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.

 

The Desperation of U.S. Democrat Leaders

page: 1
44
<<   2  3  4 >>

log in

join
share:
+28 more 
posted on Jul, 27 2019 @ 12:43 PM
link   
As if Mueller's testimony wasn't embarrassing enough, the Democrats have held two different press conferences since then to misrepresent Mueller's statements as well as some of the information that came to light from the Republicans during the hearing.

Shortly after Mueller's testimony, the Democrat leaders had their first press conference in which Nadler highlights Mueller's concerns about Russian interference during the 2016 election "and that it continues today". Just how concerned is Nadler about that? Not very. His only concerns seem to be that it gave Trump's campaign the advantage back in 2016.

To make matters worse, during the first press conference, Nadler says that Mueller proved that the obstruction of justice charges against Trump met all three elements to classify them as "criminal" obstruction of justice, which simply is not true. As Mueller would say, "had that been true we would have said so". No, the truth is, as a Republican member of Congress pointed out during Mueller's testimony, the "possible cases" of obstruction DID NOT meet the requirements of the statute that Mueller listed in his report and some were pointed out to Mueller (as he sat there with nothing to say or defend himself with). Here's the video of the first press conference...



The specific matter that was pointed out during Mueller's testimony was 18 U.S. Code 1512 with regards to Tampering With a Witness, Victim, or Informant. As you'll notice, and as someone pointed out to Mueller, to make this a criminal charge all of the tampering has to revolve around a "official proceeding" or "judicial proceeding" being obstructed. With regards to Trump, this just wasn't the case.

www.law.cornell.edu...

Yesterday, the Democrat leaders decided to hold another press conference. Notice Nadler's lies again as he tells everyone that Mueller's testimony to Ted Lieu proves that Mueller would have charged Trump if he were not president. Forget the fact that Mueller came back out shortly after this exchange to correct his own statements on the matter. Nadler didn't acknowledge that. Nadler's desperate lies about Mueller's testimony on that issue are here...



During this presser, Nadler also goes on to say that Trump obviously engaged in further misconduct that was covered up in the Mueller report with redactions. In order to reveal this misconduct, they are asking a judge to release all of the grand jury information without Bill Barr's permission, as they are CONSIDERING an impeachment inquiry. Will a judge go for that? We'll see. As far as Nadler knows, some of those redactions could easily involve other ongoing investigations related to Roger Stone or someone else.

One thing is for sure, while Mueller (or more likely, Weissman) accused Barr of confusing the American public with his summary of the report, no one has done a better job of muddying the waters and talking out both sides of his mouth than Mueller!

Mueller (or Weissman) didn't even adhere to the rules of writing the report. While the report was ONLY supposed to include prosecutorial charges or declination reasons for charges, Mueller's team wrote half of his report around allegations that he REFUSED to make a determination on. If Mueller couldn't make a determination one way or the other, he wasn't supposed to include it in his report, as the rules claim that throwing accusations out there for speculative purposes, hinders the justice process of anyone being presumed innocent until PROVEN guilty.

Mueller's report was just as big of a failure as his testimony, and as usual, it's all going to backfire on the Democrats.


edit on 27-7-2019 by Deetermined because: (no reason given)




posted on Jul, 27 2019 @ 01:21 PM
link   
a reply to: Deetermined

So how was the Miller testimony bad for the democrats when if nothing else, it established that trump and cronies were bald face lying by claiming the muller report found him innocent..


In fact By saying “the president cannot be charged with a crime, but if he was obviously innocent we would say so.. “


Well they did not say they thought he was innocent...


+21 more 
posted on Jul, 27 2019 @ 01:28 PM
link   

originally posted by: JustJohnny
a reply to: Deetermined

So how was the Miller testimony bad for the democrats when if nothing else, it established that trump and cronies were bald face lying by claiming the muller report found him innocent..


In fact By saying “the president cannot be charged with a crime, but if he was obviously innocent we would say so.. “


Well they did not say they thought he was innocent...




From Muellers mouth to your eyes...."No American citizen was found to have conspired with Russia...."

That's about as clear as it gets and it was in Muellers report. Do you have any more idiocy that needs debunking?


