It’s Mueller Time ....running thread

[CO. Hoosier]

He acted like he had taken a half a bottle of Xanax !

I know lawyers who take Ativan to relieve the anxiety of trial work. Maybe Mueller is one of those.

Didn’t watch any of the hearing, but from the comments I don’t think he acquitted himself well. Some who know him weren’t surprised that he wasn’t up to this. Could be he wasn’t really in charge of this investigation.

 

[TheOriginalHappyGoat]

This was a fun thread to read. I'll just dump on everyone all at once:

1. This whole "Mueller is mentally feeble" schtick is just beyond stupid. Anyone pushing this should be embarrassed. For shame.

2. Mueller mostly did what he said he'd do, which was not much.

3. If anyone bothered to listen to his answers, at the very least, he made it clear that the Barr interpretation of his report was BS, and the interpretation some of us on here tried to explain to you was the correct one. Anyone still screaming that Mueller "exonerated" the President is lying or being willfully ignorant.

4. Mueller slipped up once, and had to walk back a comment that made it sound like he could, in fact, conclude the President committed a crime, but was prevented from doing so only because of the OLC opinion. Combined with a few other things, I think my original interpretation of the report is still true: for whatever it's worth, Bob Mueller personally believes that Trump committed obstruction. The reason he didn't conclude Trump was innocent was simple: he didn't think he actually was.

5. This did nothing to further impeachment, although it's possible that impeachment was already inevitable, anyway.

6. I still really doubt Trump will ever see the inside of a prison cell.

7. I think the one thing from this investigation that matters most to Mueller has nothing to do with whether or not Trump is going to prison. I think he made it clear that the primary issue we should be concerned with is that foreign powers - particularly Russia - have and continue to interfere with our elections, and we aren't doing enough to stop it. I think Mueller believes this problem rises above partisan concerns.

 

[SNU0821]

Why is Medicare for all dumb? You got data or something to support your statement?

Because it would be impossible to pay for, to start.

 

[SNU0821]

Rep. Demings: "Lies by Trump campaign officials and administration officials impeded your investigation."

Mueller: "I would generally agree with that."

https://nbcnews.to/2LDNtm1

But, then again there is his multiple statements that he wasn’t impeded, in any way, by Trump or his staff. Nice try, though.

 

[zeke4ahs]

This was a fun thread to read. I'll just dump on everyone all at once:

1. This whole "Mueller is mentally feeble" schtick is just beyond stupid. Anyone pushing this should be embarrassed. For shame.

2. Mueller mostly did what he said he'd do, which was not much.

3. If anyone bothered to listen to his answers, at the very least, he made it clear that the Barr interpretation of his report was BS, and the interpretation some of us on here tried to explain to you was the correct one. Anyone still screaming that Mueller "exonerated" the President is lying or being willfully ignorant.

4. Mueller slipped up once, and had to walk back a comment that made it sound like he could, in fact, conclude the President committed a crime, but was prevented from doing so only because of the OLC opinion. Combined with a few other things, I think my original interpretation of the report is still true: for whatever it's worth, Bob Mueller personally believes that Trump committed obstruction. The reason he didn't conclude Trump was innocent was simple: he didn't think he actually was.

5. This did nothing to further impeachment, although it's possible that impeachment was already inevitable, anyway.

6. I still really doubt Trump will ever see the inside of a prison cell.

7. I think the one thing from this investigation that matters most to Mueller has nothing to do with whether or not Trump is going to prison. I think he made it clear that the primary issue we should be concerned with is that foreign powers - particularly Russia - have and continue to interfere with our elections, and we aren't doing enough to stop it. I think Mueller believes this problem rises above partisan concerns.

Agreed. I’m not sure why anyone expected anything other than what we got. Maybe the media hyped it up, but knowing everything we know about Mueller what we got is just what I expected. Maybe the media hyped it up more. He spoke a little more specifically about Trump’s lying and obstruction than I actually thought he would. The fact that he would not speak about the beginning of the investigation thwarted 99% of what the GOP wanted to discuss, which was amusing. They worked around it by giving soliloquies and not asking him any questions. I’m not sure screaming at him was a good tactic for them, but who knows with that base?

 

[CO. Hoosier]

3. If anyone bothered to listen to his answers, at the very least, he made it clear that the Barr interpretation of his report was BS, and the interpretation some of us on here tried to explain to you was the correct one. Anyone still screaming that Mueller "exonerated" the President is lying or being willfully ignorant.

