When you start asking "why?", their defense falls apart

[Ralph]

Conservatives on these boards are using every rhetorical trick they can to avoid answering for what is spelled out in the Mueller report.

They are arguing the validity of the report itself, the credibility of Mueller, everything except the contents of the actual report.

When you start asking the "why" questions...i.e. why did Manafort share polling data with Russian spies? Why did Trump's counsel try to tamper with Flynn? Why did Trump order his son to lie about the June 2016 Trumnp Tower meeting with Russians? Why, why, why...that's when the Conservatives cease defending Trump and start attacking you. Attacking you for asking WHY these people did what they did.

Conservatives have no answer for the "why" because the "why" explains everything.

So that's why none of them want to read the Mueller Report...it answers the "why" and doesn't allow them to falsely equivocate.

Its not what's in the report....its what is missing from the report. Probable Cause and Suspicion Beyond Reasonable Doubt. Mueller Time is over, it was over when the Attorney General of the United States declared there was no Collusion/Obstruction. If congress wishes to investigate all they have to do is do what Mueller could not......provide indictable charges based upon the predicate of PROBABLE CAUSE. There can be no probable cause for some procedural obstruction of a CRIME that never occurred....COLLUSION. Even the POTUS is protected, not only via the Executive Privilege his office holds but also via the 4th Amendment, the 5th Amendment, the 6th, and the 14th Amendment.

Just how is Congress going to accomplish what Mueller could not with 40 federal agents, 20 democrat lawyers, 25 million dollars, over 500 witnesses....yada, yada, yada, considering the fact that CONGRESS has no authority to criminally prosecute anyone? Impeach if you want....but the Executive Office will remain protected via Executive Privilege as there was never an indictable crime proven via Mueller as was with both Clinton and Nixon. Executive Privilege was waved via the court in the United States v. Nixon....because it was proven that Nixon committed a felony. No one has proven that Donald J. Trump has committed any crime, either while in office or as a private citizen. This dog and pony show will never get out the house....its for entertainment purposes only.

 

[LV426]

Let’s do this.

Great!

So you can start by explaining why Paul Manafort shared polling data with Kilimnik?

Then you can explain why Trump ordered his son to lie about the reason for the June 2016 Trump Tower meeting?

Then you can explain why Trump ordered Cohen to lie to Congress about the Moscow Project?

Then you can explain why Trump ordered McGahn to fire Mueller?

Then you can explain why Trump ordered Sessions to end the FBI investigation?

Then you can explain why Dowd tampered with Flynn upon learning of Flynn's cooperation with Mueller?

Then you can explain why Mitch McConnell refuses to pass election security in the Senate?

So yeah...let's do this, motherfucker.

 

[LV426]

Its not what's in the report....its what is missing from the report.

A report you haven't read.

 

[Darth Omar]

Great!

So you can start by explaining why Paul Manafort shared polling data with Kilimnik?

Then you can explain why Trump ordered his son to lie about the reason for the June 2016 Trump Tower meeting?

Then you can explain why Trump ordered Cohen to lie to Congress about the Moscow Project?

Then you can explain why Trump ordered McGahn to fire Mueller?

Then you can explain why Trump ordered Sessions to end the FBI investigation?

Then you can explain why Dowd tampered with Flynn upon learning of Flynn's cooperation with Mueller?

Then you can explain why Mitch McConnell refuses to pass election security in the Senate?

So yeah...let's do this, motherfucker.

What are you, 13 lol?

Let’s do it. What’s the House waiting on? Not enough democrat votes?

 

[LV426]

Probable Cause and Suspicion Beyond Reasonable Doubt.

You haven't read the report, so you don't know what the fuck you're talking about.

34 individuals and businesses were indicted, resulting in over 150 charges and convictions, with over $40M in assets seized, and several members of Trump's inner circle behind bars.

You're just regurgitating random words in the hopes that something inarticulate will magically become articulate.

 

[Ralph]

A report you haven't read.

Read it until you go blind masturbating to Mueller's rhetorical nonsense...….but the Attorney General has ended any chance of criminally prosecuting Donald John Trump based upon anything that is contained in the Mueller report......the DOJ, the body of the executive branch that actually does hold prosecutorial power declared.....NO COLLUSION, NO OBSTRUCTION.

 

[LV426]

it was over when the Attorney General of the United States declared there was no Collusion/Obstruction.

