Did you find evidence Trump is guilty?

They also "helped" Bernie. What's your point?

They can prove Russia helped Trump and that Trump was happy about that but not that Trump /asked/ Russia for help.

Okay, but what's the evidence?

So if the campaign didnt help russia then the campaign is innocent?

So they can't prove he broke the law. QED.

MUELLER BLATANTLY STATED "RUSSIA INTERFERED IN OUR ELECTION"

TRUMP AND CONGRESS HAVE DONE NOTHING ABOUT IT. NONE OF THEM CARE, THEY JUST WANT TO FIGHT AND VIRTUE SIGNAL TO THEIR BASES. ANYONE WHO CLAIMS TO BE A DEMOCRAT OR REPUBLICAN OUTTA BE EXECUTED

My point is that your point was pointless. You addressed this guy saying
>We have ample evidence that Russia helped the Trump campaign in the election
While completing ignoring what he said two lines down
>We have no evidence of a quid pro quo or criminal conspiracy, which requires proving intent
And instead made a post to just repeat what he said.
That's all, really.

you faggots are a bunch of pussies, it's all you've ever been and it's all you'll ever be.

I can't wait until Trump's in jail and you're all holding vigils for him. You all know what a gigantic piece of shit he is and you don't care.

Fuck all of you, for not having the balls to stand up to a wannabe dictator.

Yea Forums was never good, and it has always been a home to cowards.

>Trump makes a joke about Wikileaks
>CIAniggers say Russia dun did it.
>Trump therefor had help from Russia.

Attached: 1553744810539.jpg (1140x2037, 247K)

He didnt make a judgment on if the obstruction was illegal. He could not say it was legal, but he wasnt willing to make a judgment on if it was legal because he cant prosecute so he felt it would be unjust to say it was illegal and then not give Trump any way to defend himself.

He then reminded everyone it was up to Congress to start impeachment hearings if they felt Trumps actions were (or may have been) illegal.

That's because their interference was a joke. They wasted a great deal of their paltry sum of cash on deep blue states because they know fuck all about the US.

Wasted dubs how is he a wannabe dictator?

Yeah, that was basically his conclusion on "collusion" (unlike obstruction).

All these newfags don't even realize the Steele dossier was a Yea Forums hoax

There is no evidence because Trump and his cronies have been actively covering it up and not cooperating with the investigation, aka obstruction of justice, which the report shows HAPPENED FOR A FACT. They are just unable to indict him because he currently sits as the president. If they move for impeachment and get him out of the seat, they can indict him on obstruction of justice charges and will probably end up finding evidence now that Trump would be out of the way to do anything about it.

oh, shut the fuck up with your blatant bullshitting.

OK OJ.
Too far?
You can't prove I ate the cookies so I'm an innocent good boy.

>Oh my, what's this?

An example of your own illiteracy.

Not him but i havent read the report where does it show obstruction happend for a fact?

Muellers report also fairly blatantly implies Trump can be charge with obstruction once he leaves office (even if it is through losing an election).

>777777777777777777777777777777777

Obstruction of an investigation that turned out to be balderdash? Good luck prosecuting him on that, if you can even prove it.

Attached: Wilson and Taft find your ignorance amusing.jpg (586x463, 34K)

The point is that a foreign power is making a significant effort to undermine the democratic process in our country. And trumptards don't seem to care because nO colLuSi0n.

Attached: 1484775106270.jpg (555x555, 27K)

Why would anyone help Russia? Are you confused? The investigation was over Russian involvement in the election, and also (separately) obstruction of justice by Trump as president. It was not about anyone helping Russia. Wat.

OK Rain Man, what am I missing?

That’s a gross misrepresentation. There are 448 pages of evidence, numbnuts.

But wasnt it stated that no foriegn power could interfere with our election process?

Go dilate your neo vagina Breanna, I was there when it was written. Wilson took the bait.

>>
Trumpers don't care because we wanted him to win regardless of what Russia says.

No dummy, it wasn't. Ha ha. But I do think that anyone who really thinks there's some sort of Russian tape is being silly. The Russians claim that shit all the time and never deliver.

Suck a fucking chode, you treasonous scum

And you didn't read a single one.

Attached: 1555825481453.jpg (920x941, 85K)

“Did not establish” is very different than “found no evidence of”.

It was a very weak case, which is why Barr dropped it and Mueller didn't recommend anything. You can't "prove" innocence in something like that. There is a reason he flat out refused to answer the question of "If you could prosecute, would you have recommended it?"

He's just another neverTrumper who is tiptoeing the line. He knows the case is shit legally, but because he hates Trump he wants the Dems to oust him. But if he's forced to answer the question he knows it will only hurt the Dems because he has no intention of lying outright.

Which, again, is why he said he wouldn't respond to any form of summons if he could help it, and if he couldn't he made it clear he would only repeat what was in the report and nothing else.

What sort of dumb shit is this kek. We don't want anyone interfering in our shit you traitorous shill. Laughable reply.

Lol. 448 pages of nothingburgers. Your mainstream media admits to this and you still eat the shit they shovel you.

>HAPPENED FOR A FACT
>uh, we found no evidence
>bcuz Drumpf was covering it up the whole time!
perfectly sound logic

Okay, he still obstructed the investigation.
Also, the term collusion has no legal basis. There was no collusion because that's not what they were searching for.

Stated by whom? I think the last presidential election demonstrated very clearly that foreign powers were able to influence our elections.

It lists a bunch of possible cases. It doesnt make a judgment on if it counted as obstruction though.

theguardian.com/us-news/2019/apr/19/mueller-report-unable-to-clear-trump-of-obstruction-of-justice

I keep hearing about collusion not here but everywhere online and such is why i ask. But as ive stated i havent read the Mueller report where does it say hes obstructed justice?

The house passed HR1. McConnell won’t let the senate vote on it.

Ought to*

he meant evidence was found but only congress can go after him. Apparently you can't charge a president with a federal crime while they are in office.

Apparently obstructing justice, even when you cant be proven to have done anything else wrong, is illegal in the US.

Not saying its super logical, but then again, that's US law for you...

I don't have the interest or the attention span to hold your hand in this. Just believe what you want or read it yourself, but don't just say dumb shit if you're going to then admit you have no idea what you're talking about.

You sure about that little buckaroo?

Memes and Facebook ads are "election interference?"

You couldn’t be more wrong.

>little buckaroo
What flavor of homofaggot are you?

You mad there little fellow?

You two should touch balls.

No, I just wanna know why you suddenly start writing like a pedophile.

Attached: 1552193885490.gif (320x180, 806K)

>I have no retort so here's me critiquing your word choice.

Typical 4chinz faggot

Your homoerotic fantasies are showing.

