Quote:

---

Originally posted by SECOND:
Rue, it does not sound fishy. You sound stupid and overly articulate. The full paragraphs from the Mueller Report (page 214 of 448):

Third, we considered whether to evaluate the conduct we investigated under the Justice Manual standards governing prosecution and declination decisions, but we determined not to apply an approach that could potentially result in a judgment that the President committed crimes. The threshold step under the Justice Manual standards is to assess whether a person’s conduct “constitutes a federal offense.” U.S. Dep’t of Justice, Justice Manual § 9-27.220 (2018) (Justice Manual). Fairness concerns counseled against potentially reaching that judgment when no charges can be brought. The ordinary means for an individual to respond to an accusation is through a speedy and public trial, with all the procedural protections that surround a criminal case. An individual who believes he was wrongly accused can use that process to seek to clear his name. In contrast, a prosecutor’s judgment that crimes were committed, but that no charges will be brought, affords no such adversarial opportunity for public name-clearing before an impartial adjudicator.5

The concerns about the fairness of such a determination would be heightened in the case of a sitting President, where a federal prosecutor’s accusation of a crime, even in an internal report, could carry consequences that extend beyond the realm of criminal justice. OLC noted similar concerns about sealed indictments. Even if an indictment were sealed during the President’s term, OLC reasoned, “it would be very difficult to preserve [an indictment’s] secrecy,” and if an indictment became public, “[t]he stigma and opprobrium” could imperil the President’s ability to govern.”6 Although a prosecutor’s internal report would not represent a formal public accusation akin to an indictment, the possibility of the report’s public disclosure and the absence of a neutral adjudicatory forum to review its findings counseled against potentially determining “that the person’s conduct constitutes a federal offense.” Justice Manual § 9-27.220.

You can make of these paragraphs what you will, but it plainly means Mueller, from the very start, before even beginning to work, will not indict Trump, even secretly for prosecution after Trump is out of office, no matter what is discovered.

---

Quote:

---

You being a complete idiot triggers me. The report clearly stated communications were deleted.

---

Quote:

---

What person that is INNOCENT deletes communications?

---

Quote:

---

Originally posted by WISHIMAY:

What person that is INNOCENT deletes communications?

---

Quote:

---

What innocent person orders others to do illegal things??

---

Quote:

---

Originally posted by second:

Quote:

---

Originally posted by AURaptor:

What I read doesn't change the facts. You're angry at me because I'm stating a fact. Our President didn't collude or obstruct. He's not a Russian puppet, and this has triggered you.

That is very odd behavior and is extremely telling.

---

Do you want to know what is odd and extremely telling? It is Trump saying, "I have no recollection." That was Trump's answer to every question asked of him by Mueller. That's the kind of answer you get from a crook that knows he cannot be waterboarded to get a real answer. Trump starts with "I have no recollection" on page 429 and ends with "I have no recollection" on page 438. Then Trump switched to "I do not remember" on page 439, for a little variety in not answering simple questions.

The Joss Whedon script for Serenity, where Wash lives, is Serenity-190pages.pdf at www.mediafire.com/folder/1uwh75oa407q8/Firefly

---

Quote:

---

I'm betting you're not curious in the least as to what was said and how she answered.

---

Quote:

---

Originally posted by 6IXSTRINGJACK:



Cough... Cough... 33,000 emails... Cough...



Cough... Smash your cellphones with a hammer... Cough... Cough...

---

Quote:

---

Originally posted by WISHIMAY:
What person that is INNOCENT deletes communications? What innocent person orders others to do illegal things??

---

Quote:

---

Originally posted by rue:
So I went back to check the actual report, a copy of which I have easily accessible on my computer, because, SECOND, you have a nasty reputation of very BIASED AND DISHONEST representation of so called 'facts'.

Of particular interest to me were the paragraphs you DIDN'T post. And then I realized that OLC (Office of Legal Council) was an extremely useful search term and checked out that information to get a more complete picture.

Re the the two paragraphs you DIDN'T post. Those paragraphs refer SPECIFICALLY to obstruction of justice, not to any potential collusion* (*shorthand for the entire phrase). And they apply ONLY to the President, not to anyone else. The fact that NOBODY WAS INDICTED FOR OBSTRUCTION, despite being legally liable for it, is very telling.

But I won't comment on the general OLC information because, frankly, it's too long, too complicated, and too contrary to your POV for you to read, understand, or even think honestly about, let alone discuss rationally.