A declaration that was a lie.

Mueller even said it was a lie in his March 24th letter, March 27th letter, and May 29th press conference. Then Barr lied to the Senate on April 20th when he said he didn't know if Mueller agreed with his conclusions. So you're going to have to answer why Barr lied to Van Hollen on April 20th:

Van Hollen (4/20/19): “Did Bob Mueller support your conclusion?”

Barr (4/20/19): “I don’t know whether Mueller supported my conclusion.”

Mueller (3/27/19): "The summary letter the Department sent to Congress and released to the public late in the afternoon of March 24 did not fully capture the context, nature, and substance of this Office's work and conclusions."

So Barr lied. So since Barr lied, why would his determination have any credibility? And since you're repeating Barr's lies, why do you have any credibility either?

 

[Ralph]

A declaration that was a lie.

Mueller even said it was a lie in his March 24th letter, March 27th letter, and May 29th press conference. Then Barr lied to the Senate on April 20th when he said he didn't know if Mueller agreed with his conclusions. So you're going to have to answer why Barr lied to Van Hollen on April 20th:

Van Hollen (4/20/19): “Did Bob Mueller support your conclusion?”

Barr (4/20/19): “I don’t know whether Mueller supported my conclusion.”

Mueller (3/27/19): "The summary letter the Department sent to Congress and released to the public late in the afternoon of March 24 did not fully capture the context, nature, and substance of this Office's work and conclusions."

So Barr lied. So since Barr lied, why would his determination have any credibility? And since you're repeating Barr's lies, why do you have any credibility either?

A lie? And...…….? AG BARR still concluded, as per the recommendation from MUELLER who LEFT the decision up to the Attorney General....no Collusion, no Obstruction. Cry, sling snort.....you can even hold the AG in contempt of Congress because you did not like his conclusion. But...the decision was made that ended the Mueller report as the SPECIAL COUNCIL was convened, operated under, and was concluded under DOJ guidelines. This was not an Independent Council as was the case with Blow Job Bill....it was a DOJ investigation all the way. It ended when the AG declared it ended.....not when congress decided it ended. Investigate, Masturbate, and stoke each other off...….there is nothing that congress can do short of a political solution called an IMPEACHMENT. Go for it......Mr. Trump will blow your mind every time he invokes Executive Privilege because he was never indicted for a damn thing.

Wait another 6 years until he's out of office.....and he's still protected via the 4th, 5th, 6th and 14th amendments of the constitution, meaning you will still have to present probable cause (something Mueller could not) and you will still have to prove beyond a reasonable doubt that a crime was committed. Go for it.....Muller did not because HE COULD NOT. But I suspect it will all fade away when congress faces a supermajority in all branches of government after Durham gets through with them. They'll be lucky to win a county dog catcher election in 2020.

 

[LV426]

Read it until you go blind masturbating to Mueller's rhetorical nonsense

You haven't read the report, and are only taking Barr's dishonest, discredited account -that Mueller didn't agree with- as the basis of your defense.

So you're now being forced to carry that baggage and explain why Barr lied to the Senate on April 20th?

 

[LV426]

A lie? And...…….?

LOL!

A lie.

The end.

Barr lied about Mueller's report.

That's it. It's over. Nothing Barr says has credibility because he lied about Mueller's report, and lied about communication with Mueller over Barr's summary of Mueller's report.

HE LIED.

So your defense of Barr lying is...that he lied.

LOL.

You need to do better work here.

 

[LV426]

A lie? And...…….? AG BARR still concluded, as per the recommendation from MUELLER who LEFT the decision up to the Attorney General....no Collusion, no Obstruction. Cry, sling snort.....you can even hold the AG in contempt of Congress because you did not like his conclusion. But...the decision was made that ended the Mueller report as the SPECIAL COUNCIL was convened, operated under, and was concluded under DOJ guidelines. This was not an Independent Council as was the case with Blow Job Bill....it was a DOJ investigation all the way. It ended when the AG declared it ended.....not when congress decided it ended. Investigate, Masturbate, and stoke each other off...….there is nothing that congress can do short of a political solution called an IMPEACHMENT. Go for it......Mr. Trump will blow your mind every time he invokes Executive Privilege because he was never indicted for a damn thing.

