• 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 did NOT exonerate Trump of Obstruction

H

haymarket

DP Veteran
Joined
Sep 3, 2010
Messages
120,954
Reaction score
28,531
Gender
Undisclosed
Political Leaning
Undisclosed
Robert Mueller did not exonerate Trump of the charge of instruction of justice. It was Bill Barr, a Trump political appointee with a suspicious record on the Mueller probe, who did what Mueller would not do.

Why did Mueller fail to make a decision that he could have made?

Why did Mueller allow Barr to make a decision that he would not make himself?

Why is Trump claiming falsely that the Mueller Report completely exonerated him when it did not?

Why was Barr allowed to intervene in a decision that was kept from him with the creation of the Special Counsel in the first place?

Here is the suspicious letter released on Sunday from AG Barr.

Mueller report: Read Attorney General Bill Barr’s letter on special counsel’s report - Vox

We need the report in its entirety and we need it now.
 
haymarket said:
Robert Mueller did not exonerate Trump of the charge of instruction of justice. It was Bill Barr, a Trump political appointee with a suspicious record on the Mueller probe, who did what Mueller would not do.

Why did Mueller fail to make a decision that he could have made?

Why did Mueller allow Barr to make a decision that he would not make himself?

Why is Trump claiming falsely that the Mueller Report completely exonerated him when it did not?

We need the report in its entirety and we need it now.
Click to expand...

Because the people Mueller handed the evidence to..DID.

If Mueller DISAGREES...why has he SAID NOTHING ABOUT IT?


It ain't rocket science , and Barr ill GLADLY explain it to the House Politburo after he parses the report, and releases it, ACCORDING TO THE LAW.


You and the rest of the Lying left need to start getting your NEXT LIE TOGETHER, now that " TRUMP/RUSSIA !!!" and "OBSTRUCTION!!" have crashed and burned, and the CURRENT LIE(s) about the release of the SC Report will DO THE SAME in a matter of a few short weeks....
 
Grokmaster said:
Because the people Mueller handed the evidence to..DID.
Click to expand...

That answer goes against the stated purpose for the creation of a Special Counsel in the first place.
 
haymarket said:
Robert Mueller did not exonerate Trump of the charge of instruction of justice. It was Bill Barr, a Trump political appointee with a suspicious record on the Mueller probe, who did what Mueller would not do.

Why did Mueller fail to make a decision that he could have made?

Why did Mueller allow Barr to make a decision that he would not make himself?

Why is Trump claiming falsely that the Mueller Report completely exonerated him when it did not?

Why was Barr allowed to intervene in a decision that was kept from him with the creation of the Special Counsel in the first place?

Here is the suspicious letter released on Sunday from AG Barr.

Mueller report: Read Attorney General Bill Barr’s letter on special counsel’s report - Vox

We need the report in its entirety and we need it now.
Click to expand...

Quibble and cry if you want to, but the fact remains...Trump and everyone around him have been exonerated of all the nonsense Trump/Russia and obstruction of justice charges.

As to why Mueller punted the obstruction stuff to Barr...one reason: He wanted to force Barr to make a decision that would be open to objection. Your position puts proof to this. Of course, Mueller doesn't give a rat's ass about you. He wants the Dems in Congress to be able to mount the objections. They are only too happy to run with the ball he handed them.

The Special Counsel works for the AG...who happens to be Barr. That means Barr can make any decision he wants to make...as long as it is lawful. The creation of the Special Counsel never took the AG's decision-making powers away.

Now...you may WANT to read the report in its entirety, but you won't get to. That's just the reality. Get over it.
 
Mycroft said:
Quibble and cry if you want to, but the fact remains...Trump and everyone around him have been exonerated of all the nonsense Trump/Russia and obstruction of justice charges.
Click to expand...

Robert Mueller did NOT exonerate Trump of obstruction of justice. All the attacks on me do not change that reality.

Why does Trump LIE about that fact?
 
Alan M. Dershowitz, attorney and Harvard Law professor emeritus:


" ...the job of the prosecutor is to make a binary decision, yes or no: yes means indictment and no means “shut up.”

... Mueller failed to have the "guts" to say yes or no, despite all the time and money spent on the probe. ..."
 
haymarket said:
Robert Mueller did NOT exonerate Trump of obstruction of justice. All the attacks on me do not change that reality.

Why does Trump LIE about that fact?
Click to expand...

As I said...quibble if you want to. The fact remains he is exonerated of obstruction.

