Mueller did not exonerate trump on obstruction

Ask your Master to publish the Report if it is so good. At the moment he's coming over as a second Stalin.
No, Snowflake, you are coming over as a second Stalin. Our laws will be respected.

Post the names of the 20 million Americans who were murdered...Stalin style. I’ll wait.
 
If that's the case then trump should have no problem showing the report to the public with minimal redactions. But that's not going to happen because I suspect there's plenty in it that's highly unflattering to trump and his associates.
What you suspect does not Trump the Mueller Report.

No collusion, no proof of obstruction.
 
It has nothing to do with the merit of the accusations. There was not enough evidence.

Also... Comey changed the wording before interviewing Clinton. So, no, it wasn't due to what he found. It was due to what could be charged based on the wording.

You're the one who brought up "merit", not me. And Comey went through tons of paperwork about Hillary's emails before he interviewed her. Read the report again. https://www.fbi.gov/news/pressrel/p...-clinton2019s-use-of-a-personal-e-mail-system

Apparently you accept the Mueller report and trump was never interviewed either. So I guess this means you're a hypocrite.
 
The relevant regulations contemplate that the Special Counsel's report will be a "confidential report" to the Attorney General. See Office of Special Counsel, 64 Fed. Reg. 37,038, 37,040-41 (July 9, 1999). As I have previously stated, however, I am mindful of the public interest in this matter. For that reason, my goal and intent is to release as much of the Special Counsel's report as I can consistent with applicable law, regulations, and Departmental policies.
Based on my discussions with the Special Counsel (Mueller) and my initial review, it is apparent that the report contains material that is or could be subject to Federal Rule of Criminal Procedure which imposes restrictions on the use and disclosure of information relating to "matter occurring before grand jury." Fed. R. Crim. P. 6(e)(2)(B) Rule 6(e) generally limits disclosure of certain grand jury information in a criminal investigation and prosecution. Id. Disclosure of 6(e) material beyond the strict limits set forth in the rule is a crime in certain circumstances. See, e.g. 18 U.S.C. 401(3). This restriction protects the integrity of grand jury proceedings and ensures that the unique and invaluable investigative powers of a grand jury are used strictly for their intended criminal justice function.
Given these restrictions, the schedule for processing the report depends in part on how quickly the Department can identify the 6(e) material that by law cannot be made public. I have requested the assistance of the Special Counsel in identifying all 6(e) information contained in the report as quickly as possible. Separately, I also must identify any information that could impact other ongoing matters, including those that the Special Counsel has referred to other offices. As soon as that process is complete, I will be in a position to move forward expeditiously in determining what can be released in light of applicable law, regulations, and Departmental policies.
* * *
As I observed in my initial notification, the Special Counsel regulations provide that "the Attorney General may determine that public release of" notifications to your respective Committees "would be in the public interest." 28 C.F.R. § 600.9(c). I have so determined, and I will disclose this letter to the public after delivering it to you.
Sincerely,

William P. Barr
Attorney General
Document
Pages
Zoom
«
Page 1 of 4
»
This story has been updated to include the footnotes from Barr's summary.
 
If that's the case then trump should have no problem showing the report to the public with minimal redactions. But that's not going to happen because I suspect there's plenty in it that's highly unflattering to trump and his associates.

Funny how he has been changing his "mind" a lot about everything lately, eh? No destruction of the ACA. No wall, still. Now we shouldn't see the Mueller report.
 
The relevant regulations contemplate that the Special Counsel's report will be a "confidential report" to the Attorney General. See Office of Special Counsel, 64 Fed. Reg. 37,038, 37,040-41 (July 9, 1999). As I have previously stated, however, I am mindful of the public interest in this matter. For that reason, my goal and intent is to release as much of the Special Counsel's report as I can consistent with applicable law, regulations, and Departmental policies.
Based on my discussions with the Special Counsel (Mueller) and my initial review, it is apparent that the report contains material that is or could be subject to Federal Rule of Criminal Procedure which imposes restrictions on the use and disclosure of information relating to "matter occurring before grand jury." Fed. R. Crim. P. 6(e)(2)(B) Rule 6(e) generally limits disclosure of certain grand jury information in a criminal investigation and prosecution. Id. Disclosure of 6(e) material beyond the strict limits set forth in the rule is a crime in certain circumstances. See, e.g. 18 U.S.C. 401(3). This restriction protects the integrity of grand jury proceedings and ensures that the unique and invaluable investigative powers of a grand jury are used strictly for their intended criminal justice function.
Given these restrictions, the schedule for processing the report depends in part on how quickly the Department can identify the 6(e) material that by law cannot be made public. I have requested the assistance of the Special Counsel in identifying all 6(e) information contained in the report as quickly as possible. Separately, I also must identify any information that could impact other ongoing matters, including those that the Special Counsel has referred to other offices. As soon as that process is complete, I will be in a position to move forward expeditiously in determining what can be released in light of applicable law, regulations, and Departmental policies.
* * *
As I observed in my initial notification, the Special Counsel regulations provide that "the Attorney General may determine that public release of" notifications to your respective Committees "would be in the public interest." 28 C.F.R. § 600.9(c). I have so determined, and I will disclose this letter to the public after delivering it to you.
Sincerely,