Bur for anyone who doesn't want a biased 'source' to feed them their 'thoughts', the report is easily downloadable as a pdf, and searchable.

---

Quote:

---

Originally posted by SECOND:
I've got no answer for why NOBODY was indicted for obstruction, so I'm just going to blather about irrelevant pointless shit. fify

---

Quote:

---

Originally posted by rue:

Quote:

---

Originally posted by SECOND:
I've got no answer for why NOBODY was indicted for obstruction, so I'm just going to blather about irrelevant pointless shit. fify

---

Pretty much sums it up?

---

Quote:

---

Originally posted by rue:

Quote:

---

Originally posted by SECOND:
I've got no answer for why NOBODY was indicted for obstruction, so I'm just going to blather about irrelevant pointless shit. fify

---

Pretty much sums it up?

---

Quote:

---

Originally posted by SECOND:
I've got no answer for why NOBODY was indicted for obstruction, so I'm just going to blather about irrelevant pointless shit. fify

---

Quote:

---

Originally posted by rue:
Pretty much sums it up?

---

Quote:

---

Originally posted by GEEBERS:
Aren't you the one that always bitches and moans about how it's a forum crime to change someone's quotes?
^Pretty much sums you up.

---

Quote:

---

Originally posted by second:

Quote:

---

Originally posted by rue:

Quote:

---

Originally posted by SECOND:
I've got no answer for why NOBODY was indicted for obstruction, so I'm just going to blather about irrelevant pointless shit. fify

---

Pretty much sums it up?

---

Per your usual, you changed my quote, rue/1kiki. Pretty typical of a Russian troll who knows nothing, but I know something:

‘The report did not exonerate the president’

I found the most surprising part of the report to be twofold: One, that special counsel Mueller went out of his way multiple times to dispel the notion that there is any concept called “collusion,” and that what he investigated was instead coordination and conspiracy; and two, that the report did not exonerate the president even with respect to conspiracy and coordination.

Although the report stated that there was “no evidence” of conspiracy or coordination, it left open the possibility that there may be evidence out there that the president’s associates suppressed. Some individuals invoked their Fifth Amendment right against self-incrimination. Some information was screened even from the special counsel and his team. Several people affiliated with the Trump campaign (including Michael Flynn, George Papadopoulos, Michael Cohen and Paul Manafort) lied or provided incomplete information to the special counsel about their interactions with Russian-affiliated individuals. Still others deleted communications or used encryption that did not provide for the long-term retention of data. And with respect to redactions within the report, the ones concerning the Trump campaign’s interest in WikiLeaks’ releases of hacked material are particularly concerning.

The special counsel declined to make a recommendation on obstruction mostly because the Office of Legal Counsel has concluded, most recently in 2000, that a sitting president is immune from indictment. The report made clear that it is up to Congress to decide whether to use impeachment as a remedy. So what will matter most for the remainder of the Trump presidency is whether the House of Representatives will file articles of impeachment based on the substantial allegations that the president may have obstructed justice.

Marisa Maleck is a senior associate with King & Spalding, and a former clerk to Supreme Court Justice Clarence Thomas.

www.politico.com/magazine/story/2019/04/19/mueller-report-analysis-leg
al-experts-226662

The Joss Whedon script for Serenity, where Wash lives, is Serenity-190pages.pdf at www.mediafire.com/folder/1uwh75oa407q8/Firefly

---

Quote:

---

Originally posted by rue:

Quote:

---

Originally posted by SECOND:
I've got no answer for why NOBODY was indicted for obstruction, so I'm just going to blather about irrelevant pointless shit. fify

---

Quote:

---

Originally posted by rue:
Pretty much sums it up?

---

Quote:

---

Originally posted by GEEBERS:
Aren't you the one that always bitches and moans about how it's a forum crime to change someone's quotes?
^Pretty much sums you up.

---

NOPE NOT ME. So doesn't sum ME up.

Now I gotta ask - lying AGAIN, GEEBERS?

And you WILL note the fify at the end - which makes it clear I'm not trying to attribute those words to SECOND. Unlike - say - you - who routinely changes other people's posts without notification. So that makes you a hypocrite as well as a liar. Same old GEEBERS. You never get a conscience or even minor emb-bare-ass-ment about being outed as a shitstain - AGAIN.

---

Quote:

---

Originally posted by captaincrunch:

Another question:
Why do we have so many whack-jobs posting here?

