Mueller To Make Statement Today

a reply to: jadedANDcynical

Pelosi is Speaker of the House, and has resisted all efforts to begin impeachment hearings. That's why those original Article of Impeachment were never brought before the assembly.

“Only by authorizing a dedicated impeachment inquiry can the House begin to assemble disparate allegations into a coherent picture, forcing lawmakers to consider both whether specific charges are true and whether the president’s abuses of his power justify his removal.”

www.theatlantic.com...

Nadler's committee is the Ways and Means Committee, and they're looking into the IRS policy of auditing a sitting president and how they deal with inconsistencies, since Michael Cohen testified that Trump's bank and tax returns are manipulated with inflated and deflated numbers, to suit varies financial scenarios. Maxine Water's committee is the House Financial Services Committee, and they're going to be looking into Trump's banking and business transactions, based on evidence and testimony, that there might be money laundering going on.

What these committees find may or may not lead to new evidence of the president's wrongful doings, but they are not impeachment inquiries, at this time.

a reply to: Sookiechacha

Nadler is Chairman of the House Judiciary Committee 🤓

a reply to: Sookiechacha

Nadler's committee is the Ways and Means Committee

That is just silly

As was your assertion that the "articles had to be written".

good luck

originally posted by: xuenchen
a reply to: Sookiechacha

Nadler is Chairman of the House Judiciary Committee 🤓

Right. Sorry. I got my committees mixed up. Nadler's committee wants the unredacted report, testimony from Barr, McGahn and others, to clear up questions left unanswered by the report.

Still, Nadler's committee is not holding impeachment inquiries, they're exercising their constitutional oversight role.

a reply to: shooterbrody

I stand corrected. Richard Neil is chairman of the Ways and Means Committee that's investigating how the IRS handles the audits of US presidents.

As was your assertion that the "articles had to be written".

Have Article of Impeachment been written since the Mueller report came out?

a reply to: Sookiechacha

Still, Nadler's committee is not holding impeachment inquiries, they're exercising their constitutional oversight role.

that doesn't even make sense.
you understand the process will begin with the house judiciary committee?
fat jerry is the chairman, he can do as he likes as he has the majority, the only thing holding him up is himself, he does not have to wait on pelosi

a reply to: Sookiechacha

Great. Let them exercise all their Constitutional Rights (and Wrongs) 😆

Then when Voters do the same, all problems should get solved !! (even though they've been trying to solve problems for over 200 years already 😆)

a reply to: shooterbrody

The only thing holding up Nadler's review of the Mueller report is the White House's refusal to comply with their subpoenas.

a reply to: Sookiechacha

Have Article of Impeachment been written since the Mueller report came out?

nope
because the report did not state that a crime was committed
lol
you still dont get how this works do you?
the house cant use a report that lacks high crimes and misdomeners as the source of said high crimes and misdomeners

they can but those seeking re election next year (dems) wont vote for it
simple majority is all that is needed
the dems dont even have a simple majority in the house willing to use muellers bs as a basis for their vote to impeach

lol
get it now?

the only dems that have spines are green and sherman

dont think the voters will forget that come 2020

originally posted by: Sookiechacha
a reply to: shooterbrody

The only thing holding up Nadler's review of the Mueller report is the White House's refusal to comply with their subpoenas.

this is so fun and too easy

the dems cant impeach trump because of trump?
that is what you are saying?

lololololololololol

he really does beat you people down

originally posted by: Sookiechacha
a reply to: shooterbrody

The only thing holding up Nadler's review of the Mueller report is the White House's refusal to comply with their subpoenas.

That is a lame excuse. Why doesn't Nadler use his authority to make his requests through a court order?

It does seem like he really wants to drag this out and not be forced to reach a final conclusion.

a reply to: CynConcepts

Perhaps the dems really are that incompetent?
They seem worse than the rinos that left en masse when trump was elected.

a reply to: shooterbrody

because the report did not state that a crime was committed

That's wasn't their intent, as Mueller explained. But, the report does list evidence of crimes. Now, it's Congress' job to determine if those crimes rise to the level of high crimes and misdemeanors.

a reply to: CynConcepts

Why doesn't Nadler use his authority to make his requests through a court order?

