Guest viewing limit reached
  • You have reached the maximum number of guest views allowed
  • Please register below to remove this limitation

Donald Trump running for president

States deciding the criteria for their own ballots is absolutely a state's rights issue. What about it isn't?
 
nostrum420 said:
Nothing said no obstruction. Trying to fire the investigator is clear obstruction of justice.
Click to expand...

The conclusion stated that they could not find a crime of obstruction.

If trump tried to fire the investigator, why didnt they say he committed the crime of obstruction?

We can link Meuller to your response so that he can reopen the case and finally finish drumpf.
 
WolfJFlywheel said:
The conclusion stated that they could not find a crime of obstruction.

If trump tried to fire the investigator, why didnt they say he committed the crime of obstruction?

We can link Meuller to your response so that he can reopen the case and finally finish drumpf.
Click to expand...

Mueller (arguably) said no collusion. He left the obstruction of justice issues to other courts / investigators most of which are ongoing. Please provide a quote from the Mueller report that says no obstruction of justice.
 
Nothing
nostrum420 said:
Mueller (arguably) said no collusion. He left the obstruction of justice issues to other courts / investigators most of which are ongoing. Please provide a quote from the Mueller report that says no obstruction of justice.
Click to expand...

Nothing in this post is true.

Mueller definitively said no collusion. Neither trump nor anyone in his team was indicted for collusion or even accused of it by mueller.

Mueller couldn’t bring an obstruction indictment because there was no intent to obstruct. Mueller is a pro. He knows what it takes to get a charge and he didn’t have it plain and simple. He didn’t turn any obstruction case over to any other court. He punted it to Barr as a political move. Did mueller turn over Other cases? Sure. Obstruction? No. We already saw Obama lackey Greg Craig get indicted because of cases muller turned over from his investigation.

The quote from the conclusion “While this report does not conclude that the President committed a crime, it also does not exonerate him.”

“Does not conclude the president committed a crime”.

I purposefully included the exoneration part just for you because That’s the most important part for the tds group. Here’s the thing tho, special councils don’t exonerate anyone. That isn’t their job. Their job is to find crimes and indict people for crimes. I’ll give you one guess why no one was indicted for obstruction.
 
Last edited:
It's (arguably) not their job to indict the president, however. That's up to Congress (in Mueller's opinion) and that's who Mueller punted the "collusion" issue to. Obstruction is a seperate matter that was outside of Mueller's scope so he punted that to other courts because he's not Ken Starr and most of that is ongoing.
 
WolfJFlywheel said:
Russia isn't over? What does that even mean? If there was an issue with meddling why didn’t Obama, you know, the president, do anything about it? Why did he tell people to stand down? Russian meddling has happened for decades.

The real Russian collusion investigation is just heating up. Illegal spying, unmasking, attempted coup. You guys support that because ORANGE MAN BAD?
Click to expand...

This isn't about Trump, it's about Russia, whether Trump was involved or not. Trump did them a huge favor by making it about himself. Why is it ok to let illegal attacks on our country go on just because others have? That's your defense?! Not everybody who wants the Russian attacks stopped and prosecuted is just in it because of Trump. And now you want it both ways: you don't want any investigations on the Trump administration, but you want endless investigations on Obama and Clinton. Take the cheeto out of your mouth and look at the bigger picture.
 
nostrum420 said:
It's (arguably) not their job to indict the president, however. That's up to Congress (in Mueller's opinion) and that's who Mueller punted the "collusion" issue to. Obstruction is a seperate matter that was outside of Mueller's scope so he punted that to other courts because he's not Ken Starr and most of that is ongoing.
Click to expand...

But nothing was outside mueller scope. He had free reign.

Nothing got punted to Congress. Congress has no power to indict.

I’ll arguably agree with you only because we are talking about the president, that one could make the case that a sitting president can’t be indicted caused them not to indict. EXCEPT no person was indicted for collusion. No one. Not don jr, not that rascally double agent carter page or the person supposedly that got the investigation started papadopoulus. No one.

You know why? Because there wasn’t any collusion. The Russian collusion narrative is a hoax. The investigation was a blockade to cover up an illegal spying operation. They thought if they could get an investigation started, giving mueller a fishing expedition, they could then find something to get trump on.

And after hundreds of subpoenas, thousands of interviews, testifying under oath and millions of emails and documents reviewed, they couldn’t find 1 single thing.

