Tiger Board Logo

Donor's Den General Leaderboards TNET coins™ POTD Hall of Fame Map FAQ
GIVE AN AWARD
Use your TNET coins™ to grant this post a special award!

W
50
Big Brain
90
Love it!
100
Cheers
100
Helpful
100
Made Me Smile
100
Great Idea!
150
Mind Blown
150
Caring
200
Flammable
200
Hear ye, hear ye
200
Bravo
250
Nom Nom Nom
250
Take My Coins
500
Ooo, Shiny!
700
Treasured Post!
1000

YOUR BALANCE
Mueller report proves Trump obstructed justice
storage This topic has been archived - replies are not allowed.
Archives - General Boards Archive
add New Topic
Replies: 32
| visibility 1

Mueller report proves Trump obstructed justice


Apr 18, 2019, 8:55 PM

https://slate.com/news-and-politics/2019/04/mueller-report-proves-trump-obstructed-justice.html


badge-donor-05yr.jpg flag link military_tech thumb_downthumb_up


c/p


Apr 18, 2019, 9:00 PM

Special counsel Robert Mueller found ample evidence to convict President Donald Trump of obstruction of justice. His investigation uncovered multiple attempts by the president to hamper his investigation into potential misconduct by Trump and his associates. This evidence is incredibly damning and would seem to clearly meet the requirements for an obstruction charge. As he wrote in his report, Mueller only declined to indict the president because the Office of Legal Counsel, which provides legal advice to the executive branch, claimed that he could not. Instead, Mueller made the case for obstruction in his meticulous report, providing a road map to Congress, which he expects to consider impeachment proceedings. There appears to be more than enough proof of criminality for the House of Representatives to draw up articles of impeachment.

All of this is obvious from the first few pages of Volume II of Mueller’s report, which details his obstruction investigation. All of it must have been obvious to Attorney General William Barr when he attempted to cover up the report’s actual findings in his four-page summary released in March and in his Thursday press conference. All of it should be obvious to a majority of the House of Representatives once they read the report. There is no reason for the House to take impeachment off the table. Mueller’s report is as bad as the president and his allies feared.

The federal crime of obstruction has three elements: an obstructive act, some kind of nexus between the obstructive act and an official proceeding, and corrupt intent. The “official proceeding” does not have to exist yet—it can be “pending or contemplated”—and the “nexus” need only be “a relationship in time, causation, or logic.” Mueller’s report runs through various actions by the president that arguably meet this definition, and it analyzes each one in light of the elements of obstruction. He concluded that five acts supported a reasonable inference of obstruction of justice. Those acts:

• National security adviser Michael Flynn lied to FBI agents, as well as administration officials, about his contact with Russian Ambassador Sergey Kislyak. After Acting Attorney General Sally Yates notified the White House that Flynn may have lied, the president did not fire Flynn, but seemed angry at him, saying “not again, this guy, this stuff.” The next day, Trump had a one-on-one dinner with then–FBI Director James Comey and told him, “I need loyalty, I expect loyalty.” On Feb. 13, then–chief of staff Reince Priebus asked Flynn to resign, and Trump told him, “We’ll take care of you.” A day later, Trump cleared the room to have a private conversation with Comey, telling him, “I hope you can see your way clear to letting this go, to letting Flynn go.” The president’s efforts to shield Flynn from an FBI investigation by pressuring Comey could, Mueller concluded, meet the elements of obstruction. (Trump later denied that he cleared the room, “a denial that would have been unnecessary” if he thought his demand was appropriate—another indication of corrupt intent.)

• On June 17, 2017, after learning that Mueller was investigating him for obstruction, Trump asked then–White House counsel Don McGahn to fire Mueller. (He had previously asked McGahn to contemplate ways of “knocking out Mueller.”) “You gotta do this,” Trump said, but McGahn refused. Trump called him back and pressed further, telling him, “Mueller has to go.” Again, McGahn declined to interfere with Mueller’s investigation.

• On June 19, two days after asking McGahn to fire Mueller, Trump asked his former campaign manager Corey Lewandowski to deliver a message to then–Attorney General Jeff Sessions, who had recused himself from the Russia investigation. Trump’s message demanded that Sessions unrecuse himself and then limit the special counsel’s investigation, only permitting him to investigate future election interference, not the 2016 race, because Trump was “being treated very unfairly.” (On several other occasions, Trump personally demanded that Sessions unrecuse himself, and the Justice Department investigate Hillary Clinton instead of his campaign.) Lewandowski did not deliver the message, so the president followed up on his request. The message was never delivered. In July, Trump asked Priebus to fire Sessions, which, after consultation with McGahn, Priebus did not do.

• Trump repeatedly directed McGahn to lie by denying that Trump asked him to fire Mueller. He condemned McGahn for telling the truth to special counsel investigators. Acting on orders from Trump, White House staff secretary Rob Porter told McGahn to write a statement claiming that he had never been told to fire the special counsel—or else McGahn would be fired himself. McGahn refused.

• After Flynn began cooperating with the special counsel, Trump’s personal attorney left Flynn’s lawyer a voicemail that said the following (edited lightly for clarity):

I understand your situation, but let me see if I can’t state it in starker terms. It wouldn’t surprise me if you’ve gone on to make a deal with the government. If there’s information that implicates the president, then we’ve got a national security issue, so, you know, we need some kind of heads-up. Um, just for the sake of protecting all our interests if we can. Remember what we’ve always said about the president and his feelings toward Flynn, and that still remains.

Flynn’s attorney refused to share information about his client’s legal strategy. The president’s personal counsel said he took this refusal as a sign of Flynn’s hostility toward Trump and planned to tell the president as much.

• Mueller also cited Trump’s defense of former campaign chairman Paul Manafort as well as his former attorney Michael Cohen. Trump publicly floated pardons for both men after they were indicted. He also passed private messages of support to Cohen, telling him to “hang in there” and “stay strong.” Once Cohen began cooperating with prosecutors, however, Trump dismissed him as a “rat” and a “weak person.” Trump gave inconsistent answers about his knowledge of Cohen’s efforts to build a Trump property in Moscow. Finally, the report includes a lengthy segment that appears to be about Trump’s aid to Roger Stone—who was also indicted—though it is redacted.

Each of these incidents, Mueller concluded, supported the “inference” of obstruction. They arguably met all three elements of the crime: Trump committed obstructive acts to thwart or impede a current or pending investigation with corrupt intent. Mueller seems to have a slam-dunk case for an obstruction indictment. Why, then, did he not pull the trigger? It’s evident that he wanted to. But he wrote that he felt constrained because the Office of Legal Counsel has asserted that a sitting president may not be prosecuted. So he did not declare outright that Trump committed obstruction—but closed the report with a strong implication to that effect:

Because we determined not to make a traditional prosecutorial judgment, we did not draw ultimate conclusions about the President’s conduct. The evidence we obtained about the President’s actions and intent presents difficult issues that would need to be resolved if we were making a traditional prosecutorial judgment. At the same time, if we had confidence after a thorough investigation of the facts that the President clearly did not commit obstruction of justice, we would so state. Based on the facts and the applicable legal standards, we are unable to reach that judgment. Accordingly while this report does not conclude that the president committed a crime, it also does not exonerate him.

Mueller also noted:

The conclusion that Congress may apply the obstruction laws to the President’s corrupt exercise of the powers of office accords with our constitutional system of checks and balances and the principle that no person is above the law.

This sentence is, put simply, an impeachment referral to Congress. If Congress ignores it, it will have failed the special counsel and the American people. Mueller’s report is overflowing with proof of Trump’s criminality, including new information that confirms Trump’s efforts to hobble the investigation and tamper with witnesses. The president obstructed justice. And thanks to the restraints imposed on Mueller’s power, only Congress has the authority to redress this illegality by removing Trump from office. At this point, anything less than articles of impeachment would be an insufficient response to Mueller’s incriminating report.

badge-donor-05yr.jpg flag link military_tech thumb_downthumb_up


Re: c/p


Apr 20, 2019, 11:06 PM

You're stupid as ph * * k

badge-donor-05yr.jpgmilitary_donation.jpg flag link military_tech thumb_downthumb_up

Re: c/p


Apr 23, 2019, 8:52 PM

No shlt. Stunning.

flag link military_tech thumb_downthumb_up

Re: Mueller report proves Trump obstructed justice


Apr 18, 2019, 9:11 PM

Lies predicated on a fake dossier and a fraud perpetrated on the FISA court. Mueller’s appointment and purpose was baseless because of this. When the next shoe drops and the FISA documents are declassified your political party will be incinerated.

flag link military_tech thumb_downthumb_up

The dossier was real.


Apr 19, 2019, 8:56 AM

It was politically motivated, which the FBI disclosed in notes to the FISC.

https://www.politico.com/story/2018/02/05/fbi-footnote-carter-page-warrant-390795

2024 purple level memberbadge-donor-05yr.jpg flag link military_tech thumb_downthumb_up

Re: The dossier was real.


Apr 19, 2019, 10:36 AM


It was politically motivated, which the FBI disclosed in notes to the FISC.

https://www.politico.com/story/2018/02/05/fbi-footnote-carter-page-warrant-390795





Don't bother some of these guys with facts.

It just confuses them and makes them mad.

badge-donor-05yr.jpg flag link military_tech thumb_downthumb_up


Theres nothing factual about a left leaning media outlet.


Apr 20, 2019, 6:27 PM

-Dr. Nikola Tesla

2005_ncaa_champ.jpg flag link military_tech thumb_downthumb_up

I've been wrong two times, but this isn't one of them.


Re: Theres nothing factual about a left leaning media outlet.


Apr 21, 2019, 10:55 AM

"Everything that I agree with is true; everything that I don't agree with is fake" -Dr. Nikola Tesla

military_donation.jpg flag link military_tech thumb_downthumb_up

Correct is correct. Wrong is wrong.


Apr 21, 2019, 1:00 PM

You seem to have problem with that sort of closeminded-ness, don't you, Liverlips?

-PhD

2005_ncaa_champ.jpg flag link military_tech thumb_downthumb_up

I've been wrong two times, but this isn't one of them.


Re: Mueller report proves Trump obstructed justice


Apr 18, 2019, 9:36 PM

Mueller's appointment was illegal so that "Trump's" all.

badge-donor-05yr.jpgmilitary_donation.jpg flag link military_tech thumb_downthumb_up

Re:Why didn't Mueller's report say so?


Apr 18, 2019, 9:39 PM

He intentionally declared that he didn't find enough evidence to charge Trump with obstruction. Now mind you, he did not say he didn't find enough evidence to convict Trump of collusion but rather backed it down to saying there wasn't even enough to charge him.

How does proving something which a special prosecutor refuses to pursue work, exactly?


Message was edited by: ClemsonTiger1988®


2024 orange level memberbadge-donor-10yr.jpgringofhonor-clemsontiger1988-110.jpg flag link military_tech thumb_downthumb_up

Re:Why didn't Mueller's report say so?


Apr 19, 2019, 5:53 PM

Mueller's intention was never to charge a sitting president. It was to compile the facts and deliver them to Congress.

Alao, as stated in the report and a million times by legal experts on both sides, collusion is not a crime.


As to obstruction, trump clearly obstructed justice as per the report. Have you actually read it?

2024 student level member flag link military_tech thumb_downthumb_up

He could have said there was enough evidence of...


Apr 20, 2019, 12:17 PM

obstruction of justice to charge Trump. So this is perfectly clear, neither you not another knucklehead can spin it let me say it the way Mueller could have and would have said it if he had any one piece of evidence that trump obstructed justice.

'There is enough evidence that Trump obstructed justice to charge him with a crime and prove it in a court of law.' -- Mueller

No, Mueller did not say this because it would be a lie.

