Mueller Delivers Report on Russia Investigation to Attorney General

[Spurs Homer]

I didn’t ask you what they would do. I said Mueller stayed in his report congress can criminalize his actions regarding obstruction and witness tampering


Mueller spoon fed congress a prosecution report wrapped in a fucking pkg with a bow on it

congress will impeach

in time

mueller didnt even reveal the “ money trail”


yet

[hater]

Wait... Ppl here still think Trump will get impeached in the next 16 months before the election???? :lmao holy fuck these Neanderthals never learn:lol

If so Trump is a lock for reelection

[LkrFan]

1119331293467152384

If she leads the charge in impeachment of David Dennison, she'll get my vote in 2020 for sure. :tu

[djohn2oo8]

1118914899562958849

[TSA]

Wait... Ppl here still think Trump will get impeached in the next 16 months before the election???? :lmao holy fuck these Neanderthals never learn:lol

If so Trump is a lock for reelection

It’s beyond delusional at this point. Entertaining to watch though :lol

[djohn2oo8]

1118926528212033536

[TSA]

1118926528212033536

Congress won’t do shit, they aren’t that stupid.

[djohn2oo8]

Congress won’t do shit, they aren’t that stupid.
I didn’t ask you what they would do. I stated Mueller said they can. :)

[in2deep]

Trump can sit on Pelosis face. Doesn't mean he will :lol

[djohn2oo8]

Trump can sit on Pelosis face.
This is the the kind of thing Trumpers think up? Lol

[in2deep]

This is the the kind of thing Trumpers think up? Lol

Not a Trumper. Trumps is one of the biggest pieces of shit to be elected.

But that doesn't mean he collude. Mueller has acknowledged there was no evidence of collusion or obstruction d provided no evidence for the Russian government tilted our election.

[Spurs Homer]

Still need Mueller to testify - he did a great job - but -

he also has to explain why;

1) you have the biggest liar on the planet as a subject of your investigation - who would be a 100% sure thing that he will perjure himself under oath - and you DO NOT SUBPOENA? WTF?
(if he says that pushing for a grand jury subpoena would have seemed "political" -then I would say ...NOT pushing for this IS FUCKING POLITICAL anyway - so that won't fly)

2) WHY? (not force him anyway to testify?)

3) Did Barr - in ANY WAY - cause you to end your investigation prematurely?

4) Where is the "follow the money" evidence? Is EVERYTHING branched out ?

[TSA]

I didn’t ask you what they would do. I stated Mueller said they can. :)

You also stated Mueller would put Trump, Don Jr, Ivanka, and Kushner in prison. You then stated you would bet $2000 on that being correct. You’re a broke bitch welcher, nothing you state means shit anymore. You’re a nobody now, and nothing but someone to laugh at.

[TSA]

Still need Mueller to testify - he did a great job - but -

he also has to explain why;

1) you have the biggest liar on the planet as a subject of your investigation - who would be a 100% sure thing that he will perjure himself under oath - and you DO NOT SUBPOENA? WTF?
(if he says that pushing for a grand jury subpoena would have seemed "political" -then I would say ...NOT pushing for this IS FUCKING POLITICAL anyway - so that won't fly)

2) WHY? (not force him anyway to testify?)

3) Did Barr - in ANY WAY - cause you to end your investigation prematurely?

4) Where is the "follow the money" evidence? Is EVERYTHING branched out ?

Mueller did do a great job shitting all over your conspiracy theory.

1. "The investigation did not establish that members of the Trump Campaign conspired or coordinated with the Russian government in its election interference activities."

2. "The investigation examined whether [contacts between Russia and Trump figures] involved or resulted in coordination or a conspiracy with the Trump Campaign and Russia, including with respect to Russia providing assistance to the Campaign in exchange for any sort of favorable treatment in the future. Based on the available information, the investigation did not establish such coordination."

3. "The investigation did not establish that [Carter] Page coordinated with the Russian government in its efforts to interfere with the 2016 election."

4. "The Office did not identify evidence in those [contacts between Russians and people around Trump after the GOP convention] of coordination between the Campaign and the Russian government."

5. "The Office did not identify evidence of a connection between Manafort's sharing polling data and Russia's interference in the election ... [and] the investigation did not establish that Manafort otherwise coordinated with the Russian government on its election-interference efforts."

6. "The investigation did not establish that these [contacts between Russians and people around Trump during the transition] reflected or constituted coordination between the Trump Campaign and Russia in its election interference activities."

7. "The investigation did not identify evidence that any U.S. persons conspired or coordinated with the [Russian disinformation campaign]."

[djohn2oo8]

You also stated Mueller would put Trump, Don Jr, Ivanka, and Kushner in prison. You then stated you would bet $2000 on that being correct. You’re a broke bitch welcher, nothing you state means shit anymore. You’re a nobody now, and nothing but someone to laugh at.
I also know Mueller felt there was evidence to prosecute certain individuals and referred those cases to the US attorneys. Lots of it redacted regarding Wikileaks :)

[djohn2oo8]

Again. No one exonerated. That’s gotta sting.

[djohn2oo8]

Impeachment referral. Yup that one gotta hurt too.

[Spurs Homer]

Not a Trumper. Trumps is one of the biggest pieces of shit to be elected.

But that doesn't mean he collude. Mueller has acknowledged there was no evidence of collusion or obstruction d provided no evidence for the Russian government tilted our election.

This is blatantly inaccurate

please stop.

He found PLENTY of collusion - and PLENTY of it is outlined in the report and it is consistent to all the things Adam Schiff has already laid out in several interviews. All of the collusion was right in front of your eyes - and there is plenty of it.

Mueller states that - although there was a shit ton of evidence - he didn't acquire every single element of it to win a case on conspiracy - (and here again - DID BARR - stop him or impede the investigation in any way? - we don't know)

So Russia wanted to help and did and BENEFITED from this collusion- before and since the election.
Trump team accepted help, wanted help, and BENEFITED from this collusion.

That is all in the Mueller report - and there is another shit ton that was redacted - most redactions were of the collusion/conspiracy/counter-intelligence.

[TSA]

Holy shit, Rosenstein used the Steele dossier in his scope memo for Mueller. :lol

https://www.scribd.com/document/406725805/Mueller-Report

Page 11

:corn:

[djohn2oo8]

1118909536302190592

Dayum. Not just impeachment

[TSA]

I also know Mueller felt there was evidence to prosecute certain individuals and referred those cases to the US attorneys. Lots of it redacted regarding Wikileaks :)

None of those referrals were for Trump, Don Jr, Ivanka, or Kushner.

Just admit you’re a broke bitch welcher.

[djohn2oo8]

1118912636886896640

[djohn2oo8]

None of those referrals were for Trump, Don Jr, Ivanka, or Kushner.

Just admit you’re a broke bitch welcher.
You read what was blacked out? So you don’t know then :lol

[TSA]

This is blatantly inaccurate

please stop.

He found PLENTY of collusion - and PLENTY of it is outlined in the report and it is consistent to all the things Adam Schiff has already laid out in several interviews. All of the collusion was right in front of your eyes - and there is plenty of it.

Mueller states that - although there was a shit ton of evidence - he didn't acquire every single element of it to win a case on conspiracy - (and here again - DID BARR - stop him or impede the investigation in any way? - we don't know)

So Russia wanted to help and did and BENEFITED from this collusion- before and since the election.
Trump team accepted help, wanted help, and BENEFITED from this collusion.

That is all in the Mueller report - and there is another shit ton that was redacted - most redactions were of the collusion/conspiracy/counter-intelligence.

1. "The investigation did not establish that members of the Trump Campaign conspired or coordinated with the Russian government in its election interference activities."

2. "The investigation examined whether [contacts between Russia and Trump figures] involved or resulted in coordination or a conspiracy with the Trump Campaign and Russia, including with respect to Russia providing assistance to the Campaign in exchange for any sort of favorable treatment in the future. Based on the available information, the investigation did not establish such coordination."

3. "The investigation did not establish that [Carter] Page coordinated with the Russian government in its efforts to interfere with the 2016 election."

4. "The Office did not identify evidence in those [contacts between Russians and people around Trump after the GOP convention] of coordination between the Campaign and the Russian government."

5. "The Office did not identify evidence of a connection between Manafort's sharing polling data and Russia's interference in the election ... [and] the investigation did not establish that Manafort otherwise coordinated with the Russian government on its election-interference efforts."

6. "The investigation did not establish that these [contacts between Russians and people around Trump during the transition] reflected or constituted coordination between the Trump Campaign and Russia in its election interference activities."

7. "The investigation did not identify evidence that any U.S. persons conspired or coordinated with the [Russian disinformation campaign]."

[Reck]

No one in Congress is going to do shit. Mueller was their one shot to take out Trump and he didn’t.

Again talking for congress and what they will do or won't do.

Why do you do this? Psychotic behavior.

[Spurs Homer]

1118909536302190592

Dayum. Not just impeachment

It is right there in the report - BIG AS SHIT -

THAT

the investigation was done NOW so as to take advantage of fresh evidence, fresh memories, fresh testimony -in order to gather all the evidence -

which - although the criminal in chief cannot be indicted now -

the entire evidence can be used in impeachment -

or

after trump leaves office.

Trump is fucked.

There is an indictment waiting for this piece of shit on January 21,2021.

[TSA]

You read what was blacked out? So you don’t know then :lol


There’s no way to spin your huge L, trying to do so is just embarrassing.

Just admit you’re a broke bitch welcher.

[Reck]

NEW YORK (Reuters) - The number of Americans who approve of President Donald Trump dropped by 3 percentage points to the lowest level of the year following the release of a special counsel report detailing Russian interference in the last U.S. presidential election, according to an exclusive Reuters/Ipsos public opinion poll.

The poll, conducted Thursday afternoon to Friday morning, is the first national survey to measure the response from the American public after the U.S. Justice Department released Special Counsel Robert Mueller’s 448-page report that recounted numerous occasions in which Trump may have interfered with the investigation.

According to the poll, 37 percent of adults in the United States approved of Trump’s performance in office, down from 40 percent in a similar poll conducted on April 15 and matching the lowest level of the year. That is also down from 43 percent in a poll conducted shortly after U.S. Attorney General William Barr circulated a summary of the report in March.

https://www.reuters.com/article/us-usa-trump-russia-poll/trump-approval-drops-3-points-to-2019-low-after-release-of-mueller-report-reuters-ipsos-poll-idUSKCN1RV16S

https://media.giphy.com/media/3oEduGEXmDkqqRvS6s/giphy.gif

TSA: Mah Betting odds tho

[TSA]

Again talking for congress and what they will do or won't do.

Why do you do this? Psychotic behavior.


Dem leaders have already said this. Fucking dunce :lol

[djohn2oo8]

There’s no way to spin your huge L, trying to do so is just embarrassing.

Just admit you’re a broke bitch welcher.
So you don’t know what’s in the black lines.

[djohn2oo8]

Have you read any complete pages TSA?

[Reck]

Dem leaders have already said this. Fucking dunce :lol

Like who for example? I think I know who you are referring to, Steny hoyer, whom later backtracked his remarks.

https://twitter.com/LeaderHoyer/status/1119041424715071490

https://twitter.com/LeaderHoyer/status/1119309076981276672

Pelosi, Schumer and other top dems saying congress won't stay silent. :lol

Know when to walk away picapizza.

[TSA]

So you don’t know what’s in the black lines.

What was our bet?

[djohn2oo8]

What was our bet?
It’s a yes or no question. Do you know what’s in those lines?

[djohn2oo8]

I’ll wait

[Reck]

What was our bet?

:lol Buuuttttttt what about mah bet!

2 straight days of deep dicking. Your ass must be sore.

[TSA]

It’s a yes or no question. Do you know what’s in those lines?

I don’t know what’s under the black lines.

What was our bet?

[Spurs Homer]

Lol

[TSA]

:lol Buuuttttttt what about mah bet!

2 straight days of deep dicking. Your ass must be sore.

A welcher semen shielding for another welcher, cute :lol

[djohn2oo8]

:lol Buuuttttttt what about mah bet!

2 straight days of deep dicking. Your ass must be sore.
Lots of Wikileaks and Trump campaign stuff blacked out. Grand Jury info. Lawd!

[DarrinS]

Volume II, a.k.a. "Plan B"

:lol

[Spurs Homer]

Has trump denounced russias attack on our democracy yet?

has oj caught the “killers?”

[djohn2oo8]

Mueller shitted on the Seth Rich conspiracy

[Reck]

Volume II, a.k.a. "Plan B"

:lol

:lol pls subpoena mueller

[TSA]

Mueller shitted on the Seth Rich conspiracy

What did Mueller do to yours?

What does it feel like to have believed in and pushed the biggest hoax the country has ever seen?

[TSA]

It’s a yes or no question. Do you know what’s in those lines?

I don’t know what’s under the black lines.

What was our bet?

[spurraider21]

Mueller shitted on the Seth Rich conspiracy
:lol kim dotcom

but seriously... how long do you have for your bet? im legit curious as to what the terms were

[Pavlov]

Mueller shitted on the Seth Rich conspiracy

Dude will never admit it.

[djohn2oo8]

:lol kim dotcom

but seriously... how long do you have for your bet? im legit curious as to what the terms were
Until the Trump Family is cleared. Gotta see out of the 14 cases who Mueller referred for prosecution

[TSA]

Until the Trump Family is cleared. Gotta see out of the 14 cases who Mueller referred for prosecution

:lol a liar and a welcher

[djohn2oo8]

1119351414256545797

[djohn2oo8]

:lol a liar and a welcher
Wanna see who the names are?

[TSA]

1119351414256545797

Posting the same story from Fusion Ken and Kyle Griffin. You’d think after getting 2 years of your own shit shoved down your throat by your God Mueller you’d have learned something but nope, you jumped right back in it :rollin

[TSA]

Wanna see who the names are?

Don’t need to, they have nothing to do with our bet.

[djohn2oo8]

Posting the same story from Fusion Ken and Kyle Griffin. You’d think after getting 2 years of your own shit shoved down your throat by your God Mueller you’d have learned something but nope, you jumped right back in it :rollin
Did you read Mueller’s report?

[djohn2oo8]

Don’t need to, they have nothing to do with our bet.
How would you know? You just said you didn’t know who the names were...

[TSA]

The most remarkable thing about special counsel Robert Mueller’s 448-page report is how blithely the prosecutor reversed the burden of proof on the issue of obstruction.

To be sure, President Trump’s conduct outlined on this score isn’t flattering, to put it mildly. For example, the special counsel’s evidence includes indications that the president attempted to induce White House Counsel Don McGahn to fire the special counsel (in June 2017), and then (in January 2018) to deny that the president had made the request.

Mueller’s report further suggests that the president dangled pardons. He made ingratiating comments about Paul Manafort, Michael Flynn and Michael Cohen when they appeared to be fighting the cases against them (and presumably fighting the prosecutor’s efforts to get them to cooperate) but then turned on Flynn and Cohen when they decided to plead guilty and provide testimony for Mueller.


On the other hand, there is evidence that cuts sharply against obstruction. The president could have shut down the investigation at any time, but he didn’t. He could have asserted executive privilege to deny the special counsel access to key White House witnesses, such as McGahn. To the contrary, numerous witnesses were made available voluntarily (there was no need to try to subpoena them to the grand jury), and well over a million documents were disclosed, including voluminous notes of meetings between the president and his White House counsel.

Most important, the special counsel found that there was no collusion between the Trump campaign and Russia, and that the president’s frustration wasn’t over fear of guilt — the typical motivation for obstruction — but that the investigation was undermining his ability to govern the country. The existence of such a motive is a strong counter to evidence of a corrupt intent, critical because corrupt intent must be proved beyond a reasonable doubt in an obstruction case.

In his report, Mueller didn’t resolve the issue. If he had been satisfied that there was no obstruction crime, he said, he would have so found. He claimed he wasn’t satisfied. Yet he was also not convinced that there was sufficient proof to charge. Therefore, he made no decision, leaving it to Attorney General William Barr to find that there was no obstruction.

This is unbecoming behavior for a prosecutor and an outrageous shifting of the burden of proof: The constitutional right of every American to force the government to prove a crime has been committed, rather than to have to prove his or her own innocence.

This is exactly why prosecutors should never speak publicly about the evidence uncovered in an investigation of someone who isn’t charged. The obligation of the prosecutor is to render a judgment about whether there is enough proof to charge a crime. If there is, the prosecutor indicts; if there is not, the prosecutor remains silent.

If special counsel Mueller believed there was an obstruction offense, he should have had the courage of his convictions and recommended charging the president. Since he wasn’t convinced there was enough evidence to charge, he should have said he wasn’t recommending charges. Period.

Anything else was — and is — a smear. Worse than that, it flouts the Constitution.

https://nypost.com/2019/04/18/mueller-completely-dropped-the-ball-with-obstruction-punt/

[djohn2oo8]

So you didn’t read it

[TSA]

How would you know? You just said you didn’t know who the names were...


I know what our bet was. Had nothing to do with cases Mueller handed off. Regardless, for you to even think that any of those four people were handed off to other districts for prosecution and we didn’t hear about it is absolutely retarded.

You’re a liar and welched cause you can’t afford 2 grand. Poor fella.

[djohn2oo8]

I know what our bet was. Had nothing to do with cases Mueller handed off. Regardless, for you to even think that any of those four people were handed off to other districts for prosecution and we didn’t hear about it is absolutely retarded.

You’re a liar and welched cause you can’t afford 2 grand. Poor fella.
There are criminally referred cases. To complete our bet, we will see who the names are. Don’t be a pussy.

[djohn2oo8]

Btw, the Trump campaign is still under investigation :lol

[djohn2oo8]

1119226658052018177

[in2deep]

This is blatantly inaccurate

please stop.

He found PLENTY of collusion - and PLENTY of it is outlined in the report and it is consistent to all the things Adam Schiff has already laid out in several interviews. All of the collusion was right in front of your eyes - and there is plenty of it.

Mueller states that - although there was a shit ton of evidence - he didn't acquire every single element of it to win a case on conspiracy - (and here again - DID BARR - stop him or impede the investigation in any way? - we don't know)

So Russia wanted to help and did and BENEFITED from this collusion- before and since the election.
Trump team accepted help, wanted help, and BENEFITED from this collusion.

That is all in the Mueller report - and there is another shit ton that was redacted - most redactions were of the collusion/conspiracy/counter-intelligence.

Plenty yet not enough for even a remote charge :lol

Turns out that plenty is actually barely

[Spurs Homer]

Plenty yet not enough for even a remote charge :lol

Turns out that plenty is actually barely

is this how low trumpers go now?

an enemy govt attacked YOUR country and your hero helped them and your response is that it didnt constitute a legal crime?

it is like trump fucking your mom and your reaction is;

”hey- he didnt assrape her - he just raped her conventionally”

you are pathetic

[Trainwreck2100]

It’s a correct statement but purposely fail to mention no one knew it was Russians setting up the rallies.

don't have to mention that, truth is truth, ignorance is never a legitimate excuse

[Kim Jong-il]

Not a Trumper. Trumps is one of the biggest pieces of shit to be elected.

