• Welcome to OGBoards 10.0, keep in mind that we will be making LOTS of changes to smooth out the experience here and make it as close as possible functionally to the old software, but feel free to drop suggestions or requests in the Tech Support subforum!

First Charges Filed in Mueller Investigation

Wrangor said:
Barr testified under oath the following:

"Special counsel Mueller stated three times to us in that meeting (March 5) in response to our questioning that he emphatically was NOT saying that but for the OLC opinion he would have found obstruction. He (Mueller) said that in the future, the facts of the case against a president might be such that a special counsel would recommend abandoning the OLC opinion but this is not such a case."

Summary - if we had real prosecutorial evidence that a sitting president was guilty of obstruction, we would throw out / step aside/ abandon the OLC precedent and proceed with charges anyway. The case against Donald Trump does not have the evidence basis to make that move.
Click to expand...

Totally BS concept. Barr got the job by writing a nineteen page treatise stating POTUS above the law. Barr lied under oath multiple times to the House (earlier- see Crist questions) and to the Senate.
 
No reason to investigate people we feel may be guilty of crimes. We may find something which would irritate conservatives to no end
 
The only people thinking that Democrats will “get out over their skis” are Donald supporters or conservatives so afraid to admit that liberals have been right about Donald and his rise to power all along that they’re gonna keep opposing any liberal ideas to hang on to their naive conclusions that it’s just Donald taking their beloved party over the cliff rather than millions of acquiescing power hungry republicans like themselves.

If you’re still a republican today you’re a pathetic piece of trash too cowardly to acknowledge reality.
 
ImTheCaptain said:
does Wrangor believe in the IRS doing audits?
Click to expand...

Wait... you are serious? Can’t wait for the next time a cop shows up at your house without a warrant and says they are coming to investigate to see if you are committing any crimes. Should go over real well.

Quick note: tax audits = legal
The above = not legal
 
They had heard about Papadoplous bragging about Russian dirt. For several years, FISA judges authorized and re-authorized investigating Carter Paige. Trump's son took a meeting with Russian operatives. Trump borrowed over $100M DIRECTLY from Putin's bank for Trump Toronto. There was an ongoing investigation of a $220,000,000 Russian money laundering scam that was operated out of Trump Tower. Trump Soho Was financed with Russian mob money. Jared tried to set up secret communications IN THE RUSSIAN EMBASSY.

There's much, much more that is public. But in Wrangor's world it was the FBI not the Trump crime family that did wrong.
 
Wrangor, do you take issue with the fact several people are going to jail for committing crimes on Trump’s behalf or do you just take issue with investigating Trump after several people committed crimes on his behalf? Anybody in Trump’s situation would be investigated. And the investigation found one thing that helped Trump was people didn’t carry out the obstruction he ordered them to do.

If your employees committed crimes to help you and some even said you told them to commit crimes, you would be investigated.
 
Wrangor said:
Wait... you are serious? Can’t wait for the next time a cop shows up at your house without a warrant and says they are coming to investigate to see if you are committing any crimes. Should go over real well.

Quick note: tax audits = legal
The above = not legal
Click to expand...

Do you really think that’s what’s going on here?
 
“Again, the devil took him to a very high mountain and showed him all the kingdoms of the world and their splendor. “All this I will give you,” he said, “if you will bow down and worship me.” Jesus said to him, “Away from me, Satan! For it is written: ‘Worship the Lord your God, and serve him only.’ ””
‭‭Matthew‬ ‭4:8-10‬ ‭NIV‬‬ https://www.bible.com/bible/111/mat.4.8-10.niv

White evangelicals are taking the deal with the devil Jesus rejected.
 
06deacon said:
Do you really think that’s what’s going on here?
Click to expand...

With Mueller? Of course not. Muellers investigation is over. Impeachment is the option now for democrats but I don’t think they really want to go that route because it won’t pass the senate even if they could get it through the house.

The quote earlier? That is exactly what that is asking for. An investigation to unearth an unidentified crime or to reveal damaging personal and political information. That is exactly what the quote states.

