Donald Trump Presidency discussion Thread VI

Itssoeasy

Didn't watch any of the testimony and I've just caught some of the half time analysis from NBC and it seems that mueller didn't help the democrats(not that there was any belief he would) and it's at best a tied game. Chuck Todd and Andrea Mitchell was saying the democrats didn't get what they had hoped for.

Cheerful Spring2

duploelabs wrote: »

Oh you're back, the origins of the steele dossier was outside the remit of the inquiry and therefore wouldn't be answered by Mueller

Steele unverified allegations are mentioned multiple times in the report. You can not say i will to speak about it when those allegations are spoken about.

Cheerful Spring2

Quin_Dub wrote: »

The specific reason that he could not answer anything related to the Stelle Dossier or the FISA warrants is that they are subject to another investigation and he was explicity told that he couldn't answer , which the GOP knew ,but by asking the questions they get to play to the crowd about the "origins" of the investigation.

And ironically , if he did give information or opinion on those issues he himself might be guilty of obstruction or attempting to pervert to course of justice!!

Another investigation, can you explain where exactly this is happening?

everlast75

Outlaw Pete wrote: »

Amazing the attitude on here to one of the only members of congress that is speaking about what is at the heart of the Russian Collusion hoax. If you are all so interested in justice, then why aren't you interested in the corrupt origins of the investigation?

Mueller effectively plead the 5th today with his dozens of refusals to answer questions as he knows that his investigation was partisan in nature... at the very least. We're gonna be hearing a lot more about Joseph Mifsud that's for damn sure.


https://twitter.com/Jim_Jordan/status/1154033949867413504

If Jim Jordan is someone you look up to, a man whose outrage is such that he can't bring himself to wear a jacket, you need to recalibrate your expectations.

Jim landed nothing today. He asked questions about something Mueller specifically told all members he could not discuss, thanks to Barr opening an investigation (at Trump's insistence I might add), ie the "oranges" of the investigation.

Itssoeasy

Devin Nunes is carrying the baton for trump big style.

Itssoeasy

Devin Nunes is carrying the baton for trump big style.

Outlaw Pete

Penn wrote: »

...can't answer questions on Fusion GPS because it's subject to an ongoing investigation?

He didn't just not answer questions on Fusion GPS...... he acted as if he had never even heard of them :P


https://twitter.com/RealSaavedra/status/1154024015075299331

Look, I'm out until we hear from Barr (maybe even Durham) as almost none of you on here are interested in the truth, you all just want to see Trump taken down, anyway, anyhow.

As Mueller said, his investigation was not hindered in anyway and his findings were that there was NO collusion...... so dems and liberals turn to obstruction of the investigation.... and investigation which found Trump not guilty of the allegations..... it's laughable.

Durham's report can't come quick enough.

Igotadose

Devin Nunes has now mentioned the Loch Ness monster. Fail.

Cheerful Spring2

Penn wrote: »

Again, because Barr and the DOJ have started an investigation into that, Mueller can't speak on those issues because it could affect or make public info about that which could affect that investigation. The DOJ reiterated exactly that in a letter to Mueller a few days ago. What's ridiculous is the GOP constantly asking questions about it and giving out that Mueller couldn't answer questions on it when they knew the exact reason why.

Far as i know Barr is just reviewing the origins of russiagate , may be wrong about this? Mueller was asked did you interview Christoper Steele and he refused to answer. It simple yes or no answer this and it would in no way affect another investigation. Steele dossier was discussed in the Mueller report and the only complication would be if Muller was discussing new findings at the hearing.

everlast75

Can pro Trump people here clarify?

I get you have a problem with the origins of the investigation.

Do you
A) Dispute Trump obstructed justice?
Have no problem that he did based on the assertion that the investigation was ill founded?
C) Believe Trump was ensnared by the russians into accepting the offer of help?

mcmoustache

Outlaw Pete wrote: »

As Mueller said, his investigation was not hindered in anyway and his findings were that there was NO collusion...... so dems and liberals turn to obstruction of the investigation.... and investigation which found Trump not guilty of the allegations..... it's laughable.

Durham's report can't come quick enough.

Why are you saying untrue things like that bit in bold?