How do you know what pedophiles type like? Been in contact with some?

Who the fuck are you, nigger? You don't know me.

Attached: 1556414691346.png (171x266, 55K)

Yeah. The US doesnt like it when foreigners produce political ads directed at the US.

That alone might be silly, but it does make sense to be concerned when your country's leader owes the leader of another country, especially if that other country's leader has evidence they could use to get that leader removed from office.

So even if you dont care Russia gets to influence which leader the US gets you might care about your leader being held by the balls by Putin.

Read the report for yourself. It's all in there. Or you can read any of the Republican-headed congressional reports. Or you can read the summaries by the various Intelligence agencies or any news article for the past 2 years on the topic.

Or you can bury your head in the sand. Your choice.

Well, I'm talking to you, aren't I?

Attached: 1555783805136.png (386x397, 450K)

>You can't prove I ate the cookies so I'm an innocent good boy.
Yeah, that's how this works. Because the alternative is chaos. The alternative is mobs and innocence/guilt based only on feelings, most of which are based on little to no actual evidence.

So if someone steals some cookies, and it's impossible to tell who did it with any certainty you can't just blame who you "feel" did it.

It's an extremely weak case. Hell one of the examples was he told a guy to tell another guy he was "part of the team", but the middle man didn't.

Forget proving intent. Most of the cases were potential attempts at best, which failed, to possibly obstruct an investigation of a crime that didn't occur.

You'd have to overcome all of that, AND prove he was intending to obstruct rather than just being Trump. Which, again, is made more difficult because there was no crime (and thus real motive).

It's a shit case.

It doesn’t take a very stable genius to know you are a douche wagon.

Uh... yeah. Nice observation there.

Our citizens do the same with much greater effect. Who cares where it comes from? Especially if they failed so spectacularly.

As far as any court of law will ever be concerned it's really not.

>Okay, he still obstructed the investigation.
Debatable and at best superficially relevant.
>There was no collusion because that's not what they were searching for.
Then what the Sam Hill were they searching for and why does it matter?

Obstruction of justice is a crime, but if you can prove you did it under the duress of a very unjust investigation any judge will let you off easy.

Attached: 1550116241593.jpg (540x549, 39K)

innocent until proven guilty retard.

If you think all he talks about is "evidence" you obviously didn't.

No. I’m mocking you and laughing at your idiocy, that’s the extent of our communication. Don’t flatter yourself, everything about you is beneath my level of caring.

>who cares if foreign powers interfere or even attempt to interfere in matters pertaining to our country and it's elections
Boy howdy we got ourselves a Ruskie y'all

Was it treason when Hillary sold uranium to the Russians too? What about when she accepted 200,00 for her foundation?

Have you ever heard of this little group called AIPAC? Do you know about this thing called USAID?

You actually believe glownigger and jewsnews propaganda? You're dumber than I assumed.

I know you're just a standard fucktarded troll that'll say anything he wants here but keep his eyes on the ground when he leaves home

possible cases of obstruction of justice =/= obstruction of justice.

>200,00
That's not how we write numbers here, comrade.

Yet there is 448 pages containing evidence, I know because I have the .pdf. Do you? Naw...

Yet you still care enough to pay attention to me. Thank you.

Attached: 1553481615781.png (400x441, 268K)

Fuck the flying fuck off, faggot.

snopes.com/fact-check/hillary-clinton-uranium-russia-deal/

The report isn't on pdf, you turbonigger.

Bye now, little man.

Christ you are an idiot.

Ehh... not that guy but I'm pretty sure I have a pdf version of it on my phone

Saul Anksky 101. Accuse your enemies of what you are guilty of

It's called "drawing a parallel"

Did you know you can't prove a negative?
It;s likely Mueller was leaned on to give an inch. So he went as far as he could "We found no evidence to say their was no collusion"
It's like someone saying they couldn't prove you didn't cheat on your exams. If you didn't cheat, how can they prove a negative?
How do you prove the spaghetti monster doesn't exists?
You can't prove a negative.

Are you retarded?

It was posted for download AS A PDF the DAY IT WAS RELEASED.

Insofar as you are innocent until proven guilty, yes. Well, those who haven't plead out at least. They are not exonerated though which is a different legal standard. Like I mentioned, Don Jr would have been guilty for the Trump Tower meeting but for the fact that a prosecutor would have to prove he knew he was breaking the law, which is too dicey to indict the president's son on. Legally, it looks like anyone who has not been indicted is off the hook. The real questions now are regarding Trump's obstruction. Can the president fire someone or order the firing (which wasn't carried out in multiple acts of insubordination) of officials carrying out an investigation into him and his friends? Mueller didn't want to make that call and left it for congress to decide.

>legendary dipshittery

So it's not 448 pages of evidence.

Attached: moving the goalpost.jpg (290x180, 14K)

Maybe, but you cant really argue the investigation is unjust when there is evidence Russia DID help and Trump DID appreciate that. Plus the obstruction case isnt exactly minor when there are 10 different things you did, including firing people.

You are really bad at this. You should leave the Internet and never return.

Again, it doesn't matter who does it when we do it to ourselves. We don't exactly have a high bar here. Twitter bias is a much bigger issue than some paper tiger.

I have a PDF copy of mein Kampf, that doesn't make me an authority on the NSDAP, particularly as I haven't read it yet. And you haven't read that PDF
Cunt.

Just going off of what ive seen user. But all im asking is one part of a report youve obviously read

I completely agree that the US is super hypocritical about politically influencing other countries.

I think bigfoot is blurry, it's not the photographer's fault.
Bigfoot IS blurry.

And that is extra scary to me. There's a large, out-of-focus monster roaming the countryside.

Attached: mitch.jpg (480x360, 17K)

>And morally
OJ was therefore morally innocent?

Before sentencing? Yes, in the eyes of the law.

Are you still trying? You lost all credibility here. Tuck your tail and run.

For sure. While the implication is strong, theres no judgment. I would not classify it as Mueller claimed illegal amounts of obstruction occurred. He just implied it fairly heavily and deferred judgment to Congress.

There isn't ever a situation where it's okay to accept other countries meddling in our affairs for their own benefit. Do we do it? Yes! Know why? Because fuck everyone else, that's why.

>morally
>in the eyes of the law
that's two different things, why even go there?

> Mueller: okay here is all the evidence trump and his criminal campaign team worked with russian agents and other foreign governments to attack the american election, all in this report. We just can't directly throw a president into jail unless he directly in front of cameras kisses putins ass and swears loyalty to russia. So we will give all this evidence to the corresponding Law agencies, for tax corruption and illegal campaign funds/donations etc. But we can't directly one hundred percent convict him, as the president is a lot stricter to prove guilty.

