The Mueller Report thread

[*bfine32*]

(04-23-2019, 01:11 PM)hollodero Wrote: Well, maybe. But then they are not the ones who should make the prosecutorial decisions about the president. That would be up to Congress, right, to hold a president responsible.
And if said biased AGs made the call nonetheless, a citizen does not need to be content with it.

Pretty sure that's what I've been saying all along.

Please do provide that laundry list. So I can check if it amounts to misinforming the public about the contents of a special counsel report into the president's conduct.
I can see the parallels quite clearly. Obama got help by a foe, lied about it, fired the people looking into it, firing the old AG, then getting a non-exoneration exoneration and a grossly favorable view from his newly appinted AG and then demand apologies. While said AG holds a PK and says poor president was angered by leaks and bad press and we please need to all understand his bad behaoviour because of this - in that state of mind, it's ok for him to lie and he can't possibly be guilty of obstruction.
Well of course over 3,000 emails were deleted after a CPU was subpoenaed  so we really don't know the full extent of the parallels. But the point made more than the similarities of the situations is the hypocrisy in the reaction. The same folks that accept that Slick Willy and Lynch talked about grandkids and Hill's emails were about yoga, now cry you must read the report and draw your own conclusions as it is your civic duty.  The report went against what the Libs hoped for and much like the popular vote; they cannot let it go. It is never OK for anyone to lie

Well, maybe there is something similar in those Holder files of yours. But as someone recently said to me, no innuendos.
Start with this: "fast and furious"
https://www.nationalreview.com/2016/01/fast-furious-obama-first-scandal/

You'll see congress did something it had never done before: "Holder in Contempt"
https://www.cnn.com/2012/06/28/politics/holder-contempt/index.html

and when you're versed on that you can simply google "Eric Holder scandals"

Of course you don't have to do this and I'll not call you lazy if you choose not to do so.

No one ever demanded page by page reading. The question itself I do not really get. Guessing what you ask, I'd respond that a result of "the president and his people didn't willfully break any law, they just didn't know better", as it is in regard of the Trump tower meeting is pretty devastating.

So how much of the report should someone read? Anything worth doing is worth doing well amiright? I simply defer to those whose job it is to read and interpret such things

As for the rest of your post, I find it amazing how you would mock people that show an interest in such things. When they as well could just know their limits, become adult conservatives and follow your explanatory lead on anything.

I have no problem with folks being interested in things.