You were lied to for over 2 years so I get that it’s hard to come to terms with but that’s reality.

No collusion, no obstruction, trump team turned down help from the Russians. Those are Muellers words.

Almost all of the details about the hoax are available and more are coming to light every week. There is a report on Comey coming up, IG report on fisa abuse comin up and the declassification of all the documents that started the hoax. It’s coming.
 
WolfJFlywheel said:
It doesn’t matter what I think or what you or I consider the standard. Special council leader Robert Mueller and subsequently William Barr said no collusion and no obstruction based on the standard of the law.
Click to expand...

If you're going to call out others for lying, maybe stop lying yourself. Barr misrepresented the report and gave his opinion. Mueller clearly states this "Fourth, if we had confidence after a thorough investigation of the facts that the President clearly did not commit obstruction of justice, we would so state. Based on the facts and the applicable legal standards, however, we are unable to reach that judgment. The evidence we obtained about the President's actions and intent presents difficult issues that prevent us from conclusively determining that no criminal conduct occurred. Accordingly, while this report does not conclude that the President committed a crime, it also does not exonerate him."
 
Aleksandar37 said:
This isn't about Trump, it's about Russia, whether Trump was involved or not. Trump did them a huge favor by making it about himself. Why is it ok to let illegal attacks on our country go on just because others have? That's your defense?! Not everybody who wants the Russian attacks stopped and prosecuted is just in it because of Trump. And now you want it both ways: you don't want any investigations on the Trump administration, but you want endless investigations on Obama and Clinton. Take the cheeto out of your mouth and look at the bigger picture.
Click to expand...


Mueller already said trump wasn’t involved. Not me.

When did I say any attacks were ok? I said the president at the time did nothing to stop it. Trump wasn’t an elected official. He had no power. Obama actually told his team to stand down. That’s a fact.

I also never said trump shouldn’t have been investigated. I said it was a hoax. I’m glad the investigation happened. It proved he was clean.

Now the real investigation begins.
 
WolfJFlywheel said:
No collusion, no obstruction, trump team turned down help from the Russians. Those are Muellers words.

Almost all of the details about the hoax are available and more are coming to light every week. There is a report on Comey coming up, IG report on fisa abuse comin up and the declassification of all the documents that started the hoax. It’s coming.
Click to expand...

Nope, still a lie.
 
WolfJFlywheel said:
Mueller already said trump wasn’t involved. Not me.

When did I say any attacks were ok? I said the president at the time did nothing to stop it. Trump wasn’t an elected official. He had no power. Obama actually told his team to stand down. That’s a fact.

I also never said trump shouldn’t have been investigated. I said it was a hoax. I’m glad the investigation happened. It proved he was clean.

Now the real investigation begins.
Click to expand...

You're saying that the only reason we care about Russian meddling is because "Orange man bad." Using your logic, should I assume the only reason you care about spying is because you hate old white ladies and black guys? You don't seem to comprehend that there are people who care about facts and not what Q or reddit tells them is coming.

The investigations in the Mueller report are not even complete. There are many redactions based on potential harm to ongoing investigations, so claiming anybody is clean at this point is completely based on faith.
 
Mueller has absolutely deferred several matters to other courts many of those investigations are ongoing. That's not my opinion, that's fact. If he had "free reign" he did not take advantage of it.

However, he did not have said free reign all special investigations have a limited scope and if you come across evidence of a crime that's outside that scope you deferr to other investigators/prosecutors/courts so as to show it's not witch hunt/fishing expedition... unless you're Ken Starr then you start on real estate and end on lying about blow jobs but I digress...

Anyway, Mueller actually did the right thing and deferred everything outside his scope to others.
 
Aleksandar37 said:
If you're going to call out others for lying, maybe stop lying yourself. Barr misrepresented the report and gave his opinion. Mueller clearly states this "Fourth, if we had confidence after a thorough investigation of the facts that the President clearly did not commit obstruction of justice, we would so state. Based on the facts and the applicable legal standards, however, we are unable to reach that judgment. The evidence we obtained about the President's actions and intent presents difficult issues that prevent us from conclusively determining that no criminal conduct occurred. Accordingly, while this report does not conclude that the President committed a crime, it also does not exonerate him."
Click to expand...


Barr didn’t misrepresent anything. What did I lie about?

I posted the exact quote from the conclusion that you did.
 
nostrum420 said:
Mueller has absolutely deferred several matters to other courts many of those investigations are ongoing. That's not my opinion, that's fact. If he had "free reign" he did not take advantage of it.

