General Discussion

malaise

(269,216 posts) Mon Mar 25, 2019, 08:10 PM Mar 2019

The best question I've heard re the Report

is how come the Prosecutor made a decision re collusion but passed on Obstruction.

Something stinks.

14 replies

= new reply since forum marked as read

Highlight:

The best question I've heard re the Report (Original Post) malaise Mar 2019 OP

Everything about this GP6971 Mar 2019 #1

because according to Barr's logic, if there is not crime, there is no obstruction... PeeJ52 Mar 2019 #2

I'm thinking he passed on the obstruction question because the DOJ policy shraby Mar 2019 #3

Just in the back of my head it does not line up. There are some significant loose ends. RKP5637 Mar 2019 #4

Yep malaise Mar 2019 #7

A narrowly-defined decision on collusion, as reported by Barr coti Mar 2019 #5

If Robert Mueller, as a former prosecutor, is intent on making a provable case, guillaumeb Mar 2019 #6

Barr and the GOP stink to high heaven. P U!!! BigmanPigman Mar 2019 #8

Yep!!! "He clearly had an agenda ..." n/t RKP5637 Mar 2019 #13

Look, M, "collusion" is defined as Rump sitting on Putin's lap ProudLib72 Mar 2019 #9

I wonder if to prevent "Presidential" pardons, Mueller passed on indictments all the while ... marble falls Mar 2019 #10

Unfortunately he can pardon indictments/convictions for... wcmagumba Mar 2019 #11

There's also the fact that you don't have to conspire with the LITERAL government mr_lebowski Mar 2019 #12

yes, the word "government" there is a weasel word Grasswire2 Mar 2019 #14

GP6971

(31,226 posts)

1. Everything about this

Reply to malaise (Original post)

Mon Mar 25, 2019, 08:15 PM

Mar 2019

outcome sucks. There's many things amiss here.

PeeJ52

(1,588 posts)

2. because according to Barr's logic, if there is not crime, there is no obstruction...

Reply to malaise (Original post)

Mon Mar 25, 2019, 08:17 PM

Mar 2019

but I think, if the obstruction is good enough then you'll never be able to prove a crime beyond a reasonable doubt.

shraby

(21,946 posts)

3. I'm thinking he passed on the obstruction question because the DOJ policy

Reply to malaise (Original post)

Mon Mar 25, 2019, 08:18 PM

Mar 2019

is you can't indict a president.
If he had made a determination that there was obstruction, he would then need to indict him. He probably thought he was punting it to Congress and they could start the impeachment process because that would have been a reason for impeachment.

RKP5637

(67,112 posts)

4. Just in the back of my head it does not line up. There are some significant loose ends.

Reply to malaise (Original post)

Mon Mar 25, 2019, 08:19 PM

Mar 2019

It just doesn't feel right.

malaise

(269,216 posts)

7. Yep

Reply to RKP5637 (Reply #4)

Mon Mar 25, 2019, 08:23 PM

Mar 2019

It just doesn't feel right.

Truth will out.

coti

(4,612 posts)

5. A narrowly-defined decision on collusion, as reported by Barr

Reply to malaise (Original post)

Mon Mar 25, 2019, 08:21 PM

Mar 2019

We really don't know what's we'll find in the report. I presume, it will follow many of the facts reported in the media and back them up.

guillaumeb

(42,641 posts)

6. If Robert Mueller, as a former prosecutor, is intent on making a provable case,

Reply to malaise (Original post)

Mon Mar 25, 2019, 08:22 PM

Mar 2019

he may have concluded that he could not prove conspiracy.

That does not mean that there is/was no conspiracy, only that he could not prove that it had taken place.

My view.

BigmanPigman

(51,638 posts)

8. Barr and the GOP stink to high heaven. P U!!!

Reply to malaise (Original post)

Mon Mar 25, 2019, 08:23 PM

Mar 2019

Barr should have recused himself just as Sessions did. He clearly had an agenda and that is why the corrupt GOP Senate approved him.

RKP5637

(67,112 posts)

13. Yep!!! "He clearly had an agenda ..." n/t

Reply to BigmanPigman (Reply #8)

Mon Mar 25, 2019, 08:39 PM

Mar 2019

ProudLib72

(17,984 posts)

9. Look, M, "collusion" is defined as Rump sitting on Putin's lap

Reply to malaise (Original post)

Mon Mar 25, 2019, 08:25 PM

Mar 2019

Suckling at Putin's teat, while signing his name to a collusion agreement printed in triplicate.

And we all know that the agreement was only printed in duplicate, so collusion is off the table.

marble falls

(57,350 posts)

10. I wonder if to prevent "Presidential" pardons, Mueller passed on indictments all the while ...

Reply to malaise (Original post)

Mon Mar 25, 2019, 08:26 PM

Mar 2019

handing over evidence to jurisdictions like SDNY that Trump has no ability to pardon convictions from.

wcmagumba

(2,892 posts)

11. Unfortunately he can pardon indictments/convictions for...

Reply to marble falls (Reply #10)

Mon Mar 25, 2019, 08:31 PM

Mar 2019

any Federal crime including from SDNY. State charges and convictions are not
pardonable by sitting presidents.

mr_lebowski

(33,643 posts)

12. There's also the fact that you don't have to conspire with the LITERAL government

Reply to malaise (Original post)

Mon Mar 25, 2019, 08:33 PM

Mar 2019

of Russia to be guilty.

They use cut-outs, like Natalia and Maria Butina, and Guccifer 2.0. But they were emissaries for the government, and they were known by Don Jr (at minimum) and R. Stone (almost surely) to be acting on Russia's behalf.

Trump Campaigns letters to the media outlets today literally conceded that they were 'approached' by 'Russians' numerous times, but nobody 'colluded' with them. Uh-huh.

So all along Trump KNEW who was helping him through the campaign, but LIED ABOUT IT over and over, publicly, with his talk of 400-lb basement dwellers.

I guess Presidents and Candidates can now lie to the public with impunity.

Grasswire2

(13,571 posts)

14. yes, the word "government" there is a weasel word

Reply to mr_lebowski (Reply #12)

Mon Mar 25, 2019, 08:45 PM

Mar 2019

Even Chuck Todd is pointing this out. Mueller said he did not find that Trump et al coordinated with the Russian government.

Government: not Deripaska. Not Kilimnick. Many other Russians involved who are not government.

This is a dodge. A con by Barr.

Reply to this discussion