He said on camera a few days ago that he was not allowed to make a judgment on it being criminal conduct, because the DOJ does not accept that an indictment can be made against a sitting president.

Christ on a cracker, you're stupid, OP.
The report is just what they discovered, it is NOT his job to point out illegality/criminal behavior, it is his job to compile what he finds. It is CONGRESS that determines if/when to hold a hearing.

You're stupid. So fucking stupid. So stupid that I think you've given me a brain aneurysm.

LEARN HOW SHIT WORKS YOU FAG

>Maybe, but you cant really argue the investigation is unjust when there is evidence Russia DID help and Trump DID appreciate that
Yes you can because it was supported by unsound warrants and illegal spying.

>Plus the obstruction case isnt exactly minor when there are 10 different things you did, including firing people.
Ten things he allegedly did, all of which are dubious as to meeting the definition of obstruction even if they're true.

You should get a Nobel prize for making such a spectacular argument.

Attached: 1554681855988.jpg (750x536, 63K)

I get that, so the watered down version while extreme watered down is accurate

10 dubious cases build a case together. It's tricky to say it ALL was unintentional, misinterpreted and minor.

>b-b-b-b-but maybe Congress will impeach him anyway and some judge will rule that saying "I hope you can" is coercion

Attached: 1435720133176.gif (300x209, 108K)

>In the eyes of the law
No, you already said legally. Now we're taking about morally. Everyone ever found not guilty or not charged because evidence was not strong enough to bring a case is, to your mind, both LEGALLY AND MORALLY innocent, yes?

It's a comparison so that the brainlets who were hoping Mueller would save them from the bad orange man can understand, hopefully, that they've been had and that they've been the brainlets all along.

The burden of proof is on the accuser. You have to prove it was ALL intentional, properly interpreted and significant.

It was not an argument, it was a statement of fact.

No. Its proven obstruction if you prove one of ten suspected attempts to obstruct was intentional and significant.

Dude.. the DOJ did the investigation. Who do think the Congress is going to hire to do a better one? A subcommittee? A committee? Come on... it was over before it began. Just let it go. Look to 2020 and let the old bullshit go.

You are a minority. How does it feel?

Nope, not how that works idiot.

Investigating a single proven case of obstruction will lead to more evidence of the others. That's the entire point of building a case.

The obstruction is obvious at this point and Trump is only digging his hole deeper and deeper. The sides are falling in and I can't wait till you cucks are all crying because your lulz are over.

Fuck you.

Hey now, anything these idiots don't like is an opinion, remember?

Wow that sure turned my perspective right on its head.

Attached: 1428586575089.png (793x596, 748K)

How long is this new investigation going to last? By a more all-powerful team of lifelong attorneys and agents that hate trump more than the last bunch? Moral hazard much?
We all know he's a shithead. We all know he's corrupt. Just like Obama. Just like. Bush 2, Clinton Bush 1....... etc.
Get over it.

FAeK NuuZ!!!

Hardly matters since you have to convince the jury beyond any reasonable doubt, if you somehow cast a magic spell and get the impeachment bill to pass the Senate.

The warrents were solid and thus the "spying" was legal. But hey, if this is what it'll take for you to join the left against FISA courts then welcome aboard.

No one attempts to change the minds of the mentally challenged.

See

Attached: 1549250219327.jpg (630x630, 72K)

Oh fuck off, evidence has already been collected. Trump obstructed Mueller's investigation enough as it was.

>The warrents were solid and thus the "spying" was legal.
Nice opinion you've got there.
justsecurity.org/63398/revisiting-carter-page/

Which is exactly why actual Americans are pissed off. The Senate's refusal to do their fucking jobs and hold a President accountable is pathetic.

And you're pathetic for turning your back on the Constitution too, you treasonous fuckstick

how is it not innocent until.proven guilty?

since when did it become guilty until you can prove your innocence?

and when in america has it been that its up to you to prove your innocence?

a prosecuter, whether a regular or special counsel prosecutor job is to build a case of guilt or innocence of their target. its up to them to prove what they say, not the defendant.

and if they cant prove guilt, then by default, the accused is innocent.

its you who got shit backwards in your rush to denounce the bad orange man. your delusions are strong.

Carter Page was on the radar of counterintelligence investigators since 2014, jackass.

Also, ordering the firing of the special counsel who was hired to investigate you because you want the investigation to go away is as clearly obstruction as it gets. There's nothing dubious about it. If this were Obama Republicans would have impeached by now. Unfortunately Republicans will protect their guy and Democrats don't have the political power to override them, so the question for Pelosi is whether or not it's worth it to start impeachment proceedings almost a year and a half or from a major election when there's zero chance it'll go anywhere.

This.

If Trump is innocent then Hilary Clinton is innocent.

If Trump is innocent because the FBI agents and career government lawyers who investigated him did not meet the burden of proof required to bring charges.....

Then Clinton is also Innocent because the FBI agents and career government lawyers who investigated her did not meet the burden of proof required to bring charges.

Retorts to Clinton being Innocent under the same logic.

1) there was enough proof for Clinton but Comey did not follow through
2) Comey was corrupt. Lorretta Lynch was corrupt.
3) I just don't believe it because democrats are corrupt.

Retorts to Retorts:

1) There was enough proof for Trump but Barr did not follow through
2) Wray is corrupt. Barr is corrupt.
3) I just don't believe it because ReTrumpicans are corrupt.

Literally 1:1, except that obstruction of justice is easily, verifiably, demonstrably a more serious crime than violations federal PRA regulations. Even if you wanted to squeeze out every last bit for Clinton, and not for Trump, the criminal statutes for negligent sharing of classified data on unsecured networks is no jail time (the people that information was shared with had security clearances).

Oh wow, that hurt so bad. Here's your prize for making such a biting and original comeback.

Attached: 6f7e8200d24b633c18f3d0da60a0b71a5fe4960363ca04b03b1c3e3ea8d946d0.jpg (300x400, 20K)

how? did he fire mueller? did he withhold subpoenaed documents? did he refuse to testify, is that why he filled out the questionnaire under oathm

WHINE ALL YOU WANT, TRUMPSUCKING FAGGOTS.

YOU ALL KNOW THIS CANNOT END WELL FOR YOUR ORANGE MESSIAH, NO MATTER WHICH WAY IT ENDS.

ENJOY LIVING IN A POST TRUMP WORLD, WHERE REALITY IS MORE IMPORTANT THAN YOUR PERSONAL HANGUPS ABOUT BROWN PEOPLE.