Moving on...
 
Mycroft said:
As I said...quibble if you want to. The fact remains he is exonerated of obstruction.

Moving on...
Click to expand...

Even AG Barr says the Mueller Report did not exonerate Trump of obstruction. To say it did is a falsehood.

Barr letter
 
Last edited:
Mycroft said:
As I said...quibble if you want to. The fact remains he is exonerated of obstruction.

Moving on...
Click to expand...

You want to MOVE ON because you are pushing a lie as fact. That is fundamentally dishonest.

The Letter from AG Barr said specifically that the Mueller Report FAILED to exonerate Trump of obstruction of justice.

Barr letter
 
In order for there to be obstruction, there has to be a crime one is attempting to obstruct the investigation of. I believe that is what Barr explained.

The was no collusion or conspiracy to assist Russian efforts to "undermine" the 2016 election OR the hacking of the DNC server.

IMO Trump KNEW this all along, and simply wanted Comey to admit he was not personally under suspicion.

He also did nothing to prevent, nor later to stop Mueller's investigation.

Please identify EXACTLY what you think he did that constitutes "obstruction."
 
Last edited:
haymarket said:
Robert Mueller did not exonerate Trump of the charge of instruction of justice. It was Bill Barr, a Trump political appointee with a suspicious record on the Mueller probe, who did what Mueller would not do.

Why did Mueller fail to make a decision that he could have made?

Why did Mueller allow Barr to make a decision that he would not make himself?

Why is Trump claiming falsely that the Mueller Report completely exonerated him when it did not?

Why was Barr allowed to intervene in a decision that was kept from him with the creation of the Special Counsel in the first place?

Here is the suspicious letter released on Sunday from AG Barr.

Mueller report: Read Attorney General Bill Barr’s letter on special counsel’s report - Vox

We need the report in its entirety and we need it now.
Click to expand...


Attorney General William Barr has provided to Congress the key findings from the Report filed by Special Counsel Robert Mueller.

Key findings:

No further indictments recommended, no non-public indictments.

“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 U.S. presidential election.”

No conclusion by Mueller one way or the other as to obstruction of justice. But Barr and Rosenstein find no evidence to support charge of obstruction of justice.
Special Counsel did not draw a conclusion on obstruction of justice. But The Attorney General Barr and Deputy Attorney General Rod J. Rosenstein did and they decided that with evidence presented
is not sufficient to establish that the President committed an obstruction-of-justice offense.

Game, Set and Match. It's over! Just think about what happened? For two years a complete lie was pushed 7/24.
The lie has been exposed and those that pushed it will have to answer for that.
 
Captain Adverse said:
In order for there to be obstruction, there has to be a crime one is attempting to obstruct.

The was no collusion or conspiracy to assist Russian efforts to "undermine" the 2016 election OR the hacking of the DNC server.

Trump also did nothing to prevent, or later to stop Mueller's investigation.
Click to expand...

That is not true. Evidence that action was taken is enough to qualify as obstruction of justice even if the initial action fails to be prosecuted as a crime. The impeachment investigation of Nixon and the impeachment of Clinton listed separate charges of Obstruction of Justice.

Obstruction of justice - Wikipedia
 
Common Sense 1 said:
Attorney General William Barr has provided to Congress the key findings from the Report filed by Special Counsel Robert Mueller.

Key findings:

No further indictments recommended, no non-public indictments.

“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 U.S. presidential election.”

No conclusion by Mueller one way or the other as to obstruction of justice. But Barr and Rosenstein find no evidence to support charge of obstruction of justice.
Special Counsel did not draw a conclusion on obstruction of justice. But The Attorney General Barr and Deputy Attorney General Rod J. Rosenstein did and they decided that with evidence presented
is not sufficient to establish that the President committed an obstruction-of-justice offense.

Game, Set and Match. It's over! Just think about what happened? For two years a complete lie was pushed 7/24.
The lie has been exposed and those that pushed it will have to answer for that.
Click to expand...

AG Barr said that the report from Muller did not exonerate Trump of obstruction of justice. He is claiming that it did.

The Barr letter is presented for your illumination

Mueller report: Read Attorney General Bill Barr’s letter on special counsel’s report - Vox
 
haymarket said:
That is not true. Evidence that action was taken is enough to qualify as obstruction of justice even if the initial action fails to be prosecuted as a crime. The impeachment investigation of Nixon and the impeachment of Clinton listed separate charges of Obstruction of Justice.