Why does every dissenting opinion have to mean someone is broken? That’s extremely condescending and pretty awful behavior to be honest. I am remembering now why it’s better to lurk. Conversation is not desired. Dissent and be destroyed. .

You guys are right. Trump should be in jail despite a 25 million investigation. That concluded no evidence of collusion and not enough evidence of obstruction to make a determination. How is it that logic is lining up with Trump ? Get a hold of yourself Tunnels.
 
PhDeac said:
Wrangor, do you take issue with the fact several people are going to jail for committing crimes on Trump’s behalf or do you just take issue with investigating Trump after several people committed crimes on his behalf? Anybody in Trump’s situation would be investigated. And the investigation found one thing that helped Trump was people didn’t carry out the obstruction he ordered them to do.

If your employees committed crimes to help you and some even said you told them to commit crimes, you would be investigated.
Click to expand...

I take issue with asking for an FBI investigation to uncover an Unidentified crime or to find out damaging personal or career information. That’s all. I couldn’t care less about trump. Guys a scumbag. Won’t vote for him. Doesn’t mean I am going to become a liberal but I was glad they investigated him.

It when muelller concludes no evidence of collusion and that there isn’t conclusive evidence of criminal obstruction that pretty km much ends that hunt for me. I trust mueller did a thorough job. Barr’s summary was factually accurate even if he didn’t slam trump for the non criminal, scumbag behavior like mueller wanted him to.

So all this criminal talk of trump is bogus. If he committed a crime mueller would have nailed him. I don’t like the idea of an open investigation into your political enemies by a justice department as s hunt and search mechanism to ruin a person. That is an awful precedent. I wouldn’t like it if it was Hillary and I think she is a scumbag too. That’s my issue.
 
Wrangor said:
Wait... you are serious? Can’t wait for the next time a cop shows up at your house without a warrant and says they are coming to investigate to see if you are committing any crimes. Should go over real well.

Quick note: tax audits = legal
The above = not legal
Click to expand...

Why do you assume there will be no warrants? The suggestion was to investigate not to throw out the justice system and lock up the enemy...which by the way the president suggested doing during the campaign. But that’s not what we are talking about.
 
Last edited:
ITT: Wrangor doesn’t understand probable cause
 
Wrangor said:
It when muelller concludes no evidence of collusion and that there isn’t conclusive evidence of criminal obstruction that pretty km much ends that hunt for me. I trust mueller did a thorough job.
Click to expand...

What if I told you....that this is not what Mueller concluded.
 
He said he wasn't going to make a determination of whether criminal obstruction occurred because of the outstanding question as to whether a sitting president can be indicted.

For instance Mueller provided the following:

"Substantial evidence indicates that in repeatedly urging McGahn to dispute that he was ordered to have the Special Counsel terminated, the President acted for the purpose of influencing McGahn’s account in order to deflect or prevent scrutiny of the President’s conduct toward the investigation."

That's the definition of obstruction of justice.
 
Wrangor, this "open investigation" and "fishing expedition" talk is from Republicans trying to delegitimize the mountains of evidence that merit further investigation.

The Mueller investigation was very limited in scope. Mueller did the very narrow task that he was assigned by Trump appointees and then passed on information to state investigators. The Mueller report basically told Congress to follow up on plenty of information that either fell outside the scope or required evidence that he couldn't get due to lack of cooperation from people with ties to Trump. Congress has subpoena power and could call impeachment hearings that would compel people to talk who Mueller couldn't get.

When you parrot Trump talking point while claiming not to support him, you don't come across as genuine.

As far as this:

"I don’t like the idea of an open investigation into your political enemies by a justice department as s hunt and search mechanism to ruin a person. That is an awful precedent. I wouldn’t like it if it was Hillary and I think she is a scumbag too."

I'll have to take your word for it that you weren't all in for the endless investigations into Benghazi or her emails or the Whitewater investigation that lasted way longer than Mueller and led to one blow job.
 
I don't know what else to say about "Mueller would have nailed him" other than to suggest we should wait until he's no longer president and see how long it takes an indictment to come down (hopefully, for many reasons including statute of limitations, this occurs in January 2021).
 
And when that happens, Wrangor will be outraged that the Democrats are taking down their political enemies.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top