>100 thousand dollars of facebook ads
Nothing compared to the billions of dollars and thousands of hours of nonstop shilling from our own fucking propagandist media companies. Nevermind Britain's got their fingerprints all over this investigation with their so called "ex spy" nonsense.

Are you still sitting there spluttering mad and typing? You going to punch the screen?

seething

The image and your greentext are contradicting eachother. Trumptards should be gassed.

Attached: 1552067716512.jpg (653x1024, 79K)

Mueller literally states that had the target of the investigation been anyone other than the POTUS, whom the DoJ has in advance based on decades old guideline decided to never indict, they would have already been indicted and charged with obstruction.
"Had we concluded that the President is Not Guilty, our report would have said so. We did not state that as based on the evidence found, we cannot state that. Please read the full report. It is DoJ policy to not indict the sitting president. That power belongs to the congress."

legally, hecould have, tue optics woupdve been bad, but NOT illegal. but did he follow rhrough withit? no, so it doesnt rise to actual obstruction. and, had he fired Rob, the case wouldve been closed.

>Whether or not it’s illegal, I don’t yet know.
>One of the two concrete findings from the Mueller report made public thus far, in a letter by Attorney General William Barr, is that Mueller’s “investigation did not establish that members of the Trump Campaign conspired or coordinated with the Russian government in its election interference activities.” Presumably that extends to Page, who briefly served as a foreign policy advisor to the Trump campaign. On face, that would seem to imply that the evidence before Mueller was insufficient to demonstrate that Page was an “agent of a foreign power,” as the FBI had asserted to the FISA court in seeking its surveillance order.

Let's get this straight...

They obtained a warrant that eventually lead to the conclusion that she was not an agent of a foreign power, but the conclusion came after the warrant, and somehow that means that the motives for selling the warrant were invalid before that conclusion was reached?

I think this Congress under the category of obvious reaching.

That actually makes sense because our law enforcement doesn't try to exonerate people they just say not guilty

>implying killary was ever properly investigated
MUH 11 HOUR TESTIMONY!!!

> still no new us wars
> trump is cool

Attached: 43443434.gif (324x576, 1.39M)

Attached: 343.gif (285x237, 996K)

Attached: 1551219066393.jpg (600x778, 113K)

except at the very least clinton is guiltyof destruction of evidence that was under subpoena.

those 30,000 emails no matter what they were about, were supposed to go to the i vestigators, she took it upon herswlf to delete them, thus destroying evidence

How about publicly tweeting direct and implied threats to people involved? How about refusing to sit down for an interview BECAUSE HE LITERALLY CANNOT STOP LYING? How about railroading every effort to access his finances, which the House had every legal right to?

How about placing spineless cronies in the DOJ strictly to protect himself from facing justice?

How much more do you fucking need? This was barely the tip of the motherfucking iceberg with this cunt.

Just admit that you don't give a shit about what America is supposed to stand for. At this point you don't get to feign ignorance, you don't get to play the "butterymales" violin and pretend that facts aren't facts.

Fuck you dude. You know better.

>yet.
Iran is looking like it’s on the horizon, and once trumps bromance with Un ends tragically, NK will be next.

is for

/fucking thread

Attached: 1553718701778.jpg (869x1326, 498K)

I guess in clown world it's the Senate's job to prosecute the President on flimsy, unproven accusations.

Since you clearly don't have the patience to do a great deal of reading yourself, I picked out a nice tidbit for you:
justsecurity.org/63398/revisiting-carter-page/
>Though almost all of the new information added to the renewal applications remains redacted, the length of the applications increased substantially over time: The initial submission the the FISC totaled 66 pages, while the final renewal application had grown to 101 pages. While presumably not all of the additional 35 pages concerned the information gleaned from wiretapping Page, some significant portion must have. So what was the FBI telling the FISC to justify continuing surveillance? And how do we square that with Mueller’s inability to establish coordination between Trump associates and Russia? It is unfortunate, but probably inevitable, that the government will sometimes target people for surveillance and discover that their suspicions were mistaken. If, however, the government conducts nine months of intrusive electronic surveillance, persuades a court that their suspicions have been confirmed, and still proves to have been wrong, that is at least a prima facie indication of something wrong with the system.

>ordering
That's where you're wrong, kiddo. He asked someone to do it, he didn't sign an executive order or anything legally binding.

Attached: 300px-Trump_kisses_Putin's_ass_by_Jim_Carrey.jpg (300x402, 38K)

ow about publicly tweeting direct and implied threats to people involved? How about refusing to sit down for an interview BECAUSE HE LITERALLY CANNOT STOP LYING? How about railroading every effort to access his finances, which the House had every legal right to?

How about placing spineless cronies in the DOJ strictly to protect himself from facing justice?

How much more do you fucking need? This was barely the tip of the motherfucking iceberg with this cunt.

Just admit that you don't give a shit about what America is supposed to stand for. At this point you don't get to feign ignorance, you don't get to play the "butterymales" violin and pretend that facts aren't facts.

Fuck you dude. You know better.
>>
Anonymous 05/31/19(Fri)15:58:22 No.801092842▶
>yet.
Iran is looking like it’s on the horizon, and once trumps bromance with Un ends tragically, NK will be next.
>>
Anonymous 05/31/19(Fri)15:58:43 No.801092859▶is for
>>
Anonymous 05/31/19(Fri)15:59:11 No.801092884▶
/fucking thread
>>
Anonymous 05/31/19(Fri)15:59:17 No.801092891▶
File: 1553718701778.jpg (498 KB, 869x1326)
498 KB
>>
Anonymous 05/31/19(Fri)16:00:10 No.801092946▶
I guess in clown world it's the Senate's job to prosecute the President on flimsy, unproven accusations.

Since you clearly don't have the patience to do a great deal of reading yourself, I picked out a nice tidbit for you:
justsecurity.org/63398/revisiting-carter-page/
e wrong, kiddo. He asked someone to do it, he didn't sign an executive order or anything legally binding.

>no I'm not mad you're mad

Attached: 0af35cddfdb1836940ebb20ead98efe833352535e6cd7cb926a21cc66c8a663d.jpg (512x325, 30K)

There's more to it. Read up:

Attached: 1557619385142.gif (1221x1007, 142K)

Mueller: If the President didn't commit any crimes, we would have said that in the report but we didn't.
>Trumpers: XONERTATED!1!

>This report does not exonerate the president

hey, do you remember all those episodes of law and order when the prosecutor would say something like "your honor, we do not have a case against the defendant, and we'd also like to say that the defendant is also totally innocent"

know why you don't remember that?
because such episodes don't exist.

it's not a prosecutors job to say a person is innocent - their job is to prove a crime.

mueller found no crime.
no crime = exonerated

No. It's the senate's job to provide oversight along with the house and they refuse to do it.