---

Quote:

---

Originally posted by WISHIMAY:

Quote:

---

Originally posted by 6IXSTRINGJACK:



Cough... Cough... 33,000 emails... Cough...



Cough... Smash your cellphones with a hammer... Cough... Cough...

---

I know a shitstained brain like yours cannot grasp simple facts, or read and retain ANYTHING, but you should try just this once.


I AM NOT, NOR HAVE I EVER BEEN, A HILLARY SUPPORTER.

Your argument means NOTHING to me. She is NOT PRESIDENT. Neither ONE OF THEM SHOULD BE.

The amount of stupid around here....

---

Quote:

---

Originally posted by 6IXSTRINGJACK:

You're probably right that neither one of them should be.

Unfortunately for you, the alternative isn't something that sits well with you. I'm alright with it... for now, considering what the alternative was.

What are you going to do about it? It seems as though we had no choices.

And Trump is going to be re-elected unless the Democrats can find a resounding message and somebody worth voting for.

Screaming for Trump's head the next 6 years isn't going to work. And it's not going to do your lovely disposition any favors either.

Do Right, Be Right. :)

---

Quote:

---

Originally posted by captaincrunch:

Quote:

---

Originally posted by rue:

Quote:

---

Originally posted by SECOND:
I've got no answer for why NOBODY was indicted for obstruction, so I'm just going to blather about irrelevant pointless shit. fify

---

Quote:

---

Originally posted by rue:
Pretty much sums it up?

---

Quote:

---

Originally posted by GEEBERS:
Aren't you the one that always bitches and moans about how it's a forum crime to change someone's quotes?
^Pretty much sums you up.

---

NOPE NOT ME. So doesn't sum ME up.

Now I gotta ask - lying AGAIN, GEEBERS?

And you WILL note the fify at the end - which makes it clear I'm not trying to attribute those words to SECOND. Unlike - say - you - who routinely changes other people's posts without notification. So that makes you a hypocrite as well as a liar. Same old GEEBERS. You never get a conscience or even minor emb-bare-ass-ment about being outed as a shitstain - AGAIN.

---

Another thing that happens when you change the content of people's posts and then pretend you are quoting them, is you prove that none of your goofy "preservation" attempts can be trusted. You've shown you can, and will, just change the content of what you have "quoted" to whatever you want. I hope you weren't planning to use those in court...?

Another question:
Why do we have so many whack-jobs posting here?

---

Quote:

---

Originally posted by second:

Quote:

---

Originally posted by 6IXSTRINGJACK:

You're probably right that neither one of them should be.

Unfortunately for you, the alternative isn't something that sits well with you. I'm alright with it... for now, considering what the alternative was.

What are you going to do about it? It seems as though we had no choices.

And Trump is going to be re-elected unless the Democrats can find a resounding message and somebody worth voting for.

Screaming for Trump's head the next 6 years isn't going to work. And it's not going to do your lovely disposition any favors either.

Do Right, Be Right. :)

---

Once the choice was between Lincoln and Douglas. Do you remember how that ended? Being reasonable with people will not get the country back together again, as Lincoln, with all his skills at persuasion, sorrowfully learned. First Inaugural Address of Abraham Lincoln http://avalon.law.yale.edu/19th_century/lincoln1.asp

6ix, you might want to take note that Lincoln's political opponents saw him as the most immoral, treacherous liar that ever held the office. They couldn't prove it, but they didn't care. They said it anyway. In the case of Trump, he proved it. See the redacted Mueller report.

The Joss Whedon script for Serenity, where Wash lives, is Serenity-190pages.pdf at www.mediafire.com/folder/1uwh75oa407q8/Firefly

---

Quote:

---

Originally posted by 6IXSTRINGJACK:

Is any Democrat talking about that though? Nope.

It's still "Nazi" this, and muh Feminism that, and RUSSIA!!!! fearmongering and demands for tax returns that you're never going to see.


The Democratic party in 2019 is abhorrent.

Fix that, and Trump might be out.

Do Right, Be Right. :)

---

Quote:

---

Originally posted by second:

Quote:

---

Originally posted by 6IXSTRINGJACK:

Is any Democrat talking about that though? Nope.

It's still "Nazi" this, and muh Feminism that, and RUSSIA!!!! fearmongering and demands for tax returns that you're never going to see.


The Democratic party in 2019 is abhorrent.

Fix that, and Trump might be out.

