It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.

Please white-list or disable AboveTopSecret.com in your ad-blocking tool.

Thank you.

 

Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.

 

Robert Mueller's first statement about Russia probe

page: 6
12
<< 3  4  5    7  8  9 >>

log in

join
share:

posted on May, 29 2019 @ 02:24 PM
link   

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,
www.theguardian.com...


That's the funniest thing I've read all morning.




posted on May, 29 2019 @ 02:25 PM
link   
a reply to: TerryMcGuire

I did wish he had sounded a bit more confident. He is not used to public speaking thats evident.



posted on May, 29 2019 @ 02:26 PM
link   
a reply to: CriticalStinker

but that was not the position they started with
also they caught the jackasses that broke in

very different circumstances
the ones this time charged with "lying to the fbi" didnt roll over because there was no there there as fbi agents in texts noted

also trump is no nixon and will NEVER resign

this has all been bs to smear an outsider that was not supposed to win



posted on May, 29 2019 @ 02:29 PM
link   
He is covering his ass. He is a very smart man. His parting shot was to provide a soundbite that will be repeated and repeated over and over in the lame stream media.

The bottom line is that the 2020 election cycle is ready for its first debates and it is time for the media to shift gears.



posted on May, 29 2019 @ 02:29 PM
link   
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.

Narrative, dead.



posted on May, 29 2019 @ 02:37 PM
link   

originally posted by: Sillyolme
a reply to: TerryMcGuire

I did wish he had sounded a bit more confident. He is not used to public speaking thats evident.


He "emphasized" nobody is forcing him to do or say anything.

Why would he need to "emphasize" that ?

A: Blackmail for that incident in New York 😎



posted on May, 29 2019 @ 02:39 PM
link   
a reply to: TheSteppenwolf

You assumed I was stating the indictments were my reasons.

I was not. I have not given my reasons. I was just disagreeing with your assertion that the report shows no meddling.



posted on May, 29 2019 @ 02:40 PM
link   
a reply to: scraedtosleep




meddling

what are the sentencing guidelines for that?



posted on May, 29 2019 @ 02:40 PM
link   
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)



posted on May, 29 2019 @ 02:42 PM
link   
a reply to: CriticalStinker

you are correct
that does not mean mueller could not recommend to do so in his report
mueller chose not to

it also means the entire mueller episode was only to soil trump

you think this didn't effect the midterms?

this is filthy dirty



posted on May, 29 2019 @ 02:44 PM
link   

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)


The kicker: Trump was repeatedly told he was not the focus of the investigation. The investigation that no crime was found from.



posted on May, 29 2019 @ 02:44 PM
link   
a reply to: RadioRobert

Thank you for sharing the details of the Starr report conclusions!

It is so obvious that even with DOJ policy in place, Mueller could have provided his evidence of obstruction. He did not. Not because of DOJ policies but because there was no evidence of actual obstruction.

Edit add:
a reply to: shooterbrody
oops...corrected misspelling. Thank you for the laugh!
edit on 5 29 2019 by CynConcepts because: (no reason given)



posted on May, 29 2019 @ 02:46 PM
link   

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.

Narrative, dead.


Not exactly, and I'm just learning some of this on the fly myself.


“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.”
Fortune, but also in OP video at around 4:30



posted on May, 29 2019 @ 02:47 PM
link   
a reply to: CynConcepts




the stark report

is that the tony version or the robb version?

only kidding.....



posted on May, 29 2019 @ 02:48 PM
link   
a reply to: CriticalStinker




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.


But that is not what he says. He says he was prohibited from indicting. He did not say they didn't have evidence.
As a matter of fact he said that if he could say that trump did not commit a crime he would say so and he can't say so.
If nothing else this is an open ended statement.



posted on May, 29 2019 @ 02:48 PM
link   
a reply to: CriticalStinker

Yes, but he clearly said if there was evidence of a crime it would have been stated as such in the report. So the report would have said we believe the evidence says crime x happened. They would not have charged him though. Charging him has nothing to do with whether the report states a crime happened.



posted on May, 29 2019 @ 02:49 PM
link   
a reply to: bigfatfurrytexan

To be honest, I'm just trying to make sense of it all.

I've changed my thinking on some of this, and 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.



posted on May, 29 2019 @ 02:51 PM
link   
a reply to: Sillyolme




If nothing else this is an open ended statement.

and that is all the dems have
and that is what the dems would use to drag our country through an impeachment debacle over

an open ended statement

not a crime
not evidence
just an open ended statement

a fine example of the most petty people on the planet
trump has miles more good judgement than the current crop of dems



posted on May, 29 2019 @ 02:53 PM
link   
a reply to: Sillyolme

No crime not even for a Dime 😎



posted on May, 29 2019 @ 02:53 PM
link   
a reply to: CriticalStinker




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.

imo he only took that stance after he couldnt sweat a confession out of any of the smaller players
it is his mo



new topics

top topics



 
12
<< 3  4  5    7  8  9 >>

log in

join