+22 more 
posted on Jul, 27 2019 @ 01:28 PM
link   
a reply to: JustJohnny

What part of presumption of innocence is an alien concept here?



posted on Jul, 27 2019 @ 01:31 PM
link   
a reply to: JustJohnny


So how was the Miller testimony bad for the democrats when if nothing else, it established that trump and cronies were bald face lying by claiming the muller report found him innocent..


Mueller's report shows that there wasn't enough evidence to conclude that a Russian collusion/conspiracy took place between Trump and his campaign. For the most part, the Democrats don't dispute that. That's why they are trying to focus on impeaching Trump on the "obstruction of justice" ACCUSATIONS.



In fact By saying “the president cannot be charged with a crime, but if he was obviously innocent we would say so.. “


Likewise, Mueller might as well have written, "If he was obviously guilty, we would have said so". All in all, Mueller's comments regarding not exonerating Trump meant that he didn't have enough evidence to meet the standard of the law on making this a criminal charge. In fact, Mueller's report makes the statement that they couldn't make a determination of guilt or innocence based on "the difficulty of law and facts" that were not conclusive to make a sound argument or determination.



edit on 27-7-2019 by Deetermined because: (no reason given)


+9 more 
posted on Jul, 27 2019 @ 01:32 PM
link   
a reply to: Deetermined

They have to continue this attack and coup attempt.

They can’t stop half way, too much is at stake.

They will continue to abuse the Constitutional process until they either win or there is an all-out war.



posted on Jul, 27 2019 @ 01:36 PM
link   
a reply to: DBCowboy

Not only are the Democrats in too deep to turn back, they almost need to continue this charade in order to defend themselves when all of the future Inspector General reports drop. It's going to be a propaganda war at the very least and could easily turn into something much bigger.



posted on Jul, 27 2019 @ 01:48 PM
link   

originally posted by: projectvxn
a reply to: JustJohnny

What part of presumption of innocence is an alien concept here?


That would be the part where Mueller can't charge a sitting president... Only thing he can do is either exonerate or not exonerate Trump.

Mueller chose not to exonerate Trump... which to anyone except the completely feebleminded is an obvious recommendation by Mueller to congress that a crime was in fact committed by Trump.

It's not rocket science...



posted on Jul, 27 2019 @ 01:50 PM
link   
gee willikers clyde look 🤣



+1 more 
posted on Jul, 27 2019 @ 01:53 PM
link   
a reply to: Deetermined

The sordid matter of facts for Demonrats is, that they can kiss good bye for the presidency for next 35 years.
Anybody carrying name Trump will be voted in. They run economy and defense like nobody else. Keep taxes low. Keep feds in bay. And keep rest of the world in check. No dems ever delivered that. That’s why we’ll be seeing a new dynasty emerge. Americanism.


+4 more 
posted on Jul, 27 2019 @ 01:56 PM
link   
At risk of sounding like a broken record......The dim wit dims have become as pathetic as you can get. I seriously have no idea how anybody in this country can to continue to support them. You have to be dumb as #uck to keep putting any faith whatsoever into these idiots. They’re doing and have done absolutely NOTHING for this country besides waste tax dollars. The deceitful tactics, hypocrisy and downright stupidity of this party baffles me to no end and the fact that they still have people ignorant enough to continue supporting their BS, frankly kinda scares the chit out of me. I had no idea that we had so many people this brain dead and brainwashed walking on this planet. Who knew?



posted on Jul, 27 2019 @ 01:59 PM
link   
a reply to: Subaeruginosa


That would be the part where Mueller can't charge a sitting president... Only thing he can do is either exonerate or not exonerate Trump.


If you watched the hearing, it was pointed out that it WAS NOT Mueller's job (or even Barr's for that matter) to exonerate or not exonerate anyone. If Mueller had a case, he was supposed to lay it out, but his case didn't meet the standards of the law. That's why he used such questionable language as "not exonerate". Apparently, he didn't want to make it look like he wasted 2 years and $35 million dollars to come up with NOTHING.


Mueller chose not to exonerate Trump... which to anyone except the completely feebleminded is an obvious recommendation by Mueller to congress that a crime was in fact committed by Trump.