Your argument particularly pathetic because you went to law school. No prosecutor has authority to ever exonerate a subject. Because of the presumption of innocence and the hefty burden of proof in criminal cases, all of us stand exonerated until a plea or a guilty verdict. Trump should have said he remains exonerated after Mueller finished his work. Trump isn’t a lawyer, so he can be excused for that minor mischaracterization. But you can’t.

Nobody has ever shown the Barr’s summary is BS. Barr correctly noted that Muller found no evidence of Trump collusion/conspiracy. Based upon facts found by Mueller’s investigators, Barr and Rosenstein decided there was no evidence of obstruction. Mueller did not decide this question. You disagree, fine, but that doesn’t mean Barr’s conclusion is BS.

 

[mohoosier]

Agreed. I’m not sure why anyone expected anything other than what we got. Maybe the media hyped it up, but knowing everything we know about Mueller what we got is just what I expected. Maybe the media hyped it up more. He spoke a little more specifically about Trump’s lying and obstruction than I actually thought he would. The fact that he would not speak about the beginning of the investigation thwarted 99% of what the GOP wanted to discuss, which was amusing. They worked around it by giving soliloquies and not asking him any questions. I’m not sure screaming at him was a good tactic for them, but who knows with that base?

Uhhhh, I believe it was you Zeke that started this thread and obviously you were in the camp caught up in the “Mueller Euphoria” or else why would you start a thread about it?? Anyone with a half-wit would have known that he was going to say nothing outside of his already-filed report. Why would he implicate himself?

Besides, Peter Strozk knew way back in May of ‘17 that “there’s no big there there”.

It is amusing that you find questions concerning the origins of the investigation amusing, but there are several high-ranking officials that were involved in the investigation that are not laughing tonight. (See: Huber, Horowitz and Durham).

 

[mohoosier]

Your argument particularly pathetic because you went to law school. No prosecutor has authority to ever exonerate a subject. Because of the presumption of innocence and the hefty burden of proof in criminal cases, all of us stand exonerated until a plea or a guilty verdict. Trump should have said he remains exonerated after Mueller finished his work. Trump isn’t a lawyer, so he can be excused for that minor mischaracterization. But you can’t.

Nobody has ever shown the Barr’s summary is BS. Barr correctly noted that Muller found no evidence of Trump collusion/conspiracy. Based upon facts found by Mueller’s investigators, Barr and Rosenstein decided there was no evidence of obstruction. Mueller did not decide this question. You disagree, fine, but that doesn’t mean Barr’s conclusion is BS.

It’s useless CO. If someone can’t understand the basics of the legal process, this is will be a lesson in futility.

It’s this blindness though that caused many in high positions to make some absolutely stupid moves (eg. leaking classified documents to the press, presenting false information on a sworn affidavit before a federal judge in order to obtain a warrant to spy on an American citizen, etc).

The attack on our Democracy did not come from outside (Russia), it came from within.

 

[alax2]

Your argument particularly pathetic because you went to law school. No prosecutor has authority to ever exonerate a subject. Because of the presumption of innocence and the hefty burden of proof in criminal cases, all of us stand exonerated until a plea or a guilty verdict. Trump should have said he remains exonerated after Mueller finished his work. Trump isn’t a lawyer, so he can be excused for that minor mischaracterization. But you can’t.

Nobody has ever shown the Barr’s summary is BS. Barr correctly noted that Muller found no evidence of Trump collusion/conspiracy. Based upon facts found by Mueller’s investigators, Barr and Rosenstein decided there was no evidence of obstruction. Mueller did not decide this question. You disagree, fine, but that doesn’t mean Barr’s conclusion is BS.

That is not true. Please consider the word. Exhonrated means free of accusation or blame. Being exonerated is different then when a prosecutor who decides not to bring a criminal action. The prosecutors I know all have cases they didn't bring simply because they didn't think they had enough evidence (though they may have some evidence) to get a conviction but they certainly do not think theses people are innocent or exhonrated.

Also you say that Mueller didn't find any evidence of obstruction. I certainly think he did and he thinks so too but not to an extent to bring an action. That is a normal concept for every prosecutor I know.

