Today on CNN

Started by Adam_PoE5 pages

Originally posted by cdtm
I can appreciate the Dems are in a tight spot, but doubling down with the "He isn't exonerated" rhetoric is practically a gift to Fox and right wing media.

Isn't there something else they could focus on? Change the narrative? Have they forgotten how to do that?

How do you figure? Trump is not exonerated. His handpicked attorney general even states verbatim in his summary of the report that it "does not exonerate Trump." Trump has investigations pending in seven other districts as the result of the report. Sorry, but the truth is not something people should shy away from just because other people lie.

A prosecutors job is not to exonerate his client, you don't know anything about the law.

It clearly says he did not collude or conspire with Russia.

Your tears are noted.

Originally posted by Adam_PoE
How do you figure? Trump is not exonerated. His handpicked attorney general even states verbatim in his summary of the report that it "does not exonerate Trump." Trump has investigations pending in seven other districts as the result of the report. Sorry, but the truth is not something people should shy away from just because other people lie.

So which district do you believe will bring charges against Trump and what charges do you think they'll bring?

Originally posted by BrolyBlack
A prosecutors job is not to exonerate his client, you don't know anything about the law.

It clearly says he did not collude or conspire with Russia.

Your tears are noted.

They also ignore the part where it also concludes there was no crime. So no conclusion of a crime or exoneration. Still a good thing for Trump.

It sounds like the same old line repackaged

“Trump didn’t want to win the election so he conspired with the Russians to win.”

Now

“He was trying to cover up something he didn’t do.”😂

Originally posted by Surtur
They also ignore the part where it also concludes there was no crime. So no conclusion of a crime or exoneration. Still a good thing for Trump.

Barr did not state there was no evidence of a crime. He said there is not enough evidence for a criminal an indictment. Jesus, Trumpers need to learn to read.

Originally posted by Adam_PoE
Barr did not state there was no evidence of a crime. He said there is not enough evidence for a criminal an indictment. Jesus, Trumpers need to learn to read.

Jesus, you need to learn to read, it says Mueller found no evidence of collusion or conspiracy from any American in the 2016 election.

The Special Counsel's report is divided into two parts. The first describes the results of the Special Counsel's investigation into Russia's interference in the 2016 U.S. presidential election. The report outlines the Russian effort to influence the election and documents crimes committed by persons associated with the Russian government in connection with those efforts. The report further explains that a primary consideration for the Special Counsel's investigation was whether any Americans – including individuals associated with the Trump campaign – joined the Russian conspiracies to influence the election, which would be a federal crime. The Special Counsel's investigation did not find that the Trump campaign or anyone associated with it conspired or coordinated with Russia in its efforts to influence the 2016 U.S. presidential election. As the report states: “[T]he investigation did not establish that members of the Trump Campaign conspired or coordinated with the Russian government in its election interference activities.”

*https://www.chicagotribune.com/news/nationworld/politics/ct-william-barr-letter-to-congress-20190324-htmlstory.html

Originally posted by Adam_PoE
How do you figure? Trump is not exonerated. His handpicked attorney general even states verbatim in his summary of the report that it "does not exonerate Trump." Trump has investigations pending in seven other districts as the result of the report. Sorry, but the truth is not something people should shy away from just because other people lie.

Only misinformed people parrot this DNC talking point. Its not a prosecutors job to exonerate anyone, why do you not understand this?

This is not complex, you just cant accept simple facts nor do you understand law 101, you might want to read Law for Dummies.

Originally posted by Adam_PoE
Barr did not state there was no evidence of a crime. He said there is not enough evidence for a criminal an indictment. Jesus, Trumpers need to learn to read.

https://www.dailywire.com/news/45041/no-collusion-attorney-general-william-barr-emily-zanotti

"report does not conclude that the President committed a crime, it also does not exonerate him,"

"Deputy Attorney General Rod Rosenstein and I have concluded that the evidence developed during the Special Counsel's investigation is not sufficient to establish that the President committed an obstruction of justice offense," Barr says. In fact, Barr concluded that the "report identifies no actions that in our judgement constitutes obstructive conduct."

