Teh One Who Knocks]

I think they are foolish to continue this, but they will. And to their detriment in 2020, let alone all of our detriment.

The left still isn't going to drop it though. They're going apeshit that there's no indictment against Trump. Rep. Degette from here in Colorado released a statement yesterday saying that the entire report needs to be released so the pubblic can 'make up their own minds' on it.

And all the far left media outlets are like this....

Bill Barr’s Weasel Words
All the ways the attorney general is spinning the Mueller report to protect Trump.

That's from Slate

[Teh One Who Knocks]

[RBP]

The left still isn't going to drop it though. They're going apeshit that there's no indictment against Trump. Rep. Degette from here in Colorado released a statement yesterday saying that the entire report needs to be released so the pubblic can 'make up their own minds' on it.

And all the far left media outlets are like this....

Bill Barr’s Weasel Words
All the ways the attorney general is spinning the Mueller report to protect Trump.

That's from Slate

But they haven't read the report. And all the demands for it's release tells me they didn't even read Barr's summary, given that he specifically stated he would release the full report.

[Teh One Who Knocks]

[lost in melb.]

The left still isn't going to drop it though. They're going apeshit that there's no indictment against Trump. Sen. Degette from here in Colorado released a statement yesterday saying that the entire report needs to be released so the pubblic can 'make up their own minds' on it.

And all the far left media outlets are like this....

Bill Barr’s Weasel Words
All the ways the attorney general is spinning the Mueller report to protect Trump.

That's from Slate

From the last paragraph:"Mueller says his report “does not exonerate” Trump.... And it doesn’t show that Trump is innocent of collusion or obstruction. It shows that collusion and obstruction were defined to exclude what he did."

I think you're either guilt of betraying your country or not. You're either a patriot or not. It should be very clear. I thought he might be guilty was when he fired Comney and in the aftermath with all the tweeting - but then I realised that's just Trump.

I try and read the fine print of accounts that he might still be 'guilty' of 'something', but they are nearly impossible to understand - which makes me think it's 'waffle'. What baffles me the most is since when did not finding evidence of non-guilt mean guilt. Our legal system(s) don't work like that.

[RBP]

From the last paragraph:"Mueller says his report “does not exonerate” Trump.... And it doesn’t show that Trump is innocent of collusion or obstruction. It shows that collusion and obstruction were defined to exclude what he did."

I think you're either guilt of betraying your country or not. You're either a patriot or not. It should be very clear. I thought he might be guilty was when he fired Comney and in the aftermath with all the tweeting - but then I realised that's just Trump.

I try and read the fine print of accounts that he might still be 'guilty' of 'something', but they are nearly impossible to understand - which makes me think it's 'waffle'. What baffles me the most is since when did not finding evidence of non-guilt mean guilt. Our legal system(s) don't work like that.

My attempt to simplify.

The report concluded their was no collusion with Russia to interfere with the 2016 election, which was the point of the inquiry.

Mueller decided that there is evidence of obstruction but not sufficient for him to prosecute. That sends the issue to the Attorney General, who, after consultation, also decided there was insufficient evidence for prosecution. This was partially based on the fact that there was no underlying crime to obstruct, which is a prerequisite to a conviction.

Edit: Not to mention that the trial would never happen because it is constitutionally questionable if a sitting President could be prosecuted at all. The ONLY reason they want the indictment is to use it to force impeachment proceedings. The Speaker of the House has made it clear that impeachment will not happen unless there is something so egregious it cannot be ignored. There is not.

[RBP]

This is deeply frustrating and a waste of our nation's focus.
It is time to move on to pressing issues facing the country.

-MoveOn.org founders, 1998

[DemonGeminiX]

From the last paragraph:"Mueller says his report “does not exonerate” Trump.... And it doesn’t show that Trump is innocent of collusion or obstruction. It shows that collusion and obstruction were defined to exclude what he did."

I think you're either guilt of betraying your country or not. You're either a patriot or not. It should be very clear. I thought he might be guilty was when he fired Comney and in the aftermath with all the tweeting - but then I realised that's just Trump.