Funny how most of the Trumptards here will go to great lengths to tell everyone how much they don’t like Trump :lmao

[TSA]

There are criminally referred cases. To complete our bet, we will see who the names are. Don’t be a pussy.

You’re acting just like Reck did when he welched. What was our bet?

[hater]

is this how low trumpers go now?

an enemy govt attacked YOUR country and your hero helped them and your response is that it didnt constitute a legal crime?

it is like trump fucking your mom and your reaction is;

”hey- he didnt assrape her - he just raped her conventionally”

you are pathetic

You sound like a mental reject or a troll.

anyone wanting him impeached is a retarded piece os shit. Not only would thT mean Pence is in power but it would most likely fail as there is little time unt elections. and it would rally his base

Dumb mothedfucker. You don't know what's best for you but again you are probably a troll seeking attention

[spurraider21]

You’re acting just like Reck did when he welched. What was our bet?
do you have a link to the bet?

[TSA]

1119226658052018177

The gang of 8 was offered it by DOJ and Dems rejected it.

:lol Nadler

[TSA]

do you have a link to the bet?


I looked and my search function was pulling a bunch of random shit from 2017

[TSA]

don't have to mention that, truth is truth, ignorance is never a legitimate excuse

What’s your excuse for the entire Russian collusion investigation?

[Reck]

You sound like a mental reject or a troll. Couldn't care less which you are

This is my last response to you. I'm not. Trumper. He is a piece of shit and hopefully will not win in 2020

But anyone wanting him impeached is a retarded piece os shit. Not only would thT mean Pence is in power but it would most likely fail as there is little time unt elections. and it would rally his base

Dumb mothedfucker. You don't know what's best for you but again you are probably a troll seeking attention

His base is always rallied and raved. They're maniacs who would follow Trump down a cliff.

That's not really an issue for impeachment. like you said though, elections are near so this will prove to be a wasted exercise if they choose to do it.

[Reck]

The gang of 8 was offered it by DOJ and Dems rejected it.

:lol Nadler

They offered a lightly redacted report. Nadler wants it stripped of all. :lol TSA

[spurraider21]

I looked and my search function was pulling a bunch of random shit from 2017
i remember dude thought paul ryan and mitch mcconnell were going down as part of this too :lol

[Reck]

i remember dude thought paul ryan and mitch mcconnell were going down as part of this too :lol

IIRC the main bet was that the Trump family were going down. Trump, his retard sons and Ivanka+Jared.

Technically there is still time. There are unsealed indictments left and Trump could be charged with something post presidency by the SDNY for example.

[hater]

His base is always rallied and raved. They're maniacs who would follow Trump down a cliff.

That's not really an issue for impeachment. like you said though, elections are near so this will prove to be a wasted exercise if they choose to do it.

Agree :tu

Democrats should be rallying behind a couple candidates and a couple issues (Healthcare, jobs) and go from there

any more of this retardation is a terrible strategy

[Spurs Homer]

You sound like a mental reject or a troll.

anyone wanting him impeached is a retarded piece os shit. Not only would thT mean Pence is in power but it would most likely fail as there is little time unt elections. and it would rally his base

Dumb mothedfucker. You don't know what's best for you but again you are probably a troll seeking attention

Idiot.

It has to be done because no one is above the law.

You can play politics all you want - I care only about the rule of law and it is an insult to all of us to have a piece of shit criminal in office.

Unfortunately Pence is a piece of shit also - but it will be very brief that he will sit in office -if it ever gets to that.

What will happen is that pieces of shit like you in the Senate will refuse to convict a proven criminal and will go down with the ship - just like you.

Go fuck yourself you unpatriotic piece of shit.

[hater]

Speaking of proven criminals....


https://twitter.com/Techno_Fog/status/1118882533419048961?s=19

[spurraider21]

IIRC the main bet was that the Trump family were going down. Trump, his retard sons and Ivanka+Jared.

Technically there is still time. There are unsealed indictments left and Trump could be charged with something post presidency by the SDNY for example.
i know the other stuff wasn't part of the bet, but still kinda funny how far down the rabbit hole he was willing to go... literally thinking paul ryan and mitch mcconnell were going down for russia stuff :lol

[in2deep]

That FISA application is a killer t ah. Basically proven false statements to get that FISA warrant

Ppl do time for much less

[spurraider21]

That FISA application is a killer t ah. Basically proven false statements to get that FISA warrant

Ppl do time for much less
proven false when? at the time the warrant was granted?

[in2deep]

proven false when? at the time the warrant was granted?

If at the time they did not have evidence yes. It was proven false then too

[TSA]

They offered a lightly redacted report. Nadler wants it stripped of all. :lol TSA

I just heard a lady on CNN say the report released to the public only had 9% of it redacted.

[TSA]

i remember dude thought paul ryan and mitch mcconnell were going down as part of this too :lol

I didn’t remember that :rollin

You’re like a real life Google.

[TSA]

1119338305038864384

[Reck]

1119338305038864384

Convicted felon and liar. Great source of info rigth there.

[Chris]

Just wait until we see the redacted parts and Mueller has to testify. Trump will be finished then.

[spurraider21]

I didn’t remember that :rollin

You’re like a real life Google.
president orrin hatch

[spurraider21]

If at the time they did not have evidence yes. It was proven false then too
thats not how "proven false" works

[baseline bum]

i remember dude thought paul ryan and mitch mcconnell were going down as part of this too :lol

If only. I'd take another two terms of Trump if it meant McConnell would die of AIDS.

[DMC]

I didn’t remember that :rollin

You’re like a real life Google.

"Google... find 'Paul Ryan'"

Google: "So today you want to find Paul Ryan. Yesterday you hated him"

[spurraider21]

If only. I'd take another two terms of Trump if it meant McConnell would die of AIDS.
https://thumbs.gfycat.com/FrightenedCreativeIceblueredtopzebra-max-1mb.gif

[ducks]

Did you read the full 438 pages?

Waiting

[TSA]

And this is a pretty good response.

1119324830745145344

And this one is even better

1119376679015567361

[TSA]

president orrin hatch

:lol djohn
:lol Mensch

[Spurs Homer]

If you trumpers gave a shit about your country - you would read this piece and try to grasp what your hero has done;


https://www.usatoday.com/story/opinion/2019/04/19/mueller-report-trump-commander-in-chief-russia-oath-column/3506216002/

[boutons_deux]

Current Trump attorney Rudy Giuliani calls former Trump attorney Don McGahn a liar (https://www.dailykos.com/stories/2019/4/20/1851806/-Current-Trump-attorney-Rudy-Giuliani-calls-former-Trump-attorney-Don-McGahn-a-liar)

Giuliani didn’t just call McGahn a liar. As the Washington Post reports (https://www.washingtonpost.com/politics/trump-blames-mcgahn-after-mueller-paints-damning-portrait-with-notes-from-white-house-aides/2019/04/19/ea0f153a-62b4-11e9-9412-daf3d2e67c6d_story.html), he said he wished he could get Trump’s former fixer on the stand.

“The narrative is written as if it’s all true and somebody proved it. Nobody proved it,” Giuliani said in an interview Friday.

“I’m frustrated by the report because in some ways I’d love to have a trial and prove that it’s not true.”


It would be interesting to know how Giuliani would achieve this legal feat,

since the only other person in this he said / he said narrative

has both refused to testify and

defended his ability to take exactly the action which McGahn claimed.

https://www.dailykos.com/stories/1851806 (https://www.dailykos.com/stories/1851806)

[boutons_deux]

Mueller's report shows how Russia colluded with the Trump campaign through Assange and Roger Stone (https://www.dailykos.com/stories/2019/4/19/1851519/-Mueller-s-report-shows-how-Russia-colluded-with-the-Trump-campaign-through-Assange-and-Roger-Stone)

“After the U.S. intelligence community publicly announced its assessment that Russia was behind the hacking operation,

Assange continued to deny that the Clinton materials released by WikiLeaks had come from Russian hacking,”

the report reads.

“According to media reports, Assange told a U.S. congressman that the DNC hack was an ‘inside job,’

and purported to have ‘physical proof’ that Russians did not give materials to Assange.”
[...]

By then, it was no secret where the documents came from.

The computer security firm CrowdStrike had already published its technical report on the DNC breach, which laid out a trail leading directly to Moscow and the GRU.

Analysts at ThreatConnect independently presented evidence that Guccifer 2.0 and DC Leaks were fictional creations of that agency.

But rather than refuse to comment on his sources, as he’s done in other cases,

Assange used his platform to deny that he got the material from Russians,

and make statements at an alternative theory.

On August 9, 2016,

WikiLeaks’ Twitter feed announced a $20,000 reward for “information leading to conviction for the murder of DNC staffer Seth Rich.”

Assange fanned the flames even higher on August 25, 2016, when he was asked in a television interview,

"Why are you so interested in Seth Rich's killer?"

"We're very interested in anything that might be a threat to alleged Wikileaks sources,” Assange answered.

“If there's someone who's potentially connected to our publication,

and that person has been murdered in suspicious circumstances,

it doesn't necessarily mean that the two are connected.

But it is a very serious matter .. that type of allegation is very serious, as it's taken very seriously by us."

https://www.dailykos.com/stories/2019/4/19/1851519/-Mueller-s-report-shows-how-Russia-colluded-with-the-Trump-campaign-through-Assange-and-Roger-Stone?detail=emaildkre (https://www.dailykos.com/stories/2019/4/19/1851519/-Mueller-s-report-shows-how-Russia-colluded-with-the-Trump-campaign-through-Assange-and-Roger-Stone?detail=emaildkre)

[boutons_deux]

The Mueller Report’s ‘Smoking Gun’ on Obstruction of Justice

It is only two sentences in a report of some 448 pages.
As yet unnoticed,

these lines provide the strongest new evidence uncovered by Robert Mueller’s investigators that President Donald Trump may have indeed obstructed justice.

Two people directly involved in the case told me that several of the

special counsel’s prosecutors privately considered this information to be a “smoking gun” suggesting that the president acted
criminally.

1) "By the time the President spoke to Comey about Flynn, DOJ officials had informed McGahn, who informed the President,

that Flynn’s statements to senior White House officials about his contacts with Kislyak were not true and that

Flynn had told the same version of events to the FBI.

McGahn also informed the President that Flynn’s conduct could violate 18 USC §1001."

2) "[US Code (https://www.law.cornell.edu/uscode/text/18/1001)Title 18 § 1001 (https://www.law.cornell.edu/uscode/text/18/1001) is the federal statute that makes it a felony to lie to the FBI or other federal investigators, a crime that Flynn did indeed later plead guilty (https://www.nytimes.com/2017/12/01/us/politics/michael-flynn-guilty-russia-investigation.html) to.]"

The significance of this section is that Trump’s personal attorneys have always defended the president by arguing to the special counsel that

Trump did not know that Flynn was under criminal investigation for lying to the FBI about his conversations with Kislyak.
The central incident in any potential obstruction case, described on page 46 of Volume II of the Mueller report (https://assets.documentcloud.org/documents/5955997/Muellerreport.pdf), is well known:

Comey had alleged that Trump had pressured him, while the two men were alone in the Oval Office, on February 14, 2017, to shut down an FBI investigation of Trump’s former national security adviser, Flynn.

Despite Trump’s denial that he said this to Comey,

the special counsel concluded that “substantial evidence corroborates Comey’s account.”

An obstruction of justice is an effort to “corruptly” impede or interfere with an ongoing criminal investigation.

The special counsel uncovered evidence that Trump did exactly that.

https://www.nybooks.com/daily/2019/04/19/the-mueller-reports-smoking-gun-on-obstruction-of-justice/?utm_medium=email&utm_campaign=NYR%20Irrationality%20kidnapping%20Mu eller&utm_content=NYR%20Irrationality%20kidnapping%20Mue ller+CID_028a279d68625f3de0ada6a55251a384&utm_source=Newsletter&utm_term=The%20Mueller%20Reports%20Smoking%20Gun (https://www.nybooks.com/daily/2019/04/19/the-mueller-reports-smoking-gun-on-obstruction-of-justice/?utm_medium=email&utm_campaign=NYR%20Irrationality%20kidnapping%20Mu eller&utm_content=NYR%20Irrationality%20kidnapping%20Mue ller+CID_028a279d68625f3de0ada6a55251a384&utm_source=Newsletter&utm_term=The%20Mueller%20Reports%20Smoking%20Gun)

My guess: Pelosi won't let articles of impeachment onto the House floor for a vote.

[djohn2oo8]

1119960312382402560

lol keep talking

[boutons_deux]

Make Stealing From a Charity THE Centerpiece for Impeachment (https://www.dailykos.com/stories/2019/4/14/1850151/-Make-Stealing-From-a-Charity-THE-Centerpiece-for-Impeachment)

The State of New York has been prosecuting a civil case (https://www.washingtonpost.com/politics/new-york-files-suit-against-president-trump-alleging-his-charity-engaged-in-illegal-conduct/2018/06/14/c3cbf71e-6fc9-11e8-bd50-b80389a4e569_story.html?utm_term=.d0f31e2cbad9) against Trump and his family for their many charity frauds. This doesn’t mean it cannot become a criminal case in the future. Moreover, it certainly doesn’t mean it cannot be part of impeachment proceedings.


Marc S. Owens, a former head of the IRS’s nonprofit division, called the suit “an extraordinary catalogue of how not to run a private foundation.

There’s little else [Trump] could have done that would have made it worse.”



It is most likely that all of these crimes occurred before Trump assumed office.

Does the High Crimes and Misdemeanors Clause of the Constitution allow for offenses committed prior to federal political or judicial office?

The short answer is yes.

The long answer is still yes, and

it can be found on my offsite cache of relevant materials here (https://thecrimesoftrump.blogspot.com/2018/12/high-crimes-and-misdemeanors.html).

the centerpiece for any impeachment of Trump should be his embezzlement from charity.

The reasons are:

(1) It is so despicable it is an easier sell to the public than violations of the Emoluments Clause or Campaign Finance laws.

(2) It is easily understood and memed: What kind of Monster steals from a Charity?

(3) It is easily established. Let’s look at the last of those reasons first.

The Open and Shut Case for Embezzlement

New York would charge these crimes under their embezzlement/larceny statute, which

requires that the Government prove the following elements (https://codes.findlaw.com/ny/penal-law/pen-sect-155-05.html) per Section 155.05 of the New York Penal Law:

1. A person steals property and commits larceny when, with intent to deprive another of property or to appropriate the same to himself ... he wrongfully takes ... such property from an owner thereof.

2. Larceny includes a wrongful taking, obtaining or withholding of another's property, with the intent prescribed in subdivision one of this section, committed in any of the following ways:

(a) By conduct heretofore defined or known as ... embezzlement….



There would be a number of counts in the embezzlement from a Charity article of impeachment.

One of the counts would involve

Trump embezzling $100,000.00 from his Charity to settle a private lawsuit

involving a fifty-foot-tall flagpole at Mar-a-Lago.

This is one of those

High Crimes and Misdemeanors that is already proved beyond a reasonable doubt,

as Trump wrote out and then initialed his own confession:

https://images.dailykos.com/images/649622/large/trump5.jpg?1551504312


https://www.dailykos.com/stories/2019/4/14/1850151/-Make-Stealing-From-a-Charity-THE-Centerpiece-for-Impeachment (https://www.dailykos.com/stories/2019/4/14/1850151/-Make-Stealing-From-a-Charity-THE-Centerpiece-for-Impeachment)

And what about the absolute FRAUD of Trash University, costing Trash $25M?

[boutons_deux]

Prodded by Putin, Russians Sought Back Channels to Trump Through the Business World

The outreach by Mr. Dmitriev, according to the special counsel’s report, was part of

a broad, makeshift effort by the Kremlin to establish ties to Mr. Trump that began early in the campaign and shifted into high gear after Mr. Trump’s victory.

Those efforts were channeled largely through people in the business world in both countries.

Especially after the election, they led to

a conflation of diplomatic and financial interests that was a stark departure from the carefully calibrated contacts typically managed by an incoming administration in the United States.

Mr. Trump’s on-the-fly campaign,

lack of preparation for victory and

disorganized transition created a vacuum

that, as Russia sought out avenues of access and influence, was quickly filled by a number of people from outside established foreign policy circles,

many of whom appeared eager to portray themselves as access brokers or to generate business opportunities.

his report made clear how vigorously Mr. Putin sought to find points of contact and influence with Mr. Trump’s team — and

how many people on the American side were willing to participate to one degree or another in discussions

that touched on topics as varied as Mr. Trump’s desire to build a Moscow hotel to United States policy toward Ukraine.

the would-be influence peddlers in the United States and in Russia generally proceeded without much regard for the growing recognition that

Moscow had just interfered in multiple ways with the American election and

that any contacts outside established channels — especially those that mixed business and diplomacy — carried substantial political risks.

https://www.nytimes.com/2019/04/20/us/politics/trump-putin-russia-mueller.html?partner=rss&emc=rss (https://www.nytimes.com/2019/04/20/us/politics/trump-putin-russia-mueller.html?partner=rss&emc=rss)

[boutons_deux]

1110768987539791872

:lol

[Chris]

https://twitter.com/axios/status/1120003798339084293

[Reck]

That moment when the woman who was sexually objectified throughout the 90s, burns the side she's supposedly on. Ouch

[Spurtacular]

https://twitter.com/axios/status/1120003798339084293

Badgering a guy at church. Not even close to a new low for MSNBC though.

[Spurtacular]

That moment when the woman who was sexually objectified throughout the 90s, burns the side she's supposedly on. Ouch

Swing and a miss.

[Chris]

Swing and a miss.

Par.

[Reck]

Two cant reads.

[Spurtacular]

Eunuch Reck shutting down.

[boutons_deux]

THE “RED LINE” INVESTIGATIONS THAT WILL HAUNT TRUMP’S PRESIDENCY

With 14 potential cases referred by the special prosecutor, investigators in New York, Washington, and Congress are zeroing in on the president, his family, and his business dealings.

perhaps the most chilling moment in the Mueller report occurs on page 446, where

the special counsel reveals that he has referred a total of 14 potential cases to other prosecutors.

special counsel investigations have a habit of unearthing other, unrelated criminality in the process.

Perhaps that is why, when Trump first learned that Mueller had been appointed, according to the report,

he slumped back in his chair and exclaimed, “I’m fucked.”

12 of the 14 referrals that Mueller outsourced were redacted and remain shrouded in secrecy.

it is clear that Trump’s nightmare is just beginning.

Below is an accounting of the known legal threats Trumpworld has yet to grapple with.

