Mueller Investigation pt 6

[Bob001]

I think the Mueller Report settled it first.

Chris B.

What the Mueller report settled is that Mueller felt he couldn't indict a sitting President. Plenty of other questions remain.

Good news, America. Russia helped install your president. But although he owes his job in large part to that help, the president did not conspire or collude with his helpers. He was the beneficiary of a foreign intelligence operation, but not an active participant in that operation. He received the stolen goods, but he did not conspire with the thieves in advance.
....
The question unanswered by the attorney general’s summary of Special Counsel Robert Mueller’s report is: Why? Russian President Vladimir Putin took an extreme risk by interfering in the 2016 election as he did. Had Hillary Clinton won the presidency—the most likely outcome—Russia would have been exposed to fierce retaliation by a powerful adversary. The prize of a Trump presidency must have glittered alluringly, indeed, to Putin and his associates. Why?

https://www.theatlantic.com/ideas/a...rt-leaves-one-key-question-unanswered/585625/

 

[Aber]

But although he owes his job in large part to that help, the president did not conspire or collude with his helpers. He was the beneficiary of a foreign intelligence operation, but not an active participant in that operation. He received the stolen goods, but he did not conspire with the thieves in advance.

Ah, the

I was present, but don't think I was involved

defence.

 

[Horatius]

Trump hates the idea of anyone keeping a written record of what he says & does, because he knows written records can not only come back and bite you in the arse, they are also very difficult to refute.

Let us hearken back to an earlier, more innocent time, when Trump was noted for tearing up documents once he was done with them. Probably illegally.

 

[Checkmite]

I think the Mueller Report settled it first.

Chris B.

The best part was when AG Barr told the public that the report cleared Trump of obstruction and Mueller wrote him a letter saying "LOL no did you even read it?".

 

[Fast Eddie B]

The best part was when AG Barr told the public that the report cleared Trump of obstruction...

I’m about halfway through Part 2 of the report, and I can’t see how any fair minded reader could come away with Barr’s conclusion.

For each investigated example of obstruction, Mueller lays out by way of “Analysis”...

a) The purported “Obstructive act”,

b) The “Nexus to an official proceeding”, and,

c) Intent

Though not all are the proverbial slam-dunk, a case is laid out for each element of each instance. Well worth a read for those who haven’t yet found the time.

 

[smartcooky]

I think the Right is seriously underestimating how clever Nadler is being here. He know that if he shoots off to court immediately to try to force the White House, and the Executive branch to comply, he could well be rebuffed, so what he is doing is carefully laying the groundwork, with requests for people to testify, with requests for the unredacted report, with requests for documents. Then, he is following those up with deadlines, and when they pass, with subpoenas. He is giving the executive branch every chance to show how intransigent they are being.

When he finally gets to court, he will be able to show the judge(s) that he has done everything he can, that he has given the White House, the DoJ and POTUS every opportunity to cooperate. The judge(s) will not have anything to fault in the actions that Nadler and his committee have taken

 

[Fast Eddie B]

As an example, here’s the one I’m up to...

 

[ChrisBFRPKY]

What the Mueller report settled is that Mueller felt he couldn't indict a sitting President. Plenty of other questions remain.


https://www.theatlantic.com/ideas/a...rt-leaves-one-key-question-unanswered/585625/

And yet there were no crimes to indict. So that point is moot.


You left out this part of your quoted article:

"Mueller hasn’t provided answers, so much as he has posed a question: Are Americans comfortable with this president in the White House, now that they know he broke no prosecutable criminal statutes on his way into high office?"


Chris B.

 

[Skeptic Ginger]

And yet there were no crimes to indict. So that point is moot.


You left out this part of your quoted article:

"Mueller hasn’t provided answers, so much as he has posed a question: Are Americans comfortable with this president in the White House, now that they know he broke no prosecutable criminal statutes on his way into high office?"


Chris B.

There it is again, that Men in Black memory wipe.

 

[ChrisBFRPKY]

I’m about halfway through Part 2 of the report, and I can’t see how any fair minded reader could come away with Barr’s conclusion.

For each investigated example of obstruction, Mueller lays out by way of “Analysis”...

a) The purported “Obstructive act”,

b) The “Nexus to an official proceeding”, and,

c) Intent

Though not all are the proverbial slam-dunk, a case is laid out for each element of each instance. Well worth a read for those who haven’t yet found the time.

And next to each case for obstruction laid out you'll read the word "if"........
"0" + "0" still equals "0". Obama may be guilty of conspiracy "if" he instructed the FBI to work with Russian operatives to obtain information on Trump and use that information for FISA warrants or political spying.

Chris B.

