Christianity Today Op Ed

[Mountain Man]

Sorry, the statement is not a bijection. Having said if they were confident he did not commit a crime they would have said so simply does not justify saying if they were confident he did commit a crime they also would have said so. The second does not logically follow from the first

Dirty Cop Mueller didn't say definitively that President Trump committed a crime. In fact, he said he couldn't reach that conclusion.

Bottom line.

[lilpixieofterror]

Sorry, the statement is not a bijection. Having said if they were confident he did not commit a crime they would have said so simply does not justify saying if they were confident he did commit a crime they also would have said so. The second does not logically follow from the first

[Teallaura]

There was little influence attempted, the scale was minuscule and there was no demonstrable effect. Of greater concern is the actual effect produced by Google for the Clinton campaign.

[Teallaura]

Mueller didn't charge Trump with anything, he simply turned the report over to Congress to adjudicate wherein Trumps new toadie stepped in and did the exonerating. That Trump obstructed Mueller is as evident as his obstruction in the corrupt Ukrainian scheme, corruption and obstruction is what he does.

Congress DOESN'T EVER adjudicate.

[Sam]

Congress DOESN'T EVER adjudicate.

That is, actually, the function of an impeachment trial.

--Sam

[JimL]

Dirty Cop Mueller didn't say definitively that President Trump committed a crime. In fact, he said he couldn't reach that conclusion.

Bottom line.

Yeah, we don't really have to explain that (for the hundredth time) to you again do we?

[Teallaura]

That is, actually, the function of an impeachment trial.

--Sam

No, it's the function of the judiciary. Impeachment carries no penalty - removal isn't punitive.

[Sam]

No, it's the function of the judiciary. Impeachment carries no penalty - removal isn't punitive.

That's not what the word "adjudicate" means. In this case, Mueller's report stated that because of a DOJ opinion that the President cannot be charged with a crime while in office, the investigation did not proceed to make any judgments as to potential criminal violations stemming from Trump's conduct. As the report noted and Mueller heavily implied in testimony, however, the remedy for that lack of prosecutorial discretion is Congress' ability to impeach and try a President for corrupt acts in office.

Congress fulfills that remedy by drafting articles of impeachment and adjudicating the question of the President's guilt.

--Sam

[Cow Poke]

That's not what the word "adjudicate" means.

Yeah, it's not. Adjudicate can simply mean "to judge between", which is what the Senate is charged with doing.

[JimL]

Yeah, it's not. Adjudicate can simply mean "to judge between", which is what the Senate is charged with doing.

Sheesh, you guys will argue anything. That's what he said, the Senate adjudicates, i.e judges whether the President is guilty or innocent..

[Cow Poke]

Sheesh, you guys will argue anything. That's what he said, the Senate adjudicates, i.e judges whether the President is guilty or innocent..

Perhaps it's your inability to understand standard English, Jim. I was agreeing with Sam.

[JimL]

Perhaps it's your inability to understand standard English, Jim. I was agreeing with Sam.

Okay, my bad.

[Cow Poke]

Okay, my bad.

[Tassman]

. Adjudicate can simply mean "to judge between", which is what the Senate is charged with doing.

Yes. It is what the Senate is charged with doing impartially

[oxmixmudd]

Dirty Cop Mueller didn't say definitively that President Trump committed a crime. In fact, he said he couldn't reach that conclusion.

Bottom line.

No, he said he could not say he did NOT commit a crime. And he said any remedy for what the evidence implied was the job of the congress to implent.

There is a massive difference between what he said and what you are trying to imply.

You need to consider the sum of what he said, not just parts of it,