While I do believe that Mueller framed his report so that Congress would use it to TRY and impeach Trump, it's only because Mueller knew that his evidence would never pass muster in a court of law. All Congress needs are the votes to impeach. They wouldn't even need to meet the standards of the law for that, although they would tell you that they did.



posted on Jul, 27 2019 @ 02:14 PM
link   
My rudimental take is...
Left.....Trump bad man
Right....Trump good man


Did I miss anything?



Meanwhile Congress continues to neglect its constitutional obligations of protecting the border whilst they go to Africa on the 400 year anniversary apology tour.



posted on Jul, 27 2019 @ 02:15 PM
link   

originally posted by: Subaeruginosa
...Only thing he can do is either exonerate or not exonerate Trump.
...


He couldn't exonerate ANYONE, even if it was Charles Manson standing over a body with a bloody knife in his hands, saying, "I killed her". Anyone in his position simply does not have the authority to "exonerate", the AG cannot either, in fact that is not even a legal term at all. See, it is both not within their stated duties and neither is it even a legal term.

Presumption of innocence means if you do not have the evidence of a crime, and it does not go to a court or other legal due process state, then the person is innocent......period...end of discussion. Guilt must be proven beyond a reasonable doubt following due process in which BOTH sides get the opportunity to present their evidence.

After all, it's not rocket science you know.



posted on Jul, 27 2019 @ 02:18 PM
link   

originally posted by: lakenheath24
My rudimental take is...
Left.....Trump bad man
Right....Trump good man


Did I miss anything?



Meanwhile Congress continues to neglect its constitutional obligations of protecting the border whilst they go to Africa on the 400 year anniversary apology tour.


Yes, you missed a key demographic.

Innocent until proven guilty = Trump innocent regardless of political affiliation.

Reality is seldom black and white as you attempted to depict. Try harder to formulate coherent and complete thoughts next time.



posted on Jul, 27 2019 @ 02:20 PM
link   
a reply to: Deetermined

But...but...but, just think of how much $$$$$$$ Weissman and others got for this 3-year charade. Every day they could drag this "investigation" on, it was taxpayer dollars in some lawyers' pockets. Mueller probably pocketed enough to last the rest of his life.



posted on Jul, 27 2019 @ 02:20 PM
link   
a reply to: JustJohnny


So how was the Miller testimony bad for the democrats when if nothing else, it established that trump and cronies were bald face lying by claiming the muller report found him innocent..


It wasn't. Right wingers believe that however they choose to interpret something makes it the truth. Because it's their interpretation.

There's no objective reality outside of what they want to believe at this point.



posted on Jul, 27 2019 @ 02:21 PM
link   
a reply to: Subaeruginosa

That's not what his job is. Prosecutors don't exonerate, they have to prove guilt. Please see the constitution.

Mueller himself walked that line back during the hearing. This is evidence that Robert Mueller had no idea what was in this report.

He didn't know who Fusion GPS was. Could not speak to the illegal spying that predicated this investigation and what the justification for that was.

I'm amazed at what liberals are willing to buy and propose as justice. Read the constitution. The burden of proof is on the state and that does not change if it's the president.


edit on 27 7 19 by projectvxn because: (no reason given)

edit on 27 7 19 by projectvxn because: (no reason given)



posted on Jul, 27 2019 @ 02:23 PM
link   

originally posted by: JohnS23

originally posted by: JustJohnny
a reply to: Deetermined

So how was the Miller testimony bad for the democrats when if nothing else, it established that trump and cronies were bald face lying by claiming the muller report found him innocent..


In fact By saying “the president cannot be charged with a crime, but if he was obviously innocent we would say so.. “


Well they did not say they thought he was innocent...




From Muellers mouth to your eyes...."No American citizen was found to have conspired with Russia...."

That's about as clear as it gets and it was in Muellers report. Do you have any more idiocy that needs debunking?


Um, why are you ignoring the "obstruction" aspect, I'm playing devils advocate as I'm not buying into this one way or another..just pointing out WHAT he was not unequivocally cleared of.



posted on Jul, 27 2019 @ 02:24 PM
link   
a reply to: underwerks


It wasn't. Right wingers believe that however they choose to interpret something makes it the truth. Because it's their interpretation.


You're different how? What exactly is your interpretation of the reason Mueller made no determination of guilt or innocence?!



new topics

top topics



 
44
<<   2  3  4 >>

log in

join