The Southern District and the Hush-Money Payments

New York State and Trump’s Taxes

New York Attorney General and Trump

The Trump Inaugural Committee

Congressional Inquiries

https://www.vanityfair.com/news/2019/04/donald-trump-mueller-report-referral-investigations?mbid=nl_th_5cbd0e635ec6062e3c5c4c55&CNDID=43758549&utm_source=nl&utm_brand=vf&utm_mailing=VF_Hive_042219&utm_medium=email&bxid=5bd6795524c17c1048022fcc&user_id=43758549&hasha=992d608214b505003aa04bf10a595031&hashb=542eb31d958e85ddd5a4c3ccf3faae18526a77bd&hashc=54b3612ab970ce13a64a16665b1987080ca5b72e2ee7 62b722fbba6ab378f2f5&esrc=bounceX&utm_campaign=VF_Hive_042219&utm_term=VYF_Hive (https://www.vanityfair.com/news/2019/04/donald-trump-mueller-report-referral-investigations?mbid=nl_th_5cbd0e635ec6062e3c5c4c55&CNDID=43758549&utm_source=nl&utm_brand=vf&utm_mailing=VF_Hive_042219&utm_medium=email&bxid=5bd6795524c17c1048022fcc&user_id=43758549&hasha=992d608214b505003aa04bf10a595031&hashb=542eb31d958e85ddd5a4c3ccf3faae18526a77bd&hashc=54b3612ab970ce13a64a16665b1987080ca5b72e2ee7 62b722fbba6ab378f2f5&esrc=bounceX&utm_campaign=VF_Hive_042219&utm_term=VYF_Hive)

Probably because you people are always WAY behind The Great Boutons in breaking news

The Repugs are now using a phrase that Barr and the Repugs used 25+ years ago to pardon Iran-Contra CRIMINALS,

calling their actions "mistakes" and

calling pursuit of those criminals "criminalizing (Repug) politics"

"criminalizing (Repug) politics" we, and least The Great Boutons is, are hearing that phrase now as the craven, dickless, compromised Repugs spew propaganda trying to defend yet another criminal Repug President.

[boutons_deux]

These are the 5 reasons a non-president would be prosecuted for obstruction — yet Trump wasn’t


“The allegations that the Mueller report lays out are really quite devastating,” he explained.

“That shows that Trump went and said to Jim Comey in the Oval Office,

‘Hey, you should really let Michael Flynn go.’ And Trump even denied to Mueller a lot about that and about why he said it.

And Mueller’s report finds that Trump’s explanations were not as credible as Jim Comey’s who was consistent throughout his stories and had contemporaneous evidence about it. So, there would be an obstructive act there.”

Katyal said that “it sure smells really bad.”

The second point is that Trump tried to get rid of the special counsel to protect himself and

third that he tried to get his aides to lie for him.

The fourth point, Melber said, is that Trump tried to quash the Russia probe at all cost.

He made a special relationship with Rep. Devin Nunes (R-CA) who met with the president about the investigation on multiple occasions and ultimately shut down the investigation before any damning information could be uncovered.

Finally, Trump tried to have his former Attorney General, Jeff Sessions, attempt to un-recuse himself from the investigation.

https://www.rawstory.com/2019/04/5-reasons-non-president-prosecuted-obstruction-yet-trump-wasnt/

If the Dems do not impeach, or at very least vote up a horrible, long censure,

they will be as compromised and complicit with Trash and his mafiya as are the Repugs.

[boutons_deux]

Preet Bharara: Mueller Report Shows He ‘Absolutely’ Believes Trump Can Be Prosecuted Once He Leaves Office

“Is there [legal] exposure for President Trump?” Tapper asked

“Yes, look, I mean, the Mueller view, it seems to me, if you look at the document, is that

they absolutely believe there is a potential viable prosecution once Donald Trump leaves office,” Bharara said.
“I mean, he says in great particularity that,

although you cannot prosecute a sitting president under the OLC interpretation, we are nonetheless preserving evidence,

while memories are fresh and documents are available, because

a president, once he leaves office, can be charged with crimes committed while in office.”

But the position of the Mueller team, to me, is clearly the case they think there’s future legal jeopardy.”

https://www.mediaite.com/tv/preet-mueller-report-shows-he-absolutely-believes-trump-can-be-prosecuted-once-he-leaves-office/ (https://www.mediaite.com/tv/preet-mueller-report-shows-he-absolutely-believes-trump-can-be-prosecuted-once-he-leaves-office/)

[boutons_deux]

Preet Bharara Goes Off on Giuliani for ‘Extraordinary’ Comment on Taking Info from Russians: He Should Retract

Rudy Giuliani Sunday morning for saying on CNN that there’s “nothing wrong with taking information from Russians.”

it’s stunning to suggest

“that we should be telling future candidates in the run-up to an election in 2020 that

if an adversary, a foreign adversary, is offering information against a political opponent,

that it’s okay and right and proper and American and patriotic… to take that information.”

“That’s an extraordinary statement,” he said. “And I would hope he would retract it.”

https://www.mediaite.com/tv/preet-bharara-goes-off-on-giuliani-for-extraordinary-comment-on-taking-info-from-russians-he-should-retract/ (https://www.mediaite.com/tv/preet-bharara-goes-off-on-giuliani-for-extraordinary-comment-on-taking-info-from-russians-he-should-retract/)

Julie Annie is saying getting oppo dirt from an adversary is OK,

but Trash defenders, you assholes know who you are, claim a UK spy specializing in Russia who uncovers Trash's crimes is to be ignored when he gives the info to the FBI.

[boutons_deux]

Joe Lockhart: AG Barr Did Incredible Disservice to the Country In ‘Lying’ About Mueller Report Findings

Former White House Press Secretary Joe Lockhart

shared harsh words for Attorney William Barr Monday morning, calling out the manner in which Barr presented the findings of the Mueller Report which he found to

go beyond “spin” and called outright lying.
“What he did was an incredible disservice to the country.

The way he did it.

The way he withheld the report and

then on three separate occasions told the American public this is what the report says.

So that everybody read it in that frame of mind.

The fact is the report said just the opposite.

You can call it misleading, spin. I call it lying.

When you have

the president of the United States,

the press secretary,

the attorney general

all effortlessly lying

something’s got to change.

”https://www.mediaite.com/tv/joe-lockhart-ag-barr-did-incredible-disservice-to-the-country-in-lying-about-mueller-report-findings/ (https://www.mediaite.com/tv/joe-lockhart-ag-barr-did-incredible-disservice-to-the-country-in-lying-about-mueller-report-findings/)

[boutons_deux]

https://www.cheatsheet.com/wp-content/uploads/2018/04/Donald-Trump-holding-Ivankas-waist-640x430.png

[boutons_deux]

John Oliver on Mueller-Trash

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=YMBj_tU7HRU&t=1s

[pgardn]

Chris Wallace absolutely took Rudy Giuliani to the mat on Fox news yesterday.
Sweat broke out on Giuliani’s forehead.

It basically ended up with Giuliani saying I’m his lawyer so I have to defend him despite his lies.

Wallace is the best interviewer on television.
He is so thoroughly prepared and understanding situations that if the interviewee makes a questionable statement he will pounce on the spot and get to his other questions later.

Later he got Schiff to admit he basically has the wrong definition of collusion.

Wallace also had Bob Woodward and Woodward said that the first intelligence report that contained the dossier that was “hardly intelligence.” Later had dossier moved to a much less prominent role in the report ... this needs to be investigated.

[florige]

Chris Wallace absolutely took Rudy Giuliani to the mat on Fox news yesterday.
Sweat broke out on Giuliani’s forehead.

It basically ended up with Giuliani saying I’m his lawyer so I have to defend him despite his lies.

Wallace is the best interviewer on television.
He is so thoroughly prepared and understanding situations that if the interviewee makes a questionable statement he will pounce on the spot and get to his other questions later.

Later he got Schiff to admit he basically has the wrong definition of collusion.

Wallace also had Bob Woodward and Woodward said that the first intelligence report that contained the dossier that was “hardly intelligence.” Later had dossier moved to a much less prominent role in the report ... this needs to be investigated.



I'm surprised Giuliani just didn't talk over him like he did when Chuck Todd was interviewing him.

[boutons_deux]

The scientific maneuver Mueller used that implicates the president

Mueller does not set out to prove that the president engaged in obstruction of justice;

he logically disproves all the ways in which he didn’t.

The maneuver that Mueller uses in Volume 2 is extraordinary. It’s a social scientist‘s delight and should be used as a case example in research methods classes. Special counsel Mueller uses the logic and procedure of the scientific method to arrive at his conclusion in his investigation about the possibility of obstruction of justice.

rather than providing evidence to support a claim of obstruction, Mueller essentially sets out to falsify a null hypothesis that obstruction did not occur.

use involves a process called falsification.

The method was popularized by a philosopher named Karl Popper (https://www.iep.utm.edu/pop-sci/), who in the mid 20th century wrote a book called The Logic of Scientific Discovery (https://go.redirectingat.com/?id=66960X1516588&xs=1&url=https%3A%2F%2Fwww.amazon.com%2FLogic-Scientific-Discovery-Routledge-Classics%2Fdp%2F0415278449).

Popper argues that

in science it is not possible to “prove” anything;

rather, scientists seek to theorize all the possible explanations for a phenomenon, and

then seek evidence to disprove as many of those explanations as possible.

Mueller does something incredibly clever:

He falsifies all of the alternative explanations.

Mueller lays out all the possible explanations for what the president and his allies did.

Then, one by one, Mueller provides the evidence showing that each of Trump’s associates who may have aided in obstructing justice in fact did not do so.

The report exonerates these actors on this charge.

The report does not exonerate the president.

But it goes much further than that.

The report falsifies all of the possible reasons the president should be exonerated and shows each one of these claims to be false.

the remaining explanation must be true. This is the power of logic

the only conclusion one can reasonably draw from the evidence Mueller presented is that the president in fact engaged in obstruction of justice.

Mueller implicates his crimes without directly proving them.

https://www.vox.com/mischiefs-of-faction/2019/4/22/18510837/mueller-report-president-trump (https://www.vox.com/mischiefs-of-faction/2019/4/22/18510837/mueller-report-president-trump)

[Spurs Homer]

Something does not fit - after reading the Mueller report carefully -

Before Barr:
Muellers indictments were praised as "masterpieces" that showed a master at work - and experts and pundits agreed that Mueller "knows all" and the Trumps are fucked -

The Russian indictments were "expertly laid out" and every possible Russian tactic was exposed - Mueller even knew which computer used what internet address to commit conspiracy to defraud - etc...


After Barr:

Mueller abruptly closes up shop. Mueller suddenly states that the June 9th mtg - cannot be proved to be criminal because the office cannot show evidence that Trump Jr/Manafort/Kushner - "knew" that this behavior was a crime?
Suddenly Mueller is saying that witnesses lost emails or erased memory so - "this office cannot prove" that this meeting or that meeting was not a criminal conspiracy?
Suddenly Mueller opts to allow Trump to solely give written answers - but only on a small portion of the investigation - and Trump basically says "I don't recall" and Mueller lets him off the hook?


So many cowardly and half ass decisions =

AFTER the first part (before Barr) where Mueller impressed with his mastery of the law?


Something is rotten in Denmark.

No Trump Jr. grand jury testimony, no nothing - just suddenly - this "deference" to the criminal traitor???

Mueller must testify - and tell the world if he - and he alone - made these non-prosecutory decisions.

[boutons_deux]

Hilarious that DJT Jr couldn't have committed a crime, because he's too stupid and ignorant.

Since when is ignorance a defense?

I expect some, most? of those 14 criminal referrals that Mueller spewed out will result in convictions.

[Spurs Homer]

Hilarious that DJT Jr couldn't have committed a crime, because he's too stupid and ignorant.

Since when is ignorance a defense?

I expect some, most? of those 14 criminal referrals that Mueller spewed out will result in convictions.


yup

i dont buy it

ignorance of the law is not a valid defense

it just seems that once barr took over - mueller suddenly became incompetent?

nah - fuck that

[LkrFan]

1120436540046442497

:corn:

[LkrFan]

1120435120626970624

[Spurs Homer]

Mcgahn - is the person who will be known in history for ending trumps run of criminality

the crime that trump committed (obstruction) is now known and mcgahn has no choice but to testify

the crime of obstruction of justice does not have to be completed - it just has to be attempted

1) may 17, 2017 - mueller starts the “official proceeding”

2)june 17,2017- trump orders mcgahn to get rid of mueller - mvgahn refuses and takes notes, calls it “crazy shit”, alerts two (or more) witnesses (priebus/bannon), begins to pack his shit to resign - rather than complete the crime

3) slam dunk case for either congress or another prosecutor

only reason mueller did not charge him is because of the doj policy

[TSA]

Mcgahn - is the person who will be known in history for ending trumps run of criminality

the crime that trump committed (obstruction) is now known and mcgahn has no choice but to testify

the crime of obstruction of justice does not have to be completed - it just has to be attempted

1) may 17, 2017 - mueller starts the “official proceeding”

2)june 17,2017- trump orders mcgahn to get rid of mueller - mvgahn refuses and takes notes, calls it “crazy shit”, alerts two (or more) witnesses (priebus/bannon), begins to pack his shit to resign - rather than complete the crime

3) slam dunk case for either congress or another prosecutor

only reason mueller did not charge him is because of the doj policy
1120340317339881472

[boutons_deux]

Doug Collins, English motherfucker, do you speak it?

Mueller isn't "calling Congress to continue a completed DOJ investigation".

[Reck]

1120340317339881472

What if I told you....he's wrong though?

:lol

[Spurs Homer]

Its right in the mueller report ^

mueller lays it out and says “no one is above the law-not even the president”

[Reck]

Its right in the mueller report ^

mueller lays it out and says “no one is above the law-not even the president”

This dork looking Doug Collins and TSA have something in common. Neither read the thing.

[TSA]

What if I told you....he's wrong though?

:lol

You’ll have to go a little further than that, dunce.

[TSA]

This dork looking Doug Collins and TSA have something in common. Neither read the thing.

Amazing that Doug Collins didn’t read the thing yet cites it extensively showing how Nadler fed his base bullshit and you ate it up.

[Reck]

Amazing that Doug Collins didn’t read the thing yet cites it extensively showing how Nadler fed his base bullshit and you ate it up.

"Extensively"

*Posts one tweet.*

[pgardn]

1120340317339881472

Special counsel’s work is finished.

This is a horrible argument. Oversight by Congress should be fully underway. Kinda like it was not when red team controlled the house and left so much wanting.

[pgardn]

I'm surprised Giuliani just didn't talk over him like he did when Chuck Todd was interviewing him.

Wallace is doggedly determined. He did not let Rudy slide as he is brilliantly prepared for any wayward mess diversionary answers. Giuliani kept wanting to talk collusion and Wallace told him not the issue anymore. Fox has a gem of a interviewer. Sunday morning with Chris Wallace can be very good. I always tape it. There is very little foolishness in his interviews. No soft balls for anyone. I’m surprised people come back on to take more ravaging. From a fact point of view Wallace lays it out.

[Spurs Homer]

Wallace is doggedly determined. He did not let Rudy slide as he is brilliantly prepared for any wayward mess diversionary answers. Giuliani kept wanting to talk collusion and Wallace told him not the issue anymore. Fox has a gem of a interviewer. Sunday morning with Chris Wallace can be very good. I always tape it. There is very little foolishness in his interviews. No soft balls for anyone. I’m surprised people come back on to take more ravaging. From a fact point of view Wallace lays it out.

Wallace is basically average.

Relatively speaking though - on FOX news - he stands out because everyone else is basically a certified Trump cult member. Wallace is also in the Cult - but he is 80-90% invested in the Cult - not 100% - yet.

Or

He has started to see what a piece of shit criminal Trump is and is wrestling himself over it.

[spurraider21]

imo this is probably one of the more important legal passages in the entire report...


Third, we considered whether to evaluate the conduct we investigated under the JusticeManual standards governing prosecution and declination decisions, but we determined not to applyan approach that could potentially result in a judgment that the President committed crimes. Thethreshold step under the Justice Manual standards is to assess whether a person's conduct"constitutes a federal offense." U.S. Dep't of Justice, Justice Manual§ 9-27.220 (2018) (JusticeManual). Fairness concerns counseled against potentially reaching that judgment when no chargescan be brought. The ordinary means for an individual to respond to an accusation is through aspeedy and public trial, with all the procedural protections that surround a criminal case. Anindividual who believes he was wrongly accused can use that process to seek to clear his name. Incontrast, a prosecutor's judgment that crimes were committed, but that no charges will be brought,affords no such adversarial opportunity for public name-clearing before an impartial adjudicator.5

The concerns about the fairness of such a determination would be heightened in the caseof a sitting President, where a federal prosecutor's accusation of a crime, even in an internal report,could carry consequences that extend beyond the realm of criminal justice. OLC noted similarconcerns about sealed indictments. Even if an indictment were sealed during the President's term,OLC reasoned, "it would be very difficult to preserve [an indictment's] secrecy," and if anindictment became public, "[t]he stigma and opprobrium" could imperil the President's ability togovern."6 Although a prosecutor's internal report would not represent a formal public accusationakin to an indictment, the possibility of the report's public disclosure and the absence of a neutraladjudicatory forum to review its findings counseled against potentially determining "that theperson's conduct constitutes a federal offense." Justice Manual § 9-27.220.

mueller straight up said that because they are not allowed to indict a sitting president, that they were also not allowed to formally reach a conclusion that he committed a crime. so the report was never a question of "is trump guilty or not guilty" but rather, does the report exonerate trump or does it not exonerate trump. sure, its not the same legal standard as our criminal system (innocent until proven guilty), but given that they cannot bring trump into the criminal realm (due to potential constitutional limitations), that standard is inapplicable.

and the report explicitly said that it does not exonerate him.

it actually leans the other way on obstruction quite a bit...


Second, many obstruction cases involve the attempted or actual cover-up of an underlyingcrime. Personal criminal conduct can furnish strong evidence that the individual had an improperobstructive purpose, see, e.g. , United States v. Willoughby, 860 F.2d 15, 24 (2d Cir. 1988), or thathe contemplated an effect on an official proceeding, see, e.g., United States v. Binday, 804 F.3d558, 591 (2d Cir. 2015). But proof of such a crime is not an element of an obstruction offense.See United States v. Greer, 872 F.3d 790, 798 (6th Cir. 2017) (stating, in applying the obstructionsentencing guideline, that "obstruction of a criminal investigation is punishable even if theprosecution is ultimately unsuccessful or even if the investigation ultimately reveals no underlyingcrime"). Obstruction of justice can be motivated by a desire to protect non-criminal personalinterests, to protect against investigations where underlying criminal liability falls into a gray area,or to avoid personal embarrassment. The injury to the integrity of the justice system is the sameregardless of whether a person committed an underlying wrong.

and then more specifically...


Third, many of the President's acts directed at witnesses, including discouragement ofcooperation with the government and suggestions of possible future pardons, occurred in publicview. While it may be more difficult to establish that public-facing acts were motivated by acorrupt intent, the President's power to influence actions, persons, and events is enhanced by hisunique ability to attract attention through use of mass communications. And no principle of lawexcludes public acts from the scope of obstruction statutes. If the likely effect of the acts is tointimidate witnesses or alter their testimony, the justice system's integrity is equally threatened.


Our investigation found multiple acts by the President that were capable of exertingundue influence over law enforcement investigations, including the Russian-interference andobstruction investigations. The incidents were often carried out through one-on-one meetings inwhich the President sought to use his official power outside of usual channels. These actionsranged from efforts to remove the Special Counsel and to reverse the effect of the AttorneyGeneral 's recusal; to the attempted use of official power to limit the scope of the investigation; todirect and indirect contacts with witnesses with the potential to influence their testimony. Viewingthe acts collectively can help to illuminate their significance.

and imo most damning of all...