However, he did not have said free reign all special investigations have a limited scope and if you come across evidence of a crime that's outside that scope you deferr to other investigators/prosecutors/courts so as to show it's not witch hunt/fishing expedition... unless you're Ken Starr then you start on real estate and end on lying about blow jobs but I digress...

Anyway, Mueller actually did the right thing and deferred everything outside his scope to others.
Click to expand...

Exactly. Barr gave his opinion of there being free rein, but Barr also lied about the report, so we can all do the math. You can go to the transcripts of the Manafort trial and see Judge Ellis' constant objections to the scope of the Mueller investigation for one example. The prosecutors weren't allowed to do their job because it was supposedly outside the scope of the Russian investigation.
 
Aleksandar37 said:
You're saying that the only reason we care about Russian meddling is because "Orange man bad." Using your logic, should I assume the only reason you care about spying is because you hate old white ladies and black guys? You don't seem to comprehend that there are people who care about facts and not what Q or reddit tells them is coming.

The investigations in the Mueller report are not even complete. There are many redactions based on potential harm to ongoing investigations, so claiming anybody is clean at this point is completely based on faith.
Click to expand...

You’re completely disregarding facts on the other side of the isle because you don’t like trump. That’s the definition of orange man bad. The is evidence of illegal spying. There is 0 evidence of trump colluding with Russians.


Aleksandar37 said:
Nope, still a lie.
Click to expand...


What’s a lie?
 
Aleksandar37 said:
Exactly. Barr gave his opinion of there being free rein, but Barr also lied about the report, so we can all do the math. You can go to the transcripts of the Manafort trial and see Judge Ellis' constant objections to the scope of the Mueller investigation for one example. The prosecutors weren't allowed to do their job because it was supposedly outside the scope of the Russian investigation.
Click to expand...


Lol at Barr lying about the report. Simple question: who did mueller indict for collusion or obstruction?
 
You guys are using nothing but feelings in here. You are completely ignoring facts. One of those main facts is that muller didn’t indict anyone for collusion or obstruction.

The law doesn’t care about your feelings. Law has a standard and nothing done by trump or his team rose to the standard set by law to be collusion or obstruction.

The end.
 
WolfJFlywheel said:
You’re completely disregarding facts on the other side of the isle because you don’t like trump. That’s the definition of orange man bad. The is evidence of illegal spying. There is 0 evidence of trump colluding with Russians.
Click to expand...

I don't know how else to explain to you that I don't care whether Trump was involved or not. The investigation is to see if Russia interfered in our election. Democrats, Republicans, there are no sides to me. They're the same thing and should be united in this case against Russian meddling even though they're not.
 
WolfJFlywheel said:
Correct. No one. And he already said no more indictments were coming from his investigation.

Guess why
Click to expand...

Because he has referred the rest of it to other people and agencies. And because even though you claim he had free rein, he was told that he wouldn't be able to indict a sitting President.
 
Aleksandar37 said:
I don't know how else to explain to you that I don't care whether Trump was involved or not. The investigation is to see if Russia interfered in our election. Democrats, Republicans, there are no sides to me. They're the same thing and should be united in this case against Russian meddling even though they're not.
Click to expand...


I completely agree with you. Our elected officials don’t care.
 
Aleksandar37 said:
Because he has referred the rest of it to other people and agencies. And because even though you claim he had free rein, he was told that he wouldn't be able to indict a sitting President.
Click to expand...


I said his mandate gave him free reign to investigate whatever and whoever he wanted to.

If he found trump committed a crime he would have said that. There’s now way he would have just given up after 2 years if there was actual evidence that a crime had been committed.
 
WolfJFlywheel said:
I said his mandate gave him free reign to investigate whatever and whoever he wanted to.

If he found trump committed a crime he would have said that. There’s now way he would have just given up after 2 years if there was actual evidence that a crime had been committed.
Click to expand...

Free rein isn't what I or any rational human would call his questioning of Trump. Trump and his lawyers fought that the entire time and got it to be in writing only and even those questions got neutered. The end result was in Mueller's words, inadequate. Not exactly free rein.
 
WolfJFlywheel said:
I completely agree with you. Our elected officials don’t care.
Click to expand...

Neither do you! I keep saying this is about Russia and that it's not over and you keep going off about Trump being cleared. You seem to care more about padding the ego of one man than you do about the security of our democracy.
 
