Jump to content
Sign in to follow this  
DieHardBrownsFan

Mueller's TV statement

Recommended Posts

4 minutes ago, Clevfan4life said:

What are you not able to digest here OBF? The guy didn't give the dems what they wanted so now they're turning on him. He made it "crystal" clear that this was the last time he would speak on this. I don't give a fuck anymore about you republicans and democrats...I think you're all swine. That guy is a grown ass man and I wish there was a way to nominate him as president. Cause the guy I saw in that video is precisely the kind of serious customer I think is long over due in this country. 

 

What part are you not getting about Mueller packing his investigation with partisan democrats or now he is doing something no prosecutor ever does such as saying Trump might be guilty even though he did not have enough evidence to indict. 

 

"Virtually everybody agrees that, in the normal case, a prosecutor should never go beyond publicly disclosing that there is insufficient evidence to indict. No responsible prosecutor should ever suggest that the subject of his investigation might be guilty even though there was insufficient evidence or other reasons not to indict. Supporters of Mueller will argue that this is not an ordinary case, that he is not an ordinary prosecutor, and that President Trump is not an ordinary subject of an investigation. They are wrong. The rules should not be different here.

No prosecutor should ever say or do anything for the purpose of helping one party or the other. I cannot imagine a plausible reason why Mueller went beyond his report and gratuitously suggested that President Trump might be guilty, except to help the Democrats and to encourage impeachment talk and action. Shame on Mueller for abusing his position of trust and for allowing himself to be used for partisan advantage."

Alan Dershowitz

  • Upvote 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

“If we had confidence that the president did not commit a crime we would have said so,” he said. Mueller cited a Department of Justice policy prohibiting a special prosecutor from charging sitting presidents: “Charging the president with a crime,” he said, “was therefore not an option we could consider.”

 

this is exactly what was said when the report first came out. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
4 minutes ago, Clevfan4life said:

“If we had confidence that the president did not commit a crime we would have said so,” he said. Mueller cited a Department of Justice policy prohibiting a special prosecutor from charging sitting presidents: “Charging the president with a crime,” he said, “was therefore not an option we could consider.”

 

this is exactly what was said when the report first came out. 

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

again, OBF..time to think for yourself....what has changed since the report was released? Nothing was said today that wasn't said weeks ago. Stop furnishing me talking head links and just think for yourself dammit. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
6 minutes ago, Clevfan4life said:

again, OBF..time to think for yourself....what has changed since the report was released? Nothing was said today that wasn't said weeks ago. Stop furnishing me talking head links and just think for yourself dammit. 

That video by Andy McCarthy is from someone smarter than either you or me. You should take the time to watch it. Same with the article by Alan Dershowitz who defended Mueller as being non partisan up until today.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
3 minutes ago, OldBrownsFan said:

That video by Andy McCarthy is from someone smarter than either you or me. You should take the time to watch it. Same with the article by Alan Dershowitz who defended Mueller as being non partisan up until today.

I don't listen to talking heads. And that's what he is. You wouldn't disagree with me if I posted a video from one of CNN's talking heads so im not going to indulge you on this discussion. 

THINK

FOR

YOUR

SELF

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Cleve if you can't see this whole sham of an investigation was always about impeachment of Trump then stay blind. The silver lining is that the dems will overplay their hand and try to impeach Trump which will fail and guarantee Trump wins in 2020. 

  • Upvote 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
19 minutes ago, OldBrownsFan said:

Cleve if you can't see this whole sham of an investigation was always about impeachment of Trump then stay blind. The silver lining is that the dems will overplay their hand and try to impeach Trump which will fail and guarantee Trump wins in 2020. 

This about "mueller" tho. This isn't about the origins of the investigations. Your all trying to libel a man that from my perspective comes across like the only man in the room in Washington. The guy made it clear he was obstructed, and he was. That evidence is not debateable. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

the Russians’ efforts to interfere in the 2016 election “deserves the attention of every American.”

 

when the time comes that a democratic president has been "installed" by a foreign govt or theres circumstantial evidence for it, I will remind you all what this man said today. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2 minutes ago, Clevfan4life said:

This about "mueller" tho. This isn't about the origins of the investigations. Your all trying to libel a man that from my perspective comes across like the only man in the room in Washington. The guy made it clear he was obstructed, and he was. That evidence is not debateable. 

What evidence?

 

24 minutes ago, Clevfan4life said:

I don't listen to talking heads. And that's what he is. You wouldn't disagree with me if I posted a video from one of CNN's talking heads so im not going to indulge you on this discussion. 

THINK

FOR

YOUR

SELF

YOU

AREN'T

THINKING

FOR

YOURSELF

If you were you  wouldn't believe what Maxine Waters is telling you.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
3 minutes ago, Clevfan4life said:

the Russians’ efforts to interfere in the 2016 election “deserves the attention of every American.”

Hey dumbass, Obammy knew about the fuckin’ Russkies before the election...why didn’t HE do something about it?

  • Like 1
  • Thanks 3

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
13 minutes ago, Clevfan4life said:

the Russians’ efforts to interfere in the 2016 election “deserves the attention of every American.”

 

when the time comes that a democratic president has been "installed" by a foreign govt or theres circumstantial evidence for it, I will remind you all what this man said today. 

OK, so how is it that Trump was installed by a foreign govt ?  What was the process?

The only Russian collusion was that of Hillary and the DNC.

THINK

FOR

YOUR

SELF

DUMB

ASS.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2 minutes ago, Gorka said:

OK, so how is it that Trump was installed by a foreign govt ?  What was the process?

The only Russian collusion was that of Hillary and the DNC.

