Fox News says Mueller report did NOT clear Trump

R

reagansghost

eternal
Fox News urged viewers to read Robert Mueller’s report in its entirety on Tuesday, emphasizing that the special counsel did not exonerate President Donald Trump.

While covering the battle between House Democrats and the Justice Department over the Mueller report, Smith noted that the Russia investigation found multiple instances of potential obstruction on behalf of Trump, but that the special counsel followed DOJ guidelines in declining to prosecute the sitting president.

“Remember, in his 400-plus page report — that everyone in America should read, everyone — Robert Mueller laid out ten instances of apparent obstruction of justice, criminal obstruction of justice, potentially, by President Trump,” the Fox News anchor said. “The special counsel did not exonerate the president. They said if they could’ve they would’ve but they couldn’t so they didn’t.”

“Mueller explained that if he and his team had confidence that the president did not commit obstruction, they would have said so. He also said that under Justice Department guidelines, charging the president with a crime was never an option to him. He said the Constitution requires another process,” Smith continued, referring to Mueller’s suggestion that Congress take up his report.


https://www.mediaite.com/tv/shepard...he-mueller-report-it-did-not-exonerate-trump/
 
How many times will the idiots spit out this stupidity?

'We didn't prove 100% he was innocent, so please keep speculating. We didn't have enough evidence to indict, but hey... Guilty until proven innocent!'
 
Superfreak said:
bottom line: Mueller could have recommended indictment. He did not. Done.
Click to expand...

No! But your idiot is just about done- so you can put a fork in him!

tenor.gif
 
reagansghost said:
wrong, can't indict a sitting president ya ignoramus
Click to expand...

Wrong. First, that is a DOJ guideline. Second, Mueller was still able to recommend indictment... it simply would have been delayed until Trump was out of office under the guideline.

So you are incorrect. Mueller could have reached the conclusion if he felt he had the evidence.
 
In America, no collusion and insufficient evidence to pursue obstruction means that, in the eyes of the law, you are innocent.
 
Superfreak said:
bottom line: Mueller could have recommended indictment. He did not. Done.
Click to expand...

Wrong, dumbfuck.

“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.”
 
Superfreak said:
Wrong. First, that is a DOJ guideline. Second, Mueller was still able to recommend indictment... it simply would have been delayed until Trump was out of office under the guideline.

So you are incorrect. Mueller could have reached the conclusion if he felt he had the evidence.
Click to expand...

“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.”
 
Earl said:
In America, no collusion and insufficient evidence to pursue obstruction means that, in the eyes of the law, you are innocent.
Click to expand...

FACTUAL RESULTS OF THE OBSTRUCTION INVESTIGATION”


A. The Campaign's Response to Reports About Russian Support for Trump
B. The President's Conduct Concerning the Investigation of Michael Flynn
C. The President's Reaction to Public Confirmation of the FBl's Russia Investigation
D. Events Leading Up To and Surrounding the Termination of FBI Director Corney
E. The President's Efforts to Remove the Special Counsel
F. The President's Efforts to Curtail the Special Counsel Investigation
H. The President's Further Efforts to Have the Attorney General Take Over the Investigation
I. The President Orders McGahn to Deny that the President Tried to Fire the Special Counsel
J. The President's Conduct Towards Flynn, Manafort,
K. The President's Conduct Involving Michael Cohen
 
In America, no collusion and insufficient evidence to pursue obstruction means that he is innocent.

Ya esta.
 
Superfreak said:
bottom line: Mueller could have recommended indictment. He did not. Done.
Click to expand...

Not the bottom line you dishonest righty. Mueller, in the report you did not read, said he operated under the understanding that a sitting president cannot be indicted. Can you follow that whole sentence? Then he listed about 10 incidents of Trumpian obstruction. Over 1000 prosecutors said Trump's obstruction would be easy to prove.
Your premise is absolutely wrong.
Fox sucks Trump all day long, but eventually, they will be nailed if they keep lying about the Mueller investigation. They tried to save some respect. Rightys on this board have no credibility to defend, so they will not feel a sense of obligation to recognize the facts.
 
Earl said:
In America, no collusion and insufficient evidence to pursue obstruction means that he is innocent.

Ya esta.
Click to expand...

FACTUAL RESULTS OF THE OBSTRUCTION INVESTIGATION”


A. The Campaign's Response to Reports About Russian Support for Trump
B. The President's Conduct Concerning the Investigation of Michael Flynn
C. The President's Reaction to Public Confirmation of the FBl's Russia Investigation
D. Events Leading Up To and Surrounding the Termination of FBI Director Corney
E. The President's Efforts to Remove the Special Counsel
F. The President's Efforts to Curtail the Special Counsel Investigation
H. The President's Further Efforts to Have the Attorney General Take Over the Investigation
I. The President Orders McGahn to Deny that the President Tried to Fire the Special Counsel
J. The President's Conduct Towards Flynn, Manafort,
K. The President's Conduct Involving Michael Cohen
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top