Radiance3 wrote:
The 700 PROSECUTORS DID NOT investigate 500 WITNESS AND DISECT EVERY EVIDENCE PROVIDED. They could not make accurate and sound decision, but based on their political view and narratives.
I would think that 700+ trained and experienced prosecutors would be able to dissect the Mueller report and give a fairly unbiased and knowledgeable opinion on the matter.
Quote:
Whereas the Special Council under Mueller has used all necessary tools to arrive at sound and accurate decision based on the lengthy and detailed examination of the evidences and the witnesses. The 2.5 years of investigation lead by Mueller consist of 19 Grand Juries, 41 FBI agents 500 witnesses, 1,5 million documents, 600 subpoenas, at the taxpayers cost of almost $35 million.
At least you got these facts right.
Quote:
This complant was submitted by the Deep State party of the Democrats' complaints about president Trump's victory over Hillary Clinton.
As usual, not backed up by factual evidence, and totally debunked by the Mueller report.
Quote:
President Trump was duly elected by 63 million citizens of the United States and by the majority 306 Electoral College Votes. A clear victory under the guidance of the Constitution. Compared to Clinton's 227 College Votes. It was reported that Clinton had over 2.3 million popular votes over Trump. But was also reported that there were at least 5 million illegal votes cast on to Hillary Clinton. However you calculate it, it, president Trump still won by 306 College Electoral Votes.
As for the Electoral College you have your facts right. As for the popular vote, there is no evidence from any state or federal entity that indicates that there were more than a handful of votes cast illegally, most of which were mistakes in registration information due to change of residence.
Quote:
Complaints of the Hillary and the Democrat Party resulted to this lengthy investigation.
Results and findings:
Mueller's Letter:
“The Special Counsel’s investigation did not find that the Trump campaign or anyone associated with it conspired or coordinated with Russia in its efforts to influence the 2016 US Presidential Election.”
Therefore:
1. NO Russia Collusion
2. NO Obstruction of Justice. The Mueller report, failed to supply sufficient evidence, or compelling evidence concerning obstruction;. “not sufficient” to support a prosecution of the President for obstruction of justice.
Complaints of the Hillary and the Democrat Party r... (
show quote)
First, the Mueller report did not state that there was no collusion, which it could have, but merely stated that there was insufficient evidence to legally charge someone with conspiracy ... which is a very difficult thing to prove in a court of law.
Second, Mueller did state that there was insufficient evidence to prove obstruction, but in the second part of that sentence (which you left out) he stated that he could not exonerate the president, either.
Quote:
DOJ therefore prepared a Summary Report based on the FACTS and evidences provided by the Mueller Report. DOJ: NO Russia Collusion: NO obstruction of Justice.
The Attorney General took it upon himself to make that statement. If you analyze it logically, there is a vast difference between knowing that something occurred and proving it in a court of law.
Quote:
Democrats in Congress want to repeat the Mueller investigation and place the matter in their hands.
They COULD NOT DO THAT. The DOJ RPORT IS FINAL. Nadler is sending Subpoena to the DOJ.
DOJ's report is final and Nadler could not enforce him.
That's just flat wrong. The Mueller report is just that, a report. Congress has a perfect right to investigate not only what is in the report but additional facts and allegations as they see fit.
Quote:
Our US Government has 3 Equal Powers.
1. Congress: To Legislate and provide oversight.
2. Executive: To execute and Enforce the Law.
3. Judicial: To Interpret the Law.
Under the Executive has different Cabinet level Department appointed by the President and confirmed by the Senate of the United States.
Congress could not encroach on the the power of the Executive Branch ones the law is interpreted and executed.
Uh ... in a word, no. The courts have yet to rule on the powers of the Executive Branch's power of 'Executive Privilege' to any great extent. In fact, the courts curtailed those powers when Congress asked for the White House tapes in Nixon's impeachment investigation and forced Nixon to turn over the tapes. The exact law in terms of the limits of Executive Privilege have never been ruled on in terms of the testimony of aides or the production of documents from the West Wing.
Your explanations of the Executive Branch duties are superfluous and have no bearing on this particular issue.
Quote:
Fact of the matter: The Obama Administration to prevent candidate Trump from winning created a sophisticated weapon, called the Deep State, using all powerful agencies weaponized against candidate and president Trump to prevent him from winning. After he won, Congress has been harassing and intimidating him.
Pure fantasy conspiracy tripe straight from the Alex Jones / Infowars playbook. Any person thinking that these vast agencies could be coordinated without a leak coming out about what was going on is totally misinformed or is totally oblivious to how the government works. These "deep state" agencies work with such glacial speed that a conspiracy like this could not be implemented in a single presidential term, let alone have it stay secret for so long. Put this one to bed.
Quote:
But he was duly elected by 63 million citizens of the US, and 306 Electoral College Votes, compared to Hillary Clinton's 227. A clear victory for Trump.
Any complaint radical DEMS?
Selective statistics are always a good way to try to justify your position. While true, you totally ignore the popular vote and the fact that it was selective counties in particular districts that were targeted by Russian Facebook ads that influenced the Electoral College. As previously stated, the popular vote was totally in the opposite direction by 2.3 million votes.
Yes, this 'radical Dem' does have a complaint. I get somewhat irritated when actual facts and data are manipulated to prove an outcome that is contradicted by the full weight of those same statistics and facts when taken in total, rather than selectively put forth.