The President' s efforts to influence the investigation were mostly unsuccessful, but that islargely because the persons who surrounded the President declined to carry out orders or accedeto his requests.

:lol... he tried to obstruct but luckily the people around him were ethical enough not to ge along with it

[boutons_deux]

Journalists Were Right

The Mueller report reads as a 400-page confirmation of years’ worth of reporting on Donald Trump.

“I do it to discredit you all and

demean you all,

so when you write negative stories about me,

no one will believe you,”

Trump told Lesley Stahl in 2016 (https://www.cbsnews.com/news/lesley-stahl-donald-trump-said-attacking-press-to-discredit-negative-stories/).

His scorched-earth tactics have worked, to a point.

Trump’s war against journalism has energized his base

and has powered his efforts to preemptively undermine the Mueller report.

Now, the Mueller report is out, and the journalists who’ve spent the past several years reporting on Trump’s conduct are looking a lot better than Trump himself.

If Mueller’s report feels familiar, it’s because so many of the incidents it documents have already been reported.

Take the June 2016 Trump Tower meeting between Donald Trump Jr. and a Russian lawyer who a Trump associate claimed had dirt on Hillary Clinton.

According to Mueller’s report, the Times had it right all along:

In January 2018, to take another instance, the Times reported (https://www.nytimes.com/2018/01/25/us/politics/trump-mueller-special-counsel-russia.html) that Trump had ordered White House Counsel Donald McGahn to fire Robert Mueller in June 2017

The Mueller report confirmed not just that Trump had ordered McGahn to get rid of Mueller but that he later tried to get McGahn to publicly deny the whole episode.

In September 2017, the Post reported (https://www.washingtonpost.com/politics/manafort-offered-to-give-russian-billionaire-private-briefings-on-2016-campaign/2017/09/20/399bba1a-9d48-11e7-8ea1-ed975285475e_story.html?noredirect=on&utm_term=.a5d4ca6763b2) that in July 2016, Paul Manafort, who was then Trump’s campaign chairman, had “offered to provide briefings on the race to a Russian billionaire [Oleg Deripaska] closely aligned with the Kremlin,”

According to the Mueller report, Deripaska had previously put money into an investment fund helmed by Manafort. The fund subsequently failed, and “litigation between Manafort and Deripaska ensued.” Rick Gates told Mueller that “Manafort thought his role on the Campaign could help ‘confirm’ that Deripaska had dropped the Pericles lawsuit.” Manafort himself told Mueller that “if Trump won, Deripaska would want to use Manafort to advance whatever interests Deripaska had in the United States and elsewhere.”

One more example.

Trump and Fox News have been bashing BuzzFeed since January 2019, when Mueller’s office broke its usual silence (https://www.cnn.com/2019/01/18/politics/mueller-statement-buzzfeed/index.html) to publicly refute a story (https://www.buzzfeednews.com/article/jasonleopold/trump-russia-cohen-moscow-tower-mueller-investigation) claiming that Michael Cohen had told investigators that Trump had ordered him to lie to Congress. “A very sad day for journalism, but a great day for our Country!”

The Mueller report told a somewhat different story. Although Mueller was not willing to conclusively state that Trump had orchestrated Cohen’s false testimony, BuzzFeed’s Ben Smith wrote on Thursday (https://www.buzzfeednews.com/article/bensmith/how-we-characterized-michael-cohens-testimony) that

the report “finds that Cohen lied, that he did so at what he believed to be the president’s behest, that the president knew he was giving false testimony, and that the president’s lawyers encouraged that testimony.

In his report, Mueller wrote that Trump’s attorney told Cohen to ‘stay on message, and not contradict the President.’ ”

(https://slate.com/news-and-politics/2019/04/mueller-report-journalism-was-right.html)https://slate.com/news-and-politics/2019/04/mueller-report-journalism-was-right.html

[Spurs Homer]

imo this is probably one of the more important legal passages in the entire report...



mueller straight up said that because they are not allowed to indict a sitting president, that they were also not allowed to formally reach a conclusion that he committed a crime. so the report was never a question of "is trump guilty or not guilty" but rather, does the report exonerate trump or does it not exonerate trump. sure, its not the same legal standard as our criminal system (innocent until proven guilty), but given that they cannot bring trump into the criminal realm (due to potential constitutional limitations), that standard is inapplicable.

and the report explicitly said that it does not exonerate him.

it actually leans the other way on obstruction quite a bit...



and then more specifically...





and imo most damning of all...



:lol... he tried to obstruct but luckily the people around him were ethical enough not to ge along with it

on your very last point;

obstruction - the crime- does not have to be completed - an attempt is a crime

so i was never exaggerating when i said - he is a criminal

we now have at least two proven crimes by this criminal

1) directed the felonies that cohen is going to prison for
2) obstruction of justice in an official proceeding

both impeachable

but because of the traitor cult - he will have to be prosecuted after jan 21, 2021

[Spurs Homer]

Bottom line;

the law is set up in a way to protect the criminal

mueller cannot indict
mueller realized that if he cannot indict - he also cannot “charge” because the accused criminal would have no way to defend himself

so to protect the rights of the criminal he had no choice but to allow congress to impeach

leaving us with a criminal who is being protected by a corrupt political party

[spurraider21]

there's still virtually no legs on the "collusion" front. even if they couldnt indict the president, there still easily could have been indictments of others within his campaign for those kind of conpsiracy charges, yet there weren't any. that alone is pretty strong.

they basically produced a massive fact-finding report on obstruction, though felt that they were legally unable to charge him, so didn't reach an affirmative conclusion (though specifically noted he was not exonerated). imo that could be perceived as a wink-wink green light/recommendation to impeach, as he lacks the ability to formally do so. otherwise he can be charged when he's out of office, in theory.

[Spurs Homer]

there's still virtually no legs on the "collusion" front. even if they couldnt indict the president, there still easily could have been indictments of others within his campaign for those kind of conpsiracy charges, yet there weren't any. that alone is pretty strong.

they basically produced a massive fact-finding report on obstruction, though felt that they were legally unable to charge him, so didn't reach an affirmative conclusion (though specifically noted he was not exonerated). imo that could be perceived as a wink-wink green light/recommendation to impeach, as he lacks the ability to formally do so. otherwise he can be charged when he's out of office, in theory.

1) mueller clearly states he never looked at collusion
2) 12 investigations spun off-still not over -could be conspiracy elsewhere
3) counter-intelligence investigation still ongoing
4) the barr effect - we dont know what barr did to muellers investigation

[boutons_deux]

Is Mueller Bound by OLC’s Memos on Presidential Immunity?

The New York Times (https://www.nytimes.com/2017/07/22/us/politics/can-president-be-indicted-kenneth-starr-memo.html?rref=collection%2Fbyline%2Fcharlie-savage&action=click&contentCollection=undefined&region=stream&module=stream_unit&version=latest&contentPlacement=1&pgtype=collection&_r=0) recently unearthed a thorough legal memo (https://www.nytimes.com/interactive/2017/07/22/us/document-Savage-NYT-FOIA-Starr-memo-presidential.html), prepared twenty years ago for Independent Counsel Kenneth Starr, that advances the view that a sitting president can be indicted while still in office.

For those keeping score, this new memo sharpens an internal divide within the Department of Justice on this important question.

Two memos authored by the Office of Legal Counsel—

one in 1973 (https://fas.org/irp/agency/doj/olc/092473.pdf), in the midst of the Nixon impeachment saga,

the other in 2000 (https://www.justice.gov/file/19351/download), on the heels of the Clinton impeachment saga—

take the view that a sitting president is immune from indictment.

By contrast, two different memos—

authored by the Office of Special Counsel (https://drive.google.com/open?id=0B6mkR0LD6dl3SnJ6VDdkVHpXTk0) investigating Nixon, and

the Office of Independent Counsel (https://www.nytimes.com/interactive/2017/07/22/us/document-Savage-NYT-FOIA-Starr-memo-presidential.html) investigating Clinton—

reach the opposite conclusion.

https://www.lawfareblog.com/mueller-bound-olcs-memos-presidential-immunity (https://www.lawfareblog.com/mueller-bound-olcs-memos-presidential-immunity)

So Mueller, having a choice of conflicting OLC memos, decided to go with immunity memo.

[spurraider21]

1) mueller clearly states he never looked at collusion
2) 12 investigations spun off-still not over -could be conspiracy elsewhere
3) counter-intelligence investigation still ongoing
4) the barr effect - we dont know what barr did to muellers investigation
lol

[Spurs Homer]

Is Mueller Bound by OLC’s Memos on Presidential Immunity?

The New York Times (https://www.nytimes.com/2017/07/22/us/politics/can-president-be-indicted-kenneth-starr-memo.html?rref=collection%2Fbyline%2Fcharlie-savage&action=click&contentCollection=undefined&region=stream&module=stream_unit&version=latest&contentPlacement=1&pgtype=collection&_r=0) recently unearthed a thorough legal memo (https://www.nytimes.com/interactive/2017/07/22/us/document-Savage-NYT-FOIA-Starr-memo-presidential.html), prepared twenty years ago for Independent Counsel Kenneth Starr, that advances the view that a sitting president can be indicted while still in office.

For those keeping score, this new memo sharpens an internal divide within the Department of Justice on this important question.

Two memos authored by the Office of Legal Counsel—

one in 1973 (https://fas.org/irp/agency/doj/olc/092473.pdf), in the midst of the Nixon impeachment saga,

the other in 2000 (https://www.justice.gov/file/19351/download), on the heels of the Clinton impeachment saga—

take the view that a sitting president is immune from indictment.

By contrast, two different memos—

authored by the Office of Special Counsel (https://drive.google.com/open?id=0B6mkR0LD6dl3SnJ6VDdkVHpXTk0) investigating Nixon, and

the Office of Independent Counsel (https://www.nytimes.com/interactive/2017/07/22/us/document-Savage-NYT-FOIA-Starr-memo-presidential.html) investigating Clinton—

reach the opposite conclusion.

https://www.lawfareblog.com/mueller-bound-olcs-memos-presidential-immunity (https://www.lawfareblog.com/mueller-bound-olcs-memos-presidential-immunity)

So Mueller, having a choice of conflicting OLC memos, decided to go with immunity memo.




id say barr is the one making these calls

mueller can answer under oath

[Spurs Homer]

lol

which one of those are not accurate?

none of them

[boutons_deux]

The coverup for "innocent" people continues

Mnuchin will obey Barr on Trash's tax returns, so we know Barr will say refuse, violating a 1924 anti-corruption law.

Trump Is Trying To Block Current And Former WH Officials From Testifying On The Mueller Report

the White House is reportedly planning to block Don McGahn’s expected testimony before the House Judiciary Committee.

According to The Washington Post (https://www.washingtonpost.com/politics/white-house-plans-to-fight-house-subpoena-of-former-counsel-donald-mcgahn-for-testimony-on-mueller-report/2019/04/23/2d48732a-65f1-11e9-83df-04f4d124151f_story.html?utm_term=.f5eb3583f044),

“The White House plans to fight a subpoena issued by the House Judiciary Committee for former White House counsel Donald McGahn to testify, according to people familiar with the matter,

setting up another showdown in the aftermath of the special counsel report.”

there are other officials the administration wants to keep from providing testimony related to the Mueller report.
More from The Washington Post:

The Trump administration also plans to oppose other requests from House committees for the testimony of current and former aides about actions in the White House described in special counsel Robert S. Mueller III’s report

White House lawyers plan to tell attorneys for administration witnesses called by the House that they will be asserting executive privilege over their testimony, officials said.

Such a move will intensify a power struggle between the Trump administration and congressional Democrats, potentially setting up a protracted court battle.



It’s obvious why Donald Trump doesn’t want Don McGahn in front of the House Judiciary Committee.

After all, the information McGahn gave the special counsel was a central component of the Mueller report, particularly as it relates to obstruction of justice.

McGahn, who was mentioned over 150 times in the report, told special counsel investigators about Trump’s efforts to obstruct the investigation, including an episode in which the president pressured him to fire Mueller.


https://www.politicususa.com/2019/04/23/trump-is-trying-to-block-current-and-former-wh-officials-from-testifying-on-the-mueller-report.html?utm_source=feedburner&utm_medium=feed&utm_campaign=Feed%3A+politicususa%2FfJAl+%28Politi cus+USA+%29 (https://www.politicususa.com/2019/04/23/trump-is-trying-to-block-current-and-former-wh-officials-from-testifying-on-the-mueller-report.html?utm_source=feedburner&utm_medium=feed&utm_campaign=Feed%3A+politicususa%2FfJAl+%28Politi cus+USA+%29)

[boutons_deux]

The White House Will Fight McGahn Subpoena Because His Public Testimony Could Be a Knockout Blow


https://slate.com/news-and-politics/2019/04/white-house-fights-mcgahn-subpoena-trump-knockout-silver-bullet.html

[Spurs Homer]

The White House Will Fight McGahn Subpoena Because His Public Testimony Could Be a Knockout Blow


https://slate.com/news-and-politics/2019/04/white-house-fights-mcgahn-subpoena-trump-knockout-silver-bullet.html


obstruction of justice in plain sight all over again

no republicans will make a stand


and

trump white house cannot claim exec privilege now
mcgahn already was allowed (as were all other witnesses) to testify

the exec privilege boat sailed already

[boutons_deux]

Trump is putting himself in even more legal jeopardy by retaliating against witnesses: Ex-Nixon lawyer

now the president could be putting himself in even greater legal jeopardy by retaliating against witnesses in the probe.

Trump’s post-Mueller strategy of seeking revenge against people who cooperated with the probe seems “risky” and could put him in further legal jeopardy.

“I find it surprising because he’s taking these shots at witnesses who gave information to Mueller, and I think he’s got to be careful because

there’s an explicit federal statute punishing retaliation against witnesses,”

Trump so far has publicly attacked former White House counsel Don McGahn over his testimony in the Mueller probe, and

he has also tried to intimidate former “fixer” Michael Cohen by suggesting that his father-in-law should be prosecuted for crimes.

https://www.rawstory.com/2019/04/trump-putting-even-legal-jeopardy-retaliating-witnesses-ex-nixon-lawyer/?utm_source=feedburner&utm_medium=feed&utm_campaign=Feed%3A+TheRawStory+%28The+Raw+Story% 29 (https://www.rawstory.com/2019/04/trump-putting-even-legal-jeopardy-retaliating-witnesses-ex-nixon-lawyer/?utm_source=feedburner&utm_medium=feed&utm_campaign=Feed%3A+TheRawStory+%28The+Raw+Story% 29)

[RandomGuy]

From what Mueller's investigators, who no longer have to keep silent, have to say, you are not going to like what comes out of the final report.


I thought you would have learned something after finding out you fell for two years worth of bullshit, there is still time though. Out of all the Russiagate pushers I believe you will be the first to admit you were wrong the entire time. All the others will just pretend it didn't happen or just stop posting all together.

Be wary of anonymous reports alleging Mueller's team is unhappy

"Members of special counsel Robert Mueller’s team say Attorney General William Barr has soft-pedaled their investigation into whether the Trump campaign conspired with Russia during the 2016 election and whether the president committed an obstruction-of-justice offense, according to the New York Times and the Washington Post.

Be wary of these reports. We have spent the last two years watching similarly momentous Russian collusion “scoops” fall apart and from the exact same newsrooms."

"Like the Times, the Post’s article doesn’t directly quote or even paraphrase members of Mueller's team. Rather, the article attributes its findings to “people familiar with the matter,” “two people familiar with their reactions,” and “people familiar with their responses.”

You’ll forgive my skepticism. I’m going to wait until someone goes on the record or provides evidence to back up what these unnamed “government officials” suggest. That's based on the track record of such anonymous Mueller bombshells, which previously guaranteed prosecutions or even impeachment."

"The “familiar” sources declined to elaborate what, specifically, Barr downplayed. We don’t even know how many members of the special counsel’s team allegedly feel this way. There’s also nothing in either report indicating that the sources have even glimpsed the Mueller report. All we know is that “government officials” who are “familiar” with other people’s thinking claim certain members of the special counsel’s team are supposedly upset with Barr’s assessment of their work. Upset about what, exactly, we don’t know.

Meanwhile, Mueller himself has not disputed Barr's assessment. And Mueller has gone on the record before to refute mischaracterizations of his team’s findings. If Barr has undersold the special counsel’s investigation, Mueller has picked a funny time to go silent."

https://www.washingtonexaminer.com/opinion/be-wary-of-anonymous-reports-from-unhappy-mueller-team-members

Barr distorted what was in the report, and glossed over the worst of it.

Let me know when you actually read the whole thing.

[spurraider21]

Barr distorted what was in the report, and glossed over the worst of it.

Let me know when you actually read the whole thing.
see post #1903

https://www.spurstalk.com/forums/showthread.php?t=278376&p=9782553&viewfull=1#post9782553

what are your thoughts TSA?

[RandomGuy]

:lol... he tried to obstruct but luckily the people around him were ethical enough not to ge along with it

The thing is that people outright had to REFUSE to break the law as Trump ORDERED them to do.

Even so, you rightly point out where Trump broke the law all by himself, multiple times.

[pgardn]

Wallace is basically average.

Relatively speaking though - on FOX news - he stands out because everyone else is basically a certified Trump cult member. Wallace is also in the Cult - but he is 80-90% invested in the Cult - not 100% - yet.

Or

He has started to see what a piece of shit criminal Trump is and is wrestling himself over it.

So you would rather see Diane Sawyer get her ass run over just because she leans more left rather than having a real interviewer, good for you

You don’t have an Fn clue you are so blinded by your ideology.

You didn’t even watch.... piece of shit

[pgardn]

You’re still trying so hard to pretend you’re not partisan

You need to try harder to show that you’re a true radical asshole.
I know you can do it Ive seen it before.

[boutons_deux]

Victor or Victim? Trump’s Changing Response to Mueller Report

The day after the special counsel delivered his report (https://www.nytimes.com/2019/03/22/us/politics/mueller-report.html?module=inline) to the Justice Department, President Trump was ecstatic. He claimed vindication

A month later, the president’s view of the report by the special counsel, Robert S. Mueller III, has grown darker.

he has spent the last few days assailing it as a “total ‘hit job’” (https://twitter.com/realDonaldTrump/status/1119943293297623040) produced by “true Trump Haters (https://twitter.com/realDonaldTrump/status/1119569774286135297), including highly conflicted Bob Mueller himself.”

His bitterness rarely seems far from the surface.

When Mr. Trump showed up in Atlanta later in the day to deliver a speech on opioid abuse, he diverted from the script at a line about stopping the drug industry from “rigging the system.”

He grew animated.

“I know all about the rigging the system because I had the system rigged on me,” he said. “I think you know what I’m talking about.” :lol

In Mr. Trump’s world, there is a fine line between victor and victim.

The president often veers back and forth,

When the report says investigators established no conspiracy between Mr. Trump’s campaign and Russia in 2016 and makes no allegation of obstruction of justice by the president, it is right on the money.