 

[mohoosier]

That is not true. Please consider the word. Exhonrated means free of accusation or blame. Being exonerated is different then when a prosecutor who decides not to bring a criminal action. The prosecutors I know all have cases they didn't bring simply because they didn't think they had enough evidence (though they may have some evidence) to get a conviction but they certainly do not think theses people are innocent or exhonrated.

The point is AGAIN - the right or ability to exonerate is not within the prosecutor’s purview. To even discuss the issue in this context is useless.

 

[CO. Hoosier]

That is not true. Please consider the word. Exhonrated means free of accusation or blame. Being exonerated is different then when a prosecutor who decides not to bring a criminal action. The prosecutors I know all have cases they didn't bring simply because they didn't think they had enough evidence (though they may have some evidence) to get a conviction but they certainly do not think theses people are innocent or exhonrated.

There is no Dante purgatory here. The presumption and burden of proof I mentioned make each and every one of us innocent (free of blame) until shown otherwise. I don’t think an accusation changes that, as you seem to suggest. There are no degrees of innocence.

Technically, we are only talking about the obstruction part of the report. Mueller’s correction made clear that he reached no conclusion about that. Rosenstein and Barr did.

 

[iuwclurker]

Your argument particularly pathetic because you went to law school. No prosecutor has authority to ever exonerate a subject. Because of the presumption of innocence and the hefty burden of proof in criminal cases, all of us stand exonerated until a plea or a guilty verdict. Trump should have said he remains exonerated after Mueller finished his work. Trump isn’t a lawyer, so he can be excused for that minor mischaracterization. But you can’t.

I'm not a lawyer and I can see through your conflation of exonerate and presumption of innocence, purely by definition:

ex·on·er·ate

verb

1. 
   (especially of an official body) absolve (someone) from blame for a fault or wrongdoing, especially after due consideration of the case.

Presumption of innocence precedes and requires no causative action. Exonerate requires the causative action of absolving from blame. Everyone is a priori presumed innocent. No one is a priori exonerated.

What is true about the Mueller Report is that it cannot have exonerated Trump because the investigation was not intended to exonerate him. It wasn't intended to exonerate him because Mueller judged it incorrect to draw any conclusions about Trump's guilt.

Trump is POTUS in the year 2019 and is afforded unlimited legal advice. He has no recourse to not understanding the nuances of his language. Your excuse for him is..."pathetic."

 

[CO. Hoosier]

Also you say that Mueller didn't find any evidence of obstruction. I certainly think he did and he thinks so too but not to an extent to bring an action. That is a normal concept for every prosecutor I know.

There is no such thing as “almost guilty”. There is either enough evidence to meet the burden on each element of a crime, or there isn’t.

 

[CO. Hoosier]

I'm not a lawyer and I can see through your conflation of exonerate and presumption of innocence, purely by definition:

ex·on·er·ate

verb

1. 
   (especially of an official body) absolve (someone) from blame for a fault or wrongdoing, especially after due consideration of the case.

Presumption of innocence precedes and requires no causative action. Exonerate requires the causative action of absolving from blame. Everyone is a priori presumed innocent. No one is a priori exonerated.

What is true about the Mueller Report is that it cannot have exonerated Trump because the investigation was not intended to exonerate him. It wasn't intended to exonerate him because Mueller judged it incorrect to draw any conclusions about Trump's guilt.

Trump is POTUS in the year 2019 and is afforded unlimited legal advice. He has no recourse to not understanding the nuances of his language. Your excuse for him is..."pathetic."

This is why I said Trump remains exonerated. The prosecutor doesn’t (can’t) exonerate. No blame ever attaches to us. We are all free of blame until a verdict or plea.

 

[iuwclurker]

This was a fun thread to read. I'll just dump on everyone all at once:

1. This whole "Mueller is mentally feeble" schtick is just beyond stupid. Anyone pushing this should be embarrassed. For shame.

2. Mueller mostly did what he said he'd do, which was not much.

3. If anyone bothered to listen to his answers, at the very least, he made it clear that the Barr interpretation of his report was BS, and the interpretation some of us on here tried to explain to you was the correct one. Anyone still screaming that Mueller "exonerated" the President is lying or being willfully ignorant.

4. Mueller slipped up once, and had to walk back a comment that made it sound like he could, in fact, conclude the President committed a crime, but was prevented from doing so only because of the OLC opinion. Combined with a few other things, I think my original interpretation of the report is still true: for whatever it's worth, Bob Mueller personally believes that Trump committed obstruction. The reason he didn't conclude Trump was innocent was simple: he didn't think he actually was.

