"Did you actually totally exonerate the President? No."

Wolverine said:
Nope it's still on he didn't do anything wrong
Click to expand...

You're going with this line?

OK...it's your funeral...


SCHIFF: “Trump & his campaign welcomed & encouraged Russian interference?”
MUELLER: “Yes.”
SCHIFF: “And then Trump & his campaign lied about it to cover it up?”
MUELLER: “Yes.”


According to you, welcoming and encouraging Russian interference and then lying about it, isn't "wrong".

Good to know what your standard now is.
 
Wolverine said:
He didn't, she did, she destroyed evidence, and should be next to Bills buddy Epstein in Prison Rattfuck!
Click to expand...

Yes he did.

He lied about welcoming and encouraging Russian support.

SCHIFF: “Trump & his campaign welcomed & encouraged Russian interference?”
MUELLER: “Yes.”
SCHIFF: “And then Trump & his campaign lied about it to cover it up?”
MUELLER: “Yes.”
 
Wolverine said:
Should the Special Counsel conclude that the extraordinary circumstances of any particular decision would render compliance with required review and approval procedures by the designated Departmental component inappropriate, he or she may consult directly with the Attorney General
Click to expand...

The OLC guideline that the President cannot be indicted isn't a "review and/or approval procedure".
 
Last edited:
Wolverine said:
Oh this should be good
Click to expand...

Oh and just in case he weasels out by saying the AG would discipline Mueller.

"If the Attorney General concludes that a proposed action by a Special Counsel should not be pursued, the Attorney General shall notify Congress as specified in § 600.9(a)(3).
 
LV426 said:
Should the Special Counsel conclude that the extraordinary circumstances of any particular decision would render compliance with required review and approval procedures by the designated Departmental component inappropriate, he or she may consult directly with the Attorney General.

Why would Mueller consult with Barr, who was trying to shut the investigation down?
Click to expand...

And we have this.
If the Attorney General concludes that a proposed action by a Special Counsel should not be pursued, the Attorney General shall notify Congress as specified in § 600.9(a)(3).

So no worries on the SC end. Try again
 
Southern Chicken said:
And we have this.
If the Attorney General concludes that a proposed action by a Special Counsel should not be pursued, the Attorney General shall notify Congress as specified in § 600.9(a)(3).
So no worries on the SC end. Try again
Click to expand...

Actually, the thing you think says something in your favor, doesn't actually do that.

This quote you pulled: "Should the Special Counsel conclude that the extraordinary circumstances of any particular decision would render compliance with required review and approval procedures by the designated Departmental component inappropriate, he or she may consult directly with the Attorney General."

That doesn't apply to the OLC guideline because the OLC rule isn't a "review" or "approval procedure", is it?

If it is, how so?
 
Southern Chicken said:
And we have this.
If the Attorney General concludes that a proposed action by a Special Counsel should not be pursued, the Attorney General shall notify Congress as specified in § 600.9(a)(3).

So no worries on the SC end. Try again
Click to expand...

The problem with garbage people is that they're not smart.

So before, you were holding this sentence as "proof" of Trump's innocence because you mistakenly think that the OLC rule against indicting a sitting President is a review or approval procedure. But it's not. So this below, has nothing to do with what we're talking about, and is just a red herring you are desperate to toss up because you cannot defend Trump.

"Should the Special Counsel conclude that the extraordinary circumstances of any particular decision would render compliance with required review and approval procedures by the designated Departmental component inappropriate, he or she may consult directly with the Attorney General"
Click to expand...

The OLC rule against indicting a sitting President is not a "required review process", nor is it a "required approval process."

It's neither of those things.

Nice try, fraud. FAIL.
 
Gonzomin said:
Mueller was asked if the reason he did not indict Trump was due to the justice dept policy that they could not indict a sitting president. He said yes.
Click to expand...
He is correct. That is simply stating the law.
Gonzomin said:
when asked if Trump could be indicted after he leaves office, he said yes.
Click to expand...
He is correct that is again simply stating the law.
Gonzomin said:
Trump's obstruction is clear and undeniable.
Click to expand...
False equivalence fallacy. Stating the law concerning whether it's possible to indict someone does NOT make them guilty of any crime.

It is possible to indict you for murder. Therefore, you are a murderer????
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top