William P. Barr
Attorney General
Document
Pages
Zoom
«
Page 1 of 4
»
This story has been updated to include the footnotes from Barr's summary.


I don't get it. trump and his followers claim he's been "completely exonerated." Don't you guys want to see the report, so you can rub the noses of lefties in the "non-collusion and non-obstruction"?
 
I don't get it. trump and his followers claim he's been "completely exonerated." Don't you guys want to see the report, so you can rub the noses of lefties in the "non-collusion and non-obstruction"?

We're going around in circles.
We all want to see the report which will be released lawfully according to DOJ guidelines.
Nadler is grandstanding. He's an idiot. He actually wants to subpoena for something which would cause the DOJ to break the law...think about that.
The lawfully redacted report is coming out...probably within 1 or 2 weeks.
Hang in there. :cool:
 

Why? According to Barr, Rosenstein agreed with him not to prosecute your beloved Toadstool. Shouldn't you be throwing him a parade or something?

Why are you guys so afraid of the Mueller report being released in its entirety (minus of course the sensitive info)??
 
This is never ending circle jive going on.
Are any of you leftys reading what I've been writing all this time?

ONE MORE TIME.....................

We're going around in circles.
We all want to see the report which will be released lawfully according to DOJ guidelines.
Nadler is grandstanding. He's an idiot. He actually wants to subpoena for something which would cause the DOJ to break the law...think about that.
The lawfully redacted report is coming out...probably within 1 or 2 weeks.
 
You're the one who brought up "merit", not me. And Comey went through tons of paperwork about Hillary's emails before he interviewed her. Read the report again. https://www.fbi.gov/news/pressrel/p...-clinton2019s-use-of-a-personal-e-mail-system

Apparently you accept the Mueller report and trump was never interviewed either. So I guess this means you're a hypocrite.

LMAO... 'tons of paperwork'.

Do you even pay attention to the stories before you babble on and on? Trump was given the questions and responded.

I am not a hypocrite... you are simply a moron.

1) AGAIN... Comey was head of the FBI... IT WAS NOT HIS PLACE TO MAKE THE CALL. That is up to the AG.
2) Comey didn't conclude the investigation before making his determination and alteration. Mueller concluded his investigation. Then turned it over to the AG, as he is supposed to do. The AG then, by LAW, is supposed to make sure no grand jury info, no national security info and no info about those who were not charged is released. That is the LAW. The LAW that the AG is sworn to uphold.

3) I have not seen the Mueller report. But the finding that there was no collusion/coordination with Russia should be the end of this fiasco. But you idiots are going to keep pretending that someone somewhere is hiding something no matter how much info you get.
 
Why? According to Barr, Rosenstein agreed with him not to prosecute your beloved Toadstool. Shouldn't you be throwing him a parade or something?

Why are you guys so afraid of the Mueller report being released in its entirety (minus of course the sensitive info)??

We are not afraid of that. Barr has stated that is indeed what will be released. He stated clearly he intends to get it done by the 15th. Democrats then promptly demanded it by the 2nd. No matter what happens, the idiots on the left are going to continue pretending something redacted is 'the smoking gun' and that we need to see 'everything' before we can 'know for sure'!!!
 
The Clinton FBI interview was a joke. her lawyer/witness Cheryl Mill was there with immunity.
Clinton said like 40x"I can't remember" -and the "gross negligence finding" was rewritten to avoid the direct language of the statute to "extreme carelessness" giving Comey the wiggle room not to indict
 
Back
Top