When it offers unflattering descriptions of the president’s actions and refuses to exonerate him on obstruction, the report is dead wrong.

https://www.nytimes.com/2019/04/24/us/politics/mueller-report-trump-administration.html?partner=rss&emc=rss (https://www.nytimes.com/2019/04/24/us/politics/mueller-report-trump-administration.html?partner=rss&emc=rss)

Trash is full of bullshit from head to toe, and spontaneously, unreflectively bullshits non-stop

[Spurs Homer]

So you would rather see Diane Sawyer get her ass run over just because she leans more left rather than having a real interviewer, good for you

You don’t have an Fn clue you are so blinded by your ideology.

You didn’t even watch.... piece of shit

GFY

I watched it - and Wallace is ok - he was good with Mulvaney - but he could have nailed him but didn't because he is also a trumper (wallace)

He was not that good with Schiff - Schiff is consistently on point and all the "collusion evidence" in plain sight that Schiff has been pointing out - was also illustrated in the Mueller report - which confirms everything Schiff has publicly stated.

I watch Wallace every sunday and my comments were actually high praise for someone who works for FOX news.

[pgardn]

GFY

I watched it - and Wallace is ok - he was good with Mulvaney - but he could have nailed him but didn't because he is also a trumper (wallace)

He was not that good with Schiff - Schiff is consistently on point and all the "collusion evidence" in plain sight that Schiff has been pointing out - was also illustrated in the Mueller report - which confirms everything Schiff has publicly stated.

I watch Wallace every sunday and my comments were actually high praise for someone who works for FOX news.

Mulvaney was NOT on the Sunday morning show
And if you did watch this you would have commented on the actual sweat Giuliani had forming on his for head ... was amazing. Nixon like.
I only watched him on the Sunday morning show
You don’t like how he was with Schiff because Schiff is on your team.

OK is a relative term.
Who’s better?

[Spurs Homer]

Mulvaney was NOT on the Sunday morning show
And if you did watch this you would have commented on the actual sweat Giuliani had forming on his for head ... was amazing. Nixon like.
I only watched him on the Sunday morning show
You don’t like how he was with Schiff because Schiff is on your team.

OK is a relative term.
Who’s better?

yes
you are right

i tape the wallace show so i was thinking of a previous segment

yes i did catch the julie-yanni one lol

julie- yanni hit like 3 shows that day and he sweated more on meet the press

julie- yanni got more animated and more ridiculous as the day went on

chuck todd is better and jake tapper and wallace are about even

and i dont have a team you piece of shit

my team is “the truth”

[boutons_deux]

Laurence Tribe Says The Impeachment Process Is Already Under Way Against Trump

After the Mueller report came out with all after its astonishing revelations about the systemic and sustained Russian attack on our democracy, and

the president’s sustained efforts to obstruct inquiry into that attack,

even inquiry of a counter investigation type that would enable us better protect ourselves from going on attack in 2020,

it game clear there was no time to lose.

So that’s why I’m very much in favor of the kinds of hearings that Representative Nadler already as chairman of the judiciary is engaged in now.

They’re not called impeachment hearings

but the impeachment process for anyone

who understands what’s going on is it’s under way

but they don’t have the bumper sticker yet.

They’re looking into all of the evidence connecting the dots and as you’re earlier guests said,

putting live witnesses on the air.

So that people can see for themselves through people like Don McGahn,

just how corrupt and fundamentally criminal this president was. :lol AND IS STILL!

And we cannot assume that public opinion will be completely impervious to that demonstration.

That’s why the president is trying to shut them all up,

trying to stonewall in this unprecedented way,

not invoking real legal privileges

but just saying I’m the president.

And I say I don’t want any of you to cooperate with Congress.
Whose congress anyway?

A bunch of pols.

It’s an astonishing exercise in arrogant obstruction of justice,

very much like but much worse than what Nixon did leading to article 3 of his articles of impeachment the article about contempt of Congress.

That’s what we’re witnessing,

we’re witnessing contempt of Congress,

contempt of law and

contempt for the American people.

https://www.politicususa.com/2019/04/24/laurence-tribe-says-the-impeachment-process-is-already-under-way-against-trump.html

[RandomGuy]

Amazing that Doug Collins didn’t read the thing yet cites it extensively showing how Nadler fed his base bullshit and you ate it up.

Still waiting on you to actually read it.

[boutons_deux]

“TRUMP’S FURIOUS WITH DON”: INSIDE THE PRESIDENT’S MAR-A-LAGO MELTDOWN

The president is raging against his former staff and wants to sue Don McGahn—but staff think he and his lawyers blew it.

Backstage, Trump realizes the damage the report has done, and has taken a much darker view of the post-Mueller landscape.

Trump is lashing out at former West Wing officials whom he blames for providing the lion’s share of damaging information in Mueller’s 448-page report.

The former officials Trump has vented about, sources told me, are a group known as “the notetakers” :lol that includes former White House counsel

Don McGahn,

McGahn’s deputy Annie Donaldson, and

staff secretary Rob Porter.

“The thing that pisses him off is the note-taking,”

a former West Wing official interviewed by Mueller told me.

“Trump thinks they could have cooperated with Mueller without all the note-taking.” :lol

Of all Trump’s former staff members,

McGahn is receiving the brunt of Trump’s post-Mueller rage.

McGahn reportedly spoke (https://www.nytimes.com/2018/08/18/us/politics/don-mcgahn-mueller-investigation.html) to prosecutors for 30 hours during at least three voluntary interviews.

He was cited 157 times in the report—more than any witness—and provided vivid examples of Trump’s efforts to obstruct justice,

while presenting himself as an ethical actor, a circumstance that’s always been galling for the president.

“Trump’s furious with Don,”

https://www.vanityfair.com/news/2019/04/trump-mar-a-lago-meltdown?mbid=nl_th_5cbf936280902d6636dc52e5&CNDID=43758549&utm_source=nl&utm_brand=vf&utm_mailing=VF_Hive_032419&utm_medium=email&bxid=5bd6795524c17c1048022fcc&user_id=43758549&hasha=992d608214b505003aa04bf10a595031&hashb=542eb31d958e85ddd5a4c3ccf3faae18526a77bd&hashc=54b3612ab970ce13a64a16665b1987080ca5b72e2ee7 62b722fbba6ab378f2f5&esrc=bounceX&utm_campaign=VF_Hive_032419&utm_term=VYF_Hive (https://www.vanityfair.com/news/2019/04/trump-mar-a-lago-meltdown?mbid=nl_th_5cbf936280902d6636dc52e5&CNDID=43758549&utm_source=nl&utm_brand=vf&utm_mailing=VF_Hive_032419&utm_medium=email&bxid=5bd6795524c17c1048022fcc&user_id=43758549&hasha=992d608214b505003aa04bf10a595031&hashb=542eb31d958e85ddd5a4c3ccf3faae18526a77bd&hashc=54b3612ab970ce13a64a16665b1987080ca5b72e2ee7 62b722fbba6ab378f2f5&esrc=bounceX&utm_campaign=VF_Hive_032419&utm_term=VYF_Hive)

[boutons_deux]

Is Murdoch Jr letting Fox non-opinion people run looser?

Fox Analyst Napolitano Slams Trump Obstruction As ‘Criminal’ And ‘Immoral’

Napolitano on Wednesday night bashed President Donald Trump’s attempted obstruction outlined in the Mueller report, and

said that Attorney General Bill Barr was “wrong” to determine Trump didn’t obstruct justice.

Napolitano outlined special counsel Robert Mueller’s findings on the numerous attempts Trump made to impede the investigation into Russian interference,

which Napolitano called a “serious allegation of criminal activity.”

“If [Trump] had ordered his aides to violate federal law to save a human life or to preserve human freedom,

he would at least have a moral defense to his behavior,”

“But ordering them to break federal law to save him from the consequences of his own behavior?

That is immoral, that is criminal, that is defenseless, and that is condemnable.”

“On obstruction, Barr is wrong,”

“The essence of obstruction is deception or diversion — to prevent the government from finding the truth,”

https://talkingpointsmemo.com/news/fox-napolitano-trump-obstruction-criminal-immoral-mueller?utm_source=feedburner&utm_medium=feed&utm_campaign=Feed%3A+tpm-news+%28TPMNews%29 (https://talkingpointsmemo.com/news/fox-napolitano-trump-obstruction-criminal-immoral-mueller?utm_source=feedburner&utm_medium=feed&utm_campaign=Feed%3A+tpm-news+%28TPMNews%29)

[pgardn]

yes
you are right

i tape the wallace show so i was thinking of a previous segment

yes i did catch the julie-yanni one lol

julie- yanni hit like 3 shows that day and he sweated more on meet the press

julie- yanni got more animated and more ridiculous as the day went on

chuck todd is better and jake tapper and wallace are about even

and i dont have a team you piece of shit

my team is “the truth”

BS

You are a member of the blue team.
Lie or not

[boutons_deux]

The Press Didn’t Just Report Accurately on Trump-Russia Corruption.

It Prevented the Corruption From Being Worse.

Russia conspiracy skeptics like the Intercept’s Glenn Greenwald (https://twitter.com/ggreenwald)and President Donald Trump (https://twitter.com/realDonaldTrump/status/1119572078175367168) are not done gloating/ranting about how “the media” allegedly embarrassed itself by reporting on seemingly improper relationships between Trump advisers and the Russian government in 2016 and 2017.

I keep reading parts of the Mueller report and finding

examples of potential Trump-Russia deals that were very likely called off because of accurate media reports (https://slate.com/news-and-politics/2019/04/mueller-report-journalism-was-right.html).

Here are three of them!

Trump Tower Moscow.

According to the special counsel’s report, “After the media began questioning Trump’s connections to Russia, Cohen promoted a ‘party line’ that publicly distanced Trump from Russia and asserted he had no business there.”

Sanctions.

After the Washington Post broke the news (https://www.washingtonpost.com/opinions/why-did-obama-dawdle-on-russias-hacking/2017/01/12/75f878a0-d90c-11e6-9a36-1d296534b31e_story.html) of Flynn’s conversation with Kislyak, he was eventually forced out of office—and more broadly, as the New Yorker has reported (https://www.newyorker.com/news/news-desk/israeli-saudi-and-emirati-officials-privately-pushed-for-trump-to-strike-a-grand-bargain-with-putin), the administration’s efforts to strike a sanctions-easing agreement with Russia died because of “the looming Mueller investigation” and because “members of Congress were pushing at the time to expand sanctions against Russia, not reduce them.”

Michael Flynn’s nuclear deal.

According to Newsweek’s coverage (https://www.newsweek.com/2017/06/23/flynn-russia-nuclear-energy-middle-east-iran-saudi-arabia-qatar-israel-donald-623396.html), ACU’s breakup took place in the context of “reports … that the FBI was investigating possible collusion between the Russians and the Trump campaign.

The picture the Mueller report creates of Trump World in 2016 and early 2017 is one in which

Russia-connected figures were swarming around trying to squeeze concessions out of the campaign and administration.

And,

repeatedly, Trump’s advisers were receptive to hearing about and pursuing these plans

until being caught in the spotlight of press scrutiny and related political pressure.

No wonder he hates the media!

https://slate.com/news-and-politics/2019/04/trump-russia-media-mueller-corruption.html

[boutons_deux]

Fordham Law Professor: Mueller Revealed Trump-Russia Conspiracy

Fordham University Law Professor Jed Shugerman argued that, despite the headline conclusions of Special Counsel Robert Mueller’s report on the Russia investigation (https://www.nytimes.com/2019/04/25/opinion/mueller-trump-campaign-russia-conpiracy-.html?smid=tw-nytopinion&smtyp=cur),

the evidence shows there really was illegal conspiracy and coordination between the Trump campaign and the hostile foreign power.

He makes two clever analytical moves.

First, he points to Mueller’s implicit standard of evidence: proof beyond a reasonable doubt.

As a prosecutor who would be called upon to demonstrate his conclusions in a court of law, the former FBI director held himself to a rigorous standard for his claims: just below certainty.

Shugerman’s second analytical move comes in, arguing that

Mueller’s standards for assessing conspiracy and coordination may have been too stringent:

Even without knowing what is redacted, the report offers “substantial and credible information” of the Trump campaign conspiring or coordinating with the Russian government.

Under federal criminal law (https://fas.org/sgp/crs/misc/R41223.pdf), “conspiracy” does not require direct proof or explicit words of agreement.

It can be proven by action and circumstantial evidence from which the agreement may be inferred.

And on campaign “coordination,”

the Mueller report made a significant omission or oversight on this question when it stated that “‘coordination’ does not have a settled definition in federal criminal law.

We understood coordination to require an agreement — tacit or express.”

As the election law expert Paul Seamus Ryan noted, Congress in its 2002 campaign finance law rejected that view:

Federal law “shall not require agreement or formal collaboration to establish coordination.”

The federal regulations followed (https://www.law.cornell.edu/cfr/text/11/109.20) this command:

“Coordinated means

made in cooperation, consultation or concert with, or

at the request or suggestion of, a candidate,”

with no need to show any kind of agreement.

Expenditures for coordinated communications are considered in-kind contributions, and foreign contributions — public or private — are illegal.

With these less demanding interpretations of the charges,

Shugerman argues that at least three events from the Mueller report could be seen as evidence of conspiracy and coordination:

Campaign Chair Paul Manafort’s sending of internal polling data to a man believed to be a Russian spy;

Roger Stone’s interactions with WikiLeaks, which could directly implicate Trump (though much of these sections are redacted); and

Donald Trump Jr.’s communications with WikiLeaks.

“This conduct by President Trump, his son and his campaign manager and deputy campaign manager are probably civil violations of coordination for enforcement by the F.E.C.,

it does rise to the level of proof “by a preponderance of the evidence,” wrote Shugerman.

This is an acceptable standard for civil violations not punishable by prison time.

Congress gets to decide what counts as a “high crime or misdemeanor” —

and there’s no reason these acts couldn’t qualify.

Congress also gets to decide what standard of proof it needs.

There’s no reason to insist on knowing “beyond a reasonable doubt” when the integrity of the presidency is involved.

https://www.nationalmemo.com/fordham-law-professor-mueller-revealed-trump-russia-conspiracy/ (https://www.nationalmemo.com/fordham-law-professor-mueller-revealed-trump-russia-conspiracy/)

[TSA]

Fordham Law Professor: Mueller Revealed Trump-Russia Conspiracy

Fordham University Law Professor Jed Shugerman argued that, despite the headline conclusions of Special Counsel Robert Mueller’s report on the Russia investigation (https://www.nytimes.com/2019/04/25/opinion/mueller-trump-campaign-russia-conpiracy-.html?smid=tw-nytopinion&smtyp=cur),

the evidence shows there really was illegal conspiracy and coordination between the Trump campaign and the hostile foreign power.

He makes two clever analytical moves.

First, he points to Mueller’s implicit standard of evidence: proof beyond a reasonable doubt.

As a prosecutor who would be called upon to demonstrate his conclusions in a court of law, the former FBI director held himself to a rigorous standard for his claims: just below certainty.

Shugerman’s second analytical move comes in, arguing that

Mueller’s standards for assessing conspiracy and coordination may have been too stringent:

Even without knowing what is redacted, the report offers “substantial and credible information” of the Trump campaign conspiring or coordinating with the Russian government.

Under federal criminal law (https://fas.org/sgp/crs/misc/R41223.pdf), “conspiracy” does not require direct proof or explicit words of agreement.

It can be proven by action and circumstantial evidence from which the agreement may be inferred.

And on campaign “coordination,”

the Mueller report made a significant omission or oversight on this question when it stated that “‘coordination’ does not have a settled definition in federal criminal law.

We understood coordination to require an agreement — tacit or express.”

As the election law expert Paul Seamus Ryan noted, Congress in its 2002 campaign finance law rejected that view:

Federal law “shall not require agreement or formal collaboration to establish coordination.”

The federal regulations followed (https://www.law.cornell.edu/cfr/text/11/109.20) this command:

“Coordinated means

made in cooperation, consultation or concert with, or

at the request or suggestion of, a candidate,”

with no need to show any kind of agreement.

Expenditures for coordinated communications are considered in-kind contributions, and foreign contributions — public or private — are illegal.

With these less demanding interpretations of the charges,

Shugerman argues that at least three events from the Mueller report could be seen as evidence of conspiracy and coordination:

Campaign Chair Paul Manafort’s sending of internal polling data to a man believed to be a Russian spy;

Roger Stone’s interactions with WikiLeaks, which could directly implicate Trump (though much of these sections are redacted); and

Donald Trump Jr.’s communications with WikiLeaks.

“This conduct by President Trump, his son and his campaign manager and deputy campaign manager are probably civil violations of coordination for enforcement by the F.E.C.,

it does rise to the level of proof “by a preponderance of the evidence,” wrote Shugerman.

This is an acceptable standard for civil violations not punishable by prison time.

Congress gets to decide what counts as a “high crime or misdemeanor” —

and there’s no reason these acts couldn’t qualify.

Congress also gets to decide what standard of proof it needs.

There’s no reason to insist on knowing “beyond a reasonable doubt” when the integrity of the presidency is involved.

https://www.nationalmemo.com/fordham-law-professor-mueller-revealed-trump-russia-conspiracy/ (https://www.nationalmemo.com/fordham-law-professor-mueller-revealed-trump-russia-conspiracy/)


1. "The investigation did not establish that members of the Trump Campaign conspired or coordinated with the Russian government in its election interference activities."

2. "The investigation examined whether [contacts between Russia and Trump figures] involved or resulted in coordination or a conspiracy with the Trump Campaign and Russia, including with respect to Russia providing assistance to the Campaign in exchange for any sort of favorable treatment in the future. Based on the available information, the investigation did not establish such coordination."

3. "The investigation did not establish that [Carter] Page coordinated with the Russian government in its efforts to interfere with the 2016 election."

4. "The Office did not identify evidence in those [contacts between Russians and people around Trump after the GOP convention] of coordination between the Campaign and the Russian government."

5. "The Office did not identify evidence of a connection between Manafort's sharing polling data and Russia's interference in the election ... [and] the investigation did not establish that Manafort otherwise coordinated with the Russian government on its election-interference efforts."

6. "The investigation did not establish that these [contacts between Russians and people around Trump during the transition] reflected or constituted coordination between the Trump Campaign and Russia in its election interference activities."

7. "The investigation did not identify evidence that any U.S. persons conspired or coordinated with the [Russian disinformation campaign]."

[boutons_deux]

The Fordham lawyer makes a solid case of collusion sufficient for Dems to impeach as they define "crimes and misdemeanors"

I'd say Trash insulting 17 US IC agencies as Nazis, and saying their findings were a hoax, believing Pootin over his own IC, as a misdemeanor

I'd say Trash holding secret talks with Pootin after he was elected was NatSec misdemeanor.

If Trash is so innocent. why his two years of lying and obstruction?