I suppose he will, if it comes to that. Last I heard they were still negotiating. Some say that Mueller's public statement yesterday was the result of negotiations. There's 80 some subpoenas being snubbed right now. Including one highly publicized as "Hope's Choice". As if Hope Hicks has an existential choice of whether or not to comply with a congressional subpoena!

a reply to: Sookiechacha

Endless Loop 🌬

Endless Loop 🌬

Endless Loop 🌬

Endless Loop 🌬

Endless Loop 🌬

a reply to: Sookiechacha

That's wasn't their intent,

then why investigate at all, if it was not to uncover crimes?

oh and the highest lawyer in the land looked at the evidence of crimes and decided it was not
there was no crime
you keep making that leap like mueller said there were crimes

no crimes= no impeachment
you will pick up on that sooner or later

congress actually has to have a criminal referral
you should brush up on the rules

www.mololamken.com...

While Congress can investigate conduct that may be criminal, Congress itself lacks the authority to bring criminal charges or otherwise initiate a criminal prosecution. If a congressional investigation uncovers evidence of criminal activity, however, Congress may refer the matter to the Department of Justice for investigation and, potentially, prosecution. Sometimes, the DOJ investigation predates the congressional investigation. No matter which branch of government moves first to investigate, however, the end result is that a congressional investigation often will run parallel to a criminal investigation. As a result, evidence developed in a congressional investigation might be used by the DOJ in its criminal investigation or in a prosecution.

the "parallel" investigation (mueller report) failed to likst actual crimes
no matter if you like that fact or not
had mueller found a crime he would have sent a referal to congress
he did not

without that referal your dems are attempting to invent a crime mueller did not find

originally posted by: Sookiechacha
a reply to: yuppa

Nope, that's news to me. Isn't Mueller a Republican?

So? They got dirt on him somewhere from his FBI days. How hard is it to grasp the R is a cover?

a reply to: shooterbrody

then why investigate at all, if it was not to uncover crimes?

Why is that you always need things explained to you and brought back to step one?

Two years ago, the acting attorney general asked me to serve as special counsel, and he created the special counsel’s office. The appointment order directed the office to investigate Russian interference in the 2016 presidential election. This included investigating any links or coordination between the Russian government and individuals associated with the Trump campaign.
………..
The indictments allege, and the other activities in our report describe, efforts to interfere in our political system. They needed to be investigated and understood, and that is among the reasons why the Department of Justice established our office.

That is also a reason we investigated efforts to obstruct the investigation. The matters we investigated were of paramount importance. It was critical for us to obtain full and accurate information from every person we questioned. When a subject of an investigation obstructs that investigation or lies to investigators, it strikes at the core of the government’s effort to find the truth and hold wrongdoers accountable.
…………...
Let me say a word about the report. The report has two parts addressing the two main issues we were asked to investigate. The first volume of the report details numerous efforts emanating from Russia to influence the election. This volume includes a discussion of the Trump campaign’s response to this activity, as well as our conclusion that there was insufficient evidence to charge a broader conspiracy.

And in the second volume, the report describes the results and analysis of our obstruction of justice investigation involving the president. The order appointing me special counsel authorized us to investigate actions that could obstruct the investigation. We conducted that investigation, and we kept the office of the acting attorney general apprised of the progress of our work. And as set forth in the report, after that investigation if we had had confidence that the president clearly did not commit a crime we would have said so.

nymag.com...

a reply to: Sookiechacha

so simply what crime did mueller say trump committed?
and please reference such as you seem to have a lot of knowledge of the report
not could have
or potentially
but the actual crime

spoiler alert: a "confidence" level is not a legal term and has no legal bearing, what is hilarious is he didn't even have enough to reference reasonable suspicion; nope we get the invented "confidence" level

yeah
start impeachment on that

a reply to: shooterbrody

"Our investigation found multiple acts by the President that were capable of exerting undue influence over law enforcement investigations, including the Russian-interference and obstruction investigations"...

"The incidents were often carried out through one-on-one meetings in which the President sought to use his official power outside of usual channels,..."

"These actions ranged from efforts to remove the Special Counsel and to reverse the effect of the Attorney General 's recusal; to the attempted use of official power to limit the scope of the investigation; to direct and indirect contacts with witnesses with the potential to influence their testimony."

www.nbcnews.com...