[jlisenbe]

I was referring to the House which is in dem hands. But if your point is that both dems and repubs are dumb, I might be inclined to agree with you.

[talaniman]

The dems JUST got there, and while they have passed meaningful legislation, repubs led by Mitch, ain't doing nothing.

[jlisenbe]

The dems JUST got there, and while they have passed meaningful legislation, repubs led by Mitch, ain't doing nothing.

Why am I not surprised.

[talaniman]

Are you surprised that Mitch has been majority Leader with Boehner and Ryan running the house since 2011 and they have done next to nothing?

[jlisenbe]

You are partially correct. They had to fight Obama much of that time, but in Trump's first two years they should have accomplished more, like funding the wall. Now as to what the dem House has accomplished so far, they have... done nothing other than go on and on about impeachment.

[talaniman]

That's easy enough to check what the congress has done the last 4 months. If you read the Mueller Report you might learn why there is so much talk of impeachment. Of course you aren't going to bother with that. You have Hannity and Faux News to think for you.

[jlisenbe]

So in four months they have read the M report. Wow. How impressive.

[paraclete]

That's easy enough to check what the congress has done the last 4 months. If you read the Mueller Report you might learn why there is so much talk of impeachment. Of course you aren't going to bother with that. You have Hannity and Faux News to think for you.

Look we get it, Trump leaves much to be desired as a president and a person, but unfortunately, he represents the views of more than 50% of voters on the day he was elected. This is sad, but true and says something about the state of the nation so fundamental you cannot ignore it. I would like to see a statesman in office but they are hard to come by

[waltero]

I would like to see a statesman in office

I don't think they would allow it.

James Freeman Clarke

“The difference between a politician and a statesman is that a politician thinks about the next election while the statesman think about the next generation.”

[paraclete]

Well said

[Athos]

[Trump] represents the views of more than 50% of voters on the day he was elected.

No he doesn't. He got 46.1% of the voters. Hillary got 48.2%. She got almost THREE MILLION more votes than Trump.

Not only that, Republicans are beginning to bail. Judge Napoli of FOX-News is one of Trump's closest associates and he went public Thursday blasting Trump for obstruction of justice after reading the Mueller Report. He cited 10 occurrences. Another Republican informed his constituents he was leaving the Republican Party and joining the Democrats.

Napoli is a shocker since he has been a die-hard Trump supporter.

The noose tightens - ever so slowly.

[talaniman]

So in four months they have read the M report. Wow. How impressive.

I have no clue what you are yammering about, but most of us have read it in the week or so it's been out, and it's SCATHING, both for collusion and certainly for obstruction, so I suggest you read it for yourself and we can debate THAT! I told you the guy is a lying, cheating dufus, so leave the dem house alone for doing it's job under the constitution. Repubs certainly haven't and the senate is still feckless, cowards.

Why do you expect everybody to do as you do and hold their nose while dufus blathers on and his new sycophant Barr lies to your face? Why do you think they are stalling, desperately trying to run the clock out to the election? Nixon's landslide didn't save him and if the dufus gets re elected, I doubt that will save him either.

It's his ONLY hope though, as long as you true believers refuse to READ!

[jlisenbe]

but most of us have read it in the week or so it's been out, and it's SCATHING, both for collusion and certainly for obstruction,

Must not have been clear to Mueller because he did not recommend charges in either case. HC was declared guilty by Comey but then he decided not to bring charges and you were fine with that and promptly let it go. Same thing here except the hatred of all things Trump is very apparent.

[talaniman]

Must not have been clear to Mueller because he did not recommend charges in either case. HC was declared guilty by Comey but then he decided not to bring charges and you were fine with that and promptly let it go. Same thing here except the hatred of all things Trump is very apparent.

AGAIN the first two pages of the report explains he would not recommend charges on either issue because DOJ policy prohibits it. He also explained the lack of cooperation by the WH, and the dufus. It's insane to debate what the Mueller report actually says until you read it for yourself. Until you do you will sound like a moron like the rest of the right wing loony sycophants.

I'm sure by now the dufus actually knows what it says since he has 40 lawyers to read it for him, and he can tell you true believers what he wants you to hear.

[jlisenbe]

From what I think is the second page you are referring to, which is page 2 of the report, we find this: "the investigation did not establish that members of the Trump campaign conspired or coordinated with the Russian government in its election interference activities." Seems pretty clear to me and a lot less than "scathing".

Where do you see on those two pages that the DOJ prohibited the recommendation of charges?

[waltero]

What is it you are telling us? Hillary has been in the game for a long time. Do you understand why she is upset? She cheated, conspired, swindled, lied, manipulated etc. in an attempt to win the Presidency. She was faced against a know imbecile (I think we all agree), she said as much during her campaign. She played (underhandedly) and was convinced that she would be a sure win. Of course when she lost she thought she had been slighted. She played the game, and was not found out (cheating, conspiring, swindling, lying, manipulating etc.) and still lost,to an ignoramus. I would be upset as well, but if she was to be honest, with herself, she would surely see that she was trying to manipulate the system and has no real reason to be upset. I think what really hurts is that she lost, despite the opposition not providing any "hard evidence" showing her as a cheat...she cheated but that never became an issue. Believe me, nobody likes losing to an idiot, specially when you run a rigged game.

