SoCal Deek Posted July 24, 2019 Posted July 24, 2019 Just now, Tiberius said: At least OJ wasn't a traitor. A fifth columnist against our democracy. Hilarious! Actually we don’t really know whether OJ was or is a traitor. He’s never been investigated. For purposes of discussion we’ll assume he’s not. But....we do now know that Trump isn’t one. Irony is a concept that’s completely lost on you. 1
Deranged Rhino Posted July 24, 2019 Posted July 24, 2019 Just now, jrober38 said: I'm talking about OJ Simpson. No one else is. 1
SoCal Deek Posted July 24, 2019 Posted July 24, 2019 Just now, jrober38 said: I'm talking about OJ Simpson. Sure, you enter a courtroom with the presumption of innocence, but a jury's decision to convict someone comes down to whether prosecutors present enough evidence to determine that they are guilty. In the event they don't meet that threshold, you leave the courtroom "not guilty". Also, Mueller never said there wasn't enough evidence against Trump. He did say that if he felt Trump didn't commit any crimes, he'd have said so, but he never said that. So in Rober world you’d have people forever labeled as having been accused of things that they were never convicted of? Nice!
dpberr Posted July 24, 2019 Posted July 24, 2019 I think it will be a big nothing burger. The zealots on both sides are going to leave disappointed.
Deranged Rhino Posted July 24, 2019 Posted July 24, 2019 (edited) 3 minutes ago, jrober38 said: Also, Mueller never said there wasn't enough evidence against Trump. He did say that if he felt Trump didn't commit any crimes, he'd have said so, but he never said that. That's not how it works. And Mueller knows that. ***************************************************** Nadler leads off saying Mueller's indictments spoke for him... And not a single indictment was about collusion or obstruction or the 2016 campaign. Not one. Edited July 24, 2019 by Deranged Rhino
jrober38 Posted July 24, 2019 Posted July 24, 2019 Just now, SoCal Deek said: So in Rober world you’d have people forever labeled as having been accused of things that they were never convicted of? Nice! Not necessarily. I think the court of public opinion makes decisions on a case by case basis. OJ is widely believed to have committed a brutal double homicide. I can live with him having been labelled a murder, even though a jury didn't convict him. 2 minutes ago, Deranged Rhino said: That's not how it works. And Mueller knows that. ***************************************************** Nadler leads off saying Mueller's indictments spoke for him... And not a single indictment was about collusion or obstruction or the 2016 campaign. Not one. Mueller said that he wasn't allowed to indict a sitting President in his report. He's left the entire thing up to Congress, and they haven't done anything.
Tiberius Posted July 24, 2019 Author Posted July 24, 2019 3 minutes ago, dpberr said: I think it will be a big nothing burger. The zealots on both sides are going to leave disappointed. It won't change any minds, I agree.
SoCal Deek Posted July 24, 2019 Posted July 24, 2019 1 minute ago, jrober38 said: Not necessarily. I think the court of public opinion makes decisions on a case by case basis. Social Media has turned the Court of Public Opinion into a three ring circus. You’d better pray you’re never accused of something or your life will be forever ruined. 1 minute ago, Tiberius said: It won't change any minds, I agree. Hey! We actually agree on something. ? I knew we’d find common ground. So can we work on fixing the roads now? 1
Deranged Rhino Posted July 24, 2019 Posted July 24, 2019 Mueller sounds old... as he reads from his prepared statement. He also shot up in his seat when Collins hit on the origin of the investigation. This isn't going to go the way Nadler wants.
GG Posted July 24, 2019 Posted July 24, 2019 Nice way to punt on the origins of the investigations. 1
Deranged Rhino Posted July 24, 2019 Posted July 24, 2019 Mueller says he can't talk about the origin of the probe or the Steele Dossier today... No.... don't want to talk about the ACTUAL issues. Because this is a show. Just now, GG said: Nice way to punt on the origins of the investigations. Unreal.
jrober38 Posted July 24, 2019 Posted July 24, 2019 To summarize his opening statement. 1. The Russians systematically interfered with the election. 2. The Trump campaign did not collude with the Russians. 3. The Trump White House may have obstructed justice. It's on Congress to establish that conclusively.
Tiberius Posted July 24, 2019 Author Posted July 24, 2019 Just now, GG said: Nice way to punt on the origins of the investigations. Hey, Barr set the rules! Lol
Deranged Rhino Posted July 24, 2019 Posted July 24, 2019 Just now, jrober38 said: To summarize his opening statement. 1. The Russians systematically interfered with the election. 2. The Trump campaign did not collude with the Russians. 3. The Trump White House may have obstructed justice. It's on Congress to establish that conclusively. / "I won't talk about anything that matters because I can't" (like the origin or the Steele dossier)
GG Posted July 24, 2019 Posted July 24, 2019 Just now, Deranged Rhino said: Mueller says he can't talk about the origin of the probe or the Steele Dossier today... No.... don't want to talk about the ACTUAL issues. Because this is a show. Unreal. So he can't comment on some issues that occurred a few months before he was appointed SC, but had no problem indicting people for unrelated crimes that occurred years before he was appointed SC. 2
Tiberius Posted July 24, 2019 Author Posted July 24, 2019 Just now, jrober38 said: To summarize his opening statement. 1. The Russians systematically interfered with the election. 2. The Trump campaign did not collude with the Russians. 3. The Trump White House may have obstructed justice. It's on Congress to establish that conclusively. 2. Yes they did, obstruction of justice hid the truth 1
Deranged Rhino Posted July 24, 2019 Posted July 24, 2019 Nadler starts off with Obstruction... not collusion/conspiracy. This after three years of saying there was evidence of both.
Tiberius Posted July 24, 2019 Author Posted July 24, 2019 No Just now, Deranged Rhino said: Nadler starts off with Obstruction... not collusion/conspiracy. This after three years of saying there was evidence of both. This is the judiciary committee, intelligence is the second hearing, its backwards, which is dumb 1
Deranged Rhino Posted July 24, 2019 Posted July 24, 2019 Nadler is being duplicitous here. Trump's trolling has gotten into his head to such a degree he called a congressional hearing about it
jrober38 Posted July 24, 2019 Posted July 24, 2019 3 minutes ago, Tiberius said: 2. Yes they did, obstruction of justice hid the truth Yikes. Mueller says Trump can be indicted for Obstruction of Justice after he leaves the White House.
Recommended Posts