ALL HAIL PRESIDENT TRUMP

"

coatofarms wrote:

"

Boem wrote:

@coat, i get it.

Am i just wrong to assume that the FBI would act if the president was corrupt and in collusion with russia?(or showed signs of that)

I sort of imagine if they found anything in that direction it would be turned upside down and sideways.
I sort of imagine the FBI going "eh maybe" on domestic issue's or slander charges and that sort, but not on a state-safety consideration.

Peace,

-Boem-

Law enforcement would only act if they had compelling evidence of a crime. For example, if they had a voice-recording, or a paper document. Circumstantial (weak) evidence is no good. Law enforcement apparently could not find compelling evidence. So Mueller determined he could neither rule for nor against that the President colluded with Russia. Results are inconclusive.

So the text dalai posted is false?

Peace,

-Boem-

"

Boem wrote:

"

coatofarms wrote:

"

Boem wrote:

@coat, i get it.

Am i just wrong to assume that the FBI would act if the president was corrupt and in collusion with russia?(or showed signs of that)

I sort of imagine if they found anything in that direction it would be turned upside down and sideways.
I sort of imagine the FBI going "eh maybe" on domestic issue's or slander charges and that sort, but not on a state-safety consideration.

Peace,

-Boem-

Law enforcement would only act if they had compelling evidence of a crime. For example, if they had a voice-recording, or a paper document. Circumstantial (weak) evidence is no good. Law enforcement apparently could not find compelling evidence. So Mueller determined he could neither rule for nor against that the President colluded with Russia. Results are inconclusive.

So the text dalai posted is false?

Peace,

-Boem-

There's so much wrong with the summary from Barr, it's difficult to know where to begin. One thing to remember, before Barr was confirmed, he wrote a very problematic memo concerning the Mueller enquiry and obstruction of justice. It was so problematic that he was asked to recuse himself from the Mueller probe if he beceame AG. Now, within a few short hours after the report is allegedly completed, he's making decisions about the obstruction charges.


It's also worth pointing out that the section on collusion/conspiracy only accounts for two areas that include IRA and DNC hacks, it says nothing about a potential quid pro quo, for which evidence exists.

To use the words of emptywheel

"

They didn’t consider whether Trump obstructed the crime that he appears to have obstructed. They considered whether he obstructed a different crime. And having considered whether Trump obstructed the crime he didn’t commit, rather than considering whether he obstructed the crime he did commit, they decided not to charge him with a crime.

Basically, Barr has just done what he was paid to to by Trump. This now needs a full congressional investigation with the release of the FULL report/evidence, not just the parts Barr decides.

I just read what Dalai Lama posted. I stand by what I wrote earlier.

'MUELLER FINDS NO TRUMP-RUSSIAN CONSPIRACY, BARR SAYS' is an inaccurate head-line.

=^[.]^=

"

DalaiLama wrote:

"

Boem wrote:

So they have no evidence to convict. What am i not understanding?

They don't have enough evidence to even bring charges, which means they believe if it went to a trial, the prosecutors would likely lose.

Lol. Wrong. They won't go to court unless they can undeniably prove that Trump-Russia connection exists, AND that it was not just a rogue lawyer or businessman taking too many freedoms but a direct link to Kremlin. Without providing undeniable proof of the second point, Trump's lawyers can just game the system to make him look like the victim all too easy. All it really requires is for Russia to provide undeniable proof of their own that some of their... disposable assets... were working independently and indict them for their actions.

"

Anonymous1749704 wrote:

"

DalaiLama wrote:

"

Boem wrote:

So they have no evidence to convict. What am i not understanding?

They don't have enough evidence to even bring charges, which means they believe if it went to a trial, the prosecutors would likely lose.

Lol. Wrong. They won't go to court unless they can undeniably prove that Trump-Russia connection exists, AND that it was not just a rogue lawyer or businessman taking too many freedoms but a direct link to Kremlin. Without providing undeniable proof of the second point, Trump's lawyers can just game the system to make him look like the victim all too easy. All it really requires is for Russia to provide undeniable proof of their own that some of their... disposable assets... were working independently and indict them for their actions.

Shouldn't everybody be happy? Mueller get to claim some of Trump's 'useless' pawns and Trump get to claim no collusion. This does not in any way stop Democrats from going for Round 2. But seriously 2020 election is more important. They need to move on. The overcrowded Democrat field spell disaster in 2020.

"

deathflower wrote:

Shouldn't everybody be happy? Mueller get to claim some of Trump's 'useless' pawns and Trump get to claim no collusion. This does not in any way stop Democrats from going for Round 2. But seriously 2020 election is more important. They need to move on. The overcrowded Democrat field spell disaster in 2020.

This is spot on, nothing is more important than returning the US from the Twilight Zone. However, that doesn't mean that Congress give Barr a pass either. If his memo goes without investigation, it sets a precedent for white collar crimes going forward.

"

Kellog wrote:

"

deathflower wrote:

Shouldn't everybody be happy? Mueller get to claim some of Trump's 'useless' pawns and Trump get to claim no collusion. This does not in any way stop Democrats from going for Round 2. But seriously 2020 election is more important. They need to move on. The overcrowded Democrat field spell disaster in 2020.

This is spot on, nothing is more important than returning the US from the Twilight Zone. However, that doesn't mean that Congress give Barr a pass either. If his memo goes without investigation, it sets a precedent for white collar crimes going forward.

It is wonderful that there is insufficient evidence to prove our President is guilty of conspiracy with Russia. I hope he is also proven to not be a criminal guilty of financial crimes and not guilty of hanky panky regarding his inaugural committee and whatever else he is being investigated for. This things need to be investigated. Barr, Rosenstein and Mueller need to testify to congress. Most importantly Trump needs to be soundly defeated and his party needs to be soundly defeated in the 2020 election.

If the House democrats continue with the circus, it's absolutely going to hurt them in 2020. Nothing is stopping them from bringing in Barr, Rosenstein, and Mueller, but just like with Cohen, it'll be a bunch of evidence-free, fact-free feels stories and softball questions.

They've already gotten as many gullible fools as they can into the party by playing up this hoax for the last two years. Every democrat that ran on the "Impeach Trump" mandate and won in 2018 should be trying to pivot away as fast as possible, not double down.

Democrats need independents to win in 2020, and independents are very quickly seeing this as "the democrat's Benghazi".

---

"

Kelogg wrote:

returning the US from the Twilight Zone

The Twilight Zone has been the media lying to people's faces for over two years. I'm not super hopeful that they'll eat crow and return to sanity, especially watching their coverage of Barr's summary.

The US is doing very well right now, and Trump's been a way better president than anyone predicted. I definitely didn't want him in 2016 and didn't vote for him then, but unless something drastically changes, he seems like a great 2020 candidate.

On the topic of democrats, assuming they don't obliterate each other during the primaries, which is pushing forward good policy? Which is a candidate that enthuses people and makes them want to come to the polls?