No Collusion!

[lilpixieofterror]

Remember CP, you are not bound by your bias, you can overcome it, but it's difficult to admit when you are wrong, I know. But this case is far to important to remain fooling yourself.

Stage 1, denial.

[JimL]

Sorry, but there was no crime. Period, end of story and acting as though there was is simply wishful thinking. Denial is the first stage of grief, you’ll get to acceptance sooner or later.

You need to take your own advice there dunderhead. The testimony by Trumps own staff is in, and Trump obstructed justice, period. nothing you can say can change that fact.

[lilpixieofterror]

You need to take your own advice there dunderhead. The testimony by Trumps own staff is in, and Trump obstructed justice, period. nothing you can say can change that fact.

And yet again:

No indictment from Muller.

None from Barr.

None from ranking Democrat members of Congress.

There will be no charges idiot because even if we accept your crazed ranting, they were based on the anger of a falsely accused man, accused of a crime cooked up by his political opponents. I’ll wait for your next talking point memo to come out, to tell you what to think.

[JimL]

And yet again:

No indictment from Muller.

None from Barr.

None from ranking Democrat members of Congress.

There will be no charges idiot because even if we accept your crazed ranting, they were based on the anger of a falsely accused man, accused of a crime cooked up by his political opponents. I’ll wait for your next talking point memo to come out, to tell you what to think.

Once again Lilpix, whether the president, or anyone else, believes they are innocent or not, it is against the law to obstruct in any way the investigation. Your "the president was upset" excuse is irrelevant, and just plain ignorant. And btw, innocent people don't try to influence an investigation through obstruction, but guilty people do it all the time.

[seer]

Trump ordered McGahn, the white House council to fire Mueller. Is that obstruction or not?

1. Trump never followed up, and he could have.

2. Jim did Trump have the legal right to fire Mueller? Yes or no?

3. And you only know this because Trump allowed McGahn to testify, he was within his legal right to assert executive privilege.

[lilpixieofterror]

Once again Lilpix, whether the president, or anyone else, believes they are innocent or not, it is against the law to obstruct in any way the investigation. Your "the president was upset" excuse is irrelevant, and just plain ignorant. And btw, innocent people don't try to influence an investigation through obstruction, but guilty people do it all the time.

And yet again, list the crimes Trump is being indicted for:



I’ll wait.

[Cow Poke]

Remember CP, you are not bound by your bias, you can overcome it...

I wish I could say the same for you, Jimmy, but you will never overcome your loony left leanings.

[Cow Poke]

Once again Lilpix, whether the president, or anyone else, believes they are innocent or not, it is against the law to obstruct in any way the investigation.

Actually, that's not true. There are degrees of obstruction, and not everything rises to the level of criminal conduct - hence, no indictment, no referral for indictment, no arrest....

Jimmy, you're almost as bad at understanding the legal system as you are contractions and possessives!

[JimL]

And yet again, list the crimes Trump is being indicted for:



I’ll wait.

Sheesh, no matter how many times someone explains that to you, it just doesn't get through, does it? What a block head!

[lilpixieofterror]

Sheesh, no matter how many times someone explains that to you, it just doesn't get through, does it? What a block head!

AKA the answer is nothing.

Thanks, but your ‘questions’ require reading in the worse possible light. You scream, “He ordered someone to fire Muller, that’s OBSTRUCTION!!!”

How could it be ‘obstruction’ when the crime being investigated was a cooked up scheme of his political opponents, to undermine his presidency? Second, Muller was never fired. Third, we say a lot of things when we’re annoyed and angry.

Yet again, no crime, no matter how much you fuss and whine and assert otherwise.

[Mountain Man]

Actually, that's not true. There are degrees of obstruction, and not everything rises to the level of criminal conduct - hence, no indictment, no referral for indictment, no arrest....

Jimmy, you're almost as bad at understanding the legal system as you are contractions and possessives!

Mueller even discussed the standard for criminal obstruction in his report and implied even if he didn't outright say it that nothing Trump did rose to that level.

[lilpixieofterror]

Actually, that's not true. There are degrees of obstruction, and not everything rises to the level of criminal conduct - hence, no indictment, no referral for indictment, no arrest....

Jimmy, you're almost as bad at understanding the legal system as you are contractions and possessives!

Explaining laws to Jimmy is like trying to explain to a child why they need to eat their veggies.

[Cow Poke]

Trump ordered McGahn, the white House council to fire Mueller. Is that obstruction or not? He then ordered Lewendowski to tell the then Atty Gen., Jeff Sessions to unrecuse himself so that he could fire Mueller. Is that obstruction? He then told Lewendowski that if Sessions refused, then he, Lewendowski was to fire Sessions. Is that obstruction? There are many other cases wherin the President attempted to obstruct the investigation and Atty Gen Barr then went out and said that the president has been fully cooperative. Now tell us, were those actions by the president attempts to obstruct the investigation or not, and in light of those facts was Atty Gen Barr lying when he said that the president was fully cooperative with the investigation?

Perhaps you should adjust your prosecutorial delusion to "ATTEMPTED obstruction!"

[Cow Poke]

Explaining laws to Jimmy is like trying to explain to a child why they need to eat their veggies.

Especially if they haven't yet mastered the English language!

veggies.jpg

[JimL]

Actually, that's not true. There are degrees of obstruction, and not everything rises to the level of criminal conduct - hence, no indictment, no referral for indictment, no arrest....

Jimmy, you're almost as bad at understanding the legal system as you are contractions and possessives!

Intent dummy, intent. Trump is lucky that his underlings refused to carry out his orders, but he intended for them to, and that is a criminal offense. You should already know by this time why there was no indictment by Mueller, but I know that you Trumpsters will never admit to anything. It's ok, live in your fantasy world of the deep state like the con man Trump instructed you.