Why is no one talking about the Muller report and how Trump is possibly confirmed to have collaborated with Russia...

Trump is the same man who doesn't know the judicial branch doesn't decide impeachment. He literally doesn't read more than 140 characters at a time.

Why does the left lack foresight?
This is what will happen. The Dems don't actually care about impeachment. Just the appearance of actually doing anything and making their opponents look bad.
The problem is the precedence they've set now. That any sitting president can have their shit pushed in, and so now this is all that will happen. A great big giant smoke screen to hide corruption that also has the net effect of ruining confidence in the system. A standard tactic of private concerns trying to shift favor away from public ones. Defund, bloat the bureaucracy with incompetence or unnecessary procedure. Buy at reduced cost. Deregulation. Then you have an income and you're not legally beholden to do shit. And if it's a necessary industry like utilities or medicine, people have to buy at whatever price you set.
That's what the TAA and the TPA were about. Corporate globalism.

guys just fix your damn country

Attached: 1557521523787.png (540x735, 486K)

it gets better as the day progresses-
Question
Do you think they're going to impeach you?
Donald Trump
I don't see how they can. Because they're possibly allowed, although I can't imagine the courts allowing it. I've never gone into it. I never thought that would even be possible to be using that word. To me, it's a dirty word -- the word "impeach." It's a dirty, filthy, disgusting word. And it had nothing to do with me. So I don't think so, because there was no crime.
You know, it's "high crimes and…" not "with" or "or." It's "high crimes and misdemeanors." There was no high crime and there was no misdemeanor. So how do you impeach based on that? And it came out that there was nothing to do with Russia. The whole thing is a scam. It's one of -- it's a giant presidential harassment.
factba.se/transcript/donald-trump-press-gaggle-marine-one-departure-may-30-2019

It's quite alarming that no one seems to have explained to Trump the basic principles of impeachment as a constitutional mechanism:
- Trump “can’t imagine the courts allowing it.” But the Framers quite deliberately vested the power of impeachment in the House, and of trial in the Senate. “The courts” have no role to play here whatsoever.
- Trump says, "It's high crimes AND misdemeanors, not high crimes OR misdemeanors.” Which is true! But it’s not a dual requirement, it’s an eighteenth-century legal term of art.
- Trump insists “there was no high crime, and there was no misdemeanor.” But not all impeachable offenses are statutory crimes; not all statutory crimes are impeachable offenses. Trump is making a basic category error here.

Attached: Tuckered-Out.png (333x333, 206K)

OP is a massive faggot

Nope, that's what Trump said. The problem is the evidence that they could obtain because things like this are hard to pin especially when you are investigating a sitting president. Yet still Muller has made it clear that Trump is not fully exonerated of the crime as he never reported that Trump was innocent to the attorney general.

>GUILTY UNTIL PROVEN INNOCENT GOYIM
Fuck off. It’s over.

Oooooo look at you edge lord, maybe if you stop drinking all that Mountain Jew you might be able to actually hold a conversation.

Wow is almost like if Russia did have a hand in it Trump wouldn't want to admit it due to the fact he would be impeached. Your argument is pretty much like asking a man if he wants to get shot and him replying that he would love to.

Live action pilpul. Wow.

Attached: 1442008381698.jpg (313x286, 17K)

Why are you just quoting him? If you need another example to explain how brainless your argument is, it would be like if a dude confesses to killing his wife. He has a horse in the race so it is expected he will lie about it if he can get ahead.

>The problem is the precedence they've set now
Bill Clinton????????

Attached: tumblr_onpvh9fNKo1vmtp2uo1_500.jpg (500x500, 64K)

>>GUILTY UNTIL PROVEN INNOCENT GOYIM
No it's guilty but unable to charge because of executive privilege
Fuck your kike puppet, boomer, just another neocon that needs the pillow

Attached: 155557144242.jpg (636x358, 53K)

Even though if Trump was found innocent without a reasonable doubt Muller would be bound by law to report that and so far he hasn't? Fuck off brain dead conservatard.

Because it’s fake news. It’s over, the Russia box is over. But now it’s time for us all to buy facebook ads supporting Joe Biden through Chinese shell companies and get that fagtard on the NSA surveillance train.