Aleksandar37 said:
Free rein isn't what I or any rational human would call his questioning of Trump. Trump and his lawyers fought that the entire time and got it to be in writing only and even those questions got neutered. The end result was in Mueller's words, inadequate. Not exactly free rein.
Click to expand...

Mueller could have subpoenaed trump at any time. Know why he didn’t? Because no judge would have ever let it happen with no evidence being present.
 
Aleksandar37 said:
Neither do you! I keep saying this is about Russia and that it's not over and you keep going off about Trump being cleared. You seem to care more about padding the ego of one man than you do about the security of our democracy.
Click to expand...


You saying I don’t care is just feelings.

I don’t want Russia meddling in our elections, politics, etc. There, we are clear now.

They have been doing it for decades and will continue to do it.


This discussion has been about trump colluding with the Russians. That’s the portion that is over. Maybe that’s where the miscommunication is.


And we live in a republic not a democracy
 
Last edited:
Aleksandar37 said:
Neither do you! I keep saying this is about Russia and that it's not over and you keep going off about Trump being cleared. You seem to care more about padding the ego of one man than you do about the security of our democracy.
Click to expand...


And if you’re so concerned about the republic, why aren’t you calling for a investigation into the illegal spying and use of our IC to stop an election and then a coup?

The Obama administration has done more to disrupt our republic and poses more of a threat than Russia could ever dream of doing.
 
WolfJFlywheel said:
And if you’re so concerned about the republic, why aren’t you calling for a investigation into the illegal spying and use of our IC to stop an election and then a coup?

The Obama administration has done more to disrupt our republic and poses more of a threat than Russia could ever dream of doing.
Click to expand...
I'm fine with investigations. I'm not fine with stating what they're going to find before they even look or attacking the investigators while they do their job.

So why choose one over the other? You want to go after a President, but let a foreign aggressor go free? Like a lot of Trump-supporters, and a lot of Clinton, Obama, etc supporters you're in favor of protecting a single person over the country, based on what? You don't want us to believe one set of rumors, but we should believe another set of rumors?
 
WolfJFlywheel said:
You saying I don’t care is just feelings.

I don’t want Russia meddling in our elections, politics, etc. There, we are clear now.

They have been doing it for decades and will continue to do it.


This discussion has been about trump colluding with the Russians. That’s the portion that is over. Maybe that’s where the miscommunication is.


And we live in a republic not a democracy
Click to expand...
Why do you keep talking about feelings? Just because I think Trump is a piece of crap doesn't automatically mean I like Obama or Clinton...you got some catching up to do on that one. I'm basing my responses on your exact words. You just jumped into this thread and wanted to make it about Trump, not Russia. Your knee jerk reaction to me saying that it wasn't over was to claim it's over because Trump supposedly was cleared because that's all it is to you. I happen to think that the report, entitled "Report On The Investigation Into Russian Interference In The 2016 Presidential Election" is exactly that. I don't have time for online reddit bs and politicians who want to spin the report in whatever direction helps their already preconceived opinions.

A republic is a form of democracy, so not sure what online expert sold you that one. Or have you finally solved those definitions that have been argued since the Federalist Papers?
 
Aleksandar37 said:
I'm fine with investigations. I'm not fine with stating what they're going to find before they even look or attacking the investigators while they do their job.

So why choose one over the other? You want to go after a President, but let a foreign aggressor go free? Like a lot of Trump-supporters, and a lot of Clinton, Obama, etc supporters you're in favor of protecting a single person over the country, based on what? You don't want us to believe one set of rumors, but we should believe another set of rumors?
Click to expand...

This is just another group of feelings and assumptions.

I haven’t chosen anyone over anyone else. There was investigation. I didn’t know for trump was clear until it was done. Now it’s down and the origins of that investigation are in the spotlight.

What I want is an equal justice system under the law. What I want is for a president not to be able to start an illegal spying campaign on the opposition candidate.

Mueller already tried indicting a bunch of Russians for their Facebook memes how did that work out?

The problem we are facing is that countries meddle in other countries elections all the time. We do it all the time. What do you propose we do to Russia?

And why are you ok with illegal spying in the us? There are actual facts and evidence supporting the illegal spying. There is 0 evidence to support trump colluding with the Russians. So I’m not asking you to believe any rumors since there is actual evidence.

It’s just seems like you aren’t interested because you don’t like trump. Like him or not, no big deal. He isn’t that great of a person but I won’t approve of a coup attempt just because I don’t like someone.
 
