Understanding through Discussion


Welcome! You are not logged in. [ Login ]
EvC Forum active members: 84 (8950 total)
32 online now:
GDR, jar, JonF (3 members, 29 visitors)
Newest Member: Mikee
Post Volume: Total: 867,058 Year: 22,094/19,786 Month: 657/1,834 Week: 157/500 Day: 54/61 Hour: 3/2


Thread  Details

Email This Thread
Newer Topic | Older Topic
  
Author Topic:   The Mueller Report On-Line and Downloadable
Faith
Member
Posts: 33880
From: Nevada, USA
Joined: 10-06-2001
Member Rating: 1.2


Message 16 of 43 (867761)
12-02-2019 6:21 PM
Reply to: Message 15 by DrJones*
12-02-2019 6:05 PM


Re: the conclusion
The story keeps changing. If they indicted Russians that has nothing to do with Trump but it's always been about getting Trump one way or another. They don't even really need a reason, they're going to get him for anything they can dream up.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 15 by DrJones*, posted 12-02-2019 6:05 PM DrJones* has responded

Replies to this message:
 Message 17 by JonF, posted 12-02-2019 6:48 PM Faith has responded
 Message 18 by DrJones*, posted 12-02-2019 6:48 PM Faith has responded

  
JonF
Member
Posts: 5619
Joined: 06-23-2003
Member Rating: 2.9


Message 17 of 43 (867762)
12-02-2019 6:48 PM
Reply to: Message 16 by Faith
12-02-2019 6:21 PM


Re: the conclusion
No changes. Not indicted is no exonerated.

There's overwhelming evidence for Trump's real transgressions. No dreaming required.


This message is a reply to:
 Message 16 by Faith, posted 12-02-2019 6:21 PM Faith has responded

Replies to this message:
 Message 20 by Faith, posted 12-02-2019 7:33 PM JonF has responded

  
DrJones*
Member
Posts: 2025
From: Edmonton, Alberta, Canada
Joined: 08-19-2004
Member Rating: 3.7


Message 18 of 43 (867763)
12-02-2019 6:48 PM
Reply to: Message 16 by Faith
12-02-2019 6:21 PM


Re: the conclusion
but it's always been about getting Trump one way or another.

so Trump's deputy AG was doing the bidding of the Democratic party when he authorized the Mueller investigation?


It's not enough to bash in heads, you've got to bash in minds
soon I discovered that this rock thing was true
Jerry Lee Lewis was the devil
Jesus was an architect previous to his career as a prophet
All of a sudden i found myself in love with the world
And so there was only one thing I could do
Was ding a ding dang my dang along ling long - Jesus Built my Hotrod Ministry
Live every week like it's Shark Week! - Tracey Jordan
Just a monkey in a long line of kings. - Matthew Good
If "elitist" just means "not the dumbest motherfucker in the room", I'll be an elitist! - Get Your War On
*not an actual doctor

This message is a reply to:
 Message 16 by Faith, posted 12-02-2019 6:21 PM Faith has responded

Replies to this message:
 Message 19 by Faith, posted 12-02-2019 7:24 PM DrJones* has responded

  
Faith
Member
Posts: 33880
From: Nevada, USA
Joined: 10-06-2001
Member Rating: 1.2


Message 19 of 43 (867764)
12-02-2019 7:24 PM
Reply to: Message 18 by DrJones*
12-02-2019 6:48 PM


Re: the conclusion
Yes.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 18 by DrJones*, posted 12-02-2019 6:48 PM DrJones* has responded

Replies to this message:
 Message 21 by DrJones*, posted 12-02-2019 7:51 PM Faith has responded

  
Faith
Member
Posts: 33880
From: Nevada, USA
Joined: 10-06-2001
Member Rating: 1.2


Message 20 of 43 (867765)
12-02-2019 7:33 PM
Reply to: Message 17 by JonF
12-02-2019 6:48 PM


Re: the conclusion
Trump has committed no transgressions, they've all been invented by his enemies. They don't like him, they object to his style and they make that into criminal activities which they are not. Yes it is all dreamed up. Yes, in an investigative report like the Mueller report which existed for the sole purpose of discovering if there was any crimtinal activity on Trump's part, no indictment is exoneration.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 17 by JonF, posted 12-02-2019 6:48 PM JonF has responded

Replies to this message:
 Message 22 by DrJones*, posted 12-02-2019 7:52 PM Faith has responded
 Message 30 by JonF, posted 12-03-2019 9:23 AM Faith has not yet responded

  
DrJones*
Member
Posts: 2025
From: Edmonton, Alberta, Canada
Joined: 08-19-2004
Member Rating: 3.7


Message 21 of 43 (867766)
12-02-2019 7:51 PM
Reply to: Message 19 by Faith
12-02-2019 7:24 PM


Re: the conclusion
boy the guy who hired him must've been pretty dumb

This message is a reply to:
 Message 19 by Faith, posted 12-02-2019 7:24 PM Faith has responded

Replies to this message:
 Message 24 by jar, posted 12-02-2019 8:08 PM DrJones* has not yet responded
 Message 25 by Faith, posted 12-02-2019 8:13 PM DrJones* has not yet responded

  
DrJones*
Member
Posts: 2025
From: Edmonton, Alberta, Canada
Joined: 08-19-2004
Member Rating: 3.7


Message 22 of 43 (867767)
12-02-2019 7:52 PM
Reply to: Message 20 by Faith
12-02-2019 7:33 PM


Re: the conclusion
Yes, in an investigative report like the Mueller report which existed for the sole purpose of discovering if there was any crimtinal activity on Trump's part,

why do you keep lying about this?