>No it's guilty but unable to charge because of executive privilege
Wrong. Mueller has said numerous times this is wrong.
>found innocent without a reasonable doubt
>would be bound by law to report that
Troll post, no more (You)s

For (You)

Attached: Bumbler Gobolino.png (1301x666, 1.12M)

No one cares. We all know the media and politicians don’t care about foreign collusion. We all know they don’t care about civil liberties and domestic spying. Why waste time and energy on this bullshit when we can be making a list of people that need to hang.

"...I had nothing to do with Russia helping me to get elected."

Here it is folks. Trump admits that Russia interfered with our American Presidential election in order to get him elected. Congress needs to act!

Attached: Trump finally admits.png (666x428, 207K)

Receiving help is not a crime.

>We did not, however, make a determination as to whether the president did commit a crime. The introduction to the Volume II of our report explains that decision. It explains that under longstanding department policy, a president can not be charged with a federal crime while he is in office. That is unconstitutional. Even if the charge is kept under seal and hidden from public view, that too is prohibited.

Attached: my report is my testimony.png (686x1004, 165K)

>Wrong, Muller said this numerous times this is wrong
Even though he has commented that due to this ever so illusive executive privilege that he was unable to get evidence that would've proven instrumental in the investigation.
youtube.com/watch?v=Us2boO90O8M 4:38

In the same interview he explained how if they found anything that would fully exonerate him, under law, they would've been required to report it.

>guilty but unable to charge
so you’re guilty even without a trial huh?

Where does Mueller say “Trump committed obstruction?” Find him directly stating that and you win.

He is not able to be charged due to the executive privileges ingrained in the government. Check out

Attached: Small brain.jpg (254x299, 21K)

Won a presidential election due to the help of a foreign adversary who has no good intentions for our country.
Check.

Attached: bumbler weak putin stronk.jpg (333x274, 83K)

He hasn't done a damn thing anyway lol

Not a crime.

idiot

mueller concluded no collusion

he was "undecided" on obstruction. in america, we presume innocence until proven guilty. undecided = innocent.

full exoneration. russiagate conspiritards were completely btfo

it gets worse...
Question
Robert Mueller did not say "no obstruction." He said he did not feel he could charge with you a crime because [Inaudible].
Donald Trump
There were no charges. None. If you look at -- if you look at Bill Clinton, that very nice gentleman who's been so much on my side, as you know, his special prosecutor -- it was guilty, guilty, guilty, guilty, guilty. So many guiltys. With me, there was no guilty. Number one, there was no crime. And number two, I fought back.
And I'll tell you --
Question
[Inaudible] said he couldn't say "no crime."
Donald Trump
Wait. Wait. Wait. Wait. Well, there was no collusion. There was no collusion. Read volume one. There was no collusion.
Question
[Inaudible] He said he could not say there was no crime. He could not clear you.
Donald Trump
That means you're innocent. That means you're innocent.
Question
He said he couldn't say you were innocent.
Donald Trump
Excuse me -- then he should've said "you're guilty."
Question
But he said he couldn't do that because that would be unfair. [Inaudible]
Donald Trump
That's wrong. That's wrong. No. Because he said it -- he said it differently the first time. So he said, essentially, "You're innocent." I'm innocent of all charges. And, you know, the thing that nobody brings up: There was no crime. They're saying "he's obstructing something" and there was no crime. And nobody brings it up. Also, someday, you ought to read a thing called Article 2. Read Article 2, which gives the President powers that you wouldn't believe.
But I don't even have to rely on Article 2. There was no crime. There was no obstruction. There was no collusion. There was no nothing. And this is from a group of people that hate me. If they only found anything, they would've had it. And he knows that better than anybody.
Question
He did not say that you were innocent. He said he did not --
Donald Trump
There was no crime, there was no charge because he had no information.

It hurts doesn't it cobber

Because nothing ever happens. Who gives a shit about this political theater anymore?

What’s a context?

Someone who wasn’t charged can’t be guilty. Sorry but that’s how it works.

that is what an inquiry of impeachment will determine.
not all impeachable offenses are statutory crimes; not all statutory crimes are impeachable offenses. (You) are making a basic category error here.

now go back to sleep.

