Trump would have been charged with obstruction were he not president,

EdwardHeisler · 2019-05-06 22:02:41

Trump would have been charged with obstruction were he not president, hundreds of former federal prosecutors assert
by Matt Zapotosky
Washington Post
May 6, 2019

Read the article if you haven't been brainwashed by the ultra-right white supremacists and other degenerates.

http://www.msn.com/en-us/news/politics/ … &ocid=iehp

GW Johnson · 2019-05-08 11:02:17

I think that's a fair assessment. Mueller said the DOJ no-indicting-a-sitting-president rule played a big role in his results, described in his report.

GW

SpaceNut · 2019-05-08 16:37:23

Which leaves only one avenue of recourse for those thinking that they are above the law and we should not have to go there for any reason when you hold the highest office in the land. For reasons that started before or after let alone while in the office. The president is the custodian of the people of the US taking an oath to serve and protect our constitution.

kbd512 · 2019-05-08 18:26:11

SpaceNut,

You're absolutely right. Those Democrats from President Obama's administration did seem to think that they were above the law. Now that the first rays of sunlight have fallen upon their final scam, the reckoning is already well underway.

"I'm concerned if we don't impeach this President, he will get re-elected." - Al Green, US Congressman from Texas (Democrat)

After your fellow Democrats elect mental midgets like this Al Green character, who should be making megabucks on the Comedy Channel, you can't figure out why the rest of us are laughing so hard. Saturday Night Live can't hold a candle to this new Democrat Party.

Pretty please with sugar on top, continue this behavior. I want as many people to see this as possible. Please ensure that the arguments become ever more facially absurd. I want the insanity of the Democrats over their 2016 defeat to become so crystal clear that nobody else can possibly miss it. I want to see as many verifiably false allegations without evidence, the only thing the Democrats have ever had, and new conspiracy theories against President Trump, as the Democrats can manage to concoct. Be as creative as you can be. The crazier the claim, the better.

The Democrats need not waste any of their time formulating policies. That's actually a joke. Apart from "Get Trump!", they don't actually have any other policies. I want them to spend as much of their time and effort hating President Trump as they possibly can. On behalf of my fellow Republicans, I would like to extend my sincere appreciation for all the wasted energy and effort. We're looking forward to another 4 years of President Trump.

We love you guys.

GW Johnson · 2019-05-08 19:22:16

I found and downloaded the Mueller report (both volumes) as a pdf file. This is the publicly-released form with redactions, from off the official .gov site. There's not too many redactions. Most of it is there for all to read.

I have not yet read the thing in its entirety, but a quick scan showed plenty of well-documented bad behavior on the part of Trump and his team. This might not have rated a DOJ indictment, but a lot of it really does look like impeachable stuff.

Again, I stand by what I said in the Mueller investigation thread, posts 240, 250, and 260. And, again I urge folks to look at the facts. They will not lead you astray. Political belief systems nearly always will.

This will take me some time to digest fully. When I have done so, I will post those results, here and elsewhere.

GW

SpaceNut · 2019-05-08 19:40:20

17 Trump associates had contacts with Russians or Wikileaks, which released hacked documents, during the campaign or transition, with at least 100 face-to-face interactions, phone calls or electronic messages with Russians or Kremlin-linked figures and at least 51 individual communications. Trump aides known to have had contact with Russians include the president's son-in-law and adviser Jared Kushner, his son Donald Trump Jr, former National Security Adviser Michael Flynn, Attorney General Jeff Sessions and former personal lawyer Michael Cohen.

The house GOP intell committee has subpoenaed Trump Jr. of which he wants to plead the 5th on his previous testimony. They as well issued a contempt charge on Barr as a result of the redactions which showed the conspiracy connection...

kbd512 · 2019-05-08 21:39:02

GW,

Whereas people like Edward Heisler are just partisans with blind rage towards anyone who doesn't partake in their own personal political beliefs, I flatly refuse to believe that anyone with your level of intelligence can't figure out what's going on here. Unfortunately, you're still in a state of denial about what just happened. The trap that's ensnared you is your own belief system about someone you have personal prejudices against. It's no different at all from racism or any other ugly belief that people cling to about other people they don't understand or don't care to understand. It's mind numbingly obvious to me. I'm sorry if someone else or your own belief system pulled the wool over your eyes here. It's pretty sad to watch, though.