[boutons_deux]

Here’s why Trump’s abuse of ‘executive privilege’ could lead to impeachment proceedings

Trump is angrily resisting Democratic subpoenas from the U.S. House of Representatives, vowing that he will fight every last one of them

the “ultimate irony” is that Trump will “keep making it harder for Democrats to avoid impeachment proceedings. (https://edition.cnn.com/2019/04/25/opinions/trump-constitutional-crisis-opinion-zelizer/)”

Trump, vowing to fight all subpoenas from Congress, has been claiming executive privilege (https://www.washingtonpost.com/opinions/2019/04/24/how-trump-is-making-his-own-impeachment-more-likely/?noredirect=on&utm_term=.ab929f690a4a).

The executive privilege concept for U.S. presidents, Zelizer explains,

can be justified by “the interests of national security or

the need to allow staffers to have conversations free of the fear they will be on the front pages….

in July 1974, the month before President Richard Nixon’s resignation because of the Watergate scandal,

the U.S. Supreme Court upheld executive privilege as “a legitimate principle”

but ruled that “in Nixon’s case, it could not be used”

because “the right of the public to know the truth in an investigation

outweighed the president’s right to block” recordings of White House conversations.

Trump is “making a much bolder claim” by

vowing to “defy all subpoenas because he does not believe the investigations are legitimate.”

Pelosi is furious over Trump’s abuse of executive privilege, saying,

“President Trump and his administration are engaged in unprecedented stonewalling and

once again using the legal system to conceal every area of his life

as well as his wrongdoing and improprieties from the American people.”

if Trump continues to abuse executive privilege and resist congressional oversight,

more Democrats might decide that impeachment proceedings are unavoidable.

Trump ...

“keeps forcing the nation’s hand in considering how far it is willing to let a president go before finally saying that enough is enough.”

https://www.rawstory.com/2019/04/heres-trumps-abuse-executive-privilege-lead-impeachment-proceedings-2/?utm_source=feedburner&utm_medium=feed&utm_campaign=Feed%3A+TheRawStory+%28The+Raw+Story% 29 (https://www.rawstory.com/2019/04/heres-trumps-abuse-executive-privilege-lead-impeachment-proceedings-2/?utm_source=feedburner&utm_medium=feed&utm_campaign=Feed%3A+TheRawStory+%28The+Raw+Story% 29)

[Winehole23]

If Trash is so innocent. why his two years of lying and obstruction?DJT's contumaceous disregard for whatever you think is a sign of his vitality and the signature of his vengeance. Part of the "charisma."

Frank presidential contemptuousness toward judges and the law was startling at first, but seems more commonplace now, wouldn't you agree?

[RandomGuy]

1. "The investigation did not establish that members of the Trump Campaign conspired or coordinated with the Russian government in its election interference activities."

2. "The investigation examined whether [contacts between Russia and Trump figures] involved or resulted in coordination or a conspiracy with the Trump Campaign and Russia, including with respect to Russia providing assistance to the Campaign in exchange for any sort of favorable treatment in the future. Based on the available information, the investigation did not establish such coordination."

3. "The investigation did not establish that [Carter] Page coordinated with the Russian government in its efforts to interfere with the 2016 election."

4. "The Office did not identify evidence in those [contacts between Russians and people around Trump after the GOP convention] of coordination between the Campaign and the Russian government."

5. "The Office did not identify evidence of a connection between Manafort's sharing polling data and Russia's interference in the election ... [and] the investigation did not establish that Manafort otherwise coordinated with the Russian government on its election-interference efforts."

6. "The investigation did not establish that these [contacts between Russians and people around Trump during the transition] reflected or constituted coordination between the Trump Campaign and Russia in its election interference activities."

7. "The investigation did not identify evidence that any U.S. persons conspired or coordinated with the [Russian disinformation campaign]."

You didn't read the full report, did you?

[RandomGuy]

1. "The investigation did not establish that members of the Trump Campaign conspired or coordinated with the Russian government in its election interference activities."

2. "The investigation examined whether [contacts between Russia and Trump figures] involved or resulted in coordination or a conspiracy with the Trump Campaign and Russia, including with respect to Russia providing assistance to the Campaign in exchange for any sort of favorable treatment in the future. Based on the available information, the investigation did not establish such coordination."

3. "The investigation did not establish that [Carter] Page coordinated with the Russian government in its efforts to interfere with the 2016 election."

4. "The Office did not identify evidence in those [contacts between Russians and people around Trump after the GOP convention] of coordination between the Campaign and the Russian government."

5. "The Office did not identify evidence of a connection between Manafort's sharing polling data and Russia's interference in the election ... [and] the investigation did not establish that Manafort otherwise coordinated with the Russian government on its election-interference efforts."

6. "The investigation did not establish that these [contacts between Russians and people around Trump during the transition] reflected or constituted coordination between the Trump Campaign and Russia in its election interference activities."

7. "The investigation did not identify evidence that any U.S. persons conspired or coordinated with the [Russian disinformation campaign]."

I can tell you didn't read the full report, because all you did was copy and paste someone else's cherry picked summary. :lmao

HERE IS THE LINK TO YOUR SOURCE, SINCE YOU WERE TOO LAZY TO PROVIDE ONE. (https://www.washingtonexaminer.com/opinion/columnists/byron-york-mueller-trump-and-two-years-of-bullshit)


1. "The investigation did not establish that members of the Trump Campaign conspired or coordinated with the Russian government in its election interference activities."

2. "The investigation examined whether [contacts between Russia and Trump figures] involved or resulted in coordination or a conspiracy with the Trump Campaign and Russia, including with respect to Russia providing assistance to the Campaign in exchange for any sort of favorable treatment in the future. Based on the available information, the investigation did not establish such coordination."

3. "The investigation did not establish that [Carter] Page coordinated with the Russian government in its efforts to interfere with the 2016 election."

4. "The Office did not identify evidence in those [contacts between Russians and people around Trump after the GOP convention] of coordination between the Campaign and the Russian government."

5. "The Office did not identify evidence of a connection between Manafort's sharing polling data and Russia's interference in the election ... [and] the investigation did not establish that Manafort otherwise coordinated with the Russian government on its election-interference efforts."

6. "The investigation did not establish that these [contacts between Russians and people around Trump during the transition] reflected or constituted coordination between the Trump Campaign and Russia in its election interference activities."

7. "The investigation did not identify evidence that any U.S. persons conspired or coordinated with the [Russian disinformation campaign]."


:rollin

[Pavlov]

:lol Byron

[RandomGuy]

[list copied from a website]


"Guccifer 2.0

On june 14, 2016, the DNC and its cyber-response team announced the breach of the DNC network and suspected theft of DNC documents. In the statement, the cyber-response team alleged that Russian state-sponsored actors (which they referred to as "Fancy Bear") were responsible for the breach. Apparently in response to that announcement, on June 1, 2016, GRU officers using the persona Guccifer 2,0 created a WordPress blog. In the hours leading up to the launch of that WordPress blog, GRU officers searched for a number of specific words and phrases in English, including "some hundred sheets," "illuminati" and "worldwide known". Approximately two hours after the last of those searches, Guccifer 2.0 published its first post, attributing the DNC server hack to a lone Romanian hacker using several of the unique English words and phrases that the GRU officers had searched for that day.

(goes on to detail the GRU's other actions)

It was the Russians,. They were doing this in support of Trump.

Why is that? In your response, be sure to quote the parts of the report you actually read. :rollin

[DarrinS]

bitter enders, lolz

[benefactor]

I can tell you didn't read the full report, because all you did was copy and paste someone else's cherry picked summary. :lmao

HERE IS THE LINK TO YOUR SOURCE, SINCE YOU WERE TOO LAZY TO PROVIDE ONE. (https://www.washingtonexaminer.com/opinion/columnists/byron-york-mueller-trump-and-two-years-of-bullshit)




:rollin
:lol

[RandomGuy]

bitter enders, lolz

Guessing you haven't gotten off your lazy ass to read the report either.

Ironically,lazy to the bitter end. Truly pathetic in the purest sense of that word. Someone so far gone down the propaganda rabbit hole, and incapable of finding their way out.

[TSA]

I can tell you didn't read the full report, because all you did was copy and paste someone else's cherry picked summary. :lmao

HERE IS THE LINK TO YOUR SOURCE, SINCE YOU WERE TOO LAZY TO PROVIDE ONE. (https://www.washingtonexaminer.com/opinion/columnists/byron-york-mueller-trump-and-two-years-of-bullshit)




:rollin

I already linked the source the first time I posted it.

What did it feel like to have Mueller shit all over the conspiracy theory you pushed for over two years?

[Pavlov]

I already linked the source the first time I posted it.

What did it feel like to have Mueller shit all over the conspiracy theory you pushed for over two years?:lol You can tell us. He did the exact same thing to you.

[RandomGuy]

I already linked the source the first time I posted it.

What did it feel like to have Mueller shit all over the conspiracy theory you pushed for over two years?

Odd, I asked if you had read the whole report, and you didn't say you had.

If you had actually read the whole thing you would be all over my post crowing about it. You didn't do that.

You changed the subject and answered a question with a question.

Safe to assume you haven't then, actually read the report. Ironic.

As for your question: I wouldn't know. I read the report, and it showed a systemic and widespread series of dubuious, often bumbling, contacts between people in Trumps orbit and the Russians, including the most damning sharing of polling data with a russian intelligence asset by Trumps campaign manager. A data sharing that preceded a Russian campaign of ads targeting specific states.

LOL TSA hasn't read the report, thinks he knows what it says.

[RandomGuy]

I already linked the source the first time I posted it.

What did it feel like to have Mueller shit all over the conspiracy theory you pushed for over two years?

Maybe you can tell me where, in the report, Mueller says he was investigating Clinton. :rollin

[Pavlov]

What did it feel like to have Mueller shit all over the conspiracy theory you pushed for over two years?”Beginning in the summer of 2016, Assange and WikiLeaks made a number of statements about Seth Rich, a former DNC staff member who was killed in July 2016. The statements about Rich implied falsely that he had been the source of the stolen DNC emails."

:rollin TSA

[TSA]

Odd, I asked if you had read the whole report, and you didn't say you had.

If you had actually read the whole thing you would be all over my post crowing about it. You didn't do that.

You changed the subject and answered a question with a question.

Safe to assume you haven't then, actually read the report. Ironic.

As for your question: I wouldn't know. I read the report, and it showed a systemic and widespread series of dubuious, often bumbling, contacts between people in Trumps orbit and the Russians, including the most damning sharing of polling data with a russian intelligence asset by Trumps campaign manager. A data sharing that preceded a Russian campaign of ads targeting specific states.

LOL TSA hasn't read the report, thinks he knows what it says.

Are you really trying to pretend you weren't one of the top pushers of the conspiracy theory that the Trump campaign conspired and coordinated with Russia? :lmao

LOL RandomGuy has read the report and thinks he knows what it says.

https://theintercept.imgix.net/wp-uploads/sites/1/2019/04/manafor-1555606985.jpg?auto=compress%2Cformat&q=90&w=1024&h=220

You keep trying to prop up this data sharing as some big deal, it wasn't. Kilimnik wasn't even charged by Mueller for anything having to do with the data sharing, neither was Manafort. That Kilimnik was a Russian intelligence asset has never been proven and was always just innuendo to make it sound sinister.

[TSA]

Two of the biggest Russia hoax pushers deflecting to Clinton and Seth Rich :rollin

[RandomGuy]

Are you really trying to pretend you weren't one of the top pushers of the conspiracy theory that the Trump campaign conspired and coordinated with Russia? :lmao

LOL RandomGuy has read the report and thinks he knows what it says.

https://theintercept.imgix.net/wp-uploads/sites/1/2019/04/manafor-1555606985.jpg?auto=compress%2Cformat&q=90&w=1024&h=220

You keep trying to prop up this data sharing as some big deal, it wasn't. Kilimnik wasn't even charged by Mueller for anything having to do with the data sharing, neither was Manafort. That Kilimnik was a Russian intelligence asset has never been proven and was always just innuendo to make it sound sinister.

:rollin


"the Office could not assess what Kilimnik (or others he may have given it to) did with it."

The targeted Russian media campaign is just a coincidence. Totally innocuous.

Poor TSA doesn't know what hit him.

https://media.giphy.com/media/xUPGcIb6MUmPXS0QCY/giphy.gif




:lmao

[Pavlov]

Two of the biggest Russia hoax pushers deflecting to Clinton and Seth Rich :rollinSorry, TSA -- what was my Russia claim again?

You're too much of a pussy to even respond these days, I understand.

Anyway YOU asked what it was like to have Mueller shit on a conspiracy theory pushed for two years. Turns out you know exactly what it feels like because you pushed the Seth Rich conspiracy for two years.

Don't get all pissy because I actually answered your question, bitch.:lol

[RandomGuy]

"The campaign evolved from a generalized program designed in 2014 and 2015 to undermine the U.S. electoral system, to a targeted operation that by 2016 favored candidate Trump and disparaged Clinton."


By February 2016, Internal IRA documents referred to support fro the Trump campaign and opposition to candidate Clinton... "Main idea: Use any opportunity to criticize Hillary [Clinton] and the rest (except for Sanders and Trump - we support them)."

[CosmicCowboy]

yes
you are right

i tape the wallace show so i was thinking of a previous segment

yes i did catch the julie-yanni one lol

julie- yanni hit like 3 shows that day and he sweated more on meet the press

julie- yanni got more animated and more ridiculous as the day went on

chuck todd is better and jake tapper and wallace are about even

and i dont have a team you piece of shit

my team is “the truth”

:lmao

You and boutons are charter members of the whacko left team.

[RandomGuy]

:lmao

You and boutons are charter members of the whacko left team.

If the president commits multiple acts of obstruction of justice, through abuse of the powers of the presidency, should he be impeached and removed from office?

[CosmicCowboy]

If the president commits multiple acts of obstruction of justice, through abuse of the powers of the presidency, should he be impeached and removed from office?

Look, you know I don't like Trump, but I don't see that despite wishing that he could, I don't think he was able to obstruct anything.

[Winehole23]

I think RG is suggesting "trying to" might be a crime. If not, it's certainly impeachable.

[Winehole23]

If, for example, if DJT flat out ordered Don McGahn to do something illegal with corrupt intent, it hardly matters whether he succeeded with respect to law and morality.

[Winehole23]

soi disant board conservatives and Trumpistas who continually insist they aren't Trumpistas, have wandered way out into the low tide.





"if it's not strictly illegal, or you don't get caught, there's nothing wrong with that"

[CosmicCowboy]

Meh. So impeach him in the house on that weak ass shit. *shrug*. Go for your political theater. That shit will get laughed out of the senate.

[Winehole23]

You missed the point. You wandered out too far in the low tide.

[CosmicCowboy]

Damn winehole. What are you doing posting this late? Shouldn't you be In bed?

[Winehole23]

Damn winehole. What are you doing posting this late? Shouldn't you be In bed?Night owl, not sorry.

You?

[CosmicCowboy]

Sitting on the deck in Maui listening to the surf. It's only 10 here. Just got home from listening to a good cover band at mick fleetwoods place.

[Winehole23]

How nice.

Enjoy, enjoy!

[Spurs Homer]

This is a fucking lie. Every single you’re pressed on him you suck his cock like he’s a 4 year old boy you “babysit.”

giving direct orders to obstruct is impeachable.

For one fucking time in your lie of a life, quit being a piece of shit.

[Chris]

https://twitter.com/mrctv/status/1122563630384459776

Poor Chris "I know" Cuomo :lol

[Spurs Homer]

https://twitter.com/mrctv/status/1122563630384459776

Poor Chris "I know" Cuomo :lol

This is what happens to old pieces of shit caucasian people - who have been racists their entire life -

they end up brainwashed by a con man white supremacist - and end up on tv shows justifying and rationalizing the crimes of their white supremacist hero -

just because they are too fucking old to learn something new and will go to the grave with this racist hate -

pathetic

and others - just do it on the internet.

Doubly pathetic.

Too bad for you that your "great white supremacist hope" couldn't at least have been a decent person instead of a fucking criminal traitor.

Now you are stuck defending racism, criminality, and treasonous behavior.

The country would be better served if you just drank the kool-aid now.

[boutons_deux]

Rosey sez the Russian stuff in Mueller's report is just the tip of the iceberg

[DMC]

This is a fucking lie. Every single you’re pressed on him you suck his cock like he’s a 4 year old boy you “babysit.”

giving direct orders to obstruct is impeachable.

For one fucking time in your lie of a life, quit being a piece of shit.

Fat rageaholic is back. Careful there Corky, you might injure your Downs.

[CosmicCowboy]

*

[CosmicCowboy]

and you’re an ignorant racist piece of shit. A worthless trumper.

Sup, loser? Getting bored with your Spurs Homer alt? Had to call in your other alt to back you up? Life shitting on you again and needed your ManlyMan internet bully schtick to make yourself feel better? Loooozer. :lol

Sucks to be you, doesn't it? :lmao

[RandomGuy]

I think RG is suggesting "trying to" might be a crime. If not, it's certainly impeachable.

As has been noted, succeeding or not is irrelevant to the charge. You can tackle a witness and attempt to keep them from testifying against you, and still be guilty, even if they eventually succeed in getting to the courthouse.

[RandomGuy]

Look, you know I don't like Trump, but I don't see that despite wishing that he could, I don't think he was able to obstruct anything.

As the Mueller report, as well as other legal scholars noted, success in obstruction is irrelevant. Read the statute, or the report, the attempt IS the crime.

Making the question remain:

If the president commits multiple acts of obstruction of justice, through abuse of the powers of the presidency, should he be impeached and removed from office?

[Chucho]

Sup, loser? Getting bored with your Spurs Homer alt? Had to call in your other alt to back you up? Life shitting on you again and needed your ManlyMan internet bully schtick to make yourself feel better? Loooozer. :lol

Sucks to be you, doesn't it? :lmao
:lol

[RandomGuy]

Two of the biggest Russia hoax pushers deflecting to Clinton and Seth Rich :rollin

Mueller report pretty clearly shows what would commonly be considered to be collusion.

Tell you what, provide a working definition of the word that you accept, and we can walk through the report findings to see what it actually found.

[RandomGuy]

bitter enders, lolz

Mueller report pretty clearly shows what would commonly be considered to be collusion.

Tell you what, provide a working definition of the word that you accept, and we can walk through the report findings to see what it actually shows.

[TSA]

Mueller report pretty clearly shows what would commonly be considered to be collusion.

Tell you what, provide a working definition of the word that you accept, and we can walk through the report findings to see what it actually found.

col·lu·sion
/kəˈlo͞oZHən/
noun
noun: collusion

secret or illegal cooperation or conspiracy, especially in order to cheat or deceive others.

1. "The investigation did not establish that members of the Trump Campaign conspired or coordinated with the Russian government in its election interference activities."

2. "The investigation examined whether [contacts between Russia and Trump figures] involved or resulted in coordination or a conspiracy with the Trump Campaign and Russia, including with respect to Russia providing assistance to the Campaign in exchange for any sort of favorable treatment in the future. Based on the available information, the investigation did not establish such coordination."

3. "The investigation did not establish that [Carter] Page coordinated with the Russian government in its efforts to interfere with the 2016 election."

4. "The Office did not identify evidence in those [contacts between Russians and people around Trump after the GOP convention] of coordination between the Campaign and the Russian government."

