One Political Plaza - Home of politics
Home Active Topics Newest Pictures Search Login Register
Main
Mueller's tricky answer to Congress
Jul 31, 2019 22:40:00   #
tommsteyer
 
The candidates on the debate stage cite Mueller's answer during the hearings as a reason for impeachment;

Question: Do you think the President should be charged with Obstruction?
Answer: Yes.

That doesn't mean he would be convicted. and this from a man who wilfully ignored the partisan bent of his entire investigative team.

Mueller admitted that he had ignored evidence about Trump and not looked for exculpatory evidence. So of course his answer would be that.

If Mueller wanted to put together a more pointed arrow for Congress to follow, he did not err.

This was never about collusion or hidden conspiracy with Russia. This was about getting a foothold into Trumps files and his campaign organization.

Mueller overlooked the fruit of the poisoned tree. The tainted Carter Page FISA warrant would have stopped any moral attorney in their tracks.

Mueller knew he was not committing himself by saying the President might be charged. He legally could claim medical problems as a defence of any statement.

What he isn't saying is that if Trump isn't guilty, Mueller isn't risking anything by saying it.
This sophisticated use of language is what lawyers do.

But the answer says not that Mueller had the evidence but that he would agree to let his 400 pages be used that way.

This was why the Mueller report went on for two years so Mueller and his Clintonistas could find every back channel weapon and file on future Trump prosecution unrelated to Russia.

Mueller was also was not saying that since he had used illegal means to obtain slanted balances of evidence, his legal opinion and his private opinion aren't valid.
Because Mueller hasn't seen all the evidence.

But first the Democrat appointees flaunted the system to get their hands on private and most secret documents under illegal methods and means.

Guess where all those leaks came from?

So an attorney-coached Alzheimer's victim said wh**ever he had to, in order to protect his retirement package.


And this from a man who couldn't remember most of his own report.

Reply
Aug 1, 2019 10:17:42   #
Lonewolf
 
tommsteyer wrote:
The candidates on the debate stage cite Mueller's answer during the hearings as a reason for impeachment;

Question: Do you think the President should be charged with Obstruction?
Answer: Yes.

That doesn't mean he would be convicted. and this from a man who wilfully ignored the partisan bent of his entire investigative team.

Mueller admitted that he had ignored evidence about Trump and not looked for exculpatory evidence. So of course his answer would be that.

If Mueller wanted to put together a more pointed arrow for Congress to follow, he did not err.

This was never about collusion or hidden conspiracy with Russia. This was about getting a foothold into Trumps files and his campaign organization.

Mueller overlooked the fruit of the poisoned tree. The tainted Carter Page FISA warrant would have stopped any moral attorney in their tracks.

Mueller knew he was not committing himself by saying the President might be charged. He legally could claim medical problems as a defence of any statement.

What he isn't saying is that if Trump isn't guilty, Mueller isn't risking anything by saying it.
This sophisticated use of language is what lawyers do.

But the answer says not that Mueller had the evidence but that he would agree to let his 400 pages be used that way.

This was why the Mueller report went on for two years so Mueller and his Clintonistas could find every back channel weapon and file on future Trump prosecution unrelated to Russia.

Mueller was also was not saying that since he had used illegal means to obtain slanted balances of evidence, his legal opinion and his private opinion aren't valid.
Because Mueller hasn't seen all the evidence.

But first the Democrat appointees flaunted the system to get their hands on private and most secret documents under illegal methods and means.

Guess where all those leaks came from?

So an attorney-coached Alzheimer's victim said wh**ever he had to, in order to protect his retirement package.


And this from a man who couldn't remember most of his own report.
The candidates on the debate stage cite Mueller's ... (show quote)


He did say if Trump is out of office he could be prosecuted for obstruction of justice. More importantly when Trump heard about the investigation he's slumped back in his chair and said my presidency is over I am f

Reply
If you want to reply, then register here. Registration is free and your account is created instantly, so you can post right away.
Main
OnePoliticalPlaza.com - Forum
Copyright 2012-2024 IDF International Technologies, Inc.