Obstruction of justice - Wikipedia
Click to expand...

:roll:

From your own citation:

Generally, obstruction charges are laid when it is discovered that a person questioned in an investigation, other than a suspect, has lied to the investigating officers...Obstruction charges can also be laid if a person alters, destroys, or conceals physical evidence.[1] Obstruction charges may also be laid in unique situations such as refusal to aid a police officer, escape through voluntary action of an officer and refusing to assist prison officers in arresting escaped convicts.
Click to expand...
Obstruction of justice - Wikipedia

At what point did Trump "lie to investigating officers?"

Where is it shown Trump "altered, destroyed, or concealed physical evidence?"

You know who actually appears to have done both of the above? The other Party Presidential candidate in 2016 :coffeepap:
 
Last edited:
Captain Adverse said:
:roll:

From your own citation:

Obstruction of justice - Wikipedia

At what point to Trump "lie to investigating officers?"

Where is it shown Trump "altered, destroyed, or concealed physical evidence?"

You know who actually appears to have done both of the above? The other Party Presidential candidate in 2016 :coffeepap:
Click to expand...

The word GENERALLY is NOT a restriction which limits the charge from being pursued against a sitting President.

Nowhere does it say that a charge of activity first must be filed to precede a charge of obstruction. And that is true for a sitting President as well.
 
Grokmaster said:
Because the people Mueller handed the evidence to..DID.

If Mueller DISAGREES...why has he SAID NOTHING ABOUT IT?


It ain't rocket science , and Barr ill GLADLY explain it to the House Politburo after he parses the report, and releases it, ACCORDING TO THE LAW.


You and the rest of the Lying left need to start getting your NEXT LIE TOGETHER, now that " TRUMP/RUSSIA !!!" and "OBSTRUCTION!!" have crashed and burned, and the CURRENT LIE(s) about the release of the SC Report will DO THE SAME in a matter of a few short weeks....
Click to expand...

It's amazing that people do so little research on threads that they make.
 
haymarket said:
The word GENERALLY is NOT a restriction which limits the charge from being pursued against a sitting President.

Nowhere does it say that a charge of activity first must be filed to precede a charge of obstruction. And that is true for a sitting President as well.
Click to expand...

If Mueller felt he had sufficient evidence to "charge" Trump or anyone else in his campaign with "obstruction of Justice," he would have simply said so.

He did not hesitate to go after Flynn and Papadopoulos on process charges even though the "lies" were not about anything actually illegal.

He did not do so. He did not ever recommend it be done. :no:

He simply provided Mr. Barr and Mr. Rosenstein with his findings and left it up to them to do so. THEY have not done so, and Mr. Barr has stated categorically that there was no obstruction.

END OF STORY, despite all your conspiracy theory wishful thinking.

I knew your side would only accept a finding from Mueller of cause for indictments. That anything else would be a "weasel" moment, i.e. trying to find ANYTHING to bolster the narrative justifying why Trump may have won but should never have become President.
 
Last edited:
haymarket said:
Robert Mueller did not exonerate Trump of the charge of instruction of justice. It was Bill Barr, a Trump political appointee with a suspicious record on the Mueller probe, who did what Mueller would not do.

Why did Mueller fail to make a decision that he could have made?

Why did Mueller allow Barr to make a decision that he would not make himself?

Why is Trump claiming falsely that the Mueller Report completely exonerated him when it did not?

Why was Barr allowed to intervene in a decision that was kept from him with the creation of the Special Counsel in the first place?

Here is the suspicious letter released on Sunday from AG Barr.

Mueller report: Read Attorney General Bill Barr’s letter on special counsel’s report - Vox

We need the report in its entirety and we need it now.
Click to expand...

Your headline is 100% factual but Trump Fan Nation is lying about it.

Mueller absolutely, unquestioningly did not exonerate Trump of obstruction. Which means he punted it to Congress because he knows it happened.

Yes, we need the report in its entirety. There was once a time when I was a Republican, and the people on the right (before they became drooling idiots) where we would not accept the opinion of a political appointee of (insert Democrat's name here) as the gospel. I wonder what happened to the party, besides of the obvious of Trump and millions of idiots who are both hypocritical and brainwashed?

The American people have a right to know. It was no different when it was Nixon or Clinton. The American people have the right, and there is no debating that.
 
Captain Adverse said:
If Mueller felt he had sufficient evidence to "charge" Trump or anyone else in his campaign with "obstruction of Justice," he would had simply said so.