I don't know who you're trying to fool here but it won't fool anyone who has been watching this.

Itssoeasy

It appears that the deputy special counsel won’t be asked any questions by the republicans.

batgoat

Outlaw Pete wrote: »

He didn't just not answer questions on Fusion GPS...... he acted as if he had never even heard of them :P


https://twitter.com/RealSaavedra/status/1154024015075299331

Look, I'm out until we hear from Barr (maybe even Durham) as almost none of you on here are interested in the truth, you all just want to see Trump taken down, anyway, anyhow.

As Mueller said, his investigation was not hindered in anyway and his findings were that there was NO collusion...... so dems and liberals turn to obstruction of the investigation.... and investigation which found Trump not guilty of the allegations..... it's laughable.

Durham's report can't come quick enough.

Can you point to where Mueller said there was no collusion? He explicitly said multiple times that it is not for him to determine.

Cody montana

Very impressed with Schiff.

Igotadose

Schiff's line of questions should be emblazoned somewhere.
Paraphrasing: "Was this person convicting of lying?" "Yes." Lots and lots of names
Convicting. Of Lying. Encouraging others to lie.
"Did the Trump campaign build their messaging strategy around those stolen documents?" "Yes." "Did they lie to cover it up." "Yes."

Cheerful Spring2

batgoat wrote: »

Can you point to where Mueller said there was no collusion? He explicitly said multiple times that it is not for him to determine.

He said multiple times during the hearing he found no evidence Trump directed anyone in his campaign to talk to Russia. Mueller himself said there was no collusion. The report leaves ther door open for obstruction of justice.

The problem for democrats is Mueller found no guiilty evidence, there lot of hearsay and speculation. There no way you can get Trump on obstruction of justice now when Mueller found no evidence he conspired in the first place. Trump saying it was witch hunt is confirmed by Mueller.

It like convicting someone for a robbery and then finding out there no evidence he did it, but still convinced he did anyway and just ignore the rule of law you innocent till proven guilty.

everlast75

Schiff absolutely nailing it.

Concise and devastating questions and answers.

That's the pro-Dem campaign advert right there.

duploelabs

Cheerful Spring2 wrote: »

He said multiple times during the hearing he found no evidence Trump directed anyone in his campaign to talk to Russia. Mueller himself said there was no collusion. The report leaves ther door open for obstruction of justice.

The problem for democrats is Mueller found no guiilty evidence, there lot of hearsay and speculation. There no way you can get Trump on obstruction of justice now when Mueller found no evidence he conspired in the first place. Trump saying it was witch hunt is confirmed by Mueller.

It like convicting someone for a robbery and then finding out there no evidence he did it, but still convinced he did anyway and just ignore the rule of law you innocent till proven guilty.

Absolutely categorically wrong.

Impeeding an investigation is obstruction of justice, irregardless if any crime was commited in the first place.

Buck: "Could charge the president with a crime after he left office?"

Mueller: "Yes."

Buck: "You believe that you could charge the president of the United States with obstruction of justice after he left office?"

Mueller: "Yes."

https://twitter.com/kylegriffin1/status/1154040136109215744

Igotadose

Mueller sure does not sound vigorous. Not terribly impressive, sounds, well, kind of out of it.

hill16bhoy

All this is pretty simple to understand at its core.

Trump has blatantly obstructed justice.

If the US was a functioning democracy, Democrats would launch impeachment proceedings, which would be passed by both the House and Senate, and Trump would be removed from office, followed by a criminal prosecution resulting in his imprisonment.

And the obstruction of justice is just the obvious corruption and criminality, it's just the tip of a massive iceberg.

Cheerful Spring2

duploelabs wrote: »

Absolutely categorically wrong.

Impeeding an investigation is obstruction of justice, irregardless if any crime was commited in the first place.

Buck: "Could charge the president with a crime after he left office?"

Mueller: "Yes."

Buck: "You believe that you could charge the president of the United States with obstruction of justice after he left office?"

Mueller: "Yes."

https://twitter.com/kylegriffin1/status/1154040136109215744

Sorry, but Trump is never going to face charges for this its over move on. Mueller has vindicated the main charge against him and the republicans and large part of the population in America will just ignore what the law says. Democrats are wasting their time on this and they should be spend more time on beating Trump in 2020.