Neither your belief system, the belief system of our political partisans, nor my own belief system will change how the laws of this country actually work. Here in America, to this day, you don't get to falsely accuse someone else of a crime with manufactured "evidence", that's subsequently completely repudiated by one of the most thorough / lengthy / costly investigations in modern history, and then claim that the person being investigated committed other crimes merely because he called the "investigation" exactly what it was- a modern day witch hunt... that still failed miserably to find its witch. This is the exact kind of thing that the Soviet Union or China would do and has no place in our political system.

We have the real blatant crimes committed by the criminals with allegiance to this new and very scary Democrat Party, we have the Kabuki Theater that the Democrats are hoping to use to distract attention away from their organized criminal activities, and then we have the very ugly truth of this matter. The Democrats from the previous Presidential administration are responsible for committing all of the crimes that they've failed to pin on President Trump. They thought they were going to use him as their patsy, but he's not playing along with their game.

President Trump's election was a repudiation of the lawlessness and egregiously bad policies of President Obama's administration. President Trump wasn't who you believed he was and he's still not. Your personal prejudices against him will never change that.

GW Johnson · 2019-05-09 16:42:16

Kbd512:

You seem to think I have some sort of Democrat-associated political belief system, apparently because I do not share yours.

The actual fact is: I have no political belief system at all, other than that I believe a worthy elected official will prioritize good of country over party or personal advantage (my definition of a statesman). Many (from both major parties) fail that test. Utterly.

Your obviously have a political belief system, and it appears to me to summarize succinctly as “all Democrats are bad no matter what, and all Republicans are good, no matter what”.

I will never share that belief. Or its reverse.

Real people do both good and bad while serving, that simply being human. What you want is one who will do more good than bad.

Identifying one who will do that is hard to do, with the news reporting slanted to highlight idiotically-irrelevant hot-button issues the way it is.

I have NEVER seen one who prioritizes party over country do more good than bad. And that’s a fact, Jack!

Quite the opposite, actually: a lot more bad than good. And that observation applies to BOTH Democrats and Republicans.

Unfortunately, that “mis-priority does bad” characterization applies to the majority of them. Of both parties.

As for the Mueller report effects, I am just getting started perusing it, but so far the FACTS are that it contains plenty of impeachable misbehavior well-documented, while not actually issuing indictments. It is anything but the exoneration that Trump and McConnell insist it is.

As I said, I have no political belief system to lead me astray, beyond wanting statesmen instead of crass politicians. I exert the effort to look at the facts and then make up my own mind.

In my own opinion, your “all Republicans are good and all Democrats are bad” is simply not justifiable by the real facts on the ground. But that’s just my opinion, and I just told you exactly how I came to it.

GW

SpaceNut · 2019-05-09 18:23:34

They both insist that it does as it can not charge them for any crime while in office.

For the "good of country over party or personal advantage" is what Republicans are labling socialistic and quickly attach it to being what democrats stand for.

Our founding fathers used the term of common good for all to be united. There was no such thing as socialism back then only Kings, dictators and tyrants. A rule by the people and for the people was born.

kbd512 · 2019-05-09 20:08:28

GW,

Political Beliefs vs Law & Order
I don't care in the slightest whether you share my political beliefs or not. It's very odd to me that you think what you or I believe has any bearing on the laws of this country. Fidelity to the laws of this country shouldn't be predicated on one's political beliefs. The argument seems to be that since some people REALLY don't like this one particular person, President Trump, whatever they do to him is justifiable. We can accuse him of committing a crime for which we know from the start that we have no evidence at all and then accuse him of another crime when he loudly and publicly points out the sheer absurdity of it all and does what little he can to end the witch hunt. I think that's egregiously bad policy. If President Hillary Clinton was elected to office and the Republicans were trying this same crap on her, they wouldn't just lose my support, they'd lose my vote. This truly is about right and wrong, for me anyway. Accusing someone of obstructing a crime in progress is aiding and abetting criminal behavior. Mueller had his chance to indict President Trump, but declined to do so. Feel free to "Monday Morning Quarterback" the legal determinations of the finest investigative and legal minds in our country, but I think you're making a mistake. If Mueller came out and found that their was collusion with the Russians, I'd just change who I vote for and apologize for doubting the opposing party. There's a pretty simple fix for that problem.