5. This did nothing to further impeachment, although it's possible that impeachment was already inevitable, anyway.

6. I still really doubt Trump will ever see the inside of a prison cell.

7. I think the one thing from this investigation that matters most to Mueller has nothing to do with whether or not Trump is going to prison. I think he made it clear that the primary issue we should be concerned with is that foreign powers - particularly Russia - have and continue to interfere with our elections, and we aren't doing enough to stop it. I think Mueller believes this problem rises above partisan concerns.

I would add to your realistic summary a non-partisan idealistic point of view.

1. The Russians have undertaken an unprecedented and comprehensive attempt to undermine our democracy and our nation using propaganda. Because of the politically polarized nature of our nation, the (relatively large) gullible segment of our populace is particularly vulnerable to this new form of propaganda.

2. The Russians and other adversarial entities are experts in hacking and have every intention of physically manipulating our voting processes as soon as possible.

3. Our current president is legitimately suspected as being compromised to the Russian government if not also others. This is not a partisan point but rather a point of national security, as is always the case with any American individual who represents State interests in any form.

All three of these need to be taken seriously and addressed in a non-partisan manner. I would argue that these two public sessions with Mueller did not afford him an opportunity to voice his grave concerns. There should be private Congressional sessions with Mueller and his senior team of researchers/lawyers to gather full information on these delicate issues of national security interest. The partisan circus demonstrated a lack of due concern.

 

[mohoosier]

I'm not a lawyer and I can see through your conflation of exonerate and presumption of innocence, purely by definition:

ex·on·er·ate

verb

1. 
   (especially of an official body) absolve (someone) from blame for a fault or wrongdoing, especially after due consideration of the case.

Presumption of innocence precedes and requires no causative action. Exonerate requires the causative action of absolving from blame. Everyone is a priori presumed innocent. No one is a priori exonerated.

What is true about the Mueller Report is that it cannot have exonerated Trump because the investigation was not intended to exonerate him. It wasn't intended to exonerate him because Mueller judged it incorrect to draw any conclusions about Trump's guilt.

Trump is POTUS in the year 2019 and is afforded unlimited legal advice. He has no recourse to not understanding the nuances of his language. Your excuse for him is..."pathetic."

Delusion is such a scary thing.

 

[mohoosier]

I would add to your realistic summary a non-partisan idealistic point of view.

1. The Russians have undertaken an unprecedented and comprehensive attempt to undermine our democracy and our nation using propaganda. Because of the politically polarized nature or our nation, the (relatively large) gullible segment of our populace is particularly vulnerable to this new form of propaganda.

2. The Russians and other adversarial entities are experts in hacking and have every intention of physically manipulating our voting processes as soon as possible.

3. Our current president is legitimately suspected as being compromised to the Russian government if not also others. This is not a partisan point but rather a point of national security, as is always the case with any American individual who represents State interests in any form.

All three of these need to be taken seriously and addressed in a non-partisan manner. I would argue that these two public sessions with Mueller did not afford him an opportunity to voice his grave concerns. There should be private Congressional sessions with Mueller and his senior team of researchers/lawyers to gather full information on these delicate issues of national security interest. The partisan circus demonstrated a lack of due concern.

Wow

 

[iuwclurker]

This is why I said Trump remains exonerated. The prosecutor doesn’t (can’t) exonerate. No blame ever attaches to us. We are all free of blame until a verdict or plea.

You still don't get the difference. Free of blame is not the same as absolved from blame.

You were overly quick to attack Goat's lawyering, considering your failure to discern the difference. (To say nothing of violating your own dictum against attacking others.)

 

[TheOriginalHappyGoat]

Your argument particularly pathetic because you went to law school. No prosecutor has authority to ever exonerate a subject.

I love how you think this is my failing, and not the failing of the people who actually say that Mueller exonerated the President. Typical bullshit from you.

 

[CO. Hoosier]

You still don't get the difference. Free of blame is not the same as absolved from blame.

Here is what you don’t get. In our system there is no difference between a prosecutor’s exoneration ( assuming there is such a thing). and the presumption of innocence.

 

[CO. Hoosier]

I love how you think this is my failing, and not the failing of the people who actually say that Mueller exonerated the President. Typical bullshit from you.

Whatever you say. I’m talking about the Mueller report. You are talking about people talking about the Mueller report.

