Agin the right has turned anything in to a legal on argument only . Like saying because they weren't convicted they did nothing ... but if you take the time to remove your partisan glasses or try if Obama's did these things . And read the detail s of the report .. you would possibly see.. how abhorrent Trump and his peoples actions and behavior was..

CONSERVATIVE logic

If I bring a women to your hotel room who you know is a hooker (Trumps people) . But they were watching this hooker (Fbi). There was investigations. (TRUMP PEOPLE LIED WHEN ASKED ) than they concluded you only spoke to the hooker. (We don't have enought to meet the standard of the law...
then the wife found out (American people)

Conservatives the wife needs to get over it ...

Anymeans necessary
Posted from my iPhone/Mobile device

Wayne,this disjointed gibberish is a little tough to follow but my guess is more

Conservative = bad
Posted from my iPhone/Mobile device

You can't indict someone for collusion. The bar for criminal conspiracy was set very high and the report clearly states that encrypted messaging apps and rampant dishonesty impaired the investigation.

But that being said, do you take comfort in the fact that the campaign actively encouraged and benefited from Russian election meddling, that the campaign and Trump helped to cover up the Russian actions, that they had highly unusual amount of Russian contacts and lied repeatedly about all of them, that they lied repeatedly to American voters etc... etc... you're good with all of this just because nobody was indicted for conspiracy?

And for those claiming there's nothing there, weren't there over 30 indictments handed out? Didn't the investigation spin off 14 other investigations 12 of which we know little about?

The obstruction case laid out in the report is incredibly damning to Trump personally. I don't know if the House will actually move forward with impeachment for political reasons, but the blueprint for the case is there and it's pretty clear.

As Dan York who's no liberal said yesterday. If every American were to just skim through the report there's no chance Trump would get reelected.

now you got it.

WDMSO, for the ten millionth time, Trump is a disgusting person. But three separate investigations have concluded that with regards to russia, there’s not enough to bring charges.

you say he didn’t get convicted? No. He didn’t even get charged.

The Mueller report was
exculpatory. i’m sorry, but it was. How about we start talking about whether or not his policies are making things better for the nation? there is a reason why the left is this desperate, to avoid having that conversation. they humiliate themselves to avoid having that conversation.

ANYTHING to avoid talking about policy.

Russia! Racism! People aren’t illegal! LGBTQ!! Gender isn’t binary! Hitler! The polar bears! Free stuff! Waaahhhh!!!!!
Posted from my iPhone/Mobile device

again yes no charges.. I get it and i understand why .. seems your willing ignore the behavior As if were talking about the guy Down the Street .. and not the Office of the POTUS ... Thats the part that i dont understand how republicans can just look the other way ... after making bigger issue over less concerning the last Potus .. its amazing

its very simple even if your not convicted or charged for soliciting sex

you were still hanging out with hookers ..

its as easy as that .. unless your a Trump supporter it's all good cuz He didn't stick it in

"seems your willing ignore the behavior"

I call him out all the time. Bit I'm not willing to call for impeachment or imprisonment just because you hate him.

"Because I hate his guts", isn't valid reason for impeachment. He won. Deal. With. It. There's another election next year.

Here's the fatal flaw with your hooker analogy and the wife finding out.

Trump isn't your spouse. We didn't elect him to be the moral head of our family. He's president.

If I was friends with Melania Trump, I would tell her to kick his azz to the curb and take half of what he's got. His behavior is sufficient grounds for a divorce, and probably an annulment. That's not nearly the same thing as being grounds for incarceration, or impeachment.

Bill Clinton was also serially unfaithful, which makes him a horrible husband and father. But in my opinion, he left the country far better off than when he showed up, so he was a good POTUS.

There's the valid analogy. The criteria for being POTUS, ain't the same criteria to be a good spouse.

He won an election fair and square, and in the process, he made 99% of the people on the left, look like morons. So they hate him. They, which includes you, are consumed and deranged with hate.

He's doing a good job. The division, which is terrible for the country, is mostly a creation of democrats and the media, though he certainly doesn't help.

The left likes to hit below the belt, ask Bush, McCain, Romney. The left doesn't like when their target hits back, it's never happened before, but boy is it happening now. And it's beyond glorious to watch.

The stock market is up, unemployment is down, and the entire left is coming un-glued. I feel like a kid at Christmas getting the exact bike I wanted.

https://www.nationalreview.com/corne...arning-sign-2/ good read on how wrong you are about your stable genius

From the article "It is not hard to see why Trump’s senior staff treat him as they do. They understand better than any of us that his distinct disabilities as a decision maker have to be accommodated in some extraordinary ways to prevent them from exacting terrible costs. But these extraordinary accommodations are unlikely to be sustainable in truly extraordinary circumstances. We can hope that the country is lucky enough to avoid a serious crisis of some kind that requires a functional emergency-management response under time pressure."



ps founding father's are no actually our fathers .. it's called a metaphor. as was wife and husband

And what does the market and unemployment have to with other than for you to excuse his behavior
Posted from my iPhone/Mobile device

I wish it was as simple as Hate That's your sides way of Governing we saw 8 years of it..