He did not hesitate to go after Flynn and Papadopoulos on process charges even though the "lies" were not about anything actually illegal.

He did not do so. :no:

He simply provided Mr. Barr and Mr. Rosenstein with his facts and left it to them to do so. THEY have not done so, and Mr. Barr has stated categorically that there was no obstruction.

END OF STORY, despite all your conspiracy theory wishful thinking.

I knew your side would only accept a finding from Mueller of cause for indictments. That anything else would be a "weasel" moment, i.e. trying to find ANYTHING to bolster the narrative justifying why Trump may have won but should never have become President.
Click to expand...

Mueller could not charge a sitting President. A sitting President can not be indicted by the Special Counsel. Flynn and the others are not and were not the President.

Mueller did not exonerate Trump of obstruction because it's Congress' job to investigate a President for that.

You may not care about potential obstruction of justice, but many others do.

No, it actually is not end of story.
 
tres borrachos said:
Mueller could not charge a sitting President. A sitting President can not be indicted by the Special Counsel. Flynn and the others are not and were not the President.

Mueller did not exonerate Trump of obstruction because it's Congress' job to investigate a President for that.

You may not care about potential obstruction of justice, but many others do.

No, it actually is not end of story.
Click to expand...

Of course it isn't...for YOUR side of this issue. It will NEVER be the end of the story, as your side will probably go to their deathbed believing a false flag issue designed as an "insurance policy" to undermine a Presidential candidate in the event he actually got elected.

More and more evidence appears to be coming to light, starting with Ms. Page's testimony, Steele's UK civil lawsuit testimony, and other acts by the "conspirators" (Ohr, Strzok, McCabe, etc.).
 
Captain Adverse said:
Of course it isn't...for YOUR side of this issue. It will NEVER be the end of the story, as your side will probably go to their deathbed believing a false flag issue designed as an "insurance policy" to undermine a Presidential candidate in the event he actually got elected.

More and more evidence appears to be coming to light, starting with Ms. Page's testimony, and other acts by the "conspirators" (Ohr, Stzok, McCabe, etc.).
Click to expand...

My side of the issue? What would that be?

I said for the last 2 years that they were never going to fond collusion, mostly because I think Trump is too stupid for that. He was a useful idiot for Russia. He didn't seek them out. I said for 2 years that it appeared that he was trying to obstruct justice. I still think he was, and I'm not alone - and Mueller didn't exonerate him of that. You want it swept under the rug. That may not happen.

So what is my side? Is that the side of citizens who believe the President of the United States should never obstruct justice, no matter who he is? Yes, that's my side. We're known as "patriots".

But again, if you don't care about potential obstruction, that's your choice. It doesn't say much for you though.
 
haymarket said:
You want to MOVE ON because you are pushing a lie as fact. That is fundamentally dishonest.

The Letter from AG Barr said specifically that the Mueller Report FAILED to exonerate Trump of obstruction of justice.

Barr letter
Click to expand...

I haven't pushed anything. I've stated the facts exactly.

It's you who keeps crying about how Trump says Mueller exonerated him of obstruction. It's you who keeps pushing that.

I'm saying...it doesn't matter. I guess it matters to you for some reason.
 
Captain Adverse said:
If Mueller felt he had sufficient evidence to "charge" Trump or anyone else in his campaign with "obstruction of Justice," he would have simply said so.
Click to expand...

You may be correct... and there is lots of other room between that and total exoneration.
 
tres borrachos said:
Your headline is 100% factual but Trump Fan Nation is lying about it.

Mueller absolutely, unquestioningly did not exonerate Trump of obstruction. Which means he punted it to Congress because he knows it happened.

Yes, we need the report in its entirety. There was once a time when I was a Republican, and the people on the right (before they became drooling idiots) where we would not accept the opinion of a political appointee of (insert Democrat's name here) as the gospel. I wonder what happened to the party, besides of the obvious of Trump and millions of idiots who are both hypocritical and brainwashed?

The American people have a right to know. It was no different when it was Nixon or Clinton. The American people have the right, and there is no debating that.
Click to expand...

So the key question is why the lying.... and why is Trump getting away with it?
 
Mycroft said:
I haven't pushed anything. I've stated the facts exactly.

It's you who keeps crying about how Trump says Mueller exonerated him of obstruction. It's you who keeps pushing that.

I'm saying...it doesn't matter. I guess it matters to you for some reason.
Click to expand...

Reality always matters to me.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom