• This is a political forum that is non-biased/non-partisan and treats every person's position on topics equally. This debate forum is not aligned to any political party. In today's politics, many ideas are split between and even within all the political parties. Often we find ourselves agreeing on one platform but some topics break our mold. We are here to discuss them in a civil political debate. If this is your first visit to our political forums, be sure to check out the RULES. Registering for debate politics is necessary before posting. Register today to participate - it's free!

Mueller testimony delayed by one week

sjmay said:
So essentially, instead of doing their job and trying to pass bills that would actually help the country, they want to do what you suggested,

Sounds about right.
Click to expand...

Flat lie.

Congress is introducing bills left and right. They've passed 50 since January.

They will be investigating the president as well.

We can all walk and chew gum at the same time.
 
D_NATURED said:
How sad that even prosecuting the glaringly guilty must be a political chess match, where the court of public opinion is the only one that can't be undermined by conservative corruption.
Click to expand...

Yes, it is. But that's on Pelosi. I don't believe her hands are tied as she claims, she's just playing political games and 'strategizing'. The young progressive members who recently took office are champing at the bit to impeach but she keeps dousing them with cold water from San Francisco Bay.

However as a booby-prize at least we get constant investigations and reveals every few weeks.
 
MovingPictures said:
Mueller testimony delayed by one week - POLITICO



Smart move.

The idea of just 2.5 hours to question Mueller's team was just idiotic. No way you can ask him all of the important question in that time.

Frankly, these negotiations with Mueller have been ludicrous and the SC has not done itself any favors by ducking a hearing, and having to be compelled to come and defend their own damn report.
Click to expand...

What the **** is Mueller gonna say that we don't already know by reading his report? This whole idea of a hearing is stupid and a time waster.
 
hanger4 said:
Collusion isn't a legal term, but I do implore you to convince the House Majority to impeach a president for something that's not illegal. :thumbs:
Click to expand...

Is that your left handed, half assed way of admitting there is not a statement in the Mueller Report saying there was no collusion? Just spit it pout for heavens sake and quit beating around the bush.
 
humbolt said:
No, that's absolutely the opposite of how it works. Sorry. If youj wish to persist in such foolishness, that's fine with me. I'm just taking a moment to point it out. Again.
Click to expand...

I debated in college for two years. The person who makes the positive claim has total responsibility to prove their claim. This sort of crap happens here all the time and it is a result of ignorance and just plain stupidity with how debate works.

Here was the claim from the poster

Quote Originally Posted by Integrityrespec View Post
No collusion and no conspiracy, and it can be said but not proven which is the point.
Click to expand...

So where in the Mueller Report does it say there was no collusion as the poster maintains?

Back it up for heavens sakes or simply stop this irritating crap.
 
haymarket said:
Is that your left handed, half assed way of admitting there is not a statement in the Mueller Report saying there was no collusion? Just spit it pout for heavens sake and quit beating around the bush.
Click to expand...

It's doesn't matter if Mueller stated "collusion" 5 thousand times, it's not a prosecutable thingy, conspiracy is and Mueller "did not establish" a conspiracy or coordination.
 
D_NATURED said:
Well, if he DOES reiterate the contents of the report, and his conclusion is STILL that Trump obstructed justice, we'll be left contemplating these treasonous conservatives who cover for him. His report already stated clearly that Trump was guilty of obstruction but it was up to congress to prosecute it. This testimony is really to shake awake the repubs so they can no longer deny the obvious.

It wouldn't surprise me if they had AG Barr interpreting English to Obstruct-o-con. I can see it now:

Meuller: Yes, it is clear that Mr. Trump obstructed justice a number of times in response to the Russian election interference probe.

Barr: What Mueller is saying is there's no evidence of wrongdoing.

Conservatards: See, we told you he was innocent.
Click to expand...

*and his conclusion is STILL that Trump obstructed justice,*

That's ^^^^ not true, Mueller came to no conclusion concerning OoJ.
 
haymarket said:
I debated in college for two years. The person who makes the positive claim has total responsibility to prove their claim. This sort of crap happens here all the time and it is a result of ignorance and just plain stupidity with how debate works.

Here was the claim from the poster



So where in the Mueller Report does it say there was no collusion as the poster maintains?

Back it up for heavens sakes or simply stop this irritating crap.
Click to expand...

collusion=conspiracy

Websters dictionary- Collusion secret agreement to cooperate especiially for illegal or deceitful purpose.
Conspiracy- to join in a secret agreement to do unlawful or wrongful act

I believe Mueller statement in his report that there was "no conspiracy" between Trump and/or campaign has been cited numerous times.
No conspiracy=No collusion.
 
Cardinal said:
It's not about anything new coming out; rather, it'll be about getting Mueller to couch in more specific and less legalese language the fact that

1) Mueller was prohibited from prosecution and even direct accusations over obstruction of justice due to OLC regulations, and
2) that while Trump was not guilty of criminal conspiracy, it can be said that his behavior regarding Russia did amount to collusion and was nefarious in nature.

Thus far, Mueller has steeped his conclusions entirely in legalese, and this will be an effort to make him answer questions in a manner the less legally-inclined will be able to comprehend. It will also be another opportunity to deliver his conclusions to those who have thus far refused to read the report.
Click to expand...
Sure, but the whole SC has been unwilling to talk to Congress and are having to be subpoenad to come and defend their own investigation.

