Mueller Delivers Report on Russia Investigation to Attorney General

[Pavlov]

"suggested"

[koriwhat]

you're right.

trump tower meeting wasn't about stolen emails. my bad there.

More like adoption... a big ploy to entrap and get manufactured "evidence".

[Spurtacular]

there's a discussion going on. you are free to read through it and pick up the context.

You quoted me, Lite. But you can hold to your girly secret if it suits you.

[Spurtacular]

Let's see that job description.

Blake level stuff, dude.

[Winehole23]

You quoted me, Lite. But you can hold to your girly secret if it suits you.

I could tell it was meant as a putdown, but I don't get it.

Can someone explain it to me?

[Spurs Homer]

Mueller wasn’t limited in the least bit, quite the opposite.

“any matters that arose or may arise directly from that investigation”

https://www.do entcloud.org/do e...stigation.html

NARROWED THE MANDATE FURTHER

You never read the Mueller report - gtfo of here with your bull .

[Spurs Homer]

yup. you're filling in gaps with your imagination

You didn't read the report -

or you missed it.

It is in there.

[spurraider21]

You didn't read the report -

or you missed it.

It is in there.

i read the report. and within it, the conclusions.

[TSA]

You never read the Mueller report - gtfo of here with your bull .

You never read the scope memos included in the Mueller report, if you had your stupid ass wouldn’t keep claiming Mueller was limited and his mandate narrowed.

Explain how the ability to investigate any matters arising from the Russia investigation is somehow a limiting factor.

[Winehole23]

You never read the scope memos included in the Mueller report

over/under?

ten years?

how long does TSA continue to say?

[Pavlov]

Blake level stuff, dude.

derp, you said it was their job description.

You've been whining all along that SCOTUS can review impeachments when they explicitly and unanimously ruled they can't review any impeachments.

You have to post a law or decision showing they can review impeachments.

Let's see them.

[Spurtacular]

You've been whining all along that SCOTUS can review impeachments when they explicitly and unanimously ruled they can't review any impeachments.

Psychopav truth.

[Pavlov]

Psychopav truth.

OK, show where it says they can, derp.

[Pavlov]

[Spurtacular]

[RandomGuy]

Darrin gave up on that a long time ago. If it takes longer than a few seconds to type out a one liner, that is too much effort.

You never fail to fail.

[boutons_deux]

Reflections on the President’s Delegation of Declassification Authority to the Attorney General



"These days, many Americans fear, the attorney general has been given a different role:

facilitating the political declassification of intelligence community materials the president wishes to make public

to retaliate against the intelligence leadership for investigating him.

Whereas once the public needed the attorney general to protect it from abuses by the intelligence agencies,

today some believe that the intelligence agencies need protection from the attorney general."

https://www.lawfareblog.com/reflecti...orney-general#

[RandomGuy]

You never read the scope memos included in the Mueller report, if you had your stupid ass wouldn’t keep claiming Mueller was limited and his mandate narrowed.

Explain how the ability to investigate any matters arising from the Russia investigation is somehow a limiting factor.

Explain how Trump isn't guilty of multiple felonies. All three elements of felony obstruction are right there, multiple times.

FIRST FELONY
E. Efforts to fire Mueller
Obstructive act (p. 87): Former White House Counsel Don McGahn is a “credible witness” in providing evidence that Trump indeed attempted to fire Mueller. This “would qualify as an obstructive act” if the firing “would naturally obstruct the investigation and any grand jury proceedings that might flow from the inquiry.”
Nexus (p. 89): “Substantial evidence” indicates that, at this point, Trump was aware that “his conduct was under investigation by a federal prosecutor who could present any evidence of federal crimes to a grand jury.”
Intent (p. 89): “Substantial evidence indicates that the President’s attempts to remove the Special Counsel were linked to the Special Counsel’s oversight of investigations that involved the President’s conduct[.]”

SECOND FELONY
F. Efforts to curtail Mueller
Obstructive act (p. 97): Trump’s effort to force Sessions to confine the investigation to only investigating future election interference “would qualify as an obstructive act if it would naturally obstruct the investigation and any grand jury proceedings that might flow from the inquiry.” “Taken together, the President’s directives indicate that Sessions was being instructed to tell the Special Counsel to end the existing investigation into the President and his campaign[.]”
Nexus (p. 97): At the relevant point, “the existence of a grand jury investigation supervised by the Special Counsel was public knowledge.”
Intent (p. 97): “Substantial evidence” indicates that Trump’s efforts were “intended to prevent further investigative scrutiny of the President’s and his campaign’s conduct.”
THIRD FELONY
I. Order to McGahn to deny Trump’s order to fire Mueller
Obstructive act (p. 118): This effort “would qualify as an obstructive act if it had the natural tendency to constrain McGahn from testifying truthfully or to undermine his credibility as a potential witness[.]” There is “some evidence” that Trump genuinely believed press reports that he had ordered McGahn to fire Mueller were wrong. However, “[o]ther evidence cuts against that understanding of the president’s conduct”—and the special counsel lists a great deal more evidence on this latter point.
Nexus (p. 119): At this point “the Special Counsel’s use of a grand jury had been further confirmed by the return of several indictments.” Mueller’s office had indicated to Trump’s lawyers that it was investigating obstruction, and Trump knew that McGahn had already been interviewed by Mueller on the topic. “That evidence indicates the President’s awareness” that his efforts to fire Mueller were relevant to official proceedings. Trump “likely contemplated the ongoing investigation and any proceedings arising from it” in directing McGahn to create a false record of the earlier interaction.
Intent (p. 120): “Substantial evidence indicates that … the President acted for the purpose of influencing McGahn’s account in order to deflect or prevent further scrutiny” of Trump.