NO ONE CARES

This.
Bunch of ineffective cunts, not even worth paying any attention to.

>We did not, however, make a determination as to whether the president did commit a crime
If you can't determine if someone committed a crime, that sounds like innocent to me. Not that I care, Trump is a Zionist and deserves a bullet like all the rest.

>passively receiving assistance you have no control over and did not collude to secure is a crime
We’re hitting retard levels that shouldn’t be possible

How did Russia help him win the Presidency?
They created facebook ads bashing both Hillary and Donald.
They created anti Trump rallies.
They didn't do the same for Hillary.
I could make the case based on this information that they helped her more since they never started anti Hillary rallies.

>inb4 hacking the DNC servers and Podesta
The report doesn't even say that's a fact, they used the word "appear".

Also, his name was Seth Rich.

Attached: 1559178076588.jpg (1667x1249, 937K)

mueller's a retard who couldn't even convict biker gangs for gang activity so why would anyone think he could actually do this unless they were relying in his years of corruption and abuse

Attached: Capture.png (611x745, 61K)

Uh oh...what happened? I guess he couldn’t find it.

>One candidate vows to start a proxy war against Russia in Syria
>Another candidate vows to normalize relations with Russia
>Which one do you think Russia will root for in the big game?
C'mon Jow Forums this is like 1st grade logic.

Attached: 573.jpg (636x358, 180K)

>passively receiving assistance you have no control over and did not collude to secure is a crime
is that (You) donald???

Attached: Bumbler Jan.png (333x261, 254K)

>Why is no one talking about the Muller report and how Trump is possibly confirmed to have collaborated with Russia?
bro, you know it says in the report that they could not find any collusion or coordination between these two parties? are you illiterate or just a kike?

Attached: 1558510097540.png (540x473, 271K)

>How did Russia help him win the Presidency?
Easy. They told the truth

I am not saying that he was charged to be guilty, what im saying is that he is not innocent either.

Nice argument. Not a crime, not an impeachable offense. Stay btfo chump

You wanna check the number of people who posted right quick?

>hes not guilty but hes not innocent

Attached: 1536690424716.png (416x435, 99K)

>here’s how mueller can still win

yeah, we're here to BTFO you. you're getting absolutely rekt in your gay thread mate

I swear to God I can't believe people actually believe Trump and Putin secretly met together to rig the presidential election.

#
Do you believe the earth is flat? Do you think we landed on the moon? Do you think Bush did 9/11?

Attached: IMG_3124.gif (223x291, 3.93M)

Put it all together and Mueller was saying: Russia interfered in our election.
Trump obstructed that investigation.
Mueller’s office could have said Trump didn’t commit a crime, but did not reach that conclusion.
The ball is in Congress’ court.

You didn't counter his argument. He's still beating you.

>possible
>might
>could be
>those close to his thinking

Bye CNN

He's trash, just like you.

That equals innocent in western society.

Congress would be really foolish to try and impeach Trump right now.

A bank robber robs a bank and sets a bag of cash next to you. The cops show up and want to arrest you for robbing the bank because the bank robber was clearly supporting you, which means you were in on it

Attached: yp6lqb3td2t21.jpg (1122x1122, 100K)

You must be Jewish

Glowniggers should be executed publicly

>What is surveillance footage

Is that (You) Dershowitz???
Let Congress do their job.

>possibly confirmed

No one takes the left serious

It’s on par with “sources familiar with the subject’s intentions”

>Muller has made it clear that Trump is not fully exonerated of the crime
The report made it clear that the was no evidence of obstruction or collusion.
Mueller is throwing dems a bone on his way out by being vague about his conclusions.

The footage is undeniable proof that you were part of the conspiracy to commit the robbery. It's over, you're finished!

It absolutely did a lot to turn impeachment into a joke and damage public opinion of the legislative branch overall. Hurt the republicans a lot more than it hurt the democrats too. Result would probably be the same, with the democrats being hurt more, if they tried to impeach Trump. It's hard to see why they would go ahead with it considering this.

I don't think this Jow Forums.org user is preventing Congress from doing their job

What part of innocent until proven guilty is too hard for you to understand. You cannot declare a person guilty of a crime until you have established beyond a reasonable doubt that the person in question is guilty.