The Good of the Country
We have someone in the White House who is prioritizing the good of this country over pleasing either the Democrat or Republican political parties. He's been incessantly attacked by both parties whenever and wherever possible, to the detriment of all else related to the business of the country. I don't think I've ever seen so many people have a religious experience over someone's election. Quite frankly, he's not really a Republican or a Democrat. If his policies were exactly what they presently are, and he ran as a Democrat rather than a Republican, he'd still have my vote. Right is still right. Wrong is still wrong. Good policy is still good policy. Bad policy is still bad policy.

Good for the Goose, Good for the Gander
All political parties who perpetuate false narratives against their political opponents or who break the laws of our country are bad, no matter what. If I was a Democrat, the person in the White House was a Democrat, and he or she was breaking the laws, my opinion wouldn't change. Why is it that you suppose I never voted for Bush and voted for independents during the last two Presidential election campaigns? Neither party put forth a candidate that had any intention of following our laws or doing what was best for America. Our President is not "President of the World", he or she, quite simply, is America's Commander in Chief. That persons, first, last, and only job is to do what is best for the people. I don't care if that person is a textbook narcissist, says or writes crude things, ruffles feathers, or doesn't meet with the approval of every last person on the planet. I do care that they faithfully execute this nation's laws and that their decisions are beneficial to the American people. It should also be noted that what is pleasing to one constituency vs another has little to no bearing on what is beneficial to the people.

Inexcusably Bad Policies
Nobody here can tell me why importing millions of illegals is a good thing. It's pretty clear to me that neither political party has any intention of making our growing population of illegals into citizens or otherwise changing our laws, so they must want to pit them against our citizens or use them as slaves. I won't abide having any slaves. We fought a war over that. That matter has been settled. It's pure evil and I won't stand for it. I'll also vote against such an obscenity at every opportunity.

Nobody here can tell me why convincing minorities to murder their children before they take their first breath in a free country is a good thing. It's profoundly evil, racist, and totally disgusting.

Nobody here can tell me why robbing Peter to pay Paul is good for America. It's nearly certain to garner Paul's support, but again, also evil. I'm of the opinion that avarice is not something we want enshrined in law.

Nobody here can tell me why diminishing our role in international affairs is good for our country or all the other countries of the world. We've already tried that and what followed was the greatest mass murder in history. I believe we called those events World War Two and the rise of communism during the Cold War. That's another part of history that I never want to revisit.

Nobody here can tell me how our vast trade imbalances with other countries are beneficial to our workers or our economy.

Nobody here can tell me how we can ever afford to "buy" our allies. It's pretty clear to me that we can't. We either share common interests that override petty differences or we don't. If we have common causes that dictate that we band together for the greater good, then we need to treat each other as equals. If we sign agreements, then we must be faithful to those agreements or renegotiate them in good faith.

Nobody here can tell me how double standards for the application of law are beneficial to a society whose founding principles were predicated on equal protection before the law. Every instance where that was not the case in the past is an example of egregiously bad policy, no matter how many people supported it, what they looked like, how much money they had or didn't have, etc.

Nobody here can point to any historical example of how a greater measure of socialism resulted in better outcomes for a society. Dragging everyone down to the lowest common denominator in society is not a recipe for economic prosperity, nor the pursuit of happiness. It just makes everyone equally destitute and uneducated. I fail to see how that's a desirable state of affairs, even if someone else does.

Social and Legal Remedies
Whether some of us disagree with our laws or not, they're not suggestions, nor are they only applicable to certain people. Absent clearly articulated reasons why the laws were not followed, related to otherwise intolerable behavior, the laws of our land must be followed. If something needs to be changed, there are legislative and judicial procedures for that. If you can't get the result you're after, maybe there's a good reason why, even if you don't think there is.

Whenever we're in doubt, we only need to return to our founding principles. Despite their numerous personal failings, our core principles that The Founders committed to paper so many years ago are every bit as applicable today as they ever were. There's wisdom there for the ages.

EdwardHeisler · 2019-05-10 10:42:03

Like a true Trumpite kbd512 is long on wind, flapping his jaw endlessly, and short on facts and truth.

Everyone here understands that …. except for loyal Trumpites who are easily fooled by America's number # con man, the liar in chief Trump
and believe whatever political spin Trump's chief propagandists and apologists dish out.

No I did not vote for Hilary Clinton

SpaceNut · 2019-05-10 20:00:12

After 2 years of the Mueller probe and Russia that Trump would know better than to send Giuliani says he's going to Ukraine to meddle in probes in hopes of helping Trump all of which is an act of collusion....

Both Trump and Hillary and others should go to jail do not pass go....