If you want to gaslight someone, try setting yourself on fire.

Attached: 1559330243624.gif (1000x1000, 208K)

you are taking a small bit of what he said and blowing it way out of context. he said that we cannot pursue any action against the president thats to the constitution so we are not going to come forth with our accusations because it would be pointless to do so without being able to properly take action against him

Attached: 1557297735487.gif (407x405, 317K)

lol no, you got that backwards, even being found "not guilty" is not "innocent"

>implying any of this matters even in bizarro world where it's all true

Attached: you.webm (1280x720, 955K)

IRA budget was $10 million

Russian salaries are 25% of American salaries. if you do the analysis then its efectively equivalent of $40 million budget.

IRA was, in essence, the equivalent of a Super PAC that did not follow any rules.

Prior to the RNC nomition Trump's campaign budget was in the 100-200 million range, so the IRA budget in absolute dollars (not effective/equivalent) was 5-10% of Trump Campaign budget.

People say throw around these numbers like they are meaningless.

The false premise is this:

"BUT OBAMA SPENT A BILLION DOLLARS!"

Obama did not deposit $1 billion into the bank account of Facebook and Google.

The actual dollars spent in Facebook and Google adwords by even the largest marketing agencies is small by comparison to the budgets.

Most of the money is just paying people's salaries.

Not for the least of reasons being that smart marketers and advertisers ACTIVELY MINIMIZE THEIR COSTS.

They laser focus their advertising dollars and try as hard as possible to spend AS LITTLE AS POSSIBLE.

$100k of actual money transferred to Facebook is an insane amount of money. that is the adword budget for a $50 million revenue retail company per year.

You faggots want us involved in more wars so you can say "told you so." Pathetic.

FUCK YOU

BLATANTLY IN THE FUCKING REPORT

AND

IN MUELLER'S PRESSER

"DOES NOT EXONERATE"

EAT A DICK FAGGOT

kek nice argument

Attached: 8514e2af86939bb91f72790abd53d90e70d187d2571dba4bd5d6e19979f6a115.jpg (1457x1571, 94K)

From your link:

>Yet in Carter Page’s case, the FBI clearly did not believe they had hit a dead end. A FISA warrant targeting a United States person must be renewed every 90 days, as Page’s was on three separate occasions, by three different FISA Court judges. Those renewal applications would not merely have recited the evidence supporting the initial order: They would have been expected to describe the fruits of previous surveillance, and justify continued monitoring by showing that useful intelligence was being gathered—or, at the very least, that there was good reason to expect some in the future.

The simplest guess would be that, while Page ultimately was cleared, the investigations into him lead to others who are still under investigation. Mueller likely did not bring those issues to light because they were outside the scope of his investigation. Either way, the article is mainly focused on the FISA system as a whole being broken, not Page's particular case. It in no way supports the position that the warrents were dubious or that the wiretapping was illegal. But, again, if all this sheds more light on the FISA system as a whole and starts bringing Republicans on board for reforms then all the better.

How about providing oversight on the utterly fraudulent "investigation" these accusations came from then?

>being found "not guilty" is not "innocent"

innocent until proven guilty
thus
being found "not guilty" is being found "innocent"

/end

>The simplest guess would be that, while Page ultimately was cleared, the investigations into him lead to others who are still under investigation. Mueller likely did not bring those issues to light because they were outside the scope of his investigation.
What if I told you that's against the law?

>IN MUELLER'S PRESSER
>"DOES NOT EXONERATE"
>EAT A DICK FAGGOT

IT'S NOT A PROSECUTOR'S JOB TO DECLARE A PERSON TO BE EXONERATED

EAT A DICK FAGGOT

you're deriving your knowledge of the law from a TV show that employed Ice T as a detective
all your arguments are irrelevent

(not to mention completely wrong)

New thread for faggots

KEK

Exoneration literally means that they found another guy who did the crime you were convicted of. Short of that, there is basically no such thing as exoneration. Like all those black people convicted in the 50s and 60s and EXONERATED due to DNA evidence later on? Aquitted.... not guilty.... case dropped.... no charges brought....

None of those things are "exonerated"

Clearly if those are exonerated then Hilary Clinton must be exonerated right?

Wew, that's a lot of mental gymnastics, and all that reddit spacing on top of it.

>Hilary Clinton must be exonerated right?
strawman

Shhh, retards that support one of both faggy parties will get butthurt

SPLIT MORE HAIRS FAGGOT. SUCK YOUR STRAW MAN'S DICK BECAUSE TRUMPLES IS NOT EXONERATED AND NOTHING CHANGES THAT SHIT

The legality is questionable at best. This is uncharted territory. It doesn't matter though because impeachment is a political, not legal, process and the burden of proof is a different standard. If congress believes the president is abusing his power for personal gain they can absolutely impeach him, and the fact that he was stopped by insubordination and incompetence isn't exactly a solid rebuttal.

>you're deriving your knowledge of the law from a TV show

*sigh
a tv show was used as a means of helping an ignorant person understand reality

move along

Sage

You're retarded. Your government's court doesn't dictate anyone's morality. Fucking Yea Forumsootlickerz

>Hilary Clinton must be exonerated right?
>strawman

...

Yeah smashed phones and wiped hard drives is totally the same as hearsay from an "ex spy" of british origin, but remember the russians are trying to interfere! they literally hacked the DNC servers, servers that were never handed over to investigators.
It all makes perfect sense, hillary is innocent :^)

BUTTERYMALES

While Trump trashes America you whine about this?

Treason's fine though?

Fuck you dude.

nice to see that mueller at least indicted all those people who helped the president obstruct justice

oh wait

This. They're all taking foreign money and the retarded Yea Forumsootlickers here are supporting one group of fucking retards over another party of fucking retards because they're brainlets

Oh wait what? He did. Or does American news constantly talking about the people being charged go through your brainlet skull?
I'm not an American, it's common knowledge on all world news that his people are being tried.

It's over. The S.S Prosecution has already set sail and Trump just got off scot free. Any hope of a charge at this point is a false one, simply put. Demofags have already wasted too much time and resources to even warrant continuing an investigation.

>indicted all those people who helped the president
obstruct justice
>Oh wait what? He did.

name them

>woohoo,trump supporters rejoice! even though we support a republican who thinks gun control is more important then the 2nd ammendment,we got the libs by fucking mueller! because we still dont realize trump's attitude towards guns and the fact he cant shut up about immigration is whats going to lose us 2020,and we think mueller and his russian stuff was gonna lose us 2020

Here's a few at least

Attached: mueller-trump-charges-promo-1534968452597-articleLarge-v6.jpg (600x399, 50K)

>name them

time.com/5556331/mueller-investigation-indictments-guilty-pleas/

Manafort, Papadopoulos, Flynn

...and what does that have to do with Page being a suspected target of Russian Intelligence since 2014? Oh it doesn’t... derp.

