Well, I don't think anyone is going to be completely happy with Mueller's statement: he categorically asserted he did NOT absolve or exonerate POTUS of any criminal malfeasance on the charge of Obstruction of Justice, but he also was emphatic that it's up to Congress to exercise its Constitutional authority if they want to make such charges, since DOJ policies precluded him from doing so.


mcconnell isn't depraved or hypocritical. he's exercising power more effectively than any senate majority leader (or minority leader) in my adult life.

he is a terrible human being from a shit state who treats his constituents with neglect. his legacy will pollute the republic for decades after his death. but he's good at politics.



What'd Clinton get away with?


Very tasteful book selection in background of mug photo #1.
McConnell talks lovingly about the institutions of the Sente, while he does his best to destroy democracy. But just like Trump said, it's all about winning.


The City Council is way over due revising public comment. If you can’t respect the process you shouldn’t expect respect. Also if you have never commented at the City Council, you should. Pick a germane topic and make a few points about it.


Fair enough, and I guess I'd not really argue any of that, even if the circumstances and context really were vastly different. Wasn't sure if he was maybe alluding to some Whitewater or other such nonsense.


@2: Yeah, Mueller is a letdown. That he hangs his hat on an opinion that a president can't be indicted has always been weak -- as that opinion was made in 1973 just to give weight to indicting a vice-president so that Elliot Richardson could indict Spiro Agnew.


Mueller: yeah I had almost three years and unlimited resources and didn’t find jack shit but maybe Congress can do something LOL I dunno peace out y’all.



@11: There, there honey, that's not what he said. Now settle down or you won't get any pudding.


"What'd Clinton get away with?"

Besides the rapes?

Pretty sure making the intern give you a blowjob at your desk would get any CEO in America instantly fired, especially now, with the me-too crowd.


@10: Checks and balances. The justice department in under the umbrella of the executive branch, and therefore it is up to Congress to check the power of the executive branch. Mueller is not allowed to just go ham and violate the constitution, even if you would like it.

When you allow entities to have full control over investigating and deciding to charge themselves, you will always end up with a corrupt entity that serves nothing but itself.


Sigh. It's a DOJ memo.

It's not a ruling.

It's not a law.

The next administration can literally change that.

That said, even a sitting President and his Crime Family are subject to State Attorneys General filing state charge, and international crimes being filed in the other venues in which they had some interaction (e.g. if I wire $125,000 to Russia via London from DC, Feds here might not charge me, Russians might not charge me, but the UK can lock me up and throw away the key if it was drug money laundered or other criminal proceeds, like say greenwashing Russian loot in golf courses and apartments).


@14: It's still unsettled on so many levels. For example, if Donald pulled out a revolver and shot a reporter in the oval office - would we have to wait till he's convicted in the Senate upon impeachment to arrest him?


@16: No, but the difference between you scenario and the reality of the Mueller report is that if Trump shot a reporter in the head there would be actionable evidence. Mueller has stated that in his view, there is not enough actionable evidence to recommend an indictment, but that is up to Congress.

But with the existing legal framework as stated by the DOJ, he would have to be impeached and found guilty by congress in order to remove him from office. But not to be arrested, as far as I know.


@16 As a practical matter, here's no chance of the Senate holding a trial, so we'd be waiting forever.


@11- I don't know- seems like Cohen, Gates, Flynn, Papadopoulos, Manafort, Van Der Zwaan, Pinedo, etc might disagree, having been convicted.


@17: Ok, if only Mueller could have articulated the evidence he collected as actionable as a ballistics report.


@17 that is NOT what he said. At all. For fuck sake READ the report and READ maulers statements.

He said he couldn't charge the president because the DOJ and Barr specifically said they would not charge a sitting (GOP) president. Period. He didn't charge because he COULDN'T charge.

Here is is statement from this morning:

"Mueller: If we had confidence the President DID NOT commit a crime, we would have said so. Mueller then explained, citing Department of Justice policy, that a President "cannot be charged with a federal crime while he is in office. That is unconstitutional."

It was Barr and the DOJ. And what this means is that ANY president can do what ever crime he wants going forward. And if the Senate will not impeach there is nothing anyone can do. So if the senate enables crimes we have no checks and balances at all.


The goalposts for the Mueller investigation have officially been relocated to fucking Zeta Reticuli.


@23: Awwwww look at baby trolling. Who's the little trolly troll? Is it you? Yes it is!


@26 If you stop supporting criminals and bigots and their racist and sexist policies, you'd have people who'd talk to you in real life, and not have to spend all your time being ignored on Slog!


@21. You are kind of a dumb fuck, aren't you? Lol. You don't assume that the person is guilty and then try to prove that there was no crime. That's not how the justice system works. It is innocent till proven guilty beyond reasonable doubt. Wherever you like it or not. If there is no evidence, there is no crime. Get that through you tin-foil covered, conspiracy riddled skull. Also, you can't disprove a negative. It is impossible. Idiot. :). Lol.


No sympathy for the dead whale? Allllll of you are heartless, artless, and full of farts.


@21: Yep, I said that Mueller could not prosecute because that it is not his legal role, as outlined by the checks and balances of our government system, and it is up to congress. Of course this investigation does not exonerate anyone. That is not how personal investigations work.

Instead of being Mad Online, learn to read.

Please wait...

Comments are closed.

Commenting on this item is available only to members of the site. You can sign in here or create an account here.

Add a comment

By posting this comment, you are agreeing to our Terms of Use.