5. "The Office did not identify evidence of a connection between Manafort's sharing polling data and Russia's interference in the election ... [and] the investigation did not establish that Manafort otherwise coordinated with the Russian government on its election-interference efforts."

6. "The investigation did not establish that these [contacts between Russians and people around Trump during the transition] reflected or constituted coordination between the Trump Campaign and Russia in its election interference activities."

7. "The investigation did not identify evidence that any U.S. persons conspired or coordinated with the [Russian disinformation campaign]."

[boutons_deux]

Five Things I Learned From the Mueller Report

A careful reading of the dense document delivers some urgent insights.

Here are five conclusions I drew from the exercise:

The president committed crimes.

the facts he recounts describe criminal behavior.

They describe criminal behavior even if we allow the president’s—and the attorney general’s—argument that

facially valid exercises of presidential authority cannot be obstructions of justice.

They do this because they describe obstructive activity that does not involve facially valid exercises of presidential power at all.

The president also committed impeachable offenses.

Crimes and impeachable offenses are not the same thing, though they are overlapping categories.

there simply is no plausible way to understand this fact pattern as a good-faith exercise of presidential power.

It describes a frank abuse of power:

a sustained demand for a wholly self-interested investigative outcome;

a willingness to disrupt a crucial institution to get that outcome,

to retaliate against an official who would not deliver it, and

to set the entire apparatus of the White House to lying about the reason for the action; and

the recruitment of senior Justice Department officials to create a pretextual paper trail to support it.


Trump was not complicit in the Russian social-media conspiracy.

It is a story of failed immunity on the U.S. side to outside interference—and aggressive Russian exploitation of the absence of democratic antibodies to fight off such manipulation.

It was able to trick prominent people into engaging with and promoting its dummy accounts.

It was able to exploit social-media companies.

And it was able to make

a series of contacts with Trump campaign affiliates and to get those figures—plus Trump himself—to engage with and promote social-media content that was part of a hostile power’s covert efforts to influence the American electorate.

Though not intentional or criminal on the U.S. side, this pattern shows a troubling degree of vulnerability on the part of the U.S. political system to outside influence campaigns.

Trump’s complicity in the Russian hacking operation and his campaign’s contacts with the Russians present a more complicated picture.

If there wasn’t collusion on the hacking, it sure wasn’t for lack of trying.

Indeed, the Mueller report makes clear that

Trump personally ordered an attempt to obtain Hillary Clinton’s emails; and

people associated with the campaign pursued this believing they were dealing with Russian hackers.

Trump also personally engaged in discussions about coordinating public-relations strategy around WikiLeaks releases of hacked emails.

At least one person associated with the campaign was in touch directly with the Guccifer 2.0 persona—which is to say with Russian military intelligence.

And Donald Trump Jr. was directly in touch with WikiLeaks—from whom he obtained a password to a hacked database.

There are reasons none of these incidents amount to crimes—good reasons, in my view, in most cases, viable judgment calls in others.

But the picture it all paints of the president’s conduct is anything but exonerating.


The counterintelligence dimensions of the entire affair remain a mystery.

Because the Mueller investigation was born out of a counterintelligence investigation, there has been an enduring impression that it had both criminal and counterintelligence elements.

The Mueller investigation was a criminal probe. Full stop.

It was not a counterintelligence probe.

Mueller then answers the question of what happened to the counterintelligence components of the investigation: The FBI took responsibility for them.

After the blood-letting at the bureau that saw the entire senior leadership replaced precisely as it was engaged with counterintelligence questions involving Trumpworld and Russia, who at the bureau now is going to push such questions?

It would be the deepest of ironies if the Mueller investigation showed evidence that the president had committed crimes and had committed impeachable offenses, and

if he had painted a remarkable historical portrait of the relationship between Trumpworld and the Russian government,

but if at the same time, the core counterintelligence concerns that gave rise to it and

that have haunted the Trump presidency from the beginning went unaddressed.
https://www.theatlantic.com/ideas/archive/2019/04/ben-wittes-five-conclusions-mueller-report/588259/ (https://www.theatlantic.com/ideas/archive/2019/04/ben-wittes-five-conclusions-mueller-report/588259/)

[Spurs Homer]

Five Things I Learned From the Mueller Report

A careful reading of the dense document delivers some urgent insights.

Here are five conclusions I drew from the exercise:

The president committed crimes.

the facts he recounts describe criminal behavior.

They describe criminal behavior even if we allow the president’s—and the attorney general’s—argument that

facially valid exercises of presidential authority cannot be obstructions of justice.

They do this because they describe obstructive activity that does not involve facially valid exercises of presidential power at all.

The president also committed impeachable offenses.

Crimes and impeachable offenses are not the same thing, though they are overlapping categories.

there simply is no plausible way to understand this fact pattern as a good-faith exercise of presidential power.

It describes a frank abuse of power:

a sustained demand for a wholly self-interested investigative outcome;

a willingness to disrupt a crucial institution to get that outcome,

to retaliate against an official who would not deliver it, and

to set the entire apparatus of the White House to lying about the reason for the action; and

the recruitment of senior Justice Department officials to create a pretextual paper trail to support it.


Trump was not complicit in the Russian social-media conspiracy.

It is a story of failed immunity on the U.S. side to outside interference—and aggressive Russian exploitation of the absence of democratic antibodies to fight off such manipulation.

It was able to trick prominent people into engaging with and promoting its dummy accounts.

It was able to exploit social-media companies.

And it was able to make

a series of contacts with Trump campaign affiliates and to get those figures—plus Trump himself—to engage with and promote social-media content that was part of a hostile power’s covert efforts to influence the American electorate.

Though not intentional or criminal on the U.S. side, this pattern shows a troubling degree of vulnerability on the part of the U.S. political system to outside influence campaigns.

Trump’s complicity in the Russian hacking operation and his campaign’s contacts with the Russians present a more complicated picture.

If there wasn’t collusion on the hacking, it sure wasn’t for lack of trying.

Indeed, the Mueller report makes clear that

Trump personally ordered an attempt to obtain Hillary Clinton’s emails; and

people associated with the campaign pursued this believing they were dealing with Russian hackers.

Trump also personally engaged in discussions about coordinating public-relations strategy around WikiLeaks releases of hacked emails.

At least one person associated with the campaign was in touch directly with the Guccifer 2.0 persona—which is to say with Russian military intelligence.

And Donald Trump Jr. was directly in touch with WikiLeaks—from whom he obtained a password to a hacked database.

There are reasons none of these incidents amount to crimes—good reasons, in my view, in most cases, viable judgment calls in others.

But the picture it all paints of the president’s conduct is anything but exonerating.


The counterintelligence dimensions of the entire affair remain a mystery.

Because the Mueller investigation was born out of a counterintelligence investigation, there has been an enduring impression that it had both criminal and counterintelligence elements.

The Mueller investigation was a criminal probe. Full stop.

It was not a counterintelligence probe.

Mueller then answers the question of what happened to the counterintelligence components of the investigation: The FBI took responsibility for them.

After the blood-letting at the bureau that saw the entire senior leadership replaced precisely as it was engaged with counterintelligence questions involving Trumpworld and Russia, who at the bureau now is going to push such questions?

It would be the deepest of ironies if the Mueller investigation showed evidence that the president had committed crimes and had committed impeachable offenses, and

if he had painted a remarkable historical portrait of the relationship between Trumpworld and the Russian government,

but if at the same time, the core counterintelligence concerns that gave rise to it and

that have haunted the Trump presidency from the beginning went unaddressed.
https://www.theatlantic.com/ideas/archive/2019/04/ben-wittes-five-conclusions-mueller-report/588259/ (https://www.theatlantic.com/ideas/archive/2019/04/ben-wittes-five-conclusions-mueller-report/588259/)




that CI investigation did not disappear into thin air

mueller never mentions the memo that trump wrote after firing comey - stating his bullshit reasoning

rosenstein fucked up when he obtained a copy and gave mccabe a copy

mccabe turned it over to mueller

mueller is silent on all of this

but the CI investigation rolls on

[boutons_deux]

Mueller report says "thorough FBI investigation" might have implicated Trump in criminal conspiracy

One section offers a strong suggestion that Mueller believed he was investigating a possible criminal conspiracy

One section, from Mueller’s analysis of President Donald

Trump’s reaction the public confirmation of the FBI’s Russia investigation, and

his subsequent firing of then-FBI director James Comey,

offers a strong suggestion that the special counsel believed he was investigating a possible criminal conspiracy.

1124132237816020993

This section of the analysis comes after Mueller’s investigators lay out evidence that Comey’s firing meets the three common elements in federal obstruction statutes —

an obstructive act,

a nexus between the obstructive act and an official proceeding, and

a corrupt intent.

“The President had a motive to put the FBI’s Russia investigation behind him,” Mueller’s team concluded in that analysis.

“The evidence does not establish that the termination of Corney was designed to cover up a conspiracy between the Trump Campaign and Russia.”

But, as the two sentences flagged by Frum point out, Mueller’s team believed that

a thorough FBI investigation would have turned up, at minimum, personally or politically damaging evidence against the president, or,

at worst, evidence implicating Trump in a criminal conspiracy.

https://www.salon.com/2019/05/05/mueller-report-show-thorough-fbi-investigation-might-have-implicated-trump-in-criminal-conspiracy_partner/ (https://www.salon.com/2019/05/05/mueller-report-show-thorough-fbi-investigation-might-have-implicated-trump-in-criminal-conspiracy_partner/)

[Spurs Homer]

Mueller report says "thorough FBI investigation" might have implicated Trump in criminal conspiracy

One section offers a strong suggestion that Mueller believed he was investigating a possible criminal conspiracy

One section, from Mueller’s analysis of President Donald

Trump’s reaction the public confirmation of the FBI’s Russia investigation, and

his subsequent firing of then-FBI director James Comey,

offers a strong suggestion that the special counsel believed he was investigating a possible criminal conspiracy.

1124132237816020993

This section of the analysis comes after Mueller’s investigators lay out evidence that Comey’s firing meets the three common elements in federal obstruction statutes —

an obstructive act,

a nexus between the obstructive act and an official proceeding, and

a corrupt intent.

“The President had a motive to put the FBI’s Russia investigation behind him,” Mueller’s team concluded in that analysis.

“The evidence does not establish that the termination of Corney was designed to cover up a conspiracy between the Trump Campaign and Russia.”

But, as the two sentences flagged by Frum point out, Mueller’s team believed that

a thorough FBI investigation would have turned up, at minimum, personally or politically damaging evidence against the president, or,

at worst, evidence implicating Trump in a criminal conspiracy.

https://www.salon.com/2019/05/05/mueller-report-show-thorough-fbi-investigation-might-have-implicated-trump-in-criminal-conspiracy_partner/ (https://www.salon.com/2019/05/05/mueller-report-show-thorough-fbi-investigation-might-have-implicated-trump-in-criminal-conspiracy_partner/)





let me give you the punch line to your post;

There is a current thorough FBI investigation being conducted on trump and his involvement in this conspiracy/russian attack. This is the counter-intelligence investigation.

[boutons_deux]

Mueller sets ‘tentative date’ to appear before House Judiciary Committee to discuss Trump investigation

Mueller has “tentatively” agreed to appear before the Democratic-controlled House Judiciary Committee on

May 15,

where he will answer questions about his 400-page report on President Donald Trump (https://www.axios.com/robert-mueller-testify-house-judiciary-committee-28f3fba4-2c72-47ad-bbfb-d50437814827.html).

https://www.rawstory.com/2019/05/mueller-sets-tentative-date-to-appear-before-house-judiciary-committee-to-discuss-trump-investigation/?utm_source=feedburner&utm_medium=feed&utm_campaign=Feed%3A+TheRawStory+%28The+Raw+Story% 29 (https://www.rawstory.com/2019/05/mueller-sets-tentative-date-to-appear-before-house-judiciary-committee-to-discuss-trump-investigation/?utm_source=feedburner&utm_medium=feed&utm_campaign=Feed%3A+TheRawStory+%28The+Raw+Story% 29)

[Spurs Homer]

Mueller sets ‘tentative date’ to appear before House Judiciary Committee to discuss Trump investigation

Mueller has “tentatively” agreed to appear before the Democratic-controlled House Judiciary Committee on

May 15,

where he will answer questions about his 400-page report on President Donald Trump (https://www.axios.com/robert-mueller-testify-house-judiciary-committee-28f3fba4-2c72-47ad-bbfb-d50437814827.html).

https://www.rawstory.com/2019/05/mueller-sets-tentative-date-to-appear-before-house-judiciary-committee-to-discuss-trump-investigation/?utm_source=feedburner&utm_medium=feed&utm_campaign=Feed%3A+TheRawStory+%28The+Raw+Story% 29 (https://www.rawstory.com/2019/05/mueller-sets-tentative-date-to-appear-before-house-judiciary-committee-to-discuss-trump-investigation/?utm_source=feedburner&utm_medium=feed&utm_campaign=Feed%3A+TheRawStory+%28The+Raw+Story% 29)


now

lets watch and see how much trump/barr try to block this

[boutons_deux]

Robert Mueller Was Wrong.

President Trump Can Be Indicted


There is not a syllable in the text of the Constitution that supports the conclusion

reached by either the Nixon-appointed OLC lawyer that Nixon was immune or the Clinton-appointed OLC lawyer that Clinton was immune.

The foundation of Mueller’s reluctance to indict is rotten to the core.

As I have written previously, both of the OLC opinions upon which Mueller relied have been described by scholars as “shaky” and “political.”

Indeed, recent historical discoveries (of which Mueller might not even be aware) make them even weaker.

To rehash what happened:

The OLC rendered the first such opinion in 1973.

On its face, it is dubious.

It derived from the Department’s criminal investigation of REPUG Vice President Spiro Agnew.

I was a member of Agnew’s legal team, and we argued the issue directly with Attorney General Elliot Richardson.

We were hardly objective historians.

We were advocates for our client, and

we advanced the theory that an incumbent Vice President was immune from criminal prosecution.

One of the bases of our argument was that inasmuch as some scholars opined the Article II President was immune,

the Article II Vice President must be immune as well.

Richardson sent the question to the OLC and asked for an objective opinion.

What he got, instead, was a politically dishonest one.

To use one of President Trump’s preferred terms, the OLC response was “rigged.”

The truth was recently uncovered via the historical research done by Michael Yarvitz, a producer for The Rachel Maddow Show.

Yarvitz, working on the background of the Agnew case for what is now the Peabody-nominated podcast, Bag Man,

located Richardson’s Executive Assistant at the time, J. T. Smith.

Smith recalled that the OLC lawyer who ultimately researched and wrote the opinion, told Smith that the matter of who was immune from prosecution was unclear.

But instead of saying so in his report, this OLC lawyer took the easy way out and asked Smith, What does the Attorney General want me to say?

Smith admits telling the OLC lawyer, in effect,

The Attorney General wanted a report saying the Vice President was not immune.

The OLC lawyer obeyed.

In an opinion that obliged the wishes of both the Attorney General and the President (each of whom wanted Agnew gone for different reasons),

the OLC opinion writer threaded the needle, and as a bonus, in the tradition of political loyalists, answered a question he was not asked:

He concluded that while Agnew was not immune, Nixon was.

Decades later, the question came up again.

In 2000, while President Bill Clinton was under attack for possible criminal indictment for perjury, his Department of Justice produced an update to the 1973 opinion.

By then, the Supreme Court had rendered two opinions that established a doctrine of Presidential vulnerability:

In Nixon v. U.S., the

Court concluded the President was not immune from a grand jury subpoena, and in Clinton v. Jones,

the Court held the President was not immune from a civil suit for damages arising out of his conduct prior to his inauguration.

Nevertheless, the Clinton-appointed OLC, citing the 1973 opinion, concluded that Clinton was immune from prosecution.

It is notable that both OLC opinions rely on practical considerations:

The President now carries a heavier burden than he did when the Constitution was adopted, they argue, and

therefore the President has become too busy to deal with an indictment. :lol

One can imagine the late Justice Antonin Scalia hearing such an argument and scolding the DOJ lawyer with his famous remark,

“[The Constitution] is not a living document. It’s dead, dead, dead.”

Inasmuch as neither opinion cites constitutional language clearly supporting its conclusion,

one assumes a conservative Supreme Court — like the one we have now — would apply the Scalia “textual” approach to constitutional interpretation,

and firmly reject both OLC opinions.

Regardless of Attorney General William Barr’s bogus decision that no charges should be brought,

this matter deserves its day in court.

Had the rigid Mueller applied the law instead of politically rigged DOJ doctrines,

Trump’s now famous prediction may have actually come to pass: In his own words, he would be “f–ked.“


http://time.com/5574520/mueller-report-trump-indictment-obstruction-justice/

[a777pilot]

This is all politics. This has nothing to do with facts, reality, or the rule of law. Just politics.

There was a great line in the movie "Evita" (1996). "Oh, what a circus, oh, what a show!"

[boutons_deux]

Trump Says It Directly: "Mueller Should Not Testify"

"No redos for the Dems!" the president bizarrely declared in a tweet

https://www.commondreams.org/news/2019/05/05/trump-says-it-directly-mueller-should-not-testify?cd-origin=rss

[boutons_deux]

https://2vwlfu3ynqxb3npfhm3m8lde-wpengine.netdna-ssl.com/wp-content/uploads/2016/08/trump-freak-out.jpg

[boutons_deux]

Cory Booker Makes The Perfect Case For Impeaching William Barr

“He has eroded his credibility to the point where I believe he should resign.

He has clearly misled Congress…

I believe he should resign.

I believe that everything should be on the table,

but when you have a person who has undermined the independence of the attorney general’s office.

A guy who is literally overseeing ongoing investigations into criminal activity and this president, and

you’ve lost your ability to trust,

you were clearly trying to spin.

You were acting more like Rudy Giuliani than the independent attorney general of this country.

I’m definitely worried.”

https://www.politicususa.com/2019/05/05/cory-booker-makes-the-perfect-case-for-impeaching-william-barr.html

[boutons_deux]

Trump claims Democrats have ‘stollen’ :lol two years of his presidency with Mueller investigation

Ignorant, stupid, illiterate President Donald Trump seems to have forgotten that

he is the reason the special counsel’s investigation

was called by his own Department of Justice and

Democrats had nothing to do with the investigations.

In a Sunday of misspelled Twitter rants,

Trump proclaimed his economy was the best in the world and of all time. :lol

https://www.rawstory.com/2019/05/trump-claims-democrats-have-stollen-two-years-of-his-presidency-with-mueller-investigation/?utm_source=feedburner&utm_medium=feed&utm_campaign=Feed%3A+TheRawStory+%28The+Raw+Story% 29

stupid, ignorant, corrupt, fraud, illiterate, mentally ill, emotionally stunted, a fucking cretin.

[boutons_deux]

Trump made House Republicans look like complete fools

House and Senate Republicans have maintained that the most crucial thing in the special counsel’s investigation is transparency for them and the public.

Now, suddenly, things have changed, leaving them in an awkward predicament.

President Donald Trump and his fellow Republicans repeated over and over that the full report from Robert Mueller would be available.

They all promised that Mueller should and would testify to the House and Senate.