Trump has made enemies of friends and strange bedfellows of our enemies.

Importing millions of immagrants is not what is happening as they are coming willingly. They are not coming here to be the new slave race thats done by those that do not see that its wrong to do. They come to be with the remaining part of there family that has come before them or as a result of there family want them to come to join them.

Buying our allies is not what we are doing in space as we are bartering and working together to make the science of space possible.

kbd512 · 2019-05-10 21:01:49

SpaceNut,

Sure, we can send President Trump to jail with Mrs. Clinton... right after we find an actual crime that he's guilty of. Occasionally bad-mouthing a slew of federal felonies committed by the Democrats isn't much of an attempt at obstructing any justice, unless interfering with the Democrats' string of felonies was recently declared a new crime. If that's the case, then yeah, let's "get him".

How has President Trump "made enemies of friends" or "strange bedfellows with our enemies"?

I've never seen anyone here explain that.

Who were our "friends" that are now our "enemies", on that note?

If we're not buying allies, then they shouldn't magically become our enemies simply because President Trump said they have to pay what they previously agreed to pay for their own defense, should they?

Are those immigrants actually coming willingly, or are the worthless criminal governments they're fleeing from starving them to death, to the point that being a virtual or actual slave in America is somehow better than living wherever they came from?

Like I said before, if those countries can't feed their own people because they're absurdly corrupt, but they're going to send millions of their people here, then I'd rather just annex those countries, fix their governments, and add more stars to our flag. I'll drop all objections to these people coming here if we annex their countries or amend our laws. For me, this starts and stops with what's legal and what's not. If the laws need to be changed, then change the damn laws! We have a remedy for that problem. The Democrats refuse to compromise with the other political party. They're too busy pretending there isn't a problem.

SpaceNut · 2019-05-12 19:59:05

The Crime of Prostitution?
The laws today are fairly straight forward. All Parties Can Be Charged. In most jurisdictions, the person offering sexual services is not... Any Sexual Activity Can Be Considered Prostitution. Trying to pay it off is an election law violation. Long and short this happened before he became president and needs to meet no level to declare that it was a crime.

There were many more crimes committed before his taking of office that were not publicized as he squelched everything, making claims in order to settle them out of court as in getting the charges dropped. These are still crimes as settlements are a penalty of doing the wrong as charged and sentenced. All that is needed to see these is do a wikipedia of which I think I posted that link in the politics topic... as well as the comparison link for Hillary and there was no comparison of the crimes which were on each, Trump was the true leader in shear numbers....

Bullying your supposed friends will make enimies of them in time and ones that will not support you in your hour of need as a result of it. The old saying of keep your friends close and your enimies even closer is just that as you know which one will have your back to keep it from having a knife in it.

Bullying your friends for money is little better than being the hit man for a mafia or a street thug shake down. Thats not being diplomatic and that is where a trade deal would work better so that you are getting something of equatable degree for the higher level to which you feel you are paying.

Nasa did just that when it needed a service module for Orion and went to the ESA for help with it as the european unit used for cargo was very close to what would work. Nasa bartered for that work with the design for use on the Orion as that is what you can do with your friends.

Annexing nations is not a good way to go forward with the southern nations which are so corrupt as to want to take them over. Giving stand up people the assistance to make the right choice is. It would seem that Venezuela is just how we are approaching.

kbd512 · 2019-05-12 20:32:09

SpaceNut,

If prostitution was a serious crime for an elected official to commit, then President Clinton would never have come to office after he raped Juanita Broaddrick. He was reelected after he did his business with Monica Lewinsky in the White House. Democrats clearly don't care about that, since they reelected him. Pretending they care about that now is pretty funny, though. I think they're still busy trying to undo the 2016 election results since they didn't get the outcome they wanted. They're still babbling on endlessly about conspiracies theories that they made up in their heads to distract from their own blatant criminality, instead of chewing up and swallowing that giant piece of humble pie that the American voters served up and moving on with the rest of life.

President Trump didn't sell guns to drug traffickers that were later used to murder US Border Patrol agents and Mexicans, didn't use the IRS to attack his political enemies, didn't leave our diplomatic personnel hanging in the wind after they were attacked by terrorists, nor did he steal classified material from the US federal government. Oddly enough, that's exactly what members of former President Obama's administration did and Democrats still don't care about those crimes, so try again.