Attached: 4A2A5898-00B9-4243-9972-5C69549F00F6.png (207x243, 3K)

Oh wow more people who were never charged with obstruction of justice

Attached: 9mu.png (583x589, 836K)

False.

Unequivocally so.

Making up random shit doesn't count as "fact"

No, just the ones willing to go to jail to cover up Trump's obstruction.

read this one more time
>people who helped the president
obstruct justice

Nothing. Good thing that's not the point.

read this one more time
>people who helped the president
obstruct justice.

You will be easily manipulated into supporting whichever ones that clown picks.

>disgraceful

read this one more time-
>people who helped the president
obstruct justice

Nice conspiracy theory you've got there.

Lol you got this shit from reddit

>No, just the ones willing to go to jail to cover up Trump's obstruction.

funny thing is, mueller likely knew there was NO COLLUSION many many many many months ago - which makes anything trump did after said point of knowledge exempt from the topic

To be fair, The Fart went to jail for covering up far worse crimes than simply aiding and abetting a bumbling 70 old fat man gain the presidency.

Even Trumpists know Manafart was bad news. Thats why they fired him.

Manafart was too sketchy and corrupt even for Trump, who continues to employ Wilbur "Nosehair" Ross (seriously who wants to bet Wilbur Ross has NOT engaged in insider trading over the last 4 weeks)

>ordering
>That's where you're wrong, kiddo. He asked someone to do it, he didn't sign an executive order or anything legally binding.

Please tell me you're not actually this retarded. Have you ever been employed? I mean, I've heard some dumb shit before but this is up there. Hell, the fact that the White House's top lawyer tendered his resignation over it should tell you how "not legally binding" it was.

Actually it is. While you try to make some dipshit case about improper FISA warrants, he was a suspect for years before any were issued. Before McDonald declared himself a candidate, before the dossier... fuck yourself with a jackhammer.

You think every word the President says is a legally imperative command? Like if he orders ranch at McDonald's and gets honey mustard instead the drive thru guy goes to prison?

Attached: c.png (528x492, 492K)

You think that will stop them? We'll be hearing about impeachment through 2024

Yea, this is allllllllllllll a conspiracy against Trump. People go to jail over conspiracies ALLLLLLL the time. There's no smoke here, just people sitting in prison for no reason at all.

Get the fuck over it. You don't get to have it both ways, faggots.

How the fuck do you people still support this treasonous asshole anyway? How fucking stupid and selfish do you have to be?

I wouldn't know. It's a layman's guess. Just like you're making a layman's guess. Difference here is I have over a decade of legal precedent on my side saying FISA warrents are legally valid. I don't like it, but that's the way it is. Meanwhile, on your side, you have actual nothing. Less than nothing since it's ignoring the reality of the situation. But go ahead and keep calling it opinions. I'm sure Trump will release all that stuff that proves misdoings any day now. Any day now.

>While you try to make some dipshit case about improper FISA warrants
Wow you're illiterate.
>Though almost all of the new information added to the renewal applications remains redacted, the length of the applications increased substantially over time: The initial submission the the FISC totaled 66 pages, while the final renewal application had grown to 101 pages. While presumably not all of the additional 35 pages concerned the information gleaned from wiretapping Page, some significant portion must have. So what was the FBI telling the FISC to justify continuing surveillance? And how do we square that with Mueller’s inability to establish coordination between Trump associates and Russia? It is unfortunate, but probably inevitable, that the government will sometimes target people for surveillance and discover that their suspicions were mistaken. If, however, the government conducts nine months of intrusive electronic surveillance, persuades a court that their suspicions have been confirmed, and still proves to have been wrong, that is at least a prima facie indication of something wrong with the system.

>mueller knew

Oh the baby logic.

Why it was obstruction even though "there was no crime" (incorrect characterization. The real, correct, characterization is "because the actions that were committed did not reach the level of a provable crime beyond the prosecutor's assumption of a winnable case beyond a reasonable doubt")

Because TRUMP did not know.

Trump, and those around him, were not sure whether they committed a crime.

its not like Trump... Or Kushner... or Lewandowski or anyone else knew the actions and communications of EVERY OTHER member of the campaign at every moment over the course of 6 months.

Trump did not even know the specifics of what Flynn told the Russians after he won the election.

Thats the issue. Trump WAS NOT EVEN SURE if he or members of his campaign did nor did not commit crimes, or actions that broke FEC regulations.

So yes. If you think there is a chance that what you did might have been illegal, and then you go to EVERY EFFORT to obstruct the investigation of that hypothetical illegality, you are still obstructing justice even if its determined that the underlying actions did not add up to a winnable case in court and the prosecutor declines to bring charges (again, highly distinct from "no crime")

This is a very simple, and probably the most basic and obvious example of a situation where obsctruction of justice is possible without an underlying crime.

Because the existince of the underlying crime was UNCLEAR to everyone involved and obstruction of that hypothetical crime is still a crime.

but that's not right at all

Attached: Mueller_61305478.jpg (649x698, 46K)

>fuck yourself with a jackhammer

11 more hours than dirty donnie

Attached: 0002.png (476x474, 142K)

Mueller will not get away that easy. Nice try Mueller.

Attached: DeepStateFools.jpg (1083x616, 152K)

Any law enforcement member will tell you, not knowing the law does not protect you from breaking it.

>There's no smoke here, just people sitting in prison for no reason at all.
For reasons that have nothing to do with Trump, once again.

>How the fuck do you people still support this treasonous asshole anyway? How fucking stupid and selfish do you have to be?
>implying
Also pic related.

Attached: 1539822740523.png (664x1014, 146K)

The drive through guy isn't a federal employee. If he were then Trump could fire him for insubordination, yes. It's really amazing how hard this is for you to grasp. Are you actually autistic? Like, for real? It's okay if you are. Just, wow.

>random buzzwords from leftist corporate media outlets
Grow a brain and use it, faggot.

Attached: NPC repeats.jpg (415x381, 53K)

>just people sitting in prison for no reason at all.

reasons that have ZERO to do with collusion, or obstruction

get away from what?

Attached: reps1524950444206.jpg (846x960, 120K)

Bigoted bullshit, gotcha.

Sounds about right.

>Difference here is I have over a decade of legal precedent on my side saying FISA warrents are legally valid
What if I told you in order to have a FISA warrant extended you have to convince a court that your warrant confirmed the initial suspicion that justified it?

Fuck you faggot, go gaslight elsewhere.