They even promised Attorney General Bill Barr would answer questions before the House and Senate,

Republicans in the House demanded in April that Mueller testify “immediately.”

Rep. Doug Collins (R-GA) demanded Rep. Jerry Nadler (D-NY) call Mueller to testify immediately.

https://www.rawstory.com/2019/05/trump-made-house-republicans-look-like-complete-fools/?utm_source=feedburner&utm_medium=feed&utm_campaign=Feed%3A+TheRawStory+%28The+Raw+Story% 29 (https://www.rawstory.com/2019/05/trump-made-house-republicans-look-like-complete-fools/?utm_source=feedburner&utm_medium=feed&utm_campaign=Feed%3A+TheRawStory+%28The+Raw+Story% 29)

[Spurs Homer]

Trump Says It Directly: "Mueller Should Not Testify"

"No redos for the Dems!" the president bizarrely declared in a tweet

https://www.commondreams.org/news/2019/05/05/trump-says-it-directly-mueller-should-not-testify?cd-origin=rss






Welp...


that did not take long.

The Cover up continues...let's see if Mueller is who we think he is...


or has Trump eaten his soul also?

[boutons_deux]

House panel issues report citing Barr for contempt


https://www.reuters.com/article/us-usa-trump-barr-contempt/house-panel-issues-report-citing-barr-for-contempt-idUSKCN1SC1AN?feedType=RSS&feedName=topNews&utm_source=feedburner&utm_medium=feed&utm_campaign=Feed%3A+reuters%2FtopNews+%28News+%2F +US+%2F+Top+News%29


"Lock 'im up!"

[boutons_deux]

House panel issues report citing Barr for contempt

https://www.reuters.com/article/us-usa-trump-barr-contempt/house-panel-issues-report-citing-barr-for-contempt-idUSKCN1SC1AN?feedType=RSS&feedName=topNews&utm_source=feedburner&utm_medium=feed&utm_campaign=Feed%3A+reuters%2FtopNews+%28News+%2F +US+%2F+Top+News%29

"Lock 'im up!"

I bet Pelosi does nothing effective but talk, at most

[Spurs Homer]

House panel issues report citing Barr for contempt

https://www.reuters.com/article/us-usa-trump-barr-contempt/house-panel-issues-report-citing-barr-for-contempt-idUSKCN1SC1AN?feedType=RSS&feedName=topNews&utm_source=feedburner&utm_medium=feed&utm_campaign=Feed%3A+reuters%2FtopNews+%28News+%2F +US+%2F+Top+News%29

"Lock 'im up!"

I bet Pelosi does nothing effective but talk, at most

Not much she can do - but at the very least - allow this to just go to the courts -

precious time is being wasted "asking" these criminals to follow the law.

Fuck that. They are criminals and will do what criminals do - commit crimes.

Just take them all to court and see if the judges have any integrity left.

Also - why is Trump now against allowing the man who "fully exonerated" him to testify under oath - unrestricted?


The cover up continues...but sure, go ahead and believe a word they say and go ahead and defend the criminals who are stealing your democracy - trump turds.

[RandomGuy]

Mueller report pretty clearly shows what would commonly be considered to be collusion.

Tell you what, provide a working definition of the word that you accept, and we can walk through the report findings to see what it actually found.



col·lu·sion
/kəˈlo͞oZHən/
noun
noun: collusion

secret or illegal cooperation or conspiracy, especially in order to cheat or deceive others.

[repetitive copy pasta omitted]

Secret or illegal cooperation, especially to cheat or deceive others. There is the start.

Good.

Now we can begin to go through what they found. Plenty of material to work with.

[boutons_deux]

"Not much she can do"

if he refuses a subpoena, she can order the sergeant-at-arms to arrest Bar.

I'm damn sure the Repugs would do it to Dem AG.

[TSA]

Secret or illegal cooperation, especially to cheat or deceive others. There is the start.

Good.

Now we can begin to go through what they found. Plenty of material to work with.

col·lu·sion
/kəˈlo͞oZHən/
noun
noun: collusion

secret or illegal cooperation or conspiracy, especially in order to cheat or deceive others.

1. "The investigation did not establish that members of the Trump Campaign conspired or coordinated with the Russian government in its election interference activities."

2. "The investigation examined whether [contacts between Russia and Trump figures] involved or resulted in coordination or a conspiracy with the Trump Campaign and Russia, including with respect to Russia providing assistance to the Campaign in exchange for any sort of favorable treatment in the future. Based on the available information, the investigation did not establish such coordination."

3. "The investigation did not establish that [Carter] Page coordinated with the Russian government in its efforts to interfere with the 2016 election."

4. "The Office did not identify evidence in those [contacts between Russians and people around Trump after the GOP convention] of coordination between the Campaign and the Russian government."

5. "The Office did not identify evidence of a connection between Manafort's sharing polling data and Russia's interference in the election ... [and] the investigation did not establish that Manafort otherwise coordinated with the Russian government on its election-interference efforts."

6. "The investigation did not establish that these [contacts between Russians and people around Trump during the transition] reflected or constituted coordination between the Trump Campaign and Russia in its election interference activities."

7. "The investigation did not identify evidence that any U.S. persons conspired or coordinated with the [Russian disinformation campaign]."

[TSA]

Not much she can do - but at the very least - allow this to just go to the courts -

precious time is being wasted "asking" these criminals to follow the law.

Fuck that. They are criminals and will do what criminals do - commit crimes.

Just take them all to court and see if the judges have any integrity left.

Also - why is Trump now against allowing the man who "fully exonerated" him to testify under oath - unrestricted?


The cover up continues...but sure, go ahead and believe a word they say and go ahead and defend the criminals who are stealing your democracy - trump turds.


:lol asking them to follow the law

1125454218784120833

I didn’t think the Dems could embarrass themselves more than they had but this is unbelievable

[boutons_deux]

450+ former federal prosecutors say Mueller report contained evidence of multiple Trump felonies (https://www.dailykos.com/stories/2019/5/6/1855769/-375-former-federal-prosecutors-say-Mueller-Report-contained-evidence-of-multiple-Trump-felonies)

Each of us believes that the conduct of President Trump described in Special Counsel Robert Mueller’s report would,

in the case of any other person not covered by the Office of Legal Counsel policy against indicting a sitting President,

result in multiple felony charges for obstruction of justice.

an obstruction charge:

conduct that obstructed or attempted to obstruct the truth-finding process, as to which the evidence of corrupt intent and connection to pending proceedings is overwhelming. These include:

· The President’s efforts to fire Mueller and to falsify evidence about that effort;
· The President’s efforts to limit the scope of Mueller’s investigation to exclude his conduct; and
· The President’s efforts to prevent witnesses from cooperating with investigators probing him and his campaign.

They noted Donald Trump’s attempt to “create false evidence” for the White House records.

Trump directed McGahn on multiple occasions to fire Mueller or to gin up false conflicts of interest as a pretext for getting rid of the Special Counsel.

When these acts began to come into public view, Trump made “repeated efforts to have McGahn deny the story”

— going so far as to tell McGahn to write a letter “for our files” falsely denying that Trump had directed Mueller’s termination.

They went on to list the numerous ways Donald Trump tried to thwart the investigation and intimidate witnesses.

to look at these facts and say that a prosecutor could not probably sustain a conviction for obstruction of justice

— the standard set out in Principles of Federal Prosecution —

runs counter to logic and our experience.

there is no “longstanding policy” against indictment of the president.

the 1973 OLC memo stating that a sitting president should not be indicted. Far from being authoritative, it

was essentially repudiated within months by the Justice Department in the United States’ filing in the Supreme Court in United States v. Nixon.

OLC opinions are not binding on state prosecutors (though state charges could raise federalism questions as well).

The complex history of criminal proceedings against presidents and vice presidents suggests that these issues are not foreclosed.

https://www.dailykos.com/stories/1855769

Dems will do nothing

[RandomGuy]

col·lu·sion
/kəˈlo͞oZHən/
noun
noun: collusion

secret or illegal cooperation or conspiracy, especially in order to cheat or deceive others.

[more copy pasta]

Repeating the comfortable lie, a soothing balm, anything avoid looking too closely or asking skeptical questions. It's ok, I know you need your security blanket to keep your little delusional bubble intact. As I said, we will delve into things beyond your pre-packaged talking points.

[Spurs Homer]

This traitor piece of shit fraud prez is...

willing to talk to putin about mueller

but

not willing to talk to mueller about putin

what a disgrace
what a piece of shit



what a traitor!

[TSA]

Repeating the comfortable lie, a soothing balm, anything avoid looking too closely or asking skeptical questions. It's ok, I know you need your security blanket to keep your little delusional bubble intact. As I said, we will delve into things beyond your pre-packaged talking points.

Why do you keep deleting the direct quotes I post from Mueller’s report?

[LkrFan]

1124273832980774912

:lol

[Spurs Homer]

1124273832980774912

:lol




:lmao:lmao

[boutons_deux]

‘It’s just a matter of time’: Ex-federal prosecutor says Barr will oust FBI chief for denying Trump was ‘spied’ on

FBI Director Christopher Wray will be fired by President Donald Trump or Attorney General Will Barr after he refused to say that the Trump campaign was a victim of government “spying.”

Attorney General Barr ought to have known what he was saying when he used to word spying. We’ve been through this before.”

https://www.rawstory.com/2019/05/its-just-a-matter-of-time-ex-federal-prosecutor-says-barr-will-oust-fbi-chief-for-denying-trump-was-spied-on/?utm_source=feedburner&utm_medium=feed&utm_campaign=Feed%3A+TheRawStory+%28The+Raw+Story% 29 (https://www.rawstory.com/2019/05/its-just-a-matter-of-time-ex-federal-prosecutor-says-barr-will-oust-fbi-chief-for-denying-trump-was-spied-on/?utm_source=feedburner&utm_medium=feed&utm_campaign=Feed%3A+TheRawStory+%28The+Raw+Story% 29)

[boutons_deux]

Trump declares entire Mueller report and all associated materials protected by executive privilege (https://www.dailykos.com/stories/2019/5/8/1856235/-Trump-declares-entire-Mueller-report-and-all-associated-materials-protected-by-executive-privilege)

https://www.dailykos.com/stories/2019/5/8/1856235/-Trump-declares-entire-Mueller-report-and-all-associated-materials-protected-by-executive-privilege?detail=emaildkbn (https://www.dailykos.com/stories/2019/5/8/1856235/-Trump-declares-entire-Mueller-report-and-all-associated-materials-protected-by-executive-privilege?detail=emaildkbn)

[Spurs Homer]

Trump declares entire Mueller report and all associated materials protected by executive privilege (https://www.dailykos.com/stories/2019/5/8/1856235/-Trump-declares-entire-Mueller-report-and-all-associated-materials-protected-by-executive-privilege)

https://www.dailykos.com/stories/2019/5/8/1856235/-Trump-declares-entire-Mueller-report-and-all-associated-materials-protected-by-executive-privilege?detail=emaildkbn (https://www.dailykos.com/stories/2019/5/8/1856235/-Trump-declares-entire-Mueller-report-and-all-associated-materials-protected-by-executive-privilege?detail=emaildkbn)


So...


weeks/months later....



it IS a Cover up.... shocking!

[boutons_deux]

The Rarely Used Congressional Power That Could Force William Barr’s Hand

It hasn’t been done in nearly a century, but House Democrats could arrest the attorney general after they find him in contempt.

as Trump-administration officials continue to defy (https://www.theatlantic.com/ideas/archive/2019/04/how-will-democrats-handle-trumps-stonewalling/587845/) House subpoenas related to Special Counsel Robert Mueller’s investigation,

Democrats in control of the chamber could turn to an even blunter weapon in their arsenal: arrest.


Courts have recognized that the House and Senate each have the authority to enforce their orders by imprisoning those who violate them—literally.

They can direct their respective sergeant at arms to arrest officials they’ve found to be in contempt and bring them to the Capitol for trial and, potentially, jail.

Congress hasn’t invoked what’s known as the “power of inherent contempt” in nearly a century (https://fas.org/sgp/crs/misc/RL34097.pdf),

but the escalating clash between two co-equal branches of government has Democrats talking about moves previously deemed unthinkable.
“Its day in the sun is coming,”

https://www.theatlantic.com/politics/archive/2019/05/house-democrats-could-arrest-william-barr-contempt/588976/?utm_source=facebook&utm_term=2019-05-08T15%3A30%3A40&utm_campaign=the-atlantic&utm_content=edit-promo&utm_medium=social&fbclid=IwAR2j7ReEBwIPTmr9pHeIeYRIcNKyovU0_U4mhtYZG 8Et5dI9pQFrS2ukIpE&fbclid=IwAR0uYDx0XlcvuYEXw4GfpwJ7hiJm_SfJ_Z0vsBZkU lOrVIy2ntnSW_uVcgk (https://www.theatlantic.com/politics/archive/2019/05/house-democrats-could-arrest-william-barr-contempt/588976/?utm_source=facebook&utm_term=2019-05-08T15%3A30%3A40&utm_campaign=the-atlantic&utm_content=edit-promo&utm_medium=social&fbclid=IwAR2j7ReEBwIPTmr9pHeIeYRIcNKyovU0_U4mhtYZG 8Et5dI9pQFrS2ukIpE&fbclid=IwAR0uYDx0XlcvuYEXw4GfpwJ7hiJm_SfJ_Z0vsBZkU lOrVIy2ntnSW_uVcgk)

[TSA]

The Rarely Used Congressional Power That Could Force William Barr’s Hand

It hasn’t been done in nearly a century, but House Democrats could arrest the attorney general after they find him in contempt.

as Trump-administration officials continue to defy (https://www.theatlantic.com/ideas/archive/2019/04/how-will-democrats-handle-trumps-stonewalling/587845/) House subpoenas related to Special Counsel Robert Mueller’s investigation,

Democrats in control of the chamber could turn to an even blunter weapon in their arsenal: arrest.


Courts have recognized that the House and Senate each have the authority to enforce their orders by imprisoning those who violate them—literally.

They can direct their respective sergeant at arms to arrest officials they’ve found to be in contempt and bring them to the Capitol for trial and, potentially, jail.

Congress hasn’t invoked what’s known as the “power of inherent contempt” in nearly a century (https://fas.org/sgp/crs/misc/RL34097.pdf),

but the escalating clash between two co-equal branches of government has Democrats talking about moves previously deemed unthinkable.
“Its day in the sun is coming,”

https://www.theatlantic.com/politics/archive/2019/05/house-democrats-could-arrest-william-barr-contempt/588976/?utm_source=facebook&utm_term=2019-05-08T15%3A30%3A40&utm_campaign=the-atlantic&utm_content=edit-promo&utm_medium=social&fbclid=IwAR2j7ReEBwIPTmr9pHeIeYRIcNKyovU0_U4mhtYZG 8Et5dI9pQFrS2ukIpE&fbclid=IwAR0uYDx0XlcvuYEXw4GfpwJ7hiJm_SfJ_Z0vsBZkU lOrVIy2ntnSW_uVcgk (https://www.theatlantic.com/politics/archive/2019/05/house-democrats-could-arrest-william-barr-contempt/588976/?utm_source=facebook&utm_term=2019-05-08T15%3A30%3A40&utm_campaign=the-atlantic&utm_content=edit-promo&utm_medium=social&fbclid=IwAR2j7ReEBwIPTmr9pHeIeYRIcNKyovU0_U4mhtYZG 8Et5dI9pQFrS2ukIpE&fbclid=IwAR0uYDx0XlcvuYEXw4GfpwJ7hiJm_SfJ_Z0vsBZkU lOrVIy2ntnSW_uVcgk)




Attempting to arrest the Attorney General for following the law :lmao

[boutons_deux]

Trump’s claim that the Mueller Report is protected by executive privilege is hot garbage

He doesn't have a legal claim, but he can probably run out the clock.

There is no one legal concept known as “executive privilege.”

Instead, the courts recognize two distinct forms of privilege (https://www.americanprogress.org/issues/courts/news/2010/06/01/7909/executive-privilege-101/) that a president might invoke.

The seminal case describing these two forms of privilege is the United States Court of Appeals for the District of Columbia Circuit’s decision in in re: Sealed Case (https://caselaw.findlaw.com/us-dc-circuit/1433973.html) — a case which is often referred to as the “Espy” case because it involved an independent counsel investigation into former Secretary of Agriculture Mike Espy.

The Mueller report emphatically does not qualify for this presidential communications privilege.

Not only was Mueller not providing advice to the president or to the president’s inner circle, but Mueller was in fact actively investigating the president. Mueller did not seek to shape Trump’s policies or decisions. If anything, Mueller was adverse to Trump throughout his investigation.

Mueller’s report and many underlying documents may fall within this weaker privilege. But the deliberative process privilege is also quite weak.

Among other things, it typically “does not shield documents that simply state or explain a decision the government has already made or protect material that is purely factual,” so it is likely that many of the underlying documents Congress seeks must be turned over if they contain purely factual information.

Even more significantly,

the Espy case explains that “where there is reason to believe the documents sought may shed light on government misconduct,

‘the privilege is routinely denied,’

on the grounds that shielding internal government deliberations in this context

does not serve ‘the public’s interest in honest, effective government.'”

The Mueller report is, itself, an investigation into government misconduct at the highest levels.

https://thinkprogress.org/trumps-claim-mueller-report-protected-executive-privilege-c0fb9c533851/

[boutons_deux]

Attempting to arrest the Attorney General for following the law :lmao

god fucking damn, you're fucking stupid, ignorant, as are ALL Trash suckers

Congressional oversight is following the law.

Trash, Barr, Munchin all gonna get fucked hard.

Trash is going down
'

[boutons_deux]

Same Justice Department that turned over a million-plus pages to the GOP won't give Democrats squat (https://www.dailykos.com/stories/2019/5/8/1856297/-Same-Justice-Department-that-turned-over-a-million-plus-pages-to-the-GOP-won-t-give-Democrats-squat)

The Justice Department's blanket refusal to turn over any Russia probe materials to House Democrats

stands in stark contrast to its willingness to comply with request after request from GOP lawmakers when they held the House majority.

They ended up producing a million pages of discovery,"

Justice Department officials released information related to both

the already-closed Clinton email probe and

the ongoing investigation by Robert Mueller,

including classified information like FISA applications and private information on unindicted people like FBI officials Peter Strzok and Lisa Page.

In other words, absolutely every excuse deployed by the White House and Attorney General William Barr for not cooperating with Democratic requests

has already been demolished by the precedent Justice Department officials set when Republicans controlled the House.

https://www.dailykos.com/stories/2019/5/8/1856297/-Same-Justice-Department-that-turned-over-a-million-plus-pages-to-the-GOP-won-t-give-Democrats-squat (https://www.dailykos.com/stories/2019/5/8/1856297/-Same-Justice-Department-that-turned-over-a-million-plus-pages-to-the-GOP-won-t-give-Democrats-squat)

[TSA]

god fucking damn, you're fucking stupid, ignorant, as are ALL Trash suckers

Congressional oversight is following the law.

Trash, Barr, Munchin all gonna get fucked hard.

Trash is going down
'

Nadler’s subpoena is asking Barr to ignore the law on the books.