FOURTH FELONY
J. Conduct toward... Manafort
Obstructive act (p. 131): “The President’s actions toward witnesses … would qualify as obstructive if they had the natural tendency to prevent particular witnesses from testifying truthfully, or otherwise would have the probable effect of influencing, delaying, or preventing their testimony to law enforcement.” ...Regarding Manafort, “there is evidence that the President’s actions had the potential” to influence Manafort’s thinking on cooperation, and his public statements “had the potential to influence the trial jury.”
Nexus (p. 132): Trump’s actions toward [Manafort and others] “appear to have been connected to pending or anticipated official proceedings involving each individual.”

Are multiple counts of obstruction of justice impeachable?

[TSA]

Explain how Trump isn't guilty of multiple felonies. All three elements of felony obstruction are right there, multiple times.

FIRST FELONY
E. Efforts to fire Mueller
Obstructive act (p. 87): Former White House Counsel Don McGahn is a “credible witness” in providing evidence that Trump indeed attempted to fire Mueller. This “would qualify as an obstructive act” if the firing “would naturally obstruct the investigation and any grand jury proceedings that might flow from the inquiry.”
Nexus (p. 89): “Substantial evidence” indicates that, at this point, Trump was aware that “his conduct was under investigation by a federal prosecutor who could present any evidence of federal crimes to a grand jury.”
Intent (p. 89): “Substantial evidence indicates that the President’s attempts to remove the Special Counsel were linked to the Special Counsel’s oversight of investigations that involved the President’s conduct[.]”

SECOND FELONY
F. Efforts to curtail Mueller
Obstructive act (p. 97): Trump’s effort to force Sessions to confine the investigation to only investigating future election interference “would qualify as an obstructive act if it would naturally obstruct the investigation and any grand jury proceedings that might flow from the inquiry.” “Taken together, the President’s directives indicate that Sessions was being instructed to tell the Special Counsel to end the existing investigation into the President and his campaign[.]”
Nexus (p. 97): At the relevant point, “the existence of a grand jury investigation supervised by the Special Counsel was public knowledge.”
Intent (p. 97): “Substantial evidence” indicates that Trump’s efforts were “intended to prevent further investigative scrutiny of the President’s and his campaign’s conduct.”
THIRD FELONY
I. Order to McGahn to deny Trump’s order to fire Mueller
Obstructive act (p. 118): This effort “would qualify as an obstructive act if it had the natural tendency to constrain McGahn from testifying truthfully or to undermine his credibility as a potential witness[.]” There is “some evidence” that Trump genuinely believed press reports that he had ordered McGahn to fire Mueller were wrong. However, “[o]ther evidence cuts against that understanding of the president’s conduct”—and the special counsel lists a great deal more evidence on this latter point.
Nexus (p. 119): At this point “the Special Counsel’s use of a grand jury had been further confirmed by the return of several indictments.” Mueller’s office had indicated to Trump’s lawyers that it was investigating obstruction, and Trump knew that McGahn had already been interviewed by Mueller on the topic. “That evidence indicates the President’s awareness” that his efforts to fire Mueller were relevant to official proceedings. Trump “likely contemplated the ongoing investigation and any proceedings arising from it” in directing McGahn to create a false record of the earlier interaction.
Intent (p. 120): “Substantial evidence indicates that … the President acted for the purpose of influencing McGahn’s account in order to deflect or prevent further scrutiny” of Trump.

FOURTH FELONY
J. Conduct toward... Manafort
Obstructive act (p. 131): “The President’s actions toward witnesses … would qualify as obstructive if they had the natural tendency to prevent particular witnesses from testifying truthfully, or otherwise would have the probable effect of influencing, delaying, or preventing their testimony to law enforcement.” ...Regarding Manafort, “there is evidence that the President’s actions had the potential” to influence Manafort’s thinking on cooperation, and his public statements “had the potential to influence the trial jury.”
Nexus (p. 132): Trump’s actions toward [Manafort and others] “appear to have been connected to pending or anticipated official proceedings involving each individual.”

Are multiple counts of obstruction of justice impeachable?

Obstructing an investigation based on manufactured fake evidence

Good luck with that

[TSA]

Excellent read on Barr’s interview.

[Pavlov]

Excellent read on Barr’s interview.

I'm sure it's just a bunch of wishcasting like you always post.

[boutons_deux]

Everybody's innocent, nothing but total set ups and frame jobs.

Barr was chosen because he was apolitical?

[Spurs Homer]

i read the report. and within it, the conclusions.

[boutons_deux]

Malcolm Nance Says It’s Time To Stop Calling William Barr The Attorney General

Nance said that since he has taken his position at the Justice Department,

Barr has been nothing but a lap dog for Trump.

“This man is not the Attorney General of the United States,” Nance said.

“This is Donald Trump’s political commissar. … It’s a shame.”

https://www.politicususa.com/2019/06/01/malcolm-nance-says-its-time-to-stop-calling-william-barr-the-attorney-general.html?utm_source=feedburner&utm_medium=feed &utm_campaign=Feed%3A+politicususa%2FfJAl+%28Polit icus+USA+%29

[Chris]