It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.
Please white-list or disable AboveTopSecret.com in your ad-blocking tool.
Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.
originally posted by: smurfy
originally posted by: xuenchen
originally posted by: Sillyolme
a reply to: neutronflux
which he laid out quite clearly... Eleven counts of obstruction.
Post those !!!
Betcha can't 😆
From the only paper worth reading,
originally posted by: CriticalStinker
a reply to: shooterbrody
My point is the DOJ as a ehole operates under the scope they cannot indict a sitting president. (I just learned this today, everyone has permission to laugh at me)
originally posted by: OccamsRazor04
a reply to: LDragonFire
Mueller said there was insufficient evidence of a crime, and if they thought there was evidence they would have explicitly stated as much in the report.
Fortune, but also in OP video at around 4:30
“Under longstanding department policy, a president cannot be charged with a federal crime while he is in office. That is unconstitutional,” said Mueller. “Charging the president with a crime was therefore not an option we could consider.”
He didn't find enough evidence of a crime to indict Trump... That's about as good of an answer as you can have these days.
If nothing else this is an open ended statement.
I think Mueller was pretty clear that he never intended on finding if Trump committed a crime, and if he did, he wouldn't say it.