These are actual problems with Trump .. We are not crying over just how many golf outings he's gone on or the cost to the public.. that scrutiny was for the last POTUS (shocking) and so so important to Fox and other conservatives :cheers:

You seem terribly agitated. I fear for your mental /emotional condition if Trump actually committed a crime.

Weak.
Posted from my iPhone/Mobile device

Probably stronger than whatever point you were trying to make.

I think with each party there are those willing to overlook indiscretions as long as things are going in the right direction for the country. There is evidence of this type of tolerance with each loyal party member. I feel those whose values are down the middle are more likely to give an accurate evaluation of such indiscretions. This is why it comes as no surprise that the hardcore snowflakes simply detest the president and will stop at nothing to discredit the man. Where there is smoke you usually find fire,this investigation found some hot coals admittedly but no flames except on this board.
Posted from my iPhone/Mobile device

spence, what bothers you more, that the wikileaks
email hack happened and hurt hilary, or that her campaign was engaged in the unethical, undemocratic actions that were revealed?

she didn’t lose because if russia. she lost because she’s impossible to like, she’s like the whole
country’s miserable ex-wife, because no matter what she says, all any man hears is a shrill voice yelling “take out the garbage!!”. and she was too good to bother with the middle of the country, and called them deplorable. then she calls them sexist for not voting for her.

Good riddance to bad garbage.
Posted from my iPhone/Mobile device

Then why bother with an investigation into it? :huh:
Posted from my iPhone/Mobile device

Please pay attention.

Says the guy that took nine days to respond.

Wit not so quick these days, huh?
Posted from my iPhone/Mobile device

Better things to do.

This is amazing.


https://www.washingtonpost.com/world...=.82d810d81b7d
Posted from my iPhone/Mobile device

Meh :sleeps:

No surprise that Trumps hand picked AG, spun the report to favor his boss, what is surprising is that if Mueller made him aware he disagreed with his conclusion; then Barr came close to lying to Congress. When asked if he was aware members of the investigation were not in agreement with his conclusions on obstruction, he said no he wasn’t.

If Barr had been honest about summarizing the report, he would have stated DOJ policy prohibits charging a sitting president and that is why Mueller’s team felt they could not move forward with an indictment on obstruction. Those that see it any other way based on what is reported in volume two, are drunk on the red coolaid.
Posted from my iPhone/Mobile device

Came “close” to lying to Congress?

And how about lying to the American people?
Posted from my iPhone/Mobile device

Don't be a snowflake - Trump lowered taxes.

So, by that reasoning, Mueller could not have moved forward with an indictment on conspiracy with Russia either if he had found sufficient evidence. So, then, he could only present conclusive evidence of guilt. Which he could not do re conspiracy. Neither could he do re obstruction.

That was the scope of his power. To find conclusive evidence of guilt. Not to find conclusive evidence of innocence. If it cannot be concluded that Trump obstructed justice, that's as far as the investigation can proceed. The jury says either guilty or not guilty. It does not say "innocent."

Maybe. Or maybe there was no wrongdoing that rises to criminality.

Mueller has SUPPOSEDLY said that Barr's letter was not inaccurate. Can't someone just ask Mueller that for the record, and end this?

Also, you conveniently left out that Mueller had the authority to indict, right? But chose not to. Presumably there was a reason for that.

"what is surprising is that if Mueller made him aware he disagreed with his conclusion"

Where is the evidence of this? Because I keep hearing that Mueller said Barr's letter was not inaccurate.

We have the fact that Mueller didn't decide to indict anyone for collusion or obstruction. We have the Mueller report. We have Barr's summary. What is the biggest discrepancy between the two?

If Mueller says that Barr's letter was not inaccurate, but didn't correctly capture the context, that's "amazing" to you?

Sorry, it appears to be what you would call, a big, fat, nothingburger. Time for the liberals to drop this and focus on late-term abortions, open borders, and socialism. That'll win in FL and NC...

Brett Baier is on Fox obviously ,but h eisn't Sean Hannity, he has attacked Trump. And if Barr lied, it should be very easy to point to what he wrote in the letter, and point to places in Mueller's report that dispute Barr's letter. If Barr lied, that would be something a 12 year-old could do. If we're talking about context and nuance, that means we're talking about nothing.

If Barr lied, he should be severely punished. But it woul dbe ridiculously easy to prove he lied nby showing the discrepancies between his letter and the Mueller report.

There's also this...Mueller found nothing to justify indictments. That's a pretty crucial element to all this, one that the snowflakes are desperately trying to avoid.



https://www.foxnews.com/politics/bre...ent-inaccurate

Barr testified that Mueller had told him 3 times that DOJ policy prohibiting the charging of a sitting President was not the reason for not indicting Trump on obstruction.

So you saw nothing in the mueller report suggesting obstruction? You need to get some reading glasses, CVS or job lot have them pretty cheap. I find it ironic that you constantly hold up the founding fathers intent and distain for government over reach, yet you are ok with clear over reach and obstruction by the executive branch of our government. No need to respond, I’m pretty sure I have your number and can predict your response. The new norm for our government should concern us all.
Posted from my iPhone/Mobile device