Not Congress’ job to investigate an innocent man. We’re done here. Stay btfo.

Based npc poster

>Put it all together and Mueller was saying: Russia interfered in our election.
Who doesn't interfere in other countris elections?
I don't hear you complaining about the Israeli lobby.
What about China, do you think they interfere in our elections via social media propaganda?
>Trump obstructed that investigation.
How, by firing Comey?
Rosenstein and Mueller both stated no ongoing investigations were halted or hurt in any way by him doing that.
>Mueller’s office could have said Trump didn’t commit a crime, but did not reach that conclusion.
That's not the job of an FBI prosecutor.
>The ball is in Congress’ court.
You're beyond retarded, user.

Oh no, they’ll only find the robber’s clothing fibers on the bag of money or a follicle of his hair and not mine. Forensics motherfucker do you know them?

>possibly

Attached: 1530922568030.jpg (452x463, 30K)

doesnt mean you cant say trump committed a crime. but mueller didnt say that did he? did he? he cant indict but he can say he committed a crime

Ok you might not be guilty, but you're not innocent either.

See what I'm trying to get at here?

So that means I’m not guilty. As in, “innocent until PROVEN guilty” and no one has proven my guilt.

Because Jow Forums doesn't care about rule of law, only trump's dick.

He's been BTFO in 100 different ways in this thread. No need to beat a dead horse user. any lurkers in this thread can see that he lost.

Except there was verifiable proof of what Clinton did. Shit, he was closer to doing what the dems claimed Kavanaugh did with actual evidence

...under longstanding department policy, a president cannot be charged with a federal crime while he is in office. That is unconstitutional. Even if the charge is kept under seal and hidden from public view, that, too, is prohibited. A special counsel’s office is part of the Department of Justice, and by regulation, it was bound by that department policy. Charging the president with a crime was therefore not an option we could consider. The department’s written opinion explaining the policy makes several important points that further informed our handling of the obstruction investigation. Those points are summarized in our report, and I will describe two of them for you.

First, the opinion explicitly permits the investigation of a sitting president, because it is important to preserve evidence while memories are fresh and documents available. Among other things, that evidence could be used if there were co-conspirators who could be charged now.

And second, the opinion says that the Constitution requires a process other than the criminal justice system to formally accuse a sitting president of wrongdoing. And beyond department policy, we were guided by principles of fairness. It would be unfair to potentially — it would be unfair to potentially accuse somebody of a crime when there can be no court resolution of the actual charge.

So that was Justice Department policy. Those were the principles under which we operated. And from them, we concluded that we would not reach a determination one way or the other about whether the president committed a crime. That is the office’s final position, and we will not comment on any other conclusions or hypotheticals about the president. We conducted an independent criminal investigation and reported the results to the attorney general, as required by department regulations.
- Robert Mueller's public statement May 29, 2019

Who is Robert Mueller?

Most of Jow Forums hates Trump. Only /ptg/ likes Trump. Doesn't change the fact that he's innocent of this Russia stuff. His name was Seth Rich. also Trump is a Zionist and deserves a bullet.

Rule of law states innocent until proven guilty. He is not guilty, therefore he is innocent
You sir are a lying nigger.

Say it with me, Seth Rich flash drive sent to kim.com forwarded to wikileaks. Easily verifiable @kim.com. Mueller raped Carolyne Cass and tried to murder Lesley Sachs. The lib hero!

>Mueller Report
Trump did not do anything illegal, he asked advisors to do questionable shit to which they responded "no" just like any other president has. Nothing is easy anymore when you have bureaucracy this deep, anyone could suggest doing something illegal because everything is subjective now. Things were supposed to be streamlined so even the the layman could defend themselves in court but shit got convoluted. Best the Dems can do is go for intent but they're the ones that made it impossible to do so.

Attached: 1538602152514.jpg (1007x1304, 297K)

>investigate an innocent man.
kek

“If we had confidence that the president had clearly not committed a crime we would have said so. We did not.”

Attached: we did not.png (666x485, 574K)

>thinks old shit applies to now, the post

You'll never be as accomplished as Mueller