In 2017, the Justice Department launched an investigation into Russian interference in the election and what role Trump associates played in the hacking effort. Special counsel Robert Mueller ultimately concluded he lacked sufficient evidence to seek criminal charges against Trump or his campaign for allegedly conspiring with the Russians.
BULLSHIT!!!
Will someone with a fucking Xitter account slap this motherfucker in the goddamned face for printing this MAGA garbage?!
A social media image makes the misleading claim that former special counsel Robert S. Mueller “can’t provide evidence that his probe reached a conclusion.” Mueller reached several conclusions, including that Russia interfered in the 2016 election to damage Hillary Clinton and help Donald Trump.
TWO SECONDS OF SEARCHING WOULD HAVE FIXED THIS i swear these fucking twitter journalists who pretend to know sweet fuck all and get a masthead over their diarrhetic prose GOD DAMN we do not need this fucking shit
Edit to add:
Investigators “found multiple acts by the President that were capable of exerting undue influence over law enforcement investigations, including the Russian-interference and obstruction investigations.” But, the report said, “[b]ecause we determined not to make a traditional prosecutorial judgment, we did not draw ultimate conclusions about the President’s conduct.”
Factoring into the decision to not weigh in on prosecution, according to the report (and as we’ve written before), was an opinion issued by the Office of Legal Counsel that found that a sitting president cannot be indicted.
Concluding that Russia interfered with an election to Trump’s benefit isn’t the same thing as concluding that Trump conspired with the Russians
Even if the report had concluded they conspired, concluding they conspired isn’t the same thing as having “sufficient evidence to seek criminal charges”
But, the report said, “because we determined not to make a traditional prosecutorial judgment, we did not draw ultimate conclusions about the President’s conduct.
And
the investigation established multiple links between Trump Campaign officials and individuals tied to the Russian government. Those links included Russia offers of assistance to the Campaign.
But, the report said, “because we determined not to make a traditional prosecutorial judgment, we did not draw ultimate conclusions about the President’s conduct.
i presume you’re pulling that from volume 2 of the report, since you didn’t link anything
volume 1 deals with election interference
volume 2 deals with obstruction of justice
or in other words, your quote isn’t relevant to evidence for conspiracy with russia
the investigation established multiple links between Trump Campaign officials and individuals tied to the Russian government. Those links included Russia offers of assistance to the Campaign.
“establishing multiple links” isn’t the same thing as concluding they conspired, but even if it was, the second line of my initial comment addresses this:
Even if the report had concluded they conspired, concluding they conspired isn’t the same thing as having “sufficient evidence to seek criminal charges”
Not to mention trump fired the AG and replaced him with yes man Bill Barr right before. It’s possible Barr pushed the can’t prosecute a sitting president on Mueller at the direction of Trump. The Mueller report was super damning, but no one took the time to read it, and Republicans just go sEe? WiTcH HunT! When the reality is the they just chose not to prosecute because Trump was the sitting president.
BULLSHIT!!!
Will someone with a fucking Xitter account slap this motherfucker in the goddamned face for printing this MAGA garbage?!
TWO SECONDS OF SEARCHING WOULD HAVE FIXED THIS i swear these fucking twitter journalists who pretend to know sweet fuck all and get a masthead over their diarrhetic prose GOD DAMN we do not need this fucking shit
Edit to add:
Concluding that Russia interfered with an election to Trump’s benefit isn’t the same thing as concluding that Trump conspired with the Russians
Even if the report had concluded they conspired, concluding they conspired isn’t the same thing as having “sufficient evidence to seek criminal charges”
Mueller very specifically refused to conclude that there wasn’t sufficient evidence to charge Donny.
from here
maybe he did but that’s the only definitive statement i can find from him on the matter
Mueller was talking about obstruction. It’s hard to prove conspiracy if your witnesses are allowed to obstruct.
And
i presume you’re pulling that from volume 2 of the report, since you didn’t link anything
volume 1 deals with election interference
volume 2 deals with obstruction of justice
or in other words, your quote isn’t relevant to evidence for conspiracy with russia
“establishing multiple links” isn’t the same thing as concluding they conspired, but even if it was, the second line of my initial comment addresses this:
Speaking of, where the hell is our fucking Unredacted report??
the memory hole
Not to mention trump fired the AG and replaced him with yes man Bill Barr right before. It’s possible Barr pushed the can’t prosecute a sitting president on Mueller at the direction of Trump. The Mueller report was super damning, but no one took the time to read it, and Republicans just go sEe? WiTcH HunT! When the reality is the they just chose not to prosecute because Trump was the sitting president.