I try and read the fine print of accounts that he might still be 'guilty' of 'something', but they are nearly impossible to understand - which makes me think it's 'waffle'. What baffles me the most is since when did not finding evidence of non-guilt mean guilt. Our legal system(s) don't work like that.

"Does not exonerate" does not imply that it implicates Trump. Muellers' words indicate that he could not determine definitively either way whether or not Trump engaged in obstruction to the point where it would constitute a federal crime. That means that it's a waste of time to charge him with a federal crime because there would likely be no way that they can prove the accusation beyond the shadow of a reasonable doubt. That implies "not guilty". "Not guilty" is not the same as "innocent", but "not guilty" is the legal standard the US law prescribes to be exonerated of a charge. Similarly for collusion. It cannot be proven. That's the basis for criminal cases in the US, whether or not guilt of a charge can be proven beyond the shadow of a reasonable doubt. Even if there's a smidgen of reasonable doubt, he would be acquitted of any and all charges brought against him. It would a waste of time and taxpayers' dollars. The evidence is not there to justify proceeding with a criminal case. That's how a prosecutor thinks.

[lost in melb.]

My attempt to simplify.

The report concluded their was no collusion with Russia to interfere with the 2016 election, which was the point of the inquiry.

Mueller decided that there is evidence of obstruction but not sufficient for him to prosecute. That sends the issue to the Attorney General, who, after consultation, also decided there was insufficient evidence for prosecution. This was partially based on the fact that there was no underlying crime to obstruct, which is a prerequisite to a conviction.

Edit: Not to mention that the trial would never happen because it is constitutionally questionable if a sitting President could be prosecuted at all. The ONLY reason they want the indictment is to use it to force impeachment proceedings. The Speaker of the House has made it clear that impeachment will not happen unless there is something so egregious it cannot be ignored. There is not.

"Does not exonerate" does not imply that it implicates Trump. Muellers' words indicate that he could not determine definitively either way whether or not Trump engaged in obstruction to the point where it would constitute a federal crime. That means that it's a waste of time to charge him with a federal crime because there would likely be no way that they can prove the accusation beyond the shadow of a reasonable doubt. That implies "not guilty". "Not guilty" is not the same as "innocent", but "not guilty" is the legal standard the US law prescribes to be exonerated of a charge. Similarly for collusion. It cannot be proven. That's the basis for criminal cases in the US, whether or not guilt of a charge can be proven beyond the shadow of a reasonable doubt. Even if there's a smidgen of reasonable doubt, he would be acquitted of any and all charges brought against him. It would a waste of time and taxpayers' dollars. The evidence is not there to justify proceeding with a criminal case. That's how a prosecutor thinks.

Thanks. Funny how a couple of dudes on the internet can explain this better

Ok, that kind of makes more sense. I think what alarms me and makes me the most uncomfortable about Trump is, quite frankly, abuse of his position and nepotism. I think what waters down this aspect is that he throws his weight about across the board, not in particular with the Russia investigation( he's kinda neurotic and can't keep his mouth shut)

Re. the sacking of Comney, who knows...I think Comney was against Trump not just personally but politically. Not enough room for the both of them and it would have ripped the nation apart. Does the President have to justify it? Yes/No/Maybe. As long as he has other reasons obstruction can never be proven imo.

[lost in melb.]

Or put another way it's as difficult/easy to prove that Comney was after Trump as much as Trump was after Comney. No one side can have their cake and eat it too

[lost in melb.]

This is deeply frustrating and a waste of our nation's focus.
It is time to move on to pressing issues facing the country.

-MoveOn.org founders, 1998

[RBP]

That's what they said about the investigation of Bill Clinton.

[Pony]

Or put another way it's as difficult/easy to prove that Comney was after Trump as much as Trump was after Comney. No one side can have their cake and eat it too

He had plenty of reasons to fire Comey that had nothing to do with obstruction. His botched handling of the Clinton investigation, Obvious bias, Constant leaks to the media, Lying.
The whole thing is a can of worms.