I was in Ireland many years ago, I was listening to the election results and the Candidate that won the election was a known felon, had to wonder...The candidate who was best suited (did good for the country) to run the country was it, it didn't matter if he was a crook. We are dealing with the same thing. Besides, I don't believe Trump is as underhanded as the others, what you see is what you get. He is doing the best he can. You should thank him for taking the Job.

[talaniman]

From what I think is the second page you are referring to, which is page 2 of the report, we find this: "the investigation did not establish that members of the Trump campaign conspired or coordinated with the Russian government in its election interference activities." Seems pretty clear to me and a lot less than "scathing".

Where do you see on those two pages that the DOJ prohibited the recommendation of charges?

First, a traditional prosecution or declination decision entails a binary determination to initiate or decline a prosecution, but we determined not to make a traditional prosecutorial judgment. The Office of Legal Counsel (OLC) has issued an opinion finding that "the indictment or criminal prosecution of a sitting President would impermissibly undermine the capacity of the executive branch to perform its constitutionally assigned functions" in violation of "the constitutional separation of powers."1 Given the role of the Special Counsel as an attorney in the Department of Justice and the framework of the Special Counsel regulations, see 28 U.S.C. § 515; 28 C.F.R. § 600.7(a), this Office accepted OLC's legal conclusion for the purpose of exercising prosecutorial jurisdiction. And apart from OLC's constitutional view, we recognized that a federal criminal accusation against a sitting President would place burdens on the President's capacity to govern and potentially preempt constitutional processes for addressing presidential misconduct.2

Second, while the OLC opinion concludes that a sitting President may not be prosecuted, it recognizes that a criminal investigation during the President's term is permissible.3 The OLC opinion also recognizes that a President does not have immunity after he leaves office.4 And if individuals other than the President committed an obstruction safeguarding the integrity of the criminal justice system, we conducted a thorough factual investigation in order to preserve the evidence when memories were fresh and documentary materials were available.

Third, we considered whether to evaluate the conduct we investigated under the Justice Manual standards governing prosecution and declination decisions, but we determined not to apply an approach that could potentially result in a judgment that the President committed crimes. The threshold step under the Justice Manual standards is to assess whether a person's conduct "constitutes a federal offense." U.S. Dep't of Justice, Justice Manual§ 9-27.220 (2018) (Justice Manual). Fairness concerns counseled against potentially reaching that judgment when no charges can be brought. The ordinary means for an individual to respond to an accusation is through a speedy and public trial, with all the procedural protections that surround a criminal case. An individual who believes he was wrongly accused can use that process to seek to clear his name. In contrast, a prosecutor's judgment that crimes were committed, but that no charges will be brought, affords no such adversarial opportunity for public name-clearing before an impartial adjudicator.5 [/FONT]offense, they may be prosecuted at this time. Given those considerations, the facts known to us, and the strong public interest in safeguarding the integrity of the criminal justice system, we conducted a thorough factual investigation in order to preserve the evidence when memories were fresh and documentary materials were available.

1 A Sitting President's Amenability to Indictment and Criminal Prosecution, 24 Op. O.L.C. 222, 222, 260 (2000) (OLC Op.). 2 See U.S. CONST. Art. I § 2, cl. 5; § 3, cl. 6; cf OLC Op. at 257-258 (discussing relationship between impeachment and criminal prosecution of a sitting President).
3 OLC Op. at 257 n.36 ("A grand jury could continue to gather evidence throughout the period of immunity"). 4 OLC Op. at 255 ("Recognizing an immunity from prosecution for a sitting President would not preclude such prosecution once the President's term is over or he is otherwise removed from office by resignation or impeachment").

[jlisenbe]

That is nowhere to be found on the first two pages as you said it was. Now again, we do read this: "the investigation did not establish that members of the Trump campaign conspired or coordinated with the Russian government in its election interference activities.

So where did you find the above?

[tomder55]

How did Mueller spend two years investigating every aspect of Russian interference...and not consider the possibility that the dossier was part of the Russian interference effort?

[talaniman]

That is nowhere to be found on the first two pages as you said it was. Now again, we do read this: "the investigation did not establish that members of the Trump campaign conspired or coordinated with the Russian government in its election interference activities.

So where did you find the above?

Sorry my bad it was p214 which is page 2 on another volume. And do we have to go through this again? The reason he gave was that the WH didn't cooperate fully, though they SAY they did and a few even plead the 5th. I suppose I have to find that too? Lets do this, read the thing and stop nitpicking.

Take your time it's loaded, but be aware that the labeled redactions indicated a lot more could be revealed later from ongoing open investigations. It also indicates the intel community and the FBI assisted Mr. Mueller. It's quite apparent that it's nothing like the dufus version or even what Barr put out. It's no wonder the dufus has gone into the full court stall and is desperately spinning his total lies.

The very idea that those subpoenas or lawsuits against the congress for documents they want reaches SCOTUS has me giddy with anticipation. It's historic I tell you!

How did Mueller spend two years investigating every aspect of Russian interference...and not consider the possibility that the dossier was part of the Russian interference effort?

Outside the scope of Mueller. Different investigation.