ALL HAIL PRESIDENT TRUMP

"

diablofdb wrote:

I think you don't understand man....

There is a difference between saying: the Muellers reports has facts... and showing the actual Facts that advance your opinion.


I want you to show me the actual facts.


edit: Btw even Mueller himself said there was no proof of collusion or anything criminal from Trump in his entire report. And that is fact.

You can lead a horse to water but you can't make him drink.

"

Turtledove wrote:

"

diablofdb wrote:

I think you don't understand man....

There is a difference between saying: the Muellers reports has facts... and showing the actual Facts that advance your opinion.


I want you to show me the actual facts.


edit: Btw even Mueller himself said there was no proof of collusion or anything criminal from Trump in his entire report. And that is fact.

You can lead a horse to water but you can't make him drink.

I've asked a simple thing man... there's a whole report that is public to read. Point me the proof you have... you've been claiming it for years.

I'm only asking the believe you, just prove it. If you can't you've been lying for years.

"

diablofdb wrote:

I've asked a simple thing man... there's a whole report that is public to read. Point me the proof you have... you've been claiming it for years.

I'm only asking the believe you, just prove it. If you can't you've been lying for years.

You're objecting to him quoting a summary of the relevant facts rather than quoting the report directly? Really?

"

MrCoo1 wrote:

"

diablofdb wrote:

I've asked a simple thing man... there's a whole report that is public to read. Point me the proof you have... you've been claiming it for years.

I'm only asking the believe you, just prove it. If you can't you've been lying for years.

You're objecting to him quoting a summary of the relevant facts rather than quoting the report directly? Really?

I'm asking him to show a proof of his saying.

"

diablofdb wrote:

"

Turtledove wrote:

"

diablofdb wrote:

I think you don't understand man....

There is a difference between saying: the Muellers reports has facts... and showing the actual Facts that advance your opinion.


I want you to show me the actual facts.


edit: Btw even Mueller himself said there was no proof of collusion or anything criminal from Trump in his entire report. And that is fact.

You can lead a horse to water but you can't make him drink.

I've asked a simple thing man... there's a whole report that is public to read. Point me the proof you have... you've been claiming it for years.

I'm only asking the believe you, just prove it. If you can't you've been lying for years.

Okay,

First, the Mueller report said that there was no collusion. The Mueller Report did not say there was no obstruction of justice. Mueller left obstruction of justice open in the report. I know this is contrary to the lies being spread by Trump but that is just the way it is.

There are three potential obstruction of justice charges explicitly referenced and summarized in the "STATEMENT BY FORMER FEDERAL PROSECUTORS".

· The President’s efforts to fire Mueller and to falsify evidence about that effort;

· The President’s efforts to limit the scope of Mueller’s investigation to exclude his conduct; and

· The President’s efforts to prevent witnesses from cooperating with investigators probing him and his campaign.

I copied in the summary detail for those three potential charges in an above post.

More detail than that is available in the Mueller report.

You ask for proof as if we were in seventh grade math class. The law doesn't work that way.

There is plenty of strong evidence that would lead to an indictment and multiple charges, for at least those three charges. Regarding any others, "It would be well within the purview of normal prosecutorial judgment also to charge other acts detailed in the report."

Once charges are brought then normally there would be a trial. "Every accused person is presumed innocent and it is always the government’s burden to prove its case beyond a reasonable doubt. But, to look at these facts and say that a prosecutor could not probably sustain a conviction for obstruction of justice — the standard set out in Principles of Federal Prosecution — runs counter to logic and our experience."

So you say that the report says: Trump tried to falsify evidence... show me. Show me where? That's what I'm asking man. I'm a man of thruth.

Show me where does it says that. It's a very simple task.

1. you made a claim.
2. I'm asking you to back that claim.
3. You back that claim.
4. I believe you.


Now show me.

edit: oh I'm going to make it easier for you, I'll tell you exactly what you need to do so it's going to be suuuuuper easy.