The SC has done enormous damage to its reputation by playing these games with a prospective hearing.
 
haymarket said:
Lets just hope that whenever the date is - Mueller is open and frank and candid to the committee and does not play cat and mouse and try to tell them nothing more than is in the report and even play that down. I already have my doubts based on reports I have seen and the actions of Mueller himself.
Click to expand...

He'll yell, "TRUMP DID IIIIIIIIIIIIITTTTTTTTTTTTT!!! TRUMP DID IIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIITTTTTTTTTTTTTT!"

:lamo :lamo
 
hanger4 said:
It's doesn't matter if Mueller stated "collusion" 5 thousand times, it's not a prosecutable thingy, conspiracy is and Mueller "did not establish" a conspiracy or coordination.
Click to expand...

So just tell us - in Mueller's own words - what he did say about collusion and was it what the other poster claimed?
 
American said:
He'll yell, "TRUMP DID IIIIIIIIIIIIITTTTTTTTTTTTT!!! TRUMP DID IIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIITTTTTTTTTTTTTT!"

:lamo :lamo
Click to expand...

Let us sincerely hope Mueller does just that.
 
D_NATURED said:
That's like asking if they're so keen to kill the king, why are they swimming in the moat. There are layers of conservative complicity that must be conquered before the goal of justice can be achieved. The difficulty thus far has been relative to conservative shamelessness, which is considerable.
Click to expand...

So you think the Democrats care about conservative's feelings, THAT is why they haven't proceeded with impeachment? LOL
 
Roadvirus said:
What the **** is Mueller gonna say that we don't already know by reading his report? This whole idea of a hearing is stupid and a time waster.
Click to expand...

Scared of hearing the facts again or more facts coming out?

If the Mueller report totally exonerates the president, he and his supporters would be reading it loud on Capitol Hill. Instead they're all making up excuses as to why we shouldn't hear any more about it.
 
haymarket said:
So just tell us - in Mueller's own words - what he did say about collusion and was it what the other poster claimed?
Click to expand...

What part of, it doesn't matter what Mueller stated about collusion, didn't you understand ??
 
Cardinal said:
It's not about anything new coming out; rather, it'll be about getting Mueller to couch in more specific and less legalese language the fact that

1) Mueller was prohibited from prosecution and even direct accusations over obstruction of justice due to OLC regulations, and
2) that while Trump was not guilty of criminal conspiracy, it can be said that his behavior regarding Russia did amount to collusion and was nefarious in nature.

Thus far, Mueller has steeped his conclusions entirely in legalese, and this will be an effort to make him answer questions in a manner the less legally-inclined will be able to comprehend. It will also be another opportunity to deliver his conclusions to those who have thus far refused to read the report.
Click to expand...

1. Barr has said Mueller could have recommended prosecution. It might be worthwhile for Mueller to be asked about that by Congress.

2. Mueller was appointed to draw a legal conclusion. Whether Trump's behavior was "nefarious" or not is a political question.
 
uptower said:
Scared of hearing the facts again or more facts coming out?

If the Mueller report totally exonerates the president, he and his supporters would be reading it loud on Capitol Hill. Instead they're all making up excuses as to why we shouldn't hear any more about it.
Click to expand...

The facts by Mueller are already out, he "did not establish" a conspiracy or coordination and came to no conclusion concerning OoJ.
 
haymarket said:
So what did Mueller say about it in his own words from his own report?
Click to expand...

I believe the words were that the "investigation did not establish" a conspiracy.
 
hanger4 said:
Then that would make Mueller a liar.
Click to expand...

That's why Mueller isn't going to testify: he isn't going to take the chance of perjuring himself.
 
Master Debator said:
The decision to impeach isn't his to make but I have a feeling Pelosi and Nadler are trying to get him to explicitly come out and say the president obstructed justice to give themselves cover if impeachment blows up in their face. That way they can come back and say Mueller gave us no choice. I can't believe Mueller after having done his job is to happy with these weak sauce Democrats using him to do theirs.
Click to expand...

He already said he isn't going outside the scope of the report. The report gave Congress the opportunity to try and prove a negative. That's how Mueller wrote the report because he hates Trump for not hiring him for the FBI job and so Mueller knew he didn't commit obstruction of justice. And, Democrats either can't read and comprehend a thing they read. Or, they simply don't care and will try to get Mueller to say Trump obstructed Justice, in which Mueller won't do.
 
bomberfox said:
Do any of the people saying “there are more important things to worry about” was the exact same thing people were trying to peddle during the Nixon hearings?
Click to expand...
Apples to Oranges. Trump committed no crimes per the Mueller report but Nixon committed crimes.:roll: Nice attempted at a strawman though. :lol:
 
j-mac said:
You can think what you want...doesn't make it reality.

Sent from my SM-T587P using Tapatalk
Click to expand...
Sometimes I wonder what alternate reality these people live in. :lol:
 
hanger4 said:
*and his conclusion is STILL that Trump obstructed justice,*

That's ^^^^ not true, Mueller came to no conclusion concerning OoJ.
Click to expand...

If he could have exonerated him he would have. He specifically said he couldn't. He was prevented by the constitution from prosecuting it.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom