Quote:
Originally Posted by sebastian_dangerfield
It is dumb. A number of people here wish to relitigate conspiracy.
Mueller found there was not adequate evidence on conspiracy. Period.
You know what you've got when you can't adduce adequate evidence to sustain a charge? Nothing. You have nothing.
|
It would help if you removed your head from your ass.
There are two issues here. Whether the President has engaged in criminal conspiracy for which he or anyone else should be charged. You're stuck on this because, for some weird reason, you think that no evidence of criminal conspiracy means no collusion and everyone should pack up their shit and move--despite the fact that the reason why Mueller presumably didn't have enough for a criminal charge was the fact that the President didn't cooperate, his henchman have lied and/or refused to cooperate, and he doesn't have access to the Russians with whom the Administration has been dealing. But that is neither here nor there, because:
The other issue is whether the collusion (dictionary definition) he and his Administration
are guilty of (again, not the statutory definition) and the clear obstruction of justice the President has engaged in amount to impeachable offenses (read: high crimes and misdemeanors).
We all know where you stand on 1. So, enough. If you have an opinion on 2 (and I'm sure I know what it is already, but whatever), fine. But shut the fuck up about 1 already.
TM
Threaded Mode