Republicans: Do you now believe the Mueller Report should be accepted by all?

A great deal has been said about grand jury testimony being redacted. This may not be a big issue. Witnesses were questioned by FBI agents. That testimony does not have the protections afforded to grand jury testimony.

That is probably why Trump is so concerned. As an example, the former White House counsel, Don McGahn was questioned for 30 hours by FBI agents. Trump's former campaign manager and NSA were questioned by FBI agents, so was his son and son-in-law. That's just for starters.

 

sad that now republicans want to hide much of the report from the public

 

I did........

You'll need to come up with the AG authorization to go beyond Russian interference in the investigation if you want to proceed with your line of debate.

https://www.rollcall.com/news/congr...rs-transcript-on-dossier-russia-investigation

 

Paying a lawyer violated campaign finance laws? Quote the statute?

 

????

What does SCOTUS have to do in any of this?

 

Appeals. Even a first year law student would appeal any convictions or pleas coming from an invalid investigation, fruit from the poison tree.

 

You seem to be in some sort of "denial trip"... but even in that you're not making any sense. Is there any word in "....any matters that arose or may arise directly from the investigation..." that you need me to google for you?

Or are you just still trying to figure out what Manafort an all those 37 were indicted for?

Or is it more like you realize you don't know what you're talking about, so you just throw in whatever comes to mind?

 

If the investigation originally proved invalid anything valid or not would be fruit from the poison tree.

 

Read Cohen's indictment. Violations are the same attributed to Cohen and Individual-1

I don't have the time or the drive to do your googling for you

 

Well.... Manafort and others are already doing jail time. So... You should probably talk to them about your "first year law student'.

 

Well... I have shown you no less than three times that it's not invalid. And you keep insisting. So I'm wondering if it's not more like fruit from the cannabis tree

 

You need to study search and seizure laws. The way the Mueller authorization is this, it authorizes investigation on what ever Federal Crimes they find. However, if the original charges are unfounded, then everything else is invalid as fruit from the poison tree. The Constitution prevents fishing expeditions.

 

Because you don't know what you're talking about.

 

What "original charges" are you talking about? It's an investigation!!!!

You're definitely in your own little trip.

 

So, you're saying if the cops obtain a search warrant for banned large capacity AR magazines and they don't find any, but they find a pot farm and evidence of tax evasion they can pursue the latter even though the warrant was specific regarding the Gun Mags? If you read Rosenstein's authorization the other Federal crimes pertain to other Federal Crimes relating to the original accusation of "any links and/or coordination between the Russian government and individuals associated with the campaign of President Donald Trump; and any matters that arose or may arise directly from the investigation; and any other matters within the scope of 28 C.F.R. § 600.4(a)."

I'll leave it to the SCOTUS to decide if it's a fishing expedition.

 

Russian Collusion.....did I really have to spell it out?

 

No, it doesn't work that way.

The investigation was based on evidence legitimately obtained, and the investigation was initiated through proper procedure. The investigation was not based on charges - charges would come after investigation, not before.

As long as Mueller stayed within his remit, his findings stand.

 

No. Cut the nonsense. I'm saying that he "obtained a search warrant" to find evidence of "....any matters that arose or may arise directly from the investigation..." Don't believe me. Read it! This is the fifth time. And also for the fifth time: why do you think Manafort is in jail?

I think explaining this twice to any moderately intelligent human being would have been enough. Five times enough for you? Hope it is, because I'm not interested in giving it a sixth go.

 

That's not a charge!!!

That is one of THREE points mandated in the investigation.

 

.

Actually, you need to recognize that as nonsense as it is only one possible outcome.

The heading states that the investigation must be a "full and thorough investigation of the Russian government's attempts to interfere".

 

So you think Barr is covering something up?

 

Impeachment based on what?

 

What else?

http://www.politicalforum.com/index...ccepted-by-all.552950/page-17#post-1070458053

 

Barr is behaving in a totally political way which is far outside of what is expected of an AG - including himself as AG.

If he's not covering something up, then why is he behaving in this way?

 

What were they investigating?