THINK

FOR

YOUR

SELF

MORON.

First you open the border, next you overwhelm the border with Millions of illegal invaders and give them the right to vote in government elections.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
41 minutes ago, Clevfan4life said:

I don't listen to talking heads. And that's what he is. You wouldn't disagree with me if I posted a video from one of CNN's talking heads so im not going to indulge you on this discussion. 

 

You don't listen cause you're afraid. What do you listen to Clevis?  Your opinions and ideas are formulated by what you see, read or hear.

Alan Dershowitz is a Harvard law professor and a liberal democrat...recently disowned by Trump hating liberal slimeballs  like you because decided he was gonna tell it like it is and you don't appreciate it much cause it aint what you want to hear. Fuck the truth.

 Listen to him and learn.

Your ignorance and or denial is really showing now Clevis.

 

  • Upvote 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
55 minutes ago, Gorka said:

You don't listen cause you're afraid. .

 

afraid of being fed partisan rubbish, yes. When a liberal says something you guys are ok with, than we should listen to him...but when a U.S congressman says Trump should be impeached well clearly that guys a rino and deep state blah blah blah. 

I just don't listen to any of them. That's why im demonstrably smarter than you. 👍

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

LISTEN: Mark Levin gets to the nub of why Mueller really made his statement today…

 

Levin argues that Mueller went well beyond what his report said and gave the Democrats what they really wanted. But why? Because it’s not just about impeachment.

Essentially Levin believes that in some way, perhaps a wink and a nod, Mueller has made a deal with the Democrats that if he gives them what they want, they won’t subject him to hearings where he’s scrutinized by Republicans over his investigation. Because perhaps Mueller isn’t on top of his ‘game’ like he used to be.

Remember Mueller made clear that his statement today along with the Mueller report was his testimony and that he wouldn’t show up before Congress. And Democratic leaders in Congress went right along with it, claiming they didn’t need Mueller to testify anymore. Levin’s analysis makes perfect sense.

https://therightscoop.com/listen-mark-levin-gets-to-the-nub-of-why-mueller-really-made-his-statement-today/

  • Upvote 3

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Two things to note here.

1.  Ken Starr recommended impeachment and laid out the evidence for it himself.  Mueller did not, despite his ability to do so.

2.  Mueller did not say Barr purgered himself, nor misled the public.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
9 minutes ago, htownbrown said:

Two things to note here.

1.  Ken Starr recommended impeachment and laid out the evidence for it himself.  Mueller did not, despite his ability to do so.

 

Do you not read either? cmon dude...he couldn't bring obstruction charges. LITERALLY COULD NOT BRING OBSTRUCTION CHARGES BECAUSE IT WAS JUSTICE DEPT REGULATION NOT TO CHARGE A SITTING PRESIDENT WITH THAT. The Ken Starr investigation was completely different. Starr was charged with finding out whether Bill deliberately lied. The ONLY comparison is whether Mueller would have found COLLUSION evidence. Which he didn't find definitve proof of..

The obstruction charge could NOT have been brought by Mueller. Fuck this is not hard guys. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I said RECOMMEND impeachment, not charge him with a crime.  FFS

10 minutes ago, Clevfan4life said:

Do you not read either? cmon dude...he couldn't bring obstruction charges. LITERALLY COULD NOT BRING OBSTRUCTION CHARGES BECAUSE IT WAS JUSTICE DEPT REGULATION NOT TO CHARGE A SITTING PRESIDENT WITH THAT. The Ken Starr investigation was completely different. Starr was charged with finding out whether Bill deliberately lied. The ONLY comparison is whether Mueller would have found COLLUSION evidence. Which he didn't find definitve proof of..

The obstruction charge could NOT have been brought by Mueller. Fuck this is not hard guys. 

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Ken Starr had criminal charges on Clinton  -  Mueller had ZILCH on trump

  go figure...

  • Upvote 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

so its nadlers sideshow against Barr / Durham investigating who knew what and when?

gee wonder whos gonna carry  the day when this ends in nov 2020?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
7 minutes ago, FairHooker11 said:

Ken Starr had criminal charges on Clinton  -  Mueller had ZILCH on trump

  go figure...

Let me correct you before someone loses it around here.  Ken Starr had evidence of crimes, he could not bring charges for the same reason Mueller can't. 

  • Thanks 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Why the kid gloves with Russia? I think most of the right thinking people here know that whatever amount of meddling they did was Tiny. They spent a few bucks on some social media crap. Less than a local car dealer would spend on his weekly ad. Those of us who spend any time on social media have seen many times that each and every day from people all over the country., haters and lovers alike. We've heard National media repeating lies and unsubstantiated smear stories that has nothing to do with the Russians.  We probably realize that Europe Israel Saudi Arabia and especially Mexico have all meddled in our sacred democracy to some extent right? 

And all of that should be seen in this light. Nothing proves the Russians commissioned the WikiLeaks. Nothing proved the Russian government commissioned the Wikileaks before were they made George W bush look bad and they were they heroic whistleblowers to the left. And finally nothing Wikileaks reported was untrue. The dirty tricks happened.

But finally none of this changed one single vote.

WSS

  • Upvote 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
4 hours ago, Westside Steve said:

. Less than a local car dealer would spend on his weekly ad.

you cannot be this dense can u? The man is spending 10's of billions not just fucking with the u.s but also europe. U really think these troll farms cost whst a local car dealer spends? This isnt hollywood u hayseed...these hack farms arent setting up in some russian suburb loft with jaded disaffected highly tech capable emo's running it. I mean what gets into u sometimes steve? 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now
Sign in to follow this  

×