 

[TheOriginalHappyGoat]

Whatever you say. I’m talking about the Mueller report. You are talking about people talking about the Mueller report.

Yes, I am, and no, you're really not.

 

[Marvin the Martian]

The same people that chant, Lock her up" are giving lectures on presumption of innocence. How cute.

 

[SNU0821]

3. Our current president is legitimately suspected as being compromised to the Russian government if not also others. This is not a partisan point but rather a point of national security, as is always the case with any American individual who represents State interests in any form.

Lol. What’s it like to not live in the real world? What’s it like to constantly wear that tin foil hat even after career officials say the above isn’t true?

You are right though, there are TONS of gullible people. You’re obviously included.

 

[Lucy01]

You guys should be embarrassed for trying to defend the Mueller report, he didn’t even know what was in his report. The man embarrassed himself, he was pathetic. It’s time for congress to start working for the people and stop this shit show. The big brains on this site laughed at me when I said Trump was going to win! Well here some more news for you, he is going to win again in 2020.

 

[zeke4ahs]

Your argument particularly pathetic because you went to law school. No prosecutor has authority to ever exonerate a subject. Because of the presumption of innocence and the hefty burden of proof in criminal cases, all of us stand exonerated until a plea or a guilty verdict. Trump should have said he remains exonerated after Mueller finished his work. Trump isn’t a lawyer, so he can be excused for that minor mischaracterization. But you can’t.

Nobody has ever shown the Barr’s summary is BS. Barr correctly noted that Muller found no evidence of Trump collusion/conspiracy. Based upon facts found by Mueller’s investigators, Barr and Rosenstein decided there was no evidence of obstruction. Mueller did not decide this question. You disagree, fine, but that doesn’t mean Barr’s conclusion is BS.

No evidence of obstruction? I believe he brought to Congress ten counts. One example: Trump asked his aides to falsify documents. How is this not obstruction?

 

[Lucy01]

No evidence of obstruction? I believe he brought to Congress ten counts. One example: Trump asked his aides to falsify documents. How is this not obstruction?

Time to move on Zeke, it’s over ok! Time to champion a new topic

 

[Ohio Guy]

Anyone who takes the findings of the Mueller report seriously should know there is cause for concern about Russian meddling in our federal elections and that there are some major red flags with this president and his administration. Take away the names and the D and R designations and even the most ardent, level-headed conservative would agree (although I'm beginning to think this is an oxymoron).

That said, I flipped over to Fox News last night and it's almost shameful how people here, on Facebook and other places are lapping up the talking points being rammed through on all those shows. To sum up their messaging in a few words, they essentially believe Mueller was a talking head who has a fading mental capacity. They created a new boogie man out of whole cloth - Andrew Weissman is now the anti-Christ who has been secretly pulling the strings to bring down St. Trump. And if you were a godly man like Donald Trump who was as pure as driven snow, of course you'd do anything in your power to thwart an investigation you're involved in!

It's insanity, but that isn't too far from the gist of the messaging I took away from Tucker Carlson and all the other jokers on Fox News.

 

[SNU0821]

Anyone who takes the findings of the Mueller report seriously should know there is cause for concern about Russian meddling in our federal elections and that there are some major red flags with this president and his administration. Take away the names and the D and R designations and even the most ardent, level-headed conservative would agree (although I'm beginning to think this is an oxymoron).

That said, I flipped over to Fox News last night and it's almost shameful how people here, on Facebook and other places are lapping up the talking points being rammed through on all those shows. To sum up their messaging in a few words, they essentially believe Mueller was a talking head who has a fading mental capacity. They created a new boogie man out of whole cloth - Andrew Weissman is now the anti-Christ who has been secretly pulling the strings to bring down St. Trump. And if you were a godly man like Donald Trump who was as pure as driven snow, of course you'd do anything in your power to thwart an investigation you're involved in!

It's insanity, but that isn't too far from the gist of the messaging I took away from Tucker Carlson and all the other jokers on Fox News.

It sounds like you’re an NBC/MSNBC/CNN type guy, amirite? Lol. Yeah, those are MUCH better.

 

[SNU0821]

No evidence of obstruction? I believe he brought to Congress ten counts none of which met the burden of proof. One example: Trump asked his aides to falsify documents. This is not obstruction because career prosecutors couldn’t determine a crime had been committed.

FIFY Zeke. You’re welcome.

