Hundreds of former prosecutors say Trump would've been charged with Obstruction..

[beowulf10]

There is a reason Mueller did not even attempt to subpoena Trump when it came to the Obstruction portion of the investigation.

From page 391 of the Mueller report pdf

What you quoted is from the section entitled "Constitutional Defenses to Applying Obstruction-Of-Justice Statutes to Presidential Conduct" and dealt with possible defenses Trump would have with regard to Obstruction.

Mueller gave the reason why he did not subpoena Trump. You can find his reasoning on page 418 of the DOJ version of the PDF:

Recognizing that the President would not be interviewed voluntarily, we considered whether to issue a subpoena for his testimony. We viewed the written answers to be inadequate. But at that point, our investigation had made significant progress and had produced substantial evidence for our report. We thus weighed the costs of potentially lengthy constitutional litigation, with resulting delay in finishing our investigation, against the anticipated benefits for our investigation and report. As explained in Volume II, Section H.B., we determined that the substantial quantity of information we had obtained from other sources allowed us to draw relevant factual conclusions on intent and credibility, which are often inferred from circumstantial evidence and assessed without direct testimony from the subject of the investigation.

[NYPat]

Its pretty obvious there was obstruction. Trump gave them everything they asked for, never hindered them in any way, and never used executive privilege. It doesn't get any more obstruction than that.

I know right, McGahn and Mueller will say the same to the House in the next couple of weeks..

[ImpressiveGainz]

Tax returns are already a dud, too.

https://forum.bodybuilding.com/showt...hp?t=177122861

Well, surely his hand-picked cabinet member is obstructing justice here by not allowing Congress to get Dlumpfffs tax returns.

Am I doing it right?

[beowulf10]

I guess that's why Mueller himself stated that there was no collusion. But, a guy on the internet didn't get the memo

Mueller stated he could not prove the crime of conspiracy. Collusion is a term which has a broader definition.

[beowulf10]

Once again please read pg 391 of the Mueller Report pdf

You don't know what you're talking about.

That's not Mueller's conclusion. In addition to laying out evidence in support of proving Trump obstructed justice Mueller also outlined possible defenses for Trump as Mueller analyzed whether or not the crime of Obstruction could apply to the President's actions.

And, at the CONCLUSION of the section you quoted, Mueller stated the following:

In sum, contrary to the position taken by the President' s counsel, we concluded that, in light of the Supreme Court precedent governing separation-of-powers issues, we had a valid basis for investigating the conduct at issue in this report. In our view, the application of the obstruction statutes would not impermissibly burden the President's performance of his Article II function to supervise prosecutorial conduct or to remove inferior law-enforcement officers. And the protection of the criminal justice system from corrupt acts by any person-including the President-accords with the fundamental principle of our government that "[n]o [person] in this country is so high that he is above the law." United States v. Lee, I 06 U.S. 196, 220 (1882); see also Clinton v. Jones, 520 U.S. at 697; United States v. Nixon, supra.

You need to read the report, the entire thing.

It's a real pain, but if you take the time to read the report our discussions on here will be more interesting.

[cashinout]

Jim Jones was unfairly criticized too said his cultist. They were the only ones who really knew what he was saying.

Bizarre

you are jim jones you bum

[WrestlingFan123]

Mueller stated he could not prove the crime of conspiracy. Collusion is a term which has a broader definition.

The report literally says

the investigation did not establish that members of the Trump campaign conspired or coordinated with the Russian government in its election interference activities

Now show me in the report where the SCO actually refers to 'collusion', you would know if you actually read it that the report actually addresses that very issue.

[WrestlingFan123]

You don't know what you're talking about.

That's not Mueller's conclusion. In addition to laying out evidence in support of proving Trump obstructed justice Mueller also outlined possible defenses for Trump.

You need to read the report, the entire thing.

The report lays ACTUAL defenses a POTUS has at his/her disposal which would preclude statutes of Obstruction. You need to read the entire report before making more bogus posts which show your lack of depth when it comes to legal matters.

[TLTrooper]

It's astounding how Trump has so mezmorized his little cultist that regardless of who or how many prominent people from all political backgrounds condemn his douchebagness, y'all just laugh and say "hur dur 6 more years" "hur dur only the stooge Trump put in place as AG matters hur dur"

Man y'all are so freaking SAD

You people have come up empty handed EVERY single time and you STILL think something is gonna happen. You have literally zero substance when it comes to what happens to Trump criminally. Dude just save yourself from the embarrassment.

[beowulf10]

The report lays ACTUAL defenses a POTUS has at his/her disposal which would preclude statutes of Obstruction. You need to read the entire report before making more bogus posts which show your lack of depth when it comes to legal matters.

My lack of depth....right.

You haven't even bothered to finish reading the section you're quoting.

That's not Mueller's conclusion. In addition to laying out evidence in support of proving Trump obstructed justice Mueller also outlined possible defenses for Trump as Mueller analyzed whether or not the crime of Obstruction could apply to the President's actions.

At the CONCLUSION of the section you quoted, Mueller stated the following:

In sum, contrary to the position taken by the President' s counsel, we concluded that, in light of the Supreme Court precedent governing separation-of-powers issues, we had a valid basis for investigating the conduct at issue in this report. In our view, the application of the obstruction statutes would not impermissibly burden the President's performance of his Article II function to supervise prosecutorial conduct or to remove inferior law-enforcement officers. And the protection of the criminal justice system from corrupt acts by any person-including the President-accords with the fundamental principle of our government that "[n]o [person] in this country is so high that he is above the law." United States v. Lee, I 06 U.S. 196, 220 (1882); see also Clinton v. Jones, 520 U.S. at 697; United States v. Nixon, supra.

Mueller was laying out an argument, and as part of an argument, he was also analyzing the President's constitutional defenses.

You need to read the report, the entire thing.

It's a real pain, but if you take the time to read the report our discussions on here will be more interesting.

[AriGhold]

Clear as day to anyone who isn’t a blind cuck.

[stevenbaker2055]

OP's failures:
1. Kavanaugh
2. Jussie Smolett
3. Covington kids
4. Russia
5. Trump called white supremacists good people

[fleeceitout]

Lol poor libs.

Must be rough taking non stop L’s all the time & having to resort to these cope threads.



Edit: lol poor little Ari got triggered again. I’d be mad too if I was the size of a teenage girl & lived in my grandmother’s basement.

[WrestlingFan123]

That's not Mueller's conclusion. In addition to laying out evidence in support of proving Trump obstructed justice Mueller also outlined possible defenses for Trump as Mueller analyzed whether or not the crime of Obstruction could apply to the President's actions.

At the CONCLUSION of the section you quoted, Mueller stated the following:



You need to read the report, the entire thing.

It's a real pain, but if you take the time to read the report our discussions on here will be more interesting.

Once again, please actually read the report before just skipping to the end and claiming vindication. Mueller laid out ACTUAL defenses a POTUS has that would preclude statutes of Obstruction. Obviously it was not a conclusion as they did a cost/benefit analysis when it came to subpoenaing Trump for testimony relating to the Obstruction portion of the investigation. The actual conclusion is that Mueller and the SCO in a dereliction of duty, PUNTED on Obstruction, after stating multiple times there was no evidence that the Trump campaign conspired or coordinated with Russian election interference.

[401Delta]

You need to read the report, the entire thing.

It's a real pain, but if you take the time to read the report our discussions on here will be more interesting.

The duly appointed and Senate confirmed Attorney General of the United States has already summarized the Mueller report for us.

AG Barr is known to have a brilliant legal mind, while you...are just some goat fukker on the interwebz...I'll stick with the AG's summary .

[LieutenantGains]

The duly appointed and Senate confirmed Attorney General of the United States has already summarized the Mueller report for us.

AG Barr is known to have a brilliant legal mind, while you...are just some goat fukker on the interwebz...I'll stick with the AG's summary .

So brilliant that he’s about to be held in contempt of Congress in a couple of days. Tick tock.

[Mark1T]

My lack of depth....right.

You haven't even bothered to finish reading the section you're quoting.

That's not Mueller's conclusion. In addition to laying out evidence in support of proving Trump obstructed justice Mueller also outlined possible defenses for Trump as Mueller analyzed whether or not the crime of Obstruction could apply to the President's actions.

At the CONCLUSION of the section you quoted, Mueller stated the following:

Mueller was laying out an argument, and as part of an argument, he was also analyzing the President's constitutional defenses.

