DOJ Initial Russia Hearings

I keep getting this rap about how the Starr report laid out levied obstruction charges and clearly told congress it was an impeachable offense and that the Mueller report doesn't do this therefor the President is vindicated because if Mueller had him on obstruction he would tell congress to impeach on obstruction. Personally I don't think that precedent is relevant in this situation for a variety of reasons, and the report reads like a compilation of evidence to me, but it is probably the strongest point I have heard from the Trump support system. Is there anything to it or just another way to spin it? 

 
I have to believe two of the names redacted for personal privacy are Jr. And Jerome Corsi. The surrounding text I've read with PP redactions fits what's been reported of those two. The rest are likely other Trumps or very close allies.

I'm guessing p. 179 is probably Corsi.

There's also someone with a shorter name who was a part of a grand jury investigation p. 194 and 199. Eric Trump?

Holy hell! P.185 basically says that while Jr., Kushner, and Manifort probably did engage in conspiracy to receive contributions from a foreign national, and they probably knew it was illegal, they were too stupid to know the exact law they were violating. That ignorance and complications with proving the value of the information promised is the only reason they were not charge with conspiracy. WTF...

 
Last edited by a moderator:
D4c8DVEWkAA04Gr.jpg


 
If anything the Fake News Mainstream Media has been vindicated. Their reporting was highly accurate and almost backed up verbatim by the report.

I hate all the gossip articles they write about strife and petty issues with cabinet members that happen behind closed doors, but it stands to reason they are coming from actual events.

 
Last edited by a moderator:
Back
Top