Posted on Mar 24, 2019
Top-Ranking Democrat Says Mueller Report Doesn’t Matter — ‘We Know There Was Collusion’
1.45K
61
30
12
12
0
"...we [Democrats in Congress] have the responsibility of protecting the rule of law..." and they're going to do it by tearing down the laws like trees in a forest in pursuit of the Devil [President Trump]. The irony is inescapable. I am embarrassed for them even if they are incapable of embarrassment for themselves. A lynch mob on Capitol Hill...
Top-Ranking Democrat Says Mueller Report Doesn’t Matter — ‘We Know There Was Collusion’
Posted from dailycaller.com
Law
Crime
Congress
Democrats
Posted >1 y ago
Responses: 12
6
6
0
5
5
0
I actually thought the release of the report well before Primary season was advantageous for the Democrats as they can now focus on actual issues. Unfortunately, Democrats in Congress appear poised to beat a dead horse. Have they learned nothing from the 2016 election?
"Bold strategy Cotton, let's see if it pays off."
"Bold strategy Cotton, let's see if it pays off."
(5)
(0)
4
4
0
If The Know there was Collusion... Where is … Where Is The Evidence…
There Is Enough evidence To Put HRC/BHO in Prison For Life … But Still nothing on TRUMP...
Thanks For The Share
There Is Enough evidence To Put HRC/BHO in Prison For Life … But Still nothing on TRUMP...
Thanks For The Share
(4)
(0)
SFC Casey O'Mally
MSgt Steve Sweeney There actually was plenty of evidence. I forget the exact numbers, but something like 100 e-mails in 18 e-mail chains....
But then Comey decided to say that he didn't think a prosecutor should follow up (not his call, overstepped his bounds. But good luck getting a conviction after THAT sound bite. Good luck having anyone believe an opt for prosecution was anything than politically motivated, despite, you know, clear and uncontestable evidence of illegal actions.)
No indictment does not necessarily mean not enough evidence. Just like indictment does not necessarily mean "guilty.". It is called prosecutorial discretion, and it is a real thing.
But then Comey decided to say that he didn't think a prosecutor should follow up (not his call, overstepped his bounds. But good luck getting a conviction after THAT sound bite. Good luck having anyone believe an opt for prosecution was anything than politically motivated, despite, you know, clear and uncontestable evidence of illegal actions.)
No indictment does not necessarily mean not enough evidence. Just like indictment does not necessarily mean "guilty.". It is called prosecutorial discretion, and it is a real thing.
(0)
(0)
SFC Casey O'Mally
MSgt Steve Sweeney Last I checked, RNC and DNC do not have indictment power. That would be the Attorney General and DoJ, which (at the time) were part of the Obama administration.
There is prosecutorial discretion, as I already mentioned, but you chose to ignore in favor of a partisan attack. Just like a prosecutor can ignore a father who assaults (on video) someone who hurt his kid, the DoJ can refuse to indict HRC despite clear evidence of wrongdoing, because the optics would be bad.
Comey said it publicly. This isn't me clinging to anything. A whole bunch of classified data which was classified at the time of transmission. A bit more which was classified AFTER the time of transmission. That is criminal. Even if it not wilful criminality it was criminal negligence.
I am not making anything up, I am not trying to find guilt. I am just stating the FACT that Comet's investigation showed criminality. No one choosing to prosecute does not mean there was no evidence.
There is prosecutorial discretion, as I already mentioned, but you chose to ignore in favor of a partisan attack. Just like a prosecutor can ignore a father who assaults (on video) someone who hurt his kid, the DoJ can refuse to indict HRC despite clear evidence of wrongdoing, because the optics would be bad.
Comey said it publicly. This isn't me clinging to anything. A whole bunch of classified data which was classified at the time of transmission. A bit more which was classified AFTER the time of transmission. That is criminal. Even if it not wilful criminality it was criminal negligence.
I am not making anything up, I am not trying to find guilt. I am just stating the FACT that Comet's investigation showed criminality. No one choosing to prosecute does not mean there was no evidence.
(0)
(0)
SFC Casey O'Mally
MSgt Steve Sweeney No, any number of prosecutors. But for that SPECIFIC crime, it falls to DoJ. NY state (or DC, or TX state, etc.) DA can't indict for criminal negligence when handling federal classified data.
Any of the federal prosecutors who CAN indict all fall under the DoJ umbrella, at least in this circumstance.
You are saying the GOP should have indicted her, if there was evidence. Exactly what indictment power do you think the political party itself has? Where does the RNC's authority to prosecute come from?
Any of the federal prosecutors who CAN indict all fall under the DoJ umbrella, at least in this circumstance.
You are saying the GOP should have indicted her, if there was evidence. Exactly what indictment power do you think the political party itself has? Where does the RNC's authority to prosecute come from?
(0)
(0)
Read This Next
Continue with Facebook 
Continue with Google