Attached: npc1557626874354.jpg (1892x1712, 330K)

>How the fuck do you people still support this treasonous asshole anyway?

yea, nobody understands the support for hillary, you're spot on

>everyone i dont like is a bigot
Meanwhile you're being bigoted yourself but you're so immersed in propaganda you're blind to it.

10/10 nice shitpost

Attached: birth of a nigger.gif (292x227, 2M)

>gaslight
You don't even know what that word means you brainlet, you just heard it on the young turks or john oliver and repeat it like a parrot.

Attached: 45.jpg (700x800, 105K)

Attached: NPC cope.jpg (900x760, 113K)

Requesting retirement does not dismiss Muller from congressional testimony.

You do realize Roger Stone doesn’t go on trial until November, right? There are 12 redacted indictments in the Muller report too. It’s far from finished in the court system.

no guilty is NOT equivalent to innocent.

GRASP

Attached: C02E025C-EDD3-4B30-9C3A-6730DEC6A8FD.jpg (480x485, 100K)

>You don't know what the word you used correctly means

Calm down there, stable genius

Facts.

All the rational democraps already realized they were taken for a ride and got off, only the most diehard retards are left.

Things like this crack me up only because those that use false equivalence and are fooled by it are so proud of their false equivalence, and simply cannot ever know how stupid they look to those who are not fooled by false equivalence. I mean, this guy doesn't even get the original quote right.
“Because we determined not to make a traditional prosecutorial judgment, we did not draw ultimate conclusions about the President’s conduct,” the Mueller report said. “The evidence we obtained about the President’s actions and intent presents difficult issues that would need to be resolved if we were making a traditional prosecutorial judgment. At the same time, if we had confidence after a thorough investigation of the facts that the President clearly did not commit obstruction of justice, we would so state.”

at no point does he say "my office found no evidence..."

Stay stupid /pol. That promotion will come along soon enough....

Some crimes require specific intent and/or knowledge that you are committing a crime. Most don't, but some do.

>You do realize Roger Stone doesn’t go on trial until November, right?
>ZERO to do with collusion, or obstruction

The meme says it all.

Okay, continue being pic related. I'll still be here to laugh at you when you lose again.

Attached: liberals in 2019.jpg (1024x682, 103K)

what it like not knowing how plea deals work? how do americans not understand how their own justice system works?

>If he were then Trump could fire him for insubordination, yes.
Now here comes the million dollar question: Why didn't Trump fire Don McGahn for insubordination?

Yet more declare for impeachment every day. You would think by your reasoning it would be going the other way... isn’t that odd?

The same old usual suspects are saying the same shit they've been saying? They're playing you for fools.

>obstructive act
>nexus
>criminal intent

It’s all there over and over for each instance in the report. It’s easy to find and not difficult to read.

everyone in here seems to think they're immune to being manipulated. This very threat is evidence of the subversion of our democracy by spreading fear and pitting us against each other.

Rise above it, you're arguing with fellow Americans and giving clickbait as your evidence.

Because Americans are fucking retarded.

I am sure you are wrong.

I feel like his statement made things more confusing I can see he is trying to be impartial but he is kind of mudding the water. On one hand he says he wont charge trump because he cant and then goes on to say he never said trump didn't commit a crime.

He should probably just choose a side right now he just looks silly trying to play the middle.

I'm not worried, seems your tyrant is the one getting roasted here.

What if I told you that's exactly what's happened and there's no evidence to the contrary? What if I told you that if Trump really wanted to release those documents for public scrutiny he could have done so already? But he hasn't, in spite of his continued promise to do so. If the warrents were unjustified and confirm his narrative that he was unjustly targeted, what reason would he have not to release them? Unless, of course, they actually stand up under scrutiny. He could have done so any time over the past 2 years. I'm sure he just needs a lithe bit more time. Just keep waiting. Any day now.

>seems
Yeah, if you watch the same propagandists day after day.
>Any day now, DRUMPF IS FINISHED!!!1
For the last 3 years.
Maybe you're not as intelligent as you think you are, maybe you're just a gullible fool who is being gaslit by the establishment democrats.

Foreign powers have been interfering in our democracy for the last 30 years. If you baby liberals weren't so young and stupid, you'd know

You're either so sarcastic I can't detect it and think you're an idiot, or you were born after the year 2000.

Attached: 1379171183659.jpg (375x550, 146K)

>he says while Fox News is blaring in the background

Because Trump doesn't like to fire people. Ironic, I know, for a man who's television catch phrase was "You're fired". Then again, if he thought there was nothing wrong then why did he tell McGahn to lie about it? Why does he keep telling McGahn not to testify?

The obstruction is pretty clear in regard to intent. The criminal conspiracy with Russia much less so. The obstruction case has other, constitutional, questions.

good, we want him to testify.

Attached: Mueller.png (640x619, 223K)

We live in a brave new world where everyone gets exactly the news they want to get.

Truth is irrelevant.

If Trump's such a strong, capable president why does he spend all of his time eating Wendy's and jerking off to Hannity?

>What if I told you that's exactly what's happened and there's no evidence to the contrary?
Then James Comey is going to prison and probably taking some friends with him.

>What if I told you that if Trump really wanted to release those documents for public scrutiny he could have done so already?
Politics is 100% optics, my friend. Saving it until Mueller was done was the only way to ensure no would could accuse him of doing it to obstruct Mueller.

Sure, but most of it was before people plugged in mindlessly into devices and surrounded themselves in a media bubble. Decades past people would do stuff like read a paper... get a library book off a shelf. We have a fast food president for a fast food culture.

Donald Trump's grandfather rans whore houses. His father was a slumlord who sold little Donny's tender pink ass to Roy Cohen. Trump is a conman who never earned a single thing in his worthless life. Has filed for bankruptcy protection six times. Steals money from charities. Wants to fuck his own daughter. Sucks up to Israel when not tonguing Vladimir Putin's asshole. And despite being leader of the free world, he has plenty of time to use Twitter to spew drivel. He's a loser and no matter how much money/fame/power he has, he'll never be loved or respected which are the things he craves most of all.

Meanwhile his supporters are cockroaches whose hivemind runs on fear, hate and stupidity and worship a cartoon frog while supporting a fake President because they're fake Americans who have no convictions and will say/do anything to justify their position at any given moment. This is why they spent DECADES railing against Russia but are now perfectly happy that their idol is in the pockets of a fascist dicator who MURDERS critics, dissenters and political opponents. This is one of the reasons why Trump sucks up to Putin, because he admires that sort of power, the other is that his credit rating is soo terrible that he's been recieving money from Russia and China for decades. Of course he could prove me wrong by releasing his tax records but that will never happen because it would prove his treasonous activity against the United States of America and reveal that his supporters are enemies of the USA and everything it stands for!!!