Originally posted by Surtur
https://www.dailywire.com/news/45041/no-collusion-attorney-general-william-barr-emily-zanotti

"report does not conclude that the President committed a crime, it also does not exonerate him,"

"Deputy Attorney General Rod Rosenstein and I have concluded that the evidence developed during the Special Counsel's investigation is not sufficient to establish that the President committed an obstruction of justice offense," Barr says. In fact, Barr concluded that the "report identifies no actions that in our judgement constitutes obstructive conduct."

That part is only pertaining to obstruction of justice, you guys are conflating the two parts to the report.

The report completely clears him from collusion. This is crystal clear.

Also as Chris Cuomo said last night, he believes that line was a cheap shot from Andrew Weissmann to try and punt it to congress.

Pelosi said this morning, they are moving past impeachment.

Originally posted by BrolyBlack
That part is only pertaining to obstruction of justice, you guys are conflating the two parts to the report.

The report completely clears him from collusion. This is crystal clear.

Also as Chris Cuomo said last night, he believes that line was a cheap shot from Weissman.

I know, I'm merely saying when it comes to obstruction it doesn't exonerate but it also says he committed no crime.

Because a prosecutor doesn't exonerate the person he's prosecuting. They had nothing, but they spent 2 years, this was a parting shot to all the shit Trump gave them.

Originally posted by Silent Master
So which district do you believe will bring charges against Trump and what charges do you think they'll bring?

Originally posted by Adam_PoE
According to a new report from the New York Times, the reason Mueller did not recommend any further indictments is because he farmed them out to seven other agencies:

[list=1][*]United States Attorney’s Office for the Central District of California
[*]United States Attorney’s Office for the District of Columbia
[*]United States Department of Justice Criminal Division
[*]United States Department of Justice National Security Division
[*]United States District Court for the Eastern District of New York
[*]United States District Court for the Southern District of New York
[*]United States District Court for the Eastern District of Virginia[/list]

In other words, Mueller not recommending any more indictments does not mean there will be no more indictments. It means he has ensured that any future indictments reside in a Presidential pardon-proof prosecutorial district.

It would seem some folks are celebrating prematurely.

Originally posted by Surtur
I know, I'm merely saying when it comes to obstruction it doesn't exonerate but it also says he committed no crime.

You understand there is a gulf of difference between "not enough evidence for a criminal indictment" and "no evidence of a crime," right?

I didn't ask for a list of the districts, I asked which of them you believe will actually bring charges against Trump and what charges you think they'll bring?

Originally posted by Silent Master
I didn't ask for a list of the districts, I asked which of them you believe will actually bring charges against Trump and what charges you think they'll bring?

I cannot speculate without knowing more about the contents of the report.

Originally posted by BrolyBlack
Jesus, you need to learn to read, it says Mueller found no evidence of collusion or conspiracy from any American in the 2016 election.

The Special Counsel's report is divided into two parts. The first describes the results of the Special Counsel's investigation into Russia's interference in the 2016 U.S. presidential election. The report outlines the Russian effort to influence the election and documents crimes committed by persons associated with the Russian government in connection with those efforts. The report further explains that a primary consideration for the Special Counsel's investigation was whether any Americans – [b]including individuals associated with the Trump campaign – joined the Russian conspiracies to influence the election, which would be a federal crime. The Special Counsel's investigation did not find that the Trump campaign or anyone associated with it conspired or coordinated with Russia in its efforts to influence the 2016 U.S. presidential election. As the report states: “[T]he investigation did not establish that members of the Trump Campaign conspired or coordinated with the Russian government in its election interference activities.” [/B]

Adam has TDS

Originally posted by Adam_PoE
You understand there is a gulf of difference between "not enough evidence for a criminal indictment" and "no evidence of a crime," right?

There was no evidence of collusion. Please learn to read.

Originally posted by Adam_PoE

I pointed similar out Sunday somewhere here