Just link me, to something that is DIRECTLY taken from the report and is a proof of what you're saying. No editing, no opinion, no false flag, no biased journalism, no that's what he she said. Just a simple link... A sentence would be enough.

"

diablofdb wrote:

So you say that the report says: Trump tried to falsify evidence... show me. Show me where? That's what I'm asking man. I'm a man of thruth.

Show me where does it says that. It's a very simple task.

1. you made a claim.
2. I'm asking you to back that claim.
3. You back that claim.
4. I believe you.


Now show me.

edit: oh I'm going to make it easier for you, I'll tell you exactly what you need to do so it's going to be suuuuuper easy.

Just link me, to something that is DIRECTLY taken from the report and is a proof of what you're saying. No editing, no opinion, no false flag, no biased journalism, no that's what he she said. Just a simple link... A sentence would be enough.

The Mueller report is not online, as far as I know. This has been detailed many times though in many places.

"

Trump told the White House counsel to lie.

https://www.washingtonpost.com/outlook/2019/04/19/muellers-biggest-bombshell-trump-told-white-house-counsel-lie/?utm_term=.da07cc88a4ee

"

Despite being advised by then-White House Counsel Don McGahn that he could face legal jeopardy for doing so, Trump directed McGahn on multiple occasions to fire Mueller or to gin up false conflicts of interest as a pretext for getting rid of the Special Counsel. When these acts began to come into public view, Trump made “repeated efforts to have McGahn deny the story” — going so far as to tell McGahn to write a letter “for our files” falsely denying that Trump had directed Mueller’s termination.

https://medium.com/@dojalumni/statement-by-former-federal-prosecutors-8ab7691c2aa1

"

"This evidence shows that the President was not just seeking an examination of whether conflicts existed but instead was looking to use asserted conflicts as a way to terminate the special counsel," Mueller wrote.

Mueller's report also directly refutes Barr's statement today that Trump may not have believed he was asking White House Counsel Don McGahn to say something false. In his analysis of the episodes with McGahn, the Mueller report says: "There also is evidence that the President knew that he should not have made those calls to McGahn."

https://www.cnn.com/politics/live-news/barr-testimony-mueller-report/h_f631a0eae5eecd9fee3f259f5170538f

"

Special counsel Robert Mueller's report, a redacted version of which was released to the public Thursday morning, revealed President Trump ordered White House counsel Don McGahn to fire Mueller in 2017. McGahn refused to do so and threatened to resign instead, telling an associate the president had asked him to do "crazy shit."
...
Mr. Trump attempted to convince McGahn to write a letter saying he had never told him to fire Mueller. McGahn refused to do so, according to the special counsel report. He also "shrugged off" the potential threat that Mr. Trump might fire him, saying "the optics would be terrible if the President followed through with firing him on that basis."

https://www.cbsnews.com/news/mueller-report-white-house-counsel-don-mcgahn-refused-trump-order-to-fire-mueller-wary-of-saturday-night-massacre/

Trump is terrified that his aides might not lie for him

All talk no evidences... where are the proof? I see a lot of she he said and biased journalism but again. Where are the proofs?


I've asked you to point to the Report.... not pseudo journalist who share their opinions.

You're like an anti-vaxxer.

"

Turtledove wrote:

The Mueller report is not online, as far as I know.

Have you tried Googling it?

"

Turtledove wrote:

This has been detailed many times though in many places.

Honk honk.

"

diablofdb wrote:

All talk no evidences... where are the proof? I see a lot of she he said and biased journalism but again. Where are the proofs?


I've asked you to point to the Report.... not pseudo journalist who share their opinions.

You're like an anti-vaxxer.

really lazy effort here to cast doubt on the report...


Here are the 10 instances of potential obstruction Mueller outlines in his report:

Trump asking James Comey to let Michael Flynn go


See if you can find the 9 others yourself.

Note that nobody except Barr and potentially Trump's White house has seen the unredacted full Mueller report, because apparently Barr is going to be held for contempt for not showing it to Congress, for his buddy Donnie.