Now let me explain what's happening in your mind. Instead of seeing and knowing one incident which proves Trump colluded you're seeing ten which do not prove he colluded when those ten are set apart. Your mind races from one to the other to try and have each on support another. Each piece of 'evidence,' must be considered as if it stands alone. Neither of those incidents proves Trump's underlying motive was to stop justice. That is the challenge when there is no underlying crime. The motive behind each action must be proven to be because the subject intended to 'obstruct justice.'

Here's a piece from Cornell Law

"Someone obstructs justice when that person has a specific intent to obstruct or interfere with a judicial proceeding..."

This from Berkeley Law

"Abstract
Federal obstruction of justice statutes bar anyone from interfering with law enforcement based on a “corrupt” motive. But what about the president of the United States? The president is vested with “executive power,” which includes the power to control federal law enforcement.

A possible view is that the statutes do not apply to the president because if they did they would violate the president’s constitutional power. However, we argue that the obstruction of justice statutes are best interpreted to apply to the president, and that the president obstructs justice when his motive for intervening in an investigation is to further personal or narrowly partisan interests, rather than to advance the public good.

According to this Mueller could have charged Trump or at least gave an honest opinion about whether or not Trump should be charged. He did neither and his inaction was not accidental, a slight or due to error.

Trump wanted to end the investigation because of what it was doing to his administration, his agenda and fulfilling the promises he made to the people who voted for him to be president.

2024 orange level memberbadge-donor-10yr.jpgringofhonor-clemsontiger1988-110.jpg flag link military_tech thumb_downthumb_up

Re:Why didn't Mueller's report say so?


Apr 20, 2019, 11:42 PM [ in reply to Re:Why didn't Mueller's report say so? ]

He intentionally declared that he didn't find enough evidence to charge Trump with obstruction.

He definitely did not say that. He said he was not going to make a determination about Trump's own criminality because a sitting president cannot be indicted.

2024 purple level memberbadge-donor-10yr.jpg flag link military_tech thumb_downthumb_up

Re:Why didn't Mueller's report say so?


Apr 21, 2019, 11:37 PM

That was derilction of duty by Mueller.

badge-donor-05yr.jpgmilitary_donation.jpg flag link military_tech thumb_downthumb_up

Re:Why didn't Mueller's report say so?


Apr 23, 2019, 8:45 PM

I don't think so.

2024 purple level memberbadge-donor-10yr.jpg flag link military_tech thumb_downthumb_up

The lions are out in force tonight***


Apr 18, 2019, 10:09 PM



2024 white level memberbadge-donor-10yr.jpg2005_majors_champ.jpgbadge-ringofhonor-xtiger.jpg flag link military_tech thumb_downthumb_up


Loons***


Apr 18, 2019, 10:20 PM



2024 white level memberbadge-donor-10yr.jpg2005_majors_champ.jpgbadge-ringofhonor-xtiger.jpg flag link military_tech thumb_downthumb_up


I don't think I can handle both.


Apr 19, 2019, 7:39 PM

I might take a break.

2024 orange level memberbadge-donor-10yr.jpgringofhonor-clemsontiger1988-110.jpg flag link military_tech thumb_downthumb_up

Re: Mueller report proves Trump obstructed justice


Apr 18, 2019, 10:50 PM

Trump attempted to obstruct our coup!

:((

flag link military_tech thumb_downthumb_up

It doesn’t prove anything. It only sez he obstructed justice


Apr 19, 2019, 1:46 AM

.

2024 orange level memberbadge-donor-15yr.jpgringofhonor-jospehg.jpg flag link military_tech thumb_downthumb_up


Re: It doesn’t prove anything. It only sez he obstructed justice


Apr 19, 2019, 5:54 PM

It only says he committed a crime. Lock him up boys! We got him.


But seriously, obstruction is a crime. It's what got Nixon.