 

[The Great Zaganza]

And next to each case for obstruction laid out you'll read the word "if"........
"0" + "0" still equals "0". Obama may be guilty of conspiracy "if" he instructed the FBI to work with Russian operatives to obtain information on Trump and use that information for FISA warrants or political spying.

Chris B.

Both incorrect and beside point.

You obviously haven't read the Mueller report, or anything but massively partisan reporting on it.

There is no way to read the report and not conclude that Trump has violated the laws.

And Mueller didn't write it that way by accident.

 

[Aridas]

There it is again, that Men in Black memory wipe.

Also, the part where that article was based on Barr's summary, not the Mueller Report. The first part of what he said sure looks like it's quite wrong, when the actual Mueller Report is what's in question, rather than Barr's whitewash attempt.

 

[Checkmite]

And next to each case for obstruction laid out you'll read the word "if"........

No, actually. The word "if" appears at the beginning of each explanation of qualifying criteria.

The actual case that each claimed instance of obstruction affirmatively meets the criteria, comes after that explanation.

 

[smartcooky]

No, actually. The word "if" appears at the beginning of each explanation of qualifying criteria.

The actual case that each claimed instance of obstruction affirmatively meets the criteria, comes after that explanation.

THIS. "If" is the question, setting up the premise. Its not the conclusion.

e.g.

"If Fred gained access to the victim's house without permission from the owner, then he will be charged with breaking and entering"

ChrisBFRPKY clearly has not read the Mueller Report at all, just partisan right-wing echo-chamber interpretations of it.

If you actually read it for your self, it is impossible not to come to the conclusion that Trump has committed crimes that would have had anyone else indicted and charged.

 

[phiwum]

And yet there were no crimes to indict. So that point is moot.


You left out this part of your quoted article:

"Mueller hasn’t provided answers, so much as he has posed a question: Are Americans comfortable with this president in the White House, now that they know he broke no prosecutable criminal statutes on his way into high office?"


Chris B.

The obstruction issues are not about his way into high office. We all know that Mueller concluded that conspiracy during the campaign wasn't prosecutable. I can't speak for others, but I'm perfectly willing to defer to Mueller on that issue.

The Trump Tower meeting sure smells like a willingness to conspire, of course.

 

[The Great Zaganza]

The obstruction issues are not about his way into high office. We all know that Mueller concluded that conspiracy during the campaign wasn't prosecutable. I can't speak for others, but I'm perfectly willing to defer to Mueller on that issue.

The Trump Tower meeting sure smells like a willingness to conspire, of course.

Mueller concluded that Trump himself wasn't prosecutable.
But he also made clear that there are still ways to further investigate, should another prosecutor wish to do so - starting with questioning Don Jr.

 

[Upchurch]

Mueller concluded that Trump himself wasn't prosecutable.
But he also made clear that there are still ways to further investigate, should another prosecutor wish to do so - starting with questioning Don Jr.

More specifically along those lines, there are the national security issues to sort out.

 

[Fast Eddie B]

Mueller concluded that Trump himself wasn't prosecutable.

True, but due to DOJ guidelines, not necessarily lack of evidence.

The evidence for each alleged obstruction incident is laid out, together with possible defenses to the charge. And some of the incidents seem weak in one or all of the 3 elements: Obstructive act, Nexus to an official proceeding, and Intent. The “Principle of Charity” was clearly at work, as a prosecutor must anticipate legitimate defenses to charges brought.

But all that aside, actually reading through all the obstruction incidents paints a damning picture of the president, one willing to lie and threaten and fabricate accounts, with the pretty clear intent of protecting himself. NOT the rule of law, the people of the U.S. or any higher ideal.

 

[The Great Zaganza]

True, but due to DOJ guidelines, not necessarily lack of evidence.

The evidence for each alleged obstruction incident is laid out, together with possible defenses to the charge. And some of the incidents seem weak in one or all of the 3 elements: Obstructive act, Nexus to an official proceeding, and Intent. The “Principle of Charity” was clearly at work, as a prosecutor must anticipate legitimate defenses to charges brought.

But all that aside, actually reading through all the obstruction incidents paints a damning picture of the president, one willing to lie and threaten and fabricate accounts, with the pretty clear intent of protecting himself. NOT the rule of law, the people of the U.S. or any higher ideal.

I was talking about the Collusion part.

The Obstruction part shows ten cases which, each on their own, are perfectly prosecutable as they stand the moment Trump leaves the office or the DOJ guideline is revoked.

 

[The Great Zaganza]

More specifically along those lines, there are the national security issues to sort out.

Looks like Mueller didn't bother with that, but handed it off to others in the FBI.