Mueller did not exonerate trump on obstruction

Evmetro said:
Trump exoneration:

"did not find that the Trump campaign or anyone associated with it conspired or coordinated with Russia in its efforts to influence the 2016 U.S. presidential election."

Definition of exoneration:

1 : to relieve of a responsibility, obligation, or hardship
2 : to clear from accusation or blame
Click to expand...

You just moved the goal posts. Barr's comment refers to the obstruction allegations, not the Russia allegations.
 
Heff said:
That's not true. Though the Washington Free Beacon employed FusionGPS for opposition research, FusionGPS hired Steel to compile the dossier after The Washington Free beacon ended their contract.
Click to expand...

That doesn't change the fact that the dossier came into existence because of repubs, not Dems. Dems picked it up seven months after the Free Beacon dropped it.
 
christiefan915 said:
That doesn't change the fact that the dossier came into existence because of repubs, not Dems. Dems picked it up seven months after the Free Beacon dropped it.
Click to expand...

That's not true. The dossier was payed for by the Clinton campaign and compiled by Steele, who was hired after the Free Beacon ended their contract.
 
Heff said:
That's not true. The dossier was payed for by the Clinton campaign and compiled by Steele, who was hired after the Free Beacon ended their contract.
Click to expand...

I'm going by this. Both parties were doing oppo on trump, until he became the presumptive nominee, then the Free Beacon stopped their research.

"The opposition research conducted by Fusion GPS on Donald Trump was in two distinct operations, each with a different client. The first research operation, from October 2015 to May 2016, was domestic research funded by The Washington Free Beacon. The second operation, from April 2016 to December 2016, was funded by the DNC and the Clinton campaign. Only the second operation involved the foreign research that produced the dossier.[SUP][30][/SUP][SUP][31][/SUP] At least for portions of the months of April and May 2016, the Washington Free Beacon and the Hillary Clinton Campaign/DNC were independently both clients of Fusion GPS. "
 
christiefan915 said:
I'm going by this. Both parties were doing oppo on trump, until he became the presumptive nominee, then the Free Beacon stopped their research.

"The opposition research conducted by Fusion GPS on Donald Trump was in two distinct operations, each with a different client. The first research operation, from October 2015 to May 2016, was domestic research funded by The Washington Free Beacon. The second operation, from April 2016 to December 2016, was funded by the DNC and the Clinton campaign. Only the second operation involved the foreign research that produced the dossier.[SUP][30][/SUP][SUP][31][/SUP] At least for portions of the months of April and May 2016, the Washington Free Beacon and the Hillary Clinton Campaign/DNC were independently both clients of Fusion GPS. "
Click to expand...

Yes, The Free Beacon hired FusionGPS for opposition research on Trump. I'm not disputing that. What I'm disputing is that the opposition research had anything to do with Steele or his dodgy dossier.

The free beacon themselves wrote:

"All of the work that Fusion GPS provided to the Free Beacon was based on public sources, and none of the work product that the Free Beacon received appears in the Steele dossier. The Free Beacon had no knowledge of or connection to the Steele dossier, did not pay for the dossier, and never had contact with, knowledge of, or provided payment for any work performed by Christopher Steele. Nor did we have any knowledge of the relationship between Fusion GPS and the Democratic National Committee, Perkins Coie, and the Clinton campaign."

https://freebeacon.com/uncategorized/fusion-gps-washington-free-beacon/
 
Adolf_Twitler said:
OK! Thanks for the public service announcement USFREEDO!

And yes, you have a bitch that seems legit, and yes you are the king of whataboutisms! LOL!

But, I know you have heard of copycat crimes! It's as easy as Monkey-See/Monkey-Do!

And you know damn well the author of this thread is only banning certain members, as an effort to give you original banners of threads, a taste-of-their-own-medicine!

It's only human nature to want to toss a cow-chip right back in the face of the ones that have lobbed them towards you!

It's also human nature to say, "Two can play that game"! What's good for the goose, is good for the gander, sort of thing.

Here is my philosophy on the subject of banning members for political revenge- DON'T DO IT!

First of all, "When they go low, we get high!!.......Right?............. LOL!........................ Hey thanks Michelle! I'm stealing that one! OK?

Look we are all friends here right? (Coughing Out Loud)! And we should never ban the opposition! I mean, you'll always want to know what your adversaries are thinking!

Now everybody kiss and makeup- and don't be caught being hypocritical again!!





LOL!



.
Click to expand...

[translation]

MUST...PROTECT...CHRISTIE..NO...MATTER...WHAT.
EVEN...IF...IT'S...APPARENT...THAT...I'M...AN...IDIOT.

[/translation]
 
domer76 said:
No spin, idiot. The words are clear.

The report offered a mixed assessment on the question of obstruction of justice. “The Special Counsel states that ‘while this report does not conclude that the President committed a crime, it also does not exonerate him,’” Attorney General William P. Barr wrote. Mr. Barr said that he had concluded that there was not sufficient evidence to establish that the president committed obstruction of justice.
Click to expand...

INNOCENT UNTIL PROVEN GUILTY. :good4u:
 
christiefan915 said:
Do I have to type these words in another language? The Special Counsel states that "while this report does not conclude that the President committed a crime, it also does not exonerate him."

You seem to be having a real hard time understanding Barr's words.
Click to expand...

INNOCENT UNTIL PROVEN GUILTY. :good4u:
 
55813620_2364867006880712_3660504264494546944_n.jpg
 
christiefan915 said:
That doesn't change the fact that the dossier came into existence because of repubs, not Dems. Dems picked it up seven months after the Free Beacon dropped it.
Click to expand...

That is a complete lie. Two different groups hired the same company. Steele didn't come into play until the DEMS were involved. Stop parroting your masters lies
 
Superfreak said:
So you agree with Barr that there was not evidence of obstruction? Good. I thought you were pretending that obstruction had occurred.
Click to expand...

<sigh> Guess you didn't read the report. Barr didn't say there was no evidence. He said the evidence developed was not sufficient to charge trump with obstruction. Do you understand that "none" isn't the same as "not enough"?

Btw SF that decision was essentially the same one Comey made in deciding not to prosecute Hillary over the emails.
 
Obstruction is almost impossible to prove without an underlying crime ( collusion) -it would have to show
gross corruption (quid pro quo) by Trump , not an incidental "can you see your way to clear Flynn"

It's over. Mueller couldn't charge Trump and you know Mueller charges anyone he can
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top