Until we see the whole report, and Grand Jury info - if only to Judiciary, Barr is obstructing justice.
“Exonerated” means there is proof of non-guilt and generally applies to a situation where there is no evidence of guilt (due to presumption of innocence). Declining to prosecute does not imply exoneration. Prosecution requires that evidence of guilt is provable, that the law in question is prosecutable with this set of evidence and this individual, and if the prosecutor deems the good of indicting this individual is worth the cost of prosecuting this crime.
For instance, if DNA evidence is found at a murder scene which clearly came from the killer but does not match the suspect, the suspect is deemed exonerated. Doesn’t mean the suspect is necessarily innocent (maybe two people were involved in the crime?) but there is no remaining solid evidence pointing to that person being guilty.
In the case of Trump, exoneration would have meant that a sound and reasonable explanation could be given for all cases of obstruction, supported by documentation at the time. It appears physically impossible for Trump to be exonerated of the act of obstruction as well as of intent to obstruct given his public statements at the time. The only way for Trump to be “exonerated” of obstruction charges is for Barr’s strained theory of proof of an underlying crime to hold sway, in which case “exoneration” of conspiracy (and all other crimes, which Mueller was not tasked with investigating) would imply exoneration of obstruction.
The bottom line, though, is simple. Mueller specifically said that Trump was not exonerated. Thus, Trump claiming Mueller exonerated him is severe gaslighting. Which will, as history has proven, work about 100% on Trump’s supporters who trust what their leader says over their lying eyes every single day.
1 Like
3 Likes
“Ex-honor-ation” is probably to be the preferred spelling s it applies to Trump and his crew.
1 Like
Mueller was not able to find evidence that cleared PP. Mueller’s team looked for and asked people for evidence that would clear PP and never found any.
“…To the “average person” the entire thing is now over, because their news sources have told them so…”
Millions just catch bits and pieces of news if any. Short, simplified tropes are what they hear and recall.
Yesterday I said how I was with a Trumpian as he got the news on his phone He raised his fist, “No collusion!”
That’s all he needed – those two words and if’s over for him.
Guarantee you’ll see it on bumper stickers and campaign ads.
2 Likes
Why is messaging so hard for the Dems?
Because they are afraid to look impolite.
I mean, where is the push back against McConnell’s attack? Where are the Democrats saying out loud, in no uncertain terms, that McConnell aided and abetted the Russians in their interference efforts in the middle of the 2016 election?
But that would be “too confrontational” for Dems like Schumer and Pelosi. It doesn’t matter to them that such an attack on McConnell would change the subject to whether or not Mitch McConnell was a traitor…which is a much better subject to be discussing than whether Trump was fully exonerated or not at this moment.
Somebody didn’t listen to Scarborough this morning. And I like Ari…
1 Like
Nice post. Would make a nice op/ed piece.
“Pushing back hard” means attacking Bill Barr, because until and unless Barr’s impartiality becomes THE issue, “release the report” is not an effective message.
Going after Barr, and demanding answers to specific questions – like WHY did Trump lie about the Trump Tower meeting, and how is this not obstruction – is the way to get the message across. Get angry – as angry as the GOP and Trump are. THAT is effective messaging.
“…Why is messaging so hard for the Dems?..”
Incompetence. I blame the DNC chair. Remember how, under Reagan, they had a message per day out by 0900 daily?
Most commenters here and elsewhere keep portraying the “mainstream media” as a bunch of clueless idiots. I don’t understand that; these are intelligent, educated people.
The more obvious conclusion is that they are complicit.
I learned years ago that Lawyer, while looking like English, is very not English.
Lawyers can can write “blah blah is A” and another lawyer understands that “blah blah is not A” e.g. a lawyer could write something sensible like “the sun rises in the east” and another lawyer would understand them to be saying “the sun rises in the west.”
Lawyers. SMDH.
Collusion was actually an inconsequential head fake. Democrat’s make a lot of
noise with conventional campaign issues, health care, the economy, etc
while quietly working on the myriad of felony investigations. I’m sure
now that Trump’s lying to himself that he’s “totally exonerated” his
naive, gullible, ignorant flock won’t understand that the always actual
serious threats to him and his little crime family were from the
Congressional, Federal NYSD, NY State, and NYC felony investigations
that are proceeding quietly full speed ahead. Collusion never was a very
serious threat cowardly Republicans probably wouldn’t impeach Dirty Donny for
murder because of the chance Trump, and over half of their support, his
base all held tightly together by the glue of their shared profound
intolerance’s, might turn on them.
Exactly!!! My guess is donnie will start saying…“I’d love to release the report but it’s still be audited.”
The Central Park 5 were exonerated. The CP5 were a group of black and Latino teenage boys who were imprisoned for the 1989 rape and assault of a white female jogger. Before the teenagers were convicted, Donald Trump paid for a full page ad in the New York Times calling for their execution.
In 2002, Matias Reyes, a convicted murderer and serial rapist in prison, confessed to raping the jogger, and DNA evidence confirmed his guilt. He knew facts about the crime that only the offender could have known, and also said he committed the rape alone.
The CP5 were released and their convictions overturned. Despite their exoneration Donald Trump to this day still maintains they were guilty.
In the CP5 case new evidence proved the the innocence of those wrongly convicted. That is exoneration. In the Russia probe, the investigator just was not able to prove a narrowly defined conspiracy beyond a reasonable doubt. That is not exoneration.
I have pretty much resisted tuning into Scarborough for weeks now. Way too annoying. Husband turned him on yesterday though and it seemed pretty good.
1 Like
And we like Ari too. Just have had our fill with Republicans droning on with lies. I think that’s still allowed.
1 Like
I like to watch his beard grow for the hour he’s on TV. He must have to shave 3x a day. 