2024 student level member flag link military_tech thumb_downthumb_up

Re: It doesn’t prove anything. It only sez he obstructed justice


Apr 21, 2019, 11:38 PM

What got Nixon was the cover up.
Trump committed no crime.

badge-donor-05yr.jpgmilitary_donation.jpg flag link military_tech thumb_downthumb_up

Two years full of lies and can't seem to stop.


Apr 19, 2019, 4:01 AM

More lies, lies, lies.

There better be some collusion. I need collusion.

flag link military_tech thumb_downthumb_up

If she's a hollerer, she'll be a screamer.
If she's a screamer, she'll get you arrested.


Re: Two years full of lies and can't seem to stop.


Apr 20, 2019, 11:13 AM

You are too cute

badge-donor-10yr.jpg flag link military_tech thumb_downthumb_up

Re: Two years full of lies and can't seem to stop.


Apr 20, 2019, 11:43 PM [ in reply to Two years full of lies and can't seem to stop. ]

There was collusion. But there was no conspiracy.

2024 purple level memberbadge-donor-10yr.jpg flag link military_tech thumb_downthumb_up

There was no collusion to commit a crime.


Apr 21, 2019, 1:32 PM

The Russian lawyer worked for Fussion GPS. Glen Simpson and the lawyer met the day before she visited Trump tower and had dinner together the day of the visit then they met again the day after. Fusion was the one of the two links between Hillary's campaign and Steele. Barr's and the IG's investigations will confirm what the senate investigation found.

You're a lawyer, you know the only way to determine motive when an obstruction of justice case has no predicate is to get it from the subject. Mueller knew that Trump was innocent back in about Dec of '17 and knew that he had nothing to sell to a judge as an underlying crime. Therefor, he could not have gotten a court order to interrogate Trump. Mueller lied when he reported he could have gotten the testimony. The entire part 2 of the report was a political dream designed by hacks to undermine the POTUS. They earned their pay.

I believe the goal of the special prosecutor was to set up a perjury trap and the dems' goal was to use the investigation to try and take control over congress. Obama's justice department's goal was to exonerate Hillary of the criminal mishandling of classified intelligence information and to see that she was elected.

Sure, it's all speculation based on rumors from the senate hearing and the Soloman/Carter reports right now but the three investigations will show I'm right again. I was right about the collusion with Russia to fix the election just three months after the rumors started swirling and y'all are going to see that I trusted the information from the right people again.

2024 orange level memberbadge-donor-10yr.jpgringofhonor-clemsontiger1988-110.jpg flag link military_tech thumb_downthumb_up

Assuming you're right...


Apr 23, 2019, 8:47 PM

then you'd have to admit that Trump, had he testified, would have fallen into the perjury "trap" within 10 seconds of testifying. Because he wouldn't be able to help himself.

2024 purple level memberbadge-donor-10yr.jpg flag link military_tech thumb_downthumb_up

Re: Mueller report proves Trump obstructed justice


Apr 20, 2019, 11:56 AM

How does a person arrive at the word “proves” after reading an article that is punctuated with the word “inferred” or “inference” 5 or 6 times. Seems like the gap between proof (which, as you know, is not the same thing as evidence) and “inference” is about 50 miles wide.

flag link military_tech thumb_downthumb_up

Mueller didn't reflect on Trump's motive which is the...


Apr 20, 2019, 12:19 PM

critical factor when showing obstruction of justice when there's no underlying crime. Just like the witch hunt this is a political farce. Those morons should be fixing healthcare instead of hunting witches.

2024 orange level memberbadge-donor-10yr.jpgringofhonor-clemsontiger1988-110.jpg flag link military_tech thumb_downthumb_up

Re: Mueller didn't reflect on Trump's motive which is the...


Apr 20, 2019, 12:46 PM

How about the Repubs focus on healthcare? What are they working on?

flag link military_tech thumb_downthumb_up

They are working on their own obstruction


Apr 20, 2019, 9:44 PM

.......to anything proposed by the house.

flag link military_tech thumb_downthumb_up

Replies: 32
| visibility 1
Archives - General Boards Archive
add New Topic