He's a silver spoon fed trust fund sniveling coward. Only people who voted for him are retards who remember the 1980's being the last good era of the USA, not realizing that it's people like Trump who sold the country out with NAFTA and Free Trade which is why their jobs got shipped to slave labor countries. Proof that Republicans/Conservatives are complete and utter fucking cretins with subhuman I.Q.'s!!!FACT!

all good things take time

Attached: 1546308014577.jpg (641x864, 36K)

amen

Attached: 08.jpg (600x532, 57K)

Obstruction is not a constitutional issue, especially from the top. Articles of obstruction were drafted against Nixon for it, and the president should be the most accountable for unbecoming conduct.

There were 140 documented contacts between the Russians and trump campaign, that’s hardly ambiguous. Erik Prince’s escapade alone should alarm every dedicated American citizen.

enough said

Attached: fucking clown.jpg (302x301, 21K)

Can’t argue with this logic. Well said, user.

>Then again, if he thought there was nothing wrong then why did he tell McGahn to lie about it?
He didn't. Keep in mind the source of this entire story still hasn't been identified and it may not have ever happened at all.

>Why does he keep telling McGahn not to testify?
Probably because it's a waste of time and resources.

Okay. Let's address your new tidbit.
>If, however, the government conducts nine months of intrusive electronic surveillance, persuades a court that their suspicions have been confirmed
They did not need to prove their suspicions confirmed to renew the FISA. They only had to prove they still held the original suspicions and use their surveillance to demonstrate that the investigation had not yet ruled the initial suspicions out. Which accounts for the extra pages.

No final conclusion had been reached. It isn't illegal to ask for more time to surveil a suspect if they haven't been eliminated.

Bring your liberal vote to the ballot box. See what it gets you, you short sighted liberal fag.

We will.

Keep pol in pol thanks.

You can find a tranny thread by scrolling down.

We sure will user. Be peace upon you and your fear and hate leaves your body

Articles were drafted against Nixon but impeachment never happened. Nixon resigned because he didn't have the numbers on his side. He resigned, and so no precedent was set. Trump won't resign because he has the numbers to protect him. Enough Republicans are willing to stand by the argument that the president is not beholden to anyone within the executive branch and has absolute authority in managing it, up to and including firing the special counsel investigating him. That is their interpretation of the constitution (when it's their guy in power). The only means forward is impeachment. Once Republicans acquit in the Senate, then there will be precedent that this behavior is okay.

I agree. It’s damned if they do and damned if they don’t, really. Not a good situation we have here.

Yes, Comey will definitely go to prison for filing a legal warrent which was upheld on three separate occasions. You keep on with those high hopes.

And Trump, the man who campaigned on not giving a fuck what people though, who literally ordered the special counsel shut down, was worried that declassifying documents would be seen as obstruction and was worried about the optics. Lol. Y'all are so delusional it would be funny except you vote.

>They did not need to prove their suspicions confirmed to renew the FISA. They only had to prove they still held the original suspicions and use their surveillance to demonstrate that the investigation had not yet ruled the initial suspicions out.
law.cornell.edu/uscode/text/50/1805

>(d) Duration of order; extensions; review of circumstances under which information was acquired, retained or disseminated

>(1) An order issued under this section may approve an electronic surveillance for the period necessary to achieve its purpose, or for ninety days, whichever is less, except that (A) an order under this section shall approve an electronic surveillance targeted against a foreign power, as defined in section 1801(a)(1), (2), or (3) of this title, for the period specified in the application or for one year, whichever is less, and (B) an order under this chapter for a surveillance targeted against an agent of a foreign power who is not a United States person may be for the period specified in the application or for 120 days, whichever is less.

>(2) Extensions of an order issued under this subchapter may be granted on the same basis as an original order upon an application for an extension
and new findings made in the same manner
>as required for an original order, except that (A) an extension of an order under this chapter for a surveillance targeted against a foreign power, as defined in paragraph (5), (6), or (7) of section 1801(a) of this title, or against a foreign power as defined in section 1801(a)(4) of this title that is not a United States person, may be for a period not to exceed one year if the judge finds probable cause to believe that no communication of any individual United States person will be acquired during the period, and (B) an extension of an order under this chapter for a surveillance targeted against an agent of a foreign power who is not a United States person may be for a period not to exceed 1 year.

>law.cornell.edu/uscode/text/50/1805
See
>who literally ordered the special counsel shut down
Except it was just a suggestion and it might not have ever happened anyway.

>was worried that declassifying documents would be seen as obstruction and was worried about the optics
Well duh, he's been accused of obstruction over stuff that had fuckall to do with it. Imagine the uproar if he slew the effort while it was still ongoing. Much better to let it Mueller reach his own conclusions first as a precedent.

>We have ample evidence that Russia helped the Trump campaign in the election
And helped Hillary just as much. It's almost like political instability in the US is the real goal. Or something.
>We have evidence the campaign was aware of this help and was receptive to it
There was no evidence of collusion between Russian agents and any American citizen. Go fuck yourself, liar.
>We have no evidence of a quid pro quo or criminal conspiracy, which requires proving intent
We have no evidence of any criminal conspiracy, period.
>The Trump Tower meeting was illegal, but we can't prove Don Jr knew it was illegal and prosecution of this crime requires proving specific intent
The Trump Tower meeting was a setup implemented by Hillary's campaign, using Fusion GPS as a buffer. No one on the Trump side knew shit about it going in other than "hey you, want some damaging info about Hillary...?" which is not illegal.
>On the question of obstruction, here is a list of acts we consider to be Trump interfering in the investigation as well as ample evidence of corrupt intent
There was no proof of intent on obstruction. I honestly believe he, probably through inexperience and lack of knowledge, intended to obstruct justice. But I'm not retarded enough to claim to have proof of that intent. It is incredibly hard to prove, which is why Mueller did not make that claim.
>There are serious constitutional questions about whether the president is allowed to do this, but since the DoJ has pre-determined it will not indict the president, we're not going to touch that with a ten foot pole and punt it to congress.
No. Mueller was setting up grounds for impeachment from day one.
>This report does not exonerate the president.
It's not in the scope of the investigation to do so. Exoneration could only come with a preponderance of evidence against the claims, and even then, Mueller probably would not make such a claim. A lack of exoneration is not guilt.

>these excuses
Nigga you could compete in Olympic level mental gymnastics competition. Sad!

Argument of the century right here.

Attached: 6a0120a5f218c1970c016301bbbe08970d-320wi.jpg (320x213, 17K)

You confuse statements with arguments very easily.