Edit: How could I possibly forget the greatest whopper of them all?... The previous administration's criminal lackeys in DoJ also initiated a failed coup attempt that President Trump quite justly "obstructed" using his 1st Amendment privilege to speak his mind. Apologies, but the Democrats have committed so many crimes that is difficult for me to keep track of them all, as it clearly is for them, since they're so busy trying to prevent AG Barr from shining a light on the criminality of former President Obama's administration.

Telling your "friends" to pay their own defense bills, that they previously agreed to pay in writing, is not "bullying them", except by very twisted Democrat logic- possibly because Democrats don't think anyone but their political enemies ever has to actually pay for anything. That's always someone else's job. Funny that. Speaking of "bullying your friends", how about bullying your own people? Democrat street thug politicians have no problem at all shaking down the American tax payer whenever they want to try another one of their idiotic wealth redistribution schemes. In what world is "diplomacy" working whereupon your "friends" won't even secure their own borders or fund their own military? Is the US solely responsible for fighting every war that ever occurs somewhere in the world?

NASA never needed to go anywhere to build a space capsule. If they gave money to our own private sector, instead of overseas interests, they could've had a functional capsule in a fraction of the time. Instead NASA and Congress blew mad money and both the capsule and the rocket will have been in development longer than the Apollo and Saturn V programs even existed. How is that even possible? This was using "existing technology from favored contractors" instead of "risky commercial development", too.

I wish I could be a Democrat. If I could, then I could outright ignore every criminal thing my political party has ever done, pretend that the other political party is a combination of Hitler and Satan incarnate, throw temper tantrums any time my party doesn't get its way, and falsely accuse anyone with a mere difference of opinion of having committed a crime for years on end without ever presenting any evidence at all. It must be fantastic to be a Democrat because there's zero accountability, no matter what they do or who they do it to- until now, apparently, and the thought of acting as good stewards of the public's resources never even crosses their minds. Man oh man, how I wish I could be a Democrat.

Last edited by kbd512 (2019-05-12 20:37:46)

SpaceNut · 2019-05-13 18:55:45

EdwardHeisler and kbd512, I have deleted the total of 3 posts combined.... Knock it off, flaming each other....

I have never heard of the rape of "juanita Broaddrick" but we all know of Monica Lewinsky which should have tossed Bill Clinton on his ear as that is a clear abuse of power.

Police state actions are almost always exempt from punitive actions.

Barr's claim of FBI spying is false as only the CIA can spy, FBI is an investigative unit. The NSA is a spying unit.

Trump's wish of a counter investigation as to the start of the mueller investigation is a go with a Barr start.

The first amendment of free speech does not allow or give shelter if you make or cause the events to happen which are criminal.

Not sure if Nasa wanted its partners for the moon mission but going with partners this time is hows its getting done. It does take away the claiming of the moon by single nation issue and hoaks by doing so.

Space x was not going to the moon with its current manned capsule version as seen with the first demo flight testing.

kbd512 · 2019-05-13 19:45:29

SpaceNut,

I don't think Bill Clinton and Monica Lewinsky engaging in whatever consensual sexual conduct that they decided to engage in was an abuse of power, but lying about it under oath was. However, what I pointed out was the increasingly obvious double standard that some Democrats have when it comes to the personal behavior of Democrat Party members versus Republican Party members. I just think it's rather odd that Democrats now care about what President Trump did years before he was in office after what former President Clinton and former President Obama did while they were in office. The truth always seems to take a back seat to politics and I think both parties prefer it that way. If both political parties simply held their own members to account for criminal conduct, we wouldn't be having this argument right now.

Edit:

Police State actions shouldn't be exempt from punitive action when they're illegal, especially when they lead to the murder of foreign nationals and Police Officers.

Former President Obama directed the CIA and NSA to share information with the FBI about President Trump. However, the CIA and NSA are only supposed to be used to spy on people in foreign lands. There's an actual law that says they can't spy on Americans, but they ignore the law and do it anyway. This is just one of the few times they were caught doing it, because they spied on the President. Furthermore, any information obtained with a falsified warrant is completely inadmissible in any court of law. Again, unless someone is around to hold the government to account, the spies remain unaccountable for their crimes.

1A need not be invoked to report a crime. If a Judge tells you that you'll be prosecuted for revealing his or her criminal actions, then the judge is still guilty of a crime, not the person reporting it.

I take no issue with going to the moon with international partners. However, that clearly hasn't done anything at all to speed up the process, has it?

