If the Mueller probe finds nothing directly implicating Trump himself, will you accept it?

Ok.

I still don’t understand what you’re looking for in this thread. Are you really expecting folks “on the left” to “admit” that they won’t accept any result that doesn’t directly implicate Donald Trump?

Maybe I’m misreading you, but you still seem convinced that all of “us” “on the left” are being dishonest when we say that we would accept the results of the Mueller probe if it doesn’t directly implicate Trump, which literally every single poster in this thread has stated. Or are we actually changing your mind? Do you now accept that at least some “on the left” are willing to accept a result that contradicts what you think we want to be found?

As far as your desire that if President Trump goes down, it should “be 100% legitimately. Not just because he did things I don’t like or don’t agree with.” Well, of course. So do all of us “on the left”. Again, maybe I’m misreading you, but you seem to believe that you have legitimate concerns about President Trump, but “everyone on the left” is merely out to get him because he did things we don’t like.

So, you “see tons of people absolutely certain this report will destroy him,” while you are “skeptical that anything coming out of this report is going to directly implicate him.”

shrug

Well, I guess we’ll see. For the record, I’m also skeptical that Donald Trump will be directly implicated, and for that matter, I actually hope that he isn’t. I’m “on the left” (well, I consider myself a centrist, moderate Democrat, but that broadly places me “on the left” of the American political spectrum), and I think Donald Trump’s presidency has been little short of a disaster, but I think the fallout from a recommendation for impeachment and/or criminal charges against him could really be disastrous for the country.

Better yet, just stop the escalator when he was halfway down. He could have been stuck there for days.
I have enough faith in Mueller that if he is able to complete his investigation to the extent he feels is necessary and finds no wrongdoing on his part, then I will accept his findings. Of course these are not the findings I expect and I hope he has the courage to indict him prior to impeachment/conviction.

No. I just think there’s a lot of people that think that anything else is inconcievable.

I think some, or hope, some would. I wouldn’t consider a half dozen replies to be totally indicative of the sentiments of this board however, which we all know skews left. BTW, my reading of general sentiment comes from some democrat politicians, celebrities, and other sources than just this board. But that’s what I’m asking for, opinions from this board, so I don’t just make assumptions.

“Everyone” was figuratively. I don’t mean literally every single person, just many people on the left. Many news outlets, if they have a comment section, as soon as a negative story is run you get as many “It’s Mueller Time!” type comments as “MAGA Trump 2020!” on the rare one favoring Trump.

The investigation has resulted in a large number of indictments (and a few convictions) for crimes against the US. Trump has tried, via public statements and firings, to scuttle the investigation. Whether or not that ultimately rises to “obstruction of justice” in the legal sense, or whether or not additional information about Trump comes out, the damage is already done. He’s tried to kill an investigation that aims to protect the US, therefore his loyalty is in question.

It is the obligation of a boss to supervise his employees. If he fails to do so, he should suffer serious consequences.

My worst nightmare is that Mueller is in on the scam. If he declares Trump pure as the driven snow there will be no recourse. I feel like I am seeing Trump for exactly what he is and his supporters for exactly who they are. An “all clear” decision from Mueller would be a stake through the heart of the American ideal.

Trump is a bad president and a bad human being.
If Mueller takes him out he deserves a place on Mount Rushmore. IMHO.

I’ve posted on the boards multiple times I’ll accept Mueller’s findings. I’ll be gobsmacked if it isn’t guilt but I would accept it. However, not limited to consipiracy. For example, Mueller finds that Trump Inc has laundered billions of dollars illegally for the Russians doesn’t mean he gets a free pass either. Nor if a Republican majority congress votes party line to acquit after Mueller presents findings.

All that said, I’ve posted before if Mueller finds “there is no there there” I will accept it.

No, because what has been leaked already shows at least something on Trump. If he suddenly changes his tune, that would make me suspect he’s been paid off or something.

