The Trump Impeachment Thread

Quote: rxwine

You're trying to rewrite history where Mueller supposedly cleared Trump of obstruction./

Not Mueller's job to clear him, as
it's not a prosecutors job to clear
anybody. Their only job is to
determine if an indictable crime
was committed.

Quote: Evenbob

Not Mueller's job to clear him, as
it's not a prosecutors job to clear
anybody. Their only job is to
determine if an indictable crime
was committed.

THANK YOU! The number of CNN and MSNBC idiots who keep yapping that "Mueller report does not exonerate Trump" is stunning. There was NEVER a possibility of the report stating that Trump is innocent of ANYTHING. All Mueller could report is if there was evidence of Trump's collusion with Russia. He was unable to do so.

But it is just as disingenuous of Trump to CLAIM he was exonerated, as that could not happen as well.

What Trump could have said is "They were looking for evidence to indict or impeach me, and could not find it."..

Quote: SOOPOO

THANK YOU! The number of CNN and MSNBC idiots who keep yapping that "Mueller report does not exonerate Trump" is stunning. There was NEVER a possibility of the report stating that Trump is innocent of ANYTHING. All Mueller could report is if there was evidence of Trump's collusion with Russia. He was unable to do so.

But it is just as disingenuous of Trump to CLAIM he was exonerated, as that could not happen as well.

What Trump could have said is "They were looking for evidence to indict or impeach me, and could not find it."..

I am not sure I agree with you SOOPOO. It is very difficult to prove a negative. If you were accused of murder and found not quilty wouldn't you claim you were exonerated? The not guilty finding under your definition only means that they were unable to find evidence that you murdered someone and you were not exonerated.

Quote: kenarman

I am not sure I agree with you SOOPOO. It is very difficult to prove a negative. If you were accused of murder and found not quilty wouldn't you claim you were exonerated? The not guilty finding under your definition only means that they were unable to find evidence that you murdered someone and you were not exonerated.

Yeah but there were two findings in the report that are completely different. There's been no serious attempt to say, as you are asserting we are still trying to prove Trump colluded with Russia, because perhaps they didn't find the evidence. As far most people are concerned that part is settled in Trump's favor.

The other conclusion about obstruction is completely different. It's not saying they found no evidence. It's certainly not saying Trump is exonerated.

I mean whatever outrageous claim one wants to make about those two conclusions, pretending they both are meaning the same thing is beyond the pale.

Quote: rxwine

Yeah but there were two findings in the report that are completely different. There's been no serious attempt to say, as you are asserting we are still trying to prove Trump colluded with Russia, because perhaps they didn't find the evidence. As far most people are concerned that part is settled in Trump's favor.

The other conclusion about obstruction is completely different. It's not saying they found no evidence. It's certainly not saying Trump is exonerated.

I mean whatever outrageous claim one wants to make about those two conclusions, pretending they both are meaning the same thing is beyond the pale.

It's fine I never expected anything but toe the company line from you. No evidence only means no evidence found so there must be some. I haven't found evidence that you are mean to unicorns but that doesn't exonerate you from unicorn abuse.

Quote: SOOPOO

But it is just as disingenuous of Trump to CLAIM he was exonerated,.
..

Not really. Trump is not a lawyer, he can
claim whatever he likes. If he feels
exonerated, so be it. I would certainly
feel that way if 20 prosecutors had
been digging into every aspect of
my life for 2 years and found nothing
to hurt me with. Wouldn't you?

They never thought somebody like
Trump didn't have bodies buried
everywhere. Imagine their exasperation
when they turned up nothing.

Quote: kenarman

It's fine I never expected anything but toe the company line from you. No evidence only means no evidence found so there must be some. I haven't found evidence that you are mean to unicorns but that doesn't exonerate you from unicorn abuse.

The point is, if Mueller had wanted to say the same thing about obstruction as he did about collusion, it was easy to do so, just say there was no evidence of obstruction.

Quote: rxwine

it was easy to do so, just say there was no evidence of obstruction.

He did say that by not finding
any. Duh. A prosecutor can't
go to court and say that they
exhausted every avenue and
found nothing, but let's keep
investigating in perpetuity
until we do find something.
It doesn't work like that.

Quote: Evenbob

He did say that by not finding
any. Duh. A prosecutor can't
go to court and say that they
exhausted every avenue and
found nothing, but let's keep
investigating in perpetuity
until we do find something.
It doesn't work like that.

You're more laughs than a bag full of dead monkeys with your wrong conclusions.

Here's the headline on the American Bar Association site about the report when it came out.

"Mueller finds no collusion with Russia, leaves obstruction question open"

What do you think that means? Duh.

Quote: rxwine

The point is, if Mueller had wanted to say the same thing about obstruction as he did about collusion, it was easy to do so, just say there was no evidence of obstruction.

His mandate wasn't to investigate obstruction. His statement was carefully crafted to give the sheepels something to believe in and to help cover up what a waste of time and money the whole investigation was. Apparently the statement accomplished it's purpose.