 

[stollcpa]

“This is delicate to say, but Mueller, whom I deeply respect, has not publicly testified before Congress in at least six years,” David Axelrod, the top strategist in Barack Obama’s campaigns, wrote on Twitter. “And he does not appear as sharp as he was then.”

 

[Thyrsis]

FIFY Zeke. You’re welcome.

You were shown the info (which you failed to read on your own), yet still persist in spreading falsehoods.

 

[SNU0821]

You were shown the info (which you failed to read on your own), yet still persist in spreading falsehoods.

What falsehoods? Taking someone at their own word? Lol. No crimes were committed. No charges of collusion/conspiracy or obstruction. Trump is exonerated, just like he said.

 

[Cortez88]

I’m trying to understand this latest far right argument. When the report was released, Trump immediately states “total exoneration!” The Trump sycophants, Fox News and the far right on this board plant a flag.

Yesterday, Mueller says that Trump was not totally exonerated. Now, those same people who considered the case closed when our dishonest POTUS made the earlier claim, are very into the minutiae of legal process. Do I have this correct?

 

[SNU0821]

I’m trying to understand this latest far right argument. When the report was released, Trump immediately states “total exoneration!” The Trump sycophants, Fox News and the far right on this board plant a flag.

Yesterday, Mueller says that Trump was not totally exonerated. Now, those same people who considered the case closed when our dishonest POTUS made the earlier claim, are very into the minutiae of legal process. Do I have this correct?

How is he not totally exonerated? He wasn’t charged with any crime. Mueller didn’t find any crimes of collusion/conspiracy or obstruction. We’re innocent until proven guilty in America and considering he wasn’t found guilty, what’s that leave us with? Lol...

Oh, and don’t forget the far left conspiracy of the MSM and the crazy libs that started this whole thing and we’re POSITIVE there was something there. Too much smoke. Where there’s smoke there’s fire. Welp. Not in this case. Sad face for CNN/NBC/MSNBC...

 

[Thyrsis]

How is he not totally exonerated? He wasn’t charged with any crime. Mueller didn’t find any crimes of collusion/conspiracy or obstruction. We’re innocent until proven guilty in America and considering he wasn’t found guilty, what’s that leave us with? Lol...

Oh, and don’t forget the far left conspiracy of the MSM and the crazy libs that started this whole thing and we’re POSITIVE there was something there. Too much smoke. Where there’s smoke there’s fire. Welp. Not in this case. Sad face for CNN/NBC/MSNBC...

Just a reminder to everyone that when the 2020 election arrives, a vote for Trump or a decision to stay home or a vote for a third party candidate is a vote for SNU and for undermining the basic principles of our republic. All the talk about taxes and judges and immigration is total BS. You're a patriot or you're not.

 

[Ohio Guy]

It sounds like you’re an NBC/MSNBC/CNN type guy, amirite? Lol. Yeah, those are MUCH better.

Similar to what @Cortez88 said in this thread, it seems like conservatives are ok with moving the goal posts as long as Fox News and Rush are pushing that narrative out.

I don't normally watch Fox News - you're right about that - but I don't see why that means any media source that is not-Fox is churning out fake news. Unless you lap up the president's twitter feed.

 

[CO. Hoosier]

No evidence of obstruction? I believe he brought to Congress ten counts. One example: Trump asked his aides to falsify documents. How is this not obstruction?

Assuming you are correct that the facts are Trump requested a false record, that is not evidence of obstruction because of the legal standard Rosenstein and Barr applied. As I said, the facts about obstruction are largely undisputed. Mueller refused to discuss the standard instead referring to the legal argument other prosecutors put into the report.

 

[SNU0821]

Just a reminder to everyone that when the 2020 election arrives, a vote for Trump or a decision to stay home or a vote for a third party candidate is a vote for SNU and for undermining the basic principles of our republic. All the talk about taxes and judges and immigration is total BS. You're a patriot or you're not.

You’re right. Voting for Trump is the patriotic thing to do. The Dems want open borders, free healthcare, free college, free everything. They basically want to turn us into Venezuela. The only patriotic vote is Trump.

 

[UncleMark]

Assuming you are correct that the facts are Trump requested a false record, that is not evidence of obstruction because of the legal standard Rosenstein and Barr applied. As I said, the facts about obstruction are largely undisputed. Mueller refused to discuss the standard instead referring to the legal argument other prosecutors put into the report.

How are you able to type that with a straight face?