Do Right, Be Right. :)

---

6ix, you have a very ineffectual way of looking at things. I have bought expensive machines that were no damn good and I got rid of them after they failed to perform. I didn't tell myself that the competing machinery seemed to me to have been worse. I get rid of what is bad and seek something else. Same with employees. When they fail, I fire their dumb asses in the meanest possible way. I don't tell myself that the other candidates for the job didn't seem to be as good and therefore I'm keeping Mr Failure as an employee. I go and seek a new employee. If you want to convince yourself that Trump isn't Mr Failure, then go right ahead. If you seek a replacement President that you want to absolutely be sure is better than Trump, there is no way to be sure. But you can be sure that any Democrat will be very different from Trump or Mike Pence or Jeb Bush or Mitt Romney. You should not pay any attention to anybody's promises. No President can deliver on their optimistic campaign promises. They can only deliver on their littlest promises, the ones that don't require Congressional approval. (Example of little promises: I promise to make my tax returns public. I promise to place my business in a blind trust. www.usatoday.com/in-depth/news/politics/2019/03/18/president-donald-tr
umps-promises-didnt-end-business-entanglements/3030377002/ )

The Joss Whedon script for Serenity, where Wash lives, is Serenity-190pages.pdf at www.mediafire.com/folder/1uwh75oa407q8/Firefly

---

Quote:

---

Originally posted by captaincrunch:


Another question:
Why do we have so many whack-jobs posting here?

---

Quote:

---

Originally posted by SECOND:
"Native PDF redaction has been available now for more than 20 years, yet this document is just images of redacted pages. As such, there is no searchable text, the document will not reflow on different devices ..."

---

Quote:

---

Originally posted by WISHIMAY:

Quote:

---

Originally posted by captaincrunch:


Another question:
Why do we have so many whack-jobs posting here?

---

I wonder that sometimes too, but now I think it's just a sampling of the actual American gen pop these days though. Everbody crazy.

The more things aren't getting anywhere, the crazier it's all getting. You can only run into the same block wall soooo many times...

Unless you are South American... They don't seem to have a problem with that

---

Quote:

---

Originally posted by rue:
God, but I do love being a loathsome hag! fify

---

Quote:

---

Originally posted by SIGNYM:
God, how I love being tedious and boring! fify

---

Quote:

---

Originally posted by 6IXSTRINGJACK:

Quote:

---

Originally posted by second:
. . . No President can deliver on their optimistic campaign promises. They can only deliver on their littlest promises, the ones that don't require Congressional approval. (Example of little promises: I promise to make my tax returns public. I promise to place my business in a blind trust. www.usatoday.com/in-depth/news/politics/2019/03/18/president-donald-tr
umps-promises-didnt-end-business-entanglements/3030377002/ )

---

I'm fine with Trump, dipshit.

Give me a reason to vote against him in 2020.

Do Right, Be Right. :)

---

Quote:

---

Originally posted by rue:

Quote:

---

Originally posted by SECOND:
"Native PDF redaction has been available now for more than 20 years, yet this document is just images of redacted pages. As such, there is no searchable text, the document will not reflow on different devices ..."

---

Strange. I got a completely searchable pdf off of a government website that is viewable by alternate software. Where did I get it? Don't remember and not my problem. But a short search should get you there. It was only 1 link down from the original webpage I looked at, either Signy's or yours. Either that or my software is better.

---

Quote:

---

Originally posted by second:

Quote:

---

Originally posted by 6IXSTRINGJACK:

Quote:

---

Originally posted by second:
. . . No President can deliver on their optimistic campaign promises. They can only deliver on their littlest promises, the ones that don't require Congressional approval. (Example of little promises: I promise to make my tax returns public. I promise to place my business in a blind trust. www.usatoday.com/in-depth/news/politics/2019/03/18/president-donald-tr
umps-promises-didnt-end-business-entanglements/3030377002/ )

---

I'm fine with Trump, dipshit.

Give me a reason to vote against him in 2020.

Do Right, Be Right. :)

---

I gave you two reasons.