MrFresh

Outlaw Pete wrote: »

Amazing the attitude on here to one of the only members of congress that is speaking about what is at the heart of the Russian Collusion hoax. If you are all so interested in justice, then why aren't you interested in the corrupt origins of the investigation?

Mueller effectively plead the 5th today with his dozens of refusals to answer questions as he knows that his investigation was partisan in nature... at the very least. We're gonna be hearing a lot more about Joseph Mifsud that's for damn sure.


https://twitter.com/Jim_Jordan/status/1154033949867413504

Can you explain what you mean by the Russian Collusion hoax? Trump's own son admitted he met with the Russians to arrange for them to receive dirt on Clinton and tried to conceal it by saying it was in relation to adoptions. So Russian Collusion is not really in question is it?

TomOnBoard

Turner (R) did a good job of challenging Mueller''s use of the statement that he could not exonerate Trump of Obstruction. That's an issue that will be weaponised by those trying to undermine the report going forward.

everlast75

R Turner just went off on Mueller saying that he didn't have the power to exonerate Trump, the insinuation being that his statement about not being able to exonerate was political.

Doesn't that mean that Trump's statement that the report exonerates him is nonsense?

everlast75

TomOnBoard wrote: »

Turner (R) did a good job of challenging Mueller''s use of the statement that he could not exonerate Trump of Obstruction. That's an issue that will be weaponised by those trying to undermine the report going forward.

He said Barr didn't have the power to, so how could Mueller.

Barr wrote a 4 page memo exonerating Trump!?

BonnieSituation

The state of Turner's line of questioning.

"Exoneration is a meaningless term"

Jesus.

All the GOPers are just dancing on the head of a pin!

peddlelies

MrFresh wrote: »

Can you explain what you mean by the Russian Collusion hoax? Trump's own son admitted he met with the Russians to arrange for them to receive dirt on Clinton and tried to conceal it by saying it was in relation to adoptions. So Russian Collusion is not really in question is it?

You can be pedantic over it all you like. Not a single American was charged with colluding or conspiring ( whatever you want to call it ) with the Russians in the 2016 election. Nobody. Not one. Nada. In fact, if anything, there was more foreign collusion on the Dem side since they exchanged information and conspired with the Ukrainians to damage Trump's campaign and they hired a foreign agent to dig up dirt on Trump using what seems for the most part, Russian sources and disinformation. Trump will never be charged with obstruction because a) Mueller completed his investigation unhindered and b) there was no underlying crime and c) The origins of the investigation will bear fruit of the poisonous tree

It's good that the hardcore anti Trumper's cling to this nonsense going into 2020 because it's going to help the Republicans. The boat has sailed so far into the distance you can't even see it anymore.

https://thehill.com/homenews/administration/436355-poll-majority-of-voters-accept-muellers-conclusion-on-russia

"The majority of U.S. voters accept special counsel Robert Mueller’s conclusion that President Trump did not conspire with Russia, and believe that congressional Democrats should do the same, according to a Harvard CAPS/Harris poll released exclusively to The Hill.

Sixty-four percent said that they accept Mueller's conclusion, the survey found, while 61 percent said they agree with the finding."

duploelabs

Cheerful Spring2 wrote: »

Sorry, but Trump is never going to face charges for this its over move on. Mueller has vindicated the main charge against him and the republicans and large part of the population in America will just ignore what the law says. Democrats are wasting their time on this and they should be spend more time on beating Trump in 2020.

There's no statute of limitations on this so if Trump gets voted out in 2020, or leaves in 2024, do you agree that he'll be charged then?

Quin_Dub

Cheerful Spring2 wrote: »

Another investigation, can you explain where exactly this is happening?

There's another DOJ investigation into the Origins of the Steele Dossier and the FISA warrants - Requested by Barr.

peddlelies

Quin_Dub wrote: »

There's another DOJ investigation into the Origins of the Steele Dossier and the FISA warrants - Requested by Barr.

IG Horrowitz is also doing an investigation separate from any request from Barr. It focuses on the origins of the Trump / Russia investigation.