Discussion»Statements»Rosie's Corner» The fake AG Barr sez Mueller "could have reached a conclusion". Mueller sez he couldn't due to DOJ protocol. Who is LYING HERE? Why?
Mueller could have reached a conclusion there was evidence of hampering the investigation ... but DOJ protocols would have rendered any such conclusion moot, since they won't prosecute.
Personally, if I were faced with that, I would have done the same as Mueller - leave it to Congress.
I disagree. If he COULD HAVE and didn't his job was incomplete. He was PREVENTED from doing it by following DOJ guidelines which means saying he "could have" is untrue if compliance with DOJ guidelines was of prime importance. Mueller CHOSE that option and therefore saying he "could have come to a conclusion" is specious. You cannot both follow a guideline preventing you from doing something while you do it. You can ignore the guideline completely and render your opinion as you CONCLUDE. EITHER/OR. You know that so I don't get this reply whatsoever. Thank you for your response.
The DOJ protocols do not prevent Mueller (or any employee) from investigating possible crimes, or concluding that they took place. The protocols only prevent prosecuting said crimes.
Mueller technically could have concluded crimes were committed ... but what would be the point, if they won't be prosecuted by the DOJ?
So yes, they are both right. Technically, Mueller could have reached a conclusion. (Barr is correct) Realistically, there was no point in him doing so. (Mueller is correct)
Didn't Mueller say since he could not convict charging would have been UNFAIR since the taint of the charge would not allow for the charged to defend himself and therefore TO BE FAIR he did not bring any charges. What I think is stupid dumb is that DOJ opinion. Is it Elizabeth Warren who said as president she would make it a law that presidents CAN BE CHARGED AND CONVICTED while in office? One of the Dem prez candidates did very specifically yesterday. I think that is a GOOD thing. Do you Walt? Thank you for going the extra mile. Appreciate it! :)
I don't see anything in the Constitution or law that says a President can't be charged, currently. That is only a DOJ protocol. So it can be changed by Executive Order - either by the head of DOJ, or a President. I honestly don't know if a law would make it through Congress, given their "good ol boy" and "Cover Your Ass (CYA)" network. Even if a President wanted such a law, I think the Parties are too entrenched in "CYA" that they wouldn't want it to come against them in the future. (I firmly believe the vast majority of politicians have criminal activity in their closets)
The Dems own the majority in the House so it would pass. But the son of a mitch mcconnell Senate would murder it immediately. Get rid of that son of a mitch and then maybe we could get some traction. Thank you for your reply Walt and Happy Monday! :)
Technically, I think Mueller did reach a conclusion. He stated that he could not say Trump didn't obstruct the investigation which means, to me, that there is evidence of obstruction, but because a sitting president cannot be indicted, there was no point in making the charge when nothing could be done by the DOJ. He referred any actions that need to be taken to Congress, which is where it should be adjudicated. Presumably, his report gave Congress the basis on which obstruction claims could be brought, if they chose to take action.
I agree. Absent the ability to say the sb prez committed no crimes means he did. I think the DOJ opinion is beyond stupid dumb. Should be obliterated! Thank you for your reply L and Happy Saturday! :) ((hugs))
Personally, I don't think the president should be above the law - any president. So, if the DOJ can't do it, then the House should, but we both know that the Senate will never convict Trump. Happy Saturday. :)
That's why folks have to get out and VOTE to replace trumpican do-nothing Senators with DEMS WHO WILL DO THE RIGHT THING. The present Senate is like an empty suit. Nothing there but air. Thank you for your reply L and Happy Saturday! :).
Oh my gosh L. You ARE NOT GOING TO BELIEVE THIS! I SWEAR TO YOU IT IS TRUE! I was going to write about ENUCHS having nothing underneath "there" where it counts. But then I thought perhaps that was a bridge too far so I changed what I wrote to empty suit. That is wild don'tcha think? I mean I know we're usually not only on the same page but the same line but YOU ARE A CONTINENT AWAY! You New York. Me California. WHAT ARE THE ODDS THAT WE BOTH would think of that specific word? You just made my day and BLEW ME AWAY! ((hugs))
Indeedy do I do. I always wonder what the odds are of something like that happening? I wonder if such odds are even calcuable L? I'm always searching for meaning and for connections, signs, reasons for things happening as and when they do. They aren't usually as mind-boggling as EUNUCH though thought about AT THE SAME TIME thousands of miles apart in different time zones! I'm at 6:49 am and you are 9:49 am though we are each in our NOW so I'm talking to my future as you are talking to your past. Sort of! ((hugs))
This post was edited by RosieG at June 1, 2019 7:48 AM MDT
“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."
"We are unable to conclude no criminal conduct occurred." Not the job of Mueller or anyone else in the justice system. Their job is to prove it happened. If you cannot prove it...then the person is considered "not guilty."
I hope they do force Mueller to testify under oath to Congress. He should have to answer questions.
:( Still you do not believe the sb prez did anything wrong despite the dozens of folks charged convicted and some jailed breaking the laws on his behalf? Seriously? Sheesh. Thank you for your reply. Standardly expected. SIGH.
Walt O'Reagun 