MovieChat Forums > SnagsWolf > Replies
SnagsWolf's Replies
[quote]This is what you wrote dummy, what I responded to. Follow your own advice. Stop being stupid.[/quote]
Huh? Are the Feds prosecuting Trump? Did Mueller say he came to the conclusion that Trump committed at crime?
No, they aren't. And no, he didn't.
So, by definition, Trump was exonerated. Mueller doesn't have to say that. Just like every other prosecutor in history didn't have to say that when they decided not to bring a case against someone.
This isn't rocket science. Try to keep up.
No.
Stupid question by a delusional Trump hater. Unless you want to list the actual steps he's taken to turn the presidency into a dictatorship. And I mean actual steps, not your crazy fantasies.
[quote]The OP can't figure out why Julian Assange wasn't interviewed?[/quote]
There are multiple interviews of Assange on YouTube. Why do you think he couldn't be interviewed?
Don't you find it curious why Mueller didn't use all those examples of evidence of Russian computer hacking to bolster his claim? And he used the one example he couldn't tie to the Russian government? Is he anti-intelligence also?
To a liberal, all they have to do to refute an argument is to call someone a name. Never mind the actual evidence presented in the article. Did you actually read the court document and what the judge ruled?
Once again, you prove you can't accept facts when they go against your beliefs.
Stop posting stupid shit.
[quote]I am concerned about climate change and its effects on Earth, but I admit I haven't really done much on my part to mitigate it...(I use a lot of energy....) [/quote]
Leonardo DiCaprio, is that you?
Al Gore?
And Mueller admitted himself that NEVER in the history of the U.S. Justice Department has a prosecutor come out and said they haven't exonerated anyone.
Because they don't need to. It's not their job to exonerate. It's their job to prosecute. If they can't find the evidence to prosecute, then, by definition, the person is exonerated.
You are aware of the concept of innocent until proven guilty, right?
Stop being stupid.
[quote]Actually, what's going on here is that you don't understand basic concept. You take the words as words.[/quote]
No, I take Mueller's clarification for what it was - backing up from the claim that the only reason he didn't indict was because of the OLC. The OLC didn't stop him from claiming that Trump broke the law. He could have easily said that the evidence showed that Trump engaged in criminal conduct, but he couldn't indict him because of the OLC.
He didn't do that, which speaks volumes. You're just too stupid to understand that.
[quote]Has Buck been tossed out from the GOP yet for scoring the winning touchdown for the opposite team?[/quote]
Despite your delusional fantasies, Buck did a great job. All he did was have Mueller admit that if there was evidence to indict, the indictment would have to wait until after the president left office.
And then Mueller admitted the evidence wasn't there, otherwise he would have come out and said that. He actually backed off his earlier claim that the only reason he didn't indict was because of the OLC.
You need to stick to simple topics you can understand, like defaced presidential seals and Melania's Christmas tweets.
[quote]Mueller corrected himself because he's explained countless times that unless he was able to legally charge Trump with the crime of obstruction of justice, which he was not due to the OLC rule, then he would not state one way or another whether a crime had been committed. [/quote]
One way or the other whether a crime has been committed, huh? So that's why he did come out and say there was no crime of collusion/conspiracy committed?
Stop posting stupid shit.
[quote]Thus, Mueller's job was not to determine criminal actions, but simply to advise on further investigation.[/quote]
That's hilarious. For almost two years we heard from all you idiots how Mueller was going to lock up Trump for collusion. Now when he doesn't, you back peddle to this inane claim. Of course his job was to determine criminal actions. How can you say something so stupid?
Doggiedaddy thinks his delusional fantasies are equal to the brutal truth of the effect of sanctuary cities.
You have to be a liberal to say such stupid things.
What Mueller said:
"I want to add one correction to my testimony this morning. I want to go back to one thing that was said this morning, by Mr. Lieu. It was said, and I quote, 'You didn't charge the president because of the OLC opinion.' That is not the correct way to say it. As we say in the report, and as I said at the opening, we did not reach a determination as to whether the president committed a crime."
Once again, "We did not reach a determination as to whether the president committed a crime."
He couldn't have said it any more clearer. And yet you idiots still claim Trump is a criminal.
It's clear to anyone with a brain who the ignorant ones are here.
Mueller's follow up statement:
"I want to add one correction to my testimony this morning. I want to go back to one thing that was said this morning, by Mr. Lieu. It was said, and I quote, 'You didn't charge the president because of the OLC opinion.' That is not the correct way to say it. As we say in the report, and as I said at the opening, we did not reach a determination as to whether the president committed a crime."
Another Doggiedaddy post goes down in flames.
Forget the media. All a sane person had to do was watch that joke of a hearing yesterday.
Just the fact that the guy running the investigation said he didn't care if the document the entire case was based on was all lies, tells you EVERYTHING you need to know about this witch hunt.
[quote]He's constantly claiming that he's exonerated.[/quote]
Not sure why this is so hard for you to understand. If the Feds investigate you, study the evidence, and decide not to prosecute, you ARE exonerated. They don't have to say it.
[quote]the incriminating evidence against trump [/quote]
Those of us who are sane in America are still waiting for that evidence. How many times do the Democrats have to be humiliated in public with their false allegations?