Link to mueller report

SixFoot · 2019-04-19T00:16:22.185Z

The goal posts will shift until the footings foot! lol

PurpnGold · 2019-04-19T00:16:35.196Z

coolidge:

Really? Now we are now moving the goalposts to lying?

What goal post is being moved?

coolidge · 2019-04-19T00:21:05.213Z

No collusion but now lying?

PurpnGold · 2019-04-19T00:55:46.978Z

coolidge:

No collusion but now lying?

No collusion AND lying

coolidge · 2019-04-19T01:01:29.492Z

Mueller seemed to think no collusion

CaughtInTheMiddle · 2019-04-19T01:38:35.386Z

Where are the republicans who value honor and integrity? Why are they not screaming?

Konssurvative1 · 2019-04-19T01:39:34.594Z

Because it is not possible to bring indictments against a sitting president am I right?

Konssurvative1 · 2019-04-19T01:42:56.749Z

Get a passport and an airline ticket and go see the movie. I hear Australia is nice this time of year.

DougBH · 2019-04-19T01:54:16.463Z

Konssurvative1:

Because it is not possible to bring indictments against a sitting president am I right?

Nothing to do with it. Find me one instance in the report that Mueller says “But for the prohibition of indicting a sitting President”. Also, Barr met with Mueller and asked him if he would have recommended an indictment if that policy did not exist and Mueller said that he would not have done so.

Plasmaball · 2019-04-19T02:25:34.104Z

Again you guys are ignoring manafort and stone…

Plasmaball · 2019-04-19T02:25:53.094Z

Nope…

Jezcoe · 2019-04-19T02:29:31.476Z

DougBH:

Konssurvative1:

Because it is not possible to bring indictments against a sitting president am I right?

Nothing to do with it. Find me one instance in the report that Mueller says “But for the prohibition of indicting a sitting President”. Also, Barr met with Mueller and asked him if he would have recommended an indictment if that policy did not exist and Mueller said that he would not have done so.

I am on my phone so I can’t link the page… but the 2nd section of the report lays out the legal opinion that a sitting President cannot be indicted. That it is congress’s job to put the check on the President

The second thing you claim… insure would like to see a link.

Jezcoe · 2019-04-19T02:31:15.277Z

Plasmaball:

Again you guys are ignoring manafort and stone…

Yep.

The campaign had Russians crawling all around them and had intent to cooperate with them.

Basically they wanted to commit crime but for some reason or another was stymied from that.

In Don Jr.s case it was his ignorance of campaign finance law that saved him.

SixFoot · 2019-04-19T02:32:09.799Z

Can’t, I’m almost done saving up for a new paramotor and my newest son is due next month. It sure would be nice to vacation in another country for a change instead of deploying to it, but I never could decide on which country to take the family to. Ever taken yours internationally?

Vigilante · 2019-04-19T02:38:01.168Z

coolidge:

Mueller seemed to think no collusion

Incorrect

Vigilante · 2019-04-19T02:40:55.220Z

CaughtInTheMiddle:

Where are the republicans who value honor and integrity? Why are they not screaming?

Some are it’s just that here some call them Libs

Konssurvative1 · 2019-04-19T02:59:38.014Z

Why would he write it if he already knows it to be true?

DougBH · 2019-04-19T03:22:55.109Z

Jezcoe:

DougBH:

Konssurvative1:

Because it is not possible to bring indictments against a sitting president am I right?

Nothing to do with it. Find me one instance in the report that Mueller says “But for the prohibition of indicting a sitting President”. Also, Barr met with Mueller and asked him if he would have recommended an indictment if that policy did not exist and Mueller said that he would not have done so.

I am on my phone so I can’t link the page… but the 2nd section of the report lays out the legal opinion that a sitting President cannot be indicted. That it is congress’s job to put the check on the President

The second thing you claim… insure would like to see a link.

The first part…discussing the legal opinion of whether a President can be indicted is not the same thing as saying you would indict a sitting President on a specific charge but for the prohibition against indicting a sitting President.
The second part is from the verbal statement of Barr during his presser this morning. It can be easily found using a search engine.

Jezcoe · 2019-04-19T03:29:25.360Z

DougBH:

Jezcoe:

DougBH:

Konssurvative1:

Because it is not possible to bring indictments against a sitting president am I right?

Nothing to do with it. Find me one instance in the report that Mueller says “But for the prohibition of indicting a sitting President”. Also, Barr met with Mueller and asked him if he would have recommended an indictment if that policy did not exist and Mueller said that he would not have done so.

I am on my phone so I can’t link the page… but the 2nd section of the report lays out the legal opinion that a sitting President cannot be indicted. That it is congress’s job to put the check on the President

The second thing you claim… insure would like to see a link.

The first part…discussing the legal opinion of whether a President can be indicted is not the same thing as saying you would indict a sitting President on a specific charge but for the prohibition against indicting a sitting President.
The second part is from the verbal statement of Barr during his presser this morning. It can be easily found using a search engine.

Okay then.

So yeah. The first part is laid out in the report

The second part… I didn’t see the presser.

I have no reason to believe Barr.

Konssurvative1 · 2019-04-19T03:31:30.099Z

Screenshot_2019-04-18-22-27-042880×1440 312 KB

Here is the section outlining the issue of not indicting a siiting president.

Screenshot_2019-04-18-22-27-22

Read all three paragraphs, especially 2 and 3.