Last edited:
Aleksandar37 said:
Why do you keep talking about feelings? Just because I think Trump is a piece of crap doesn't automatically mean I like Obama or Clinton...you got some catching up to do on that one. I'm basing my responses on your exact words. You just jumped into this thread and wanted to make it about Trump, not Russia. Your knee jerk reaction to me saying that it wasn't over was to claim it's over because Trump supposedly was cleared because that's all it is to you. I happen to think that the report, entitled "Report On The Investigation Into Russian Interference In The 2016 Presidential Election" is exactly that. I don't have time for online reddit bs and politicians who want to spin the report in whatever direction helps their already preconceived opinions.

A republic is a form of democracy, so not sure what online expert sold you that one. Or have you finally solved those definitions that have been argued since the Federalist Papers?
Click to expand...

A) the thread is about trump not Russia
B) you mentioned Russia when I got in here
C) still at the end of the day mueller found some Facebook meme farms from Russians. We didn’t need a report that cost $30 million to tell us Russia meddles in elections. Knowing that, why did Obama, when he was president, tell his team to stand down when presented with facts that Russia was meddling in elections?
 
WolfJFlywheel said:
There was no evidence to support a subpoena! Do you understand what that means?
Click to expand...
Free rein means that there would not be any restrictions. Legal or illegal restriction, it's a restriction. And it wouldn't have even be needed if he truly had free rein. So, yet again, look up the definition of what free rein means.
 

Damn, you took out the part I was going to jump on lmao
[/QUOTE]
a valid argument was made for lowering voting age to 18, they were getting drafted and sent off to Vietnam....now if you want to bring back the draft to include 16 year olds[male and female]I would be all in!!!
 
WolfJFlywheel said:
A) the thread is about trump not Russia
B) you mentioned Russia when I got in here
C) still at the end of the day mueller found some Facebook meme farms from Russians. We didn’t need a report that cost $30 million to tell us Russia meddles in elections. Knowing that, why did Obama, when he was president, tell his team to stand down when presented with facts that Russia was meddling in elections?
Click to expand...

You're obviously trolling or just that dense if you think that is all Mueller found. Read the report. Investigate Obama too, And if he is found to have done something, punish him. Line him up with the rest. Why did the Trump team meet with a Russian agent for the purpose of getting stolen information on a former Secretary of State and First Lady and not report it to the authorities? And then lied about it repeatedly?
 
thebigt said:
Damn, you took out the part I was going to jump on lmao
Click to expand...
a valid argument was made for lowering voting age to 18, they were getting drafted and sent off to Vietnam....now if you want to bring back the draft to include 16 year olds[male and female]I would be all in!!!
[/QUOTE]
Oh, no. I meant the tax return release part lol.
 
Aleksandar37 said:
Free rein means that there would not be any restrictions. Legal or illegal restriction, it's a restriction. And it wouldn't have even be needed if he truly had free rein. So, yet again, look up the definition of what free rein means.
Click to expand...

Ah yes, some wordplay to deflect from the truth. Classic.

You’re trying to tell me that because mueller couldn’t use illegal tactics that he didn’t have free reign to investigate. That’s rich man.

Who is trolling who now?
 
Aleksandar37 said:
a valid argument was made for lowering voting age to 18, they were getting drafted and sent off to Vietnam....now if you want to bring back the draft to include 16 year olds[male and female]I would be all in!!!
Click to expand...
Oh, no. I meant the tax return release part lol.
[/QUOTE]
ok, let me see if I can word it correctly...trumps returns in question are before becoming president. if we are seeking accountability then bill and barack's returns after leaving WH should also be submitted for accountability. both were fairly 'poor' before and both have amassed wealth after.
 
thebigt said:
ok, let me see if I can word it correctly...trumps returns in question are before becoming president. if we are seeking accountability then bill and barack's returns after leaving WH should also be submitted for accountability. both were fairly 'poor' before and both have amassed wealth after.
Click to expand...

Correct. As with far too many politicians.

After isn’t the issue tho. While in office is the worrisome part.
 
WolfJFlywheel said:
Correct. As with far too many politicians.

After isn’t the issue tho. While in office is the worrisome part.
Click to expand...
the deed would come during, the payoff after.

i was in kindergarten when JFK was assasinated, bill and barack were the least wealthy going into presidency that i can think of....not anymore.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top