It's not enough to bash in heads, you've got to bash in minds
soon I discovered that this rock thing was true
Jerry Lee Lewis was the devil
Jesus was an architect previous to his career as a prophet
All of a sudden i found myself in love with the world
And so there was only one thing I could do
Was ding a ding dang my dang along ling long - Jesus Built my Hotrod Ministry
Live every week like it's Shark Week! - Tracey Jordan
Just a monkey in a long line of kings. - Matthew Good
If "elitist" just means "not the dumbest motherfucker in the room", I'll be an elitist! - Get Your War On
*not an actual doctor

This message is a reply to:
 Message 20 by Faith, posted 12-02-2019 7:33 PM Faith has responded

Replies to this message:
 Message 23 by Faith, posted 12-02-2019 8:03 PM DrJones* has not yet responded

  
Faith
Member
Posts: 33880
From: Nevada, USA
Joined: 10-06-2001
Member Rating: 1.2


Message 23 of 43 (867768)
12-02-2019 8:03 PM
Reply to: Message 22 by DrJones*
12-02-2019 7:52 PM


Re: the conclusion
I'm not the one lying. Everybody on my side knows this, it's only those on the left who persist in believing a lie. Some are lying, most just believe them.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 22 by DrJones*, posted 12-02-2019 7:52 PM DrJones* has not yet responded

  
jar
Member
Posts: 31770
From: Texas!!
Joined: 04-20-2004
Member Rating: 2.6


Message 24 of 43 (867769)
12-02-2019 8:08 PM
Reply to: Message 21 by DrJones*
12-02-2019 7:51 PM


Re: the conclusion
DJ writes:

boy the guy who hired him must've been pretty dumb

What does the evidence show? After all the guy that hired him was the guy that could not even make a success out of casinos, a game show and beauty pageants.


My Sister's Website: Rose Hill Studios     My Website: My Website

This message is a reply to:
 Message 21 by DrJones*, posted 12-02-2019 7:51 PM DrJones* has not yet responded

  
Faith
Member
Posts: 33880
From: Nevada, USA
Joined: 10-06-2001
Member Rating: 1.2


Message 25 of 43 (867770)
12-02-2019 8:13 PM
Reply to: Message 21 by DrJones*
12-02-2019 7:51 PM


Re: the conclusion
He has been pretty dumb about trusting the wrong people, letting traitors remain in the White House among other things.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 21 by DrJones*, posted 12-02-2019 7:51 PM DrJones* has not yet responded

  
Admin
Director
Posts: 12653
From: EvC Forum
Joined: 06-14-2002
Member Rating: 2.9


(1)
Message 26 of 43 (867771)
12-02-2019 8:30 PM
Reply to: Message 12 by JonF
12-02-2019 5:55 PM


Moderator On Duty
To everyone:

Though this message is a reply to JonF, it is really addressed to all participants in this thread. I didn't expect a discussion to break out in the Links and Information forum, but so be it, and I will moderate. The information which was posted is in Message 1 and so is easy to find.

Discussion in this thread should be topic focused and impersonal. Words used to attack or denigrate others in the discussion will be added to the poster's disallowed words list. For example, the following would result in the words "vomit*", "bushwah" and "Trumpistas" being added to the disallowed word list:

JonF writes:

I note you cannot address the substance of the replies, just vomiting up the same bushwah. Oh, well, that's what we expect from Trumpistas.

I of course will not begin doing this right away. I'll wait for people to have a chance to see this message. If you can't help yourself please keep in mind that this approach to moderation can result in some pretty common words getting added to your disallowed word list. For example, "It's all idiots on the right," would result in not just "idiot*" getting added to your list, but also "right," which would become a bit inconvenient.

Participants who insist on posting messages with asterisks will be suspended.


--Percy
EvC Forum Director

This message is a reply to:
 Message 12 by JonF, posted 12-02-2019 5:55 PM JonF has not yet responded

Replies to this message:
 Message 27 by Faith, posted 12-02-2019 10:19 PM Admin has acknowledged this reply
 Message 28 by Faith, posted 12-02-2019 10:29 PM Admin has responded

  
Faith
Member
Posts: 33880
From: Nevada, USA
Joined: 10-06-2001
Member Rating: 1.2


Message 27 of 43 (867776)
12-02-2019 10:19 PM
Reply to: Message 26 by Admin
12-02-2019 8:30 PM


Re: Moderator On Duty
Wondering: I discovered earlier that I'm not allowed to edit messages any more. Is that connected with taking away words?