Hopefully I can say that without that being twisted into “liberals won’t accept the Mueller probe unless it finds something on Trump.” I would have, but that time has passed.

I’m pretty much with you. Trump has stepped over the line far too many times.

I VERY much doubt Mueller could be paid off. I could see him thinking that it may just be too hard to indict a sitting president, and give all his info to the States. Not sure what happens then. He is currently being sued by DC and Maryland for violating the emoluments clause. Why a lawsuit instead of a criminal proceeding is not clear to me.

It could be a reluctance to set a precedent, or to have the case tangled up in court on that basis and possibly thrown out. Do please note that Kavanaugh is on record as saying a President can’t be indicted, no matter all his work with Starr on Bill Clinton, so there’s some desperation to get him confirmed.

There is no criminal emoluments statute, for one. That makes a criminal proceeding a bit tougher.

Probably not. But then again I never quite accepted Starr results.

As a adult citizen who still has some respect for our (USA) legal system, I would like to think that I would except such a result.

I actually think that impeaching (and convicting/removing) Mr Trump would be more disastrous for a “liberal agenda” than letting him bumble his way through a single term. Mr Pence, being “clean” would continue to move forward with dismantling the last 60 years or so without the onus of the alleged criminal activities, which seems likely if he becomes President. I wonder how many, if any, folks “on the left” have thought about this.

Ok, thanks. I suppose it could be grounds for impeachment (as near anything can).

Speaking as a liberal, which based on my readings of this board lately makes me an authoritative speaker for The Left and all members thereof, if the Mueller Probe is allowed to conclude without apparent interference and end with the conclusion that it did not find sufficient evidence to bring an airtight case against Trump, I will grudgingly accept that the Mueller probe was unable to find sufficient evidence to bring an airtight case against Trump.

Which will lead me to the following conclusions:

  1. Trump shouldn’t be legally held accountable for cases that aren’t brought against him. If Mueller declines to drop the hammer, so be it.

  2. I still think he’s quite clearly a crook. Mueller declining to prosecute him would indicate he’s a much better crook than I think he is, to be able to cover his tracks well enough to dissuade prosecution. But that’s more likely than the idea that he’s an innocent angel, so I’ll have to accept his superior criminality.

  3. I still think that he should have been impeached months ago.
    Hopefully this is what the OP wanted to hear. I suspect it’s pretty close - a member of/authoritative speaker for The Left saying that nothing Mueller could say would convince him that Trump is an angel.

I certainly have thought of this and know others on this board and IRL have too.

I think the problem of not getting rid of Trump is a greater one because of the precedent it sets. I.E. it’s fine to elect a stupid, racist, criminal to the Oval Office.

I would accept it, in no small part because it is what I anticipate will happen anyway. I believe there is a truth, and I believe Mueller has no interest in finding and supporting one against Trump. He will, and has, make a show of getting little fish, but Trump will come out astonishingly clean in spite of the filthy pigs he’s surrounded himself with. I expect Mueller will always be just this close to getting charges on Trump, but will not quite reach that point before the end of Trump’s presidency.

But as far as I’m concerned, it doesn’t really matter anyway.

One could argue that the midterm election 2 years into the President’s term is one of the checks on the President’s power. If so, the precedent is set only if Republicans maintain a majority in both houses. (Which is not impossible - we have almost 100 days to go before the election.)

I think I’d still have…questions. It would be hard for me to swallow at this stage, to be honest. I’m not a member of the left, however, so can’t speak for them, but there is so much smoke that it would be hard to believe that there is no fire (well, obviously there is, just not catching Trump at this point…I think it would be beyond belief if no one get sent down the river).

Like a lot of people, I believe a “clean bill of health” from Mueller would simply be a way of stating that there is insufficient evidence of a crime to proceed any further. This happens all the time with prosecutors and investigators. I’ll consider what he says and then may or may not believe that he’s correct in his conclusions. I don’t have the authority to do anything more than shrug my shoulders.