Wait another 6 years until he's out of office.....and he's still protected via the 4th, 5th, 6th and 14th amendments of the constitution, meaning you will still have to present probable cause (something Mueller could not) and you will still have to prove beyond a reasonable doubt that a crime was committed. Go for it.....Muller did not because HE COULD NOT. But I suspect it will all fade away when congress faces a supermajority in all branches of government after Durham gets through with them. They'll be lucky to win a county dog catcher election in 2020.

Barr lied to the Senate on April 20th when he said he didn't know if Mueller agreed with Barr's conclusions.

In fact, Mueller had disagreed with Barr's conclusions and made it known twice, on March 24th and again on March 27th.

Barr didn't say he got those letters on April 20th, because news of those letters hadn't leaked yet.

So Barr was giving false testimony before the Senate on April 20th because he was counting on no one learning of Mueller's 3/24 and 3/27 letter.

So Barr has no credibility, and neither do you.

 

[LV426]

AG BARR still concluded, as per the recommendation from MUELLER who LEFT the decision up to the Attorney General....no Collusion, no Obstruction.

Mueller disagreed with Barr's conclusions and made that disagreement known twice, on 3/27 and 3/24.

Barr lied about that communication when he testified on April 20th because if he had said he got those letters, he would have had to answer Van Hollen that Mueller didn't agree with Barr conclusions.

SO WHY DID BARR LIE ON APRIL 20th AND SAY HE DIDN'T KNOW IF MUELLER AGREED WITH HIS CONCLUSIONS?

 

[LV426]

What are you, 13 lol?

Let’s do it. What’s the House waiting on? Not enough democrat votes?

You're the one who wanted this, so here it is...

You can start by explaining why Paul Manafort shared polling data with Kilimnik?

Then you can explain why Drumpf ordered his son to lie about the reason for the June 2016 Drumpf Tower meeting?

Then you can explain why Drumpf ordered Cohen to lie to Congress about the Moscow Project?

Then you can explain why Drumpf ordered McGahn to fire Mueller?

Then you can explain why Drumpf ordered Sessions to end the FBI investigation?

Then you can explain why Dowd tampered with Flynn upon learning of Flynn's cooperation with Mueller?

Then you can explain why Mitch McConnell refuses to pass election security in the Senate?

These questions aren't going to go away, no matter how badly you want them to because of what the answers mean for your judgment and credibility.

 

[Teflon Don]

What a fucking idiot.

These are the types of posts ignoramuses make because they're too lazy and stupid to do the work.

Manafort literally plead guilty to Conspiracy and Obstruction of Justice.

Not related to Russia investigation he didn't. All of Manafort's crimes were related to things he did while working for the Podesta Group. You didn't read that in the Muller report?

 

[Teflon Don]

Wrong, he indicted 34 people and businesses, across 150+ charges and convictions, seizing more than $40M in assets, and putting several members of Trump's inner circle behind bars, while getting the AG to perjure himself before the Senate.

What's your defense of all that?

read very carefully ok?

Bobby Muller did not indict ANYONE with conspiracy to collude with Russia to impact our 2016 Presidential Election. All of his indictments were for process crimes like "lying to the FBI" for petty shit. Like Papadopolous not remember the exact date he met with the FBI informant.

You should have read that in the Muller report you claim to have read

 

[Teflon Don]

Most Democrats have read it, which is why we're asking questions like why did Manafort share polling data with Kilimnik?

Say...why did Manafort do that, anyway?

Dunno. Ask Manafort.

But do you really think internal polling data is what flipped the election? Really? Really?

 

[LV426]

Not related to Russia investigation he didn't.

Yes, literally related to the Russia investigation.

That's where the charges against Manafort came from.

Now why did Manafort share polling data with Kilimnik?

 

[LV426]

All of Manafort's crimes were related to things he did while working for the Podesta Group.

Which provides the motive for why he did what he did for Trump.

So why did he share polling data with Kilimnik for months when he was campaign manager?

That question isn't going away.

 

[LV426]

read very carefully ok

Your defense of Trump from what's in the Mueller report is that he didn't indict anymore for conspiracy to collude with Russia.

BUT THAT'S NOT WHAT HIS TASK WAS.

He was tasked to investigate Russian Interference in the election; and he determined that collusion did occur, it just wasn't "criminal".

So before, when you all said "no contact with Russia", you were lying.

 

[LV426]

All of his indictments were for process crimes like "lying to the FBI"

Wait - back up.

What did they lie to the FBI about?