This message is a reply to:
 Message 26 by Admin, posted 12-02-2019 8:30 PM Admin has acknowledged this reply

  
Faith
Member
Posts: 33880
From: Nevada, USA
Joined: 10-06-2001
Member Rating: 1.2


Message 28 of 43 (867777)
12-02-2019 10:29 PM
Reply to: Message 26 by Admin
12-02-2019 8:30 PM


Re: Moderator On Duty
Could you explain what you mean by "persisting in posting messages with asterisks?" Usually the words are quite neutral in themselves and may be necessary to expressing something neutral and simple. Are you saying we can't use them this way after you've taken away words for how they were used somewhere else? I'm serious, I'm having a problem understanding this. I usually don't know what post the word first occurred in you found to be offensive.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 26 by Admin, posted 12-02-2019 8:30 PM Admin has responded

Replies to this message:
 Message 37 by Admin, posted 12-03-2019 4:14 PM Faith has not yet responded

  
RAZD
Member
Posts: 20326
From: the other end of the sidewalk
Joined: 03-14-2004
Member Rating: 3.6


Message 29 of 43 (867787)
12-03-2019 8:09 AM
Reply to: Message 4 by Faith
12-02-2019 2:32 PM


if this were Obama instead of Trump, what would you say.
Faith, I agree

That is a bunch of weasel words with no legal standing whatever. ...

The conclusion was a bunch of weasel words to get around - imho - the restriction AG Barr put on the probe to not indict a sitting president. Barr was their boss, so they had to comply.

... They were unable to prove obstruction of justice (or any involvement with Russia to affect the election) ...

No. Sadly they were not allowed to pursue indictments for the 12 cases of obstruction of justice they discovered evidence for, and they were not allowed to pursue indictments for the instances of involvement with Russia to affect the election --- by AG Barr and his insistence that a sitting president could no be indicted. Barr was their boss, so they had to comply.

Not being allowed to indict means the cases could not be tested in court, not that they were unable to prove them. You can't prove or disprove a case you are not allowed to pursue.

All they could do was report their findings, listing each case where they found evidence, and leave it to congress to determine whether or not congress should proceed with impeachment to try those cases.

... and what that means legally is that he is not guilty and what THAT means in plain English is that he is exonerated.

No it doesn't. You are grasping prematurely at straws of imagination. What you have demonstrated in this (and your following posts) is that you can't handle the truth, even when it is simple.

Starr was not hampered by an AG with an unorthodox concept of excessive presidential rights that was trying to stop him, and even still he didn't prove the cases of obstruction of justice that he gave to the congress, he gave them a list of incidences which they used to write up articles of impeachment and which were then tried in the Senate.

Where we are with the Mueller report and with the investigation by the House is assembling what charges will be included in the articles of impeachment. You can't jump ahead of that.

We now have the unusual case where the accused has been given (after much whining and whimpering and pounding of his flabby chest) an opportunity to participate in that decision on what will be included in the articles of impeachment ... unusual because normally an accused purported perpetrator is not given a chance to discuss what he is being charged with by the prosecutor. Immaterial now, because coward Dumbty Trumpty had his bluff called and he passed.

Trump has been given plenty of opportunities to provide exculpatory evidence if he has any. Again he has not taken that opportunity, likely because he doesn't have any.

We also have the unusual case where the accused purported perpetrator is given a chance to discuss how the trial will be run with the jury (Senate), that he has also wined and dined. In any normal legal trial this would be called tampering with the jury. In common ordinary terminology this is corrupt.

This is serious, Faith, and you need to come out of your shell and look at the facts and the evidence and ask yourself: if this were Obama instead of Trump, what would you say.

Enjoy

Edited by RAZD, : .


we are limited in our ability to understand
by our ability to understand
Rebel•American•Zen•Deist
... to learn ... to think ... to live ... to laugh ...
to share.


Join the effort to solve medical problems, AIDS/HIV, Cancer and more with Team EvC! (click)

This message is a reply to:
 Message 4 by Faith, posted 12-02-2019 2:32 PM Faith has not yet responded

Replies to this message:
 Message 39 by Admin, posted 12-03-2019 5:05 PM RAZD has acknowledged this reply

  
JonF
Member
Posts: 5619
Joined: 06-23-2003
Member Rating: 2.9


(1)
Message 30 of 43 (867789)
12-03-2019 9:23 AM
Reply to: Message 20 by Faith
12-02-2019 7:33 PM


Re: the conclusion
Trump was not indicted solely because of a DOJ administrative opinion. If it were only a question of breaking the law he would have been indicted for multiple crimes.

That is, he got off on a technicality. He's guilty.

That's not exoneration in law or in public opinion.


This message is a reply to:
 Message 20 by Faith, posted 12-02-2019 7:33 PM Faith has not yet responded

  
Newer Topic | Older Topic
Jump to:


Copyright 2001-2018 by EvC Forum, All Rights Reserved

™ Version 4.0 Beta
Innovative software from Qwixotic © 2019