1) Trump is cheating on his taxes.
www.nytimes.com/interactive/2018/10/02/us/politics/donald-trump-tax-sc
hemes-fred-trump.html
www.ais-cpa.com/tax-fraud-by-the-numbers-the-trump-timeline/

2) Trump bends his Presidential decisions to benefit his business.
www.usatoday.com/in-depth/news/politics/2019/03/18/president-donald-tr
umps-promises-didnt-end-business-entanglements/3030377002/

Trump could prove that he is paying his taxes and prove he is not taking bribes if he would keep his promises to make his tax returns public and make his business a blind trust. Trump does not need permission from Congress to keep those two promises. I've noticed that born-again Republicans in Texas do not want Trump to keep those promises.

6ix, if it doesn't matter to you that Trump probably is not paying his taxes and it doesn't matter that Trump is probably taking bribes through his businesses, that says that you are a born-again Republican. Vote for Trump! MAGA!

The Joss Whedon script for Serenity, where Wash lives, is Serenity-190pages.pdf at www.mediafire.com/folder/1uwh75oa407q8/Firefly

---

Quote:

---

Originally posted by 6IXSTRINGJACK:

Stop taking parts of my posts and quoting them out of context, idiot.

You know exactly what I meant, yet you proved my point and did the exact opposite. Which is what the Democratic party has been doing for the last 2 1/2 years. Which isn't going to work.

---

Quote:

---

Originally posted by second:

Quote:

---

Originally posted by 6IXSTRINGJACK:

Stop taking parts of my posts and quoting them out of context, idiot.

You know exactly what I meant, yet you proved my point and did the exact opposite. Which is what the Democratic party has been doing for the last 2 1/2 years. Which isn't going to work.

---

I know that you are going to vote for that cheating crooked businessman because you want to. I doubt that your lack of understanding of business will eventually work to your advantage.

Today: Trump sues to block Democrats’ subpoena for financial information
www.foxnews.com/politics/trump-sues-to-block-democrats-subpoena-for-fi
nancial-information

In seeking the records, Cummings has cited the February testimony from former Trump attorney Michael Cohen, who claimed the president inflated or deflated the value of his assets when it would benefit him.

Democrats sent a letter to Mazars in March requesting information about how Trump’s financial statements were prepared, but the firm said it could not voluntarily turn over documents unless subpoenaed.

The Joss Whedon script for Serenity, where Wash lives, is Serenity-190pages.pdf at www.mediafire.com/folder/1uwh75oa407q8/Firefly

---

Quote:

---

Originally posted by 6IXSTRINGJACK:

Deflecting again. Keep it up bud.

Hope you enjoy those tax returns you'll be getting until at least 2026.

---

Quote:

---

Originally posted by second:

Quote:

---

Originally posted by 6IXSTRINGJACK:

Deflecting again. Keep it up bud.

Hope you enjoy those tax returns you'll be getting until at least 2026.

---

You already made up your mind years ago to be what you are and I will not try convincing you to vote for a Democrat. Please never change because somebody, you, has to be on the bottom: the dumbest one, the poorest one, the weakest one, the shortest lived one. I'm voting for Democrats and you can do whatever, but I know Trump is a crook because I read the Mueller report.
https://dariusforoux.com/learning-from-mistakes/

The Joss Whedon script for Serenity, where Wash lives, is Serenity-190pages.pdf at www.mediafire.com/folder/1uwh75oa407q8/Firefly

---

Quote:

---

Originally posted by 6IXSTRINGJACK:

LOL

More personal insults because you don't have an argument.

Keep being predictable. It's the only personality trait you have outside of your hatred and murderous nature.

---

Quote:

---

Originally posted by rue:
"rue, per your usual, you completely missed the point that Barr did a crappy job of converting the Mueller Report to a pdf." Somebody IN THE GOVERNMENT did it right. You sure are bitchy. Is it that time of the month?

---

Quote:

---

Originally posted by rue:

Why you and your 'sources' had so much difficulty finding it is beyond me ... except perhaps because you're all inept.

---

Quote:

---

Originally posted by rue:
"There is a later version at www.justice.gov/storage/report.pdf";

So justice.gov did it right. What are you bitching about?

---

Quote:

---

Originally posted by rue:
After years of spouting that Mueller was going to end Trump ... when the rubber finally met the road ... first you criticized Barr's summary. Then you criticized the timeline. Then you criticized the presser. After that you criticized the redactions. Now you're whining ENDLESSLY about the formatting.

It's like the Mueller investigation itself. You've hit the bottom of the barrel of 'things' to find wrong.

Mueller at least had the sense to know when it was over.

So just shut up already.

---

Quote:

---

Originally posted by captaincrunch:
Russia’s cyber offensive shows no sign of slowing.

---