You need to read the report, the entire thing.

It's a real pain, but if you take the time to read the report our discussions on here will be more interesting.

Maybe you and NYPat should tour the MSM with Adam Schiff and tell the United States that you all three have evidence of collusion with Russia, but all of you have decided to keep that evidence under lock and key until the right time. This is concurrently with the majority of democrats who have accepted that there was no collusion as Mueller has stated and that is why the dems changed to obstruction.

[Mark1T]

So brilliant that he’s about to be held in contempt of Congress in a couple of days. Tick tock.

It's obvious Barr isn't afraid of Nadler. Contempt? 'So what,' says the AG.

[WrestlingFan123]

So brilliant that he’s about to be held in contempt of Congress in a couple of days. Tick tock.

You think more GOP members of Congress vote for contempt than Democrats voted for Holder's criminal contempt (17)?

Can we get an over/under?

[NYPat]

Tax returns are already a dud, too.

https://forum.bodybuilding.com/showt...hp?t=177122861

Strong thread you got there.

Trump "shall furnish" his tax returns. You know, because it's the law.

Committee Access law of 1924.

[stanlarpinger]

What about the tens of thousands of former federal prosecutors who didn't sign it?

[NYPat]

OP's failures:
1. Kavanaugh
2. Jussie Smolett
3. Covington kids
4. Russia
5. Trump called white supremacists good people

Red.

I did protest rapey Brett because he was a nerd who relied on attempted rape to get laid. But then again, there were a lot of 70's and 80's movies that promoted that kind of stuff so teenage Brett gets a pass.

[SPP1]

It's probably already been said but, I've also known hundreds of people who've had jobs they weren't qualified for. America, what a country! (insert Yakov Smirnoff pic).

[Stizzel]

I know right, McGahn and Mueller will say the same to the House in the next couple of weeks..

We'll see. Mueller might contradict his own report

[Cleveland33]

so then the House will be filing the articles of impeachment then?

wish they'd hurry up

[Trapstar4.4]

contrary to what the man tells you, it's clear that the president is above the law

[401Delta]

Strong thread you got there.

Trump "shall furnish" his tax returns. You know, because it's the law.

Committee Access law of 1924.

Can you not read, LOL? That law requires a "legitimate legislative purpose", which the Treasury Secretary has already determined that the House Ways and Means Committee doesn't have.

Further, Trump is protected by law against unlawful disclosure (IRC Section 6103). Stay mad, Patricia .

[Cleveland33]

contrary to what the man tells you, it's clear that the president is above the law

sounds like it was done by design

[beowulf10]

The report literally says the investigation did not establish that members of the Trump campaign conspired or coordinated with the Russian government in its election interference activities

For Mueller to have proven the crime of conspiracy it would have required proving beyond a reasonable doubt that the Trump campaign and the Russian government had a before the fact agreement on hacking the DNC servers or placing the pro-Trump ads.

There really are very few people in the media or who were suspicious of Trump who ever suggested Trump or his campaign had a before the fact agreement on hacking the DNC servers.

With respect to the definition of coordination Mueller's team kept the term very strict/tight. Mueller's team defined coordination as: "We understood coordination to require an agreement- tacit or express- between the Trump Campaign and the Russian government on election interference. That requires more than the two parties taking actions that were informed by or responsive to the other's actions or interests."

Now show me in the report where the SCO actually refers to 'collusion', you would know if you actually read it that the report actually addresses that very issue.

There is a wide range of "bad" activities which aren't necessarily illegal or do not full under the term coordination as defined by Mueller which we might still describe as collusion, and which we might still consider "bad".

A good example is Trump publicly asking Russia to find Clinton's missing e-mails, and then Russia later trying to hack computers associated with Clinton.

That's the sort of collusion which does not satisfy the elements of a criminal conspiracy nor does it rise to the level of the tight definition Mueller outlined for coordination.

There are also a wide range of activities which indicate conspiracy, but do not prove conspiracy. One example is Manafort sharing with a Russian agent polling data and discussing key battleground states, states which the Internet Research Agency later targeted.

[401Delta]

I did protest rapey Brett because he was a nerd who relied on attempted rape to get laid.

Do you see why the forum thinks you're so dumb now?