The SpaceX capsule is more than good enough to go to the moon. The Apollo I capsule killed 3 astronauts without ever leaving the ground, but we still went to the moon with that capsule a few short years later. We did it once and we can do it again, but someone has to decide that they actually want to do it and to move forward with the process.

Last edited by kbd512 (2019-05-13 19:59:22)

GW Johnson · 2019-05-14 08:19:26

Before the 2017 reveal of BFR/BFS at Guadalajara, the plan for lunar fly-around with paying tourists was to send crew Dragon atop a Falcon-Heavy. That's not orbiting the moon, not enough delta-vee for that without another small propulsion stage. No landing either, as there was (and still is) not ready-to-use lander (although Blue Origin seems to be working on one).

GW

SpaceNut · 2019-05-14 21:18:51

Donald Trump Jr. Strikes Deal for ‘Limited’ Interview With Intelligence Committee

Trump tower previous record and Mueller report puts him in a quite a pickle....

of course Trump does not want to show his taxes even thou he can not contune to shield them....
Judge skeptical of Trump effort to keep records from House as they will get some and then some more ....

With Trump in the White House, we're one nation, under anxiety (but don't just blame him) as the name list of on going cases in the Mueller report still is indicating that its not going to stop any time soon

SpaceNut · 2019-05-21 19:57:15

Was to show for hearing but Don McGahn was a no-show. Here’s what Democrats wanted to ask him about.

Trying to claim executive priveledge at the last minute has told McGahn to not show and he will be held in contempt for failing to appear in defiance of the committee’s subpoena. A charge will follow and in court Trump will go...

GW Johnson · 2019-05-22 14:30:45

Just an update. I am still reading the publicly-available form of the Mueller report. I have been through Vol 1, and have just completed reading through the executive summary to Vol 2. The redactions do not really get in the way of understanding what is documented, at least so far. A read-through is one thing, I will have to think about this a while before reporting any final conclusions.

Volume 1 deals with the connections between the Trump campaign and Russia. Treasonable or near-treasonable behavior supporting Russia / Putin over US intelligence agencies was not part of Mueller's scope, so that is a separate issue. There is some overlap between what in is in Vol 1 and that question, but Mueller does not address it. It DOES need to be addressed, in my humble opinion, so far.

I have only so far plowed through the table of contents and executive summary to Vol 2 of Mueller's report. The executive summary reads like a chronological litany of hard evidence of obstruction-of-justice behavior on Trump's part, in my initial impression. (Initial impression !!!) It includes what I initially interpret as 2 calls to Congress for impeachment. But that is just my first impression. I need to think about this a while, before reaching a final conclusion.

I will keep y'all informed every so often as I plow through this, and think about it. NOTHING said here includes anything about investigating H. Clinton for Russian connections (yes they exist), or mishandling classified data (yes, it appears likely to me she did that crime, too, but without being unique among recent Secretaries of State).

That's just where I am today.

GW

SpaceNut · 2019-05-22 17:26:18

The din of impeachment is getting louder from both sides of the aliase...with not all of it from the Mueller reports content.

Treasury Secretary Steven Mnuchin on Wednesday dismissed an internal IRS memo concluding it is "mandatory" for the IRS to turn over President Donald Trump's tax

Of course there are the strate issues for his taxes and New York Passes Bill Giving Congress a Way to Get Trump’s

Of course facing jail is Barr in not honoring his supeona DOJ will share Mueller probe intelligence files with House

GW Johnson · 2019-05-23 18:26:52

I have now read through both volumes of Mueller’s report. I still have a lot of thinking to do about this. What follows is only first impressions.

I stick by what I said earlier: you can get a good sense of the findings by reading only the executive summaries of Volumes 1 and 2. You will get lost in the details reading the full report, this being serious legal analysis. But, on the other hand, you learn a whole lot more.

But Mueller did his job, and he did it right. If you read the whole thing, you will see that, very clearly. “Mueller and 17 angry democrats” is an egregious lie by Trump. This was no “witch hunt”. He is very seriously misleading the public for political gain, pure and simple.

Volume 1 dealt with Russian interference in the 2016 elections. Mueller concludes such did occur, and he details exactly how, and who did it. As part of that, he documented an enormous number of alarming connections between Trump, his business, and his campaign, with Russia, to include lying to the public, and lying to Congress (a crime), by various persons about those connections.

Things other than conspiracy with Russia (and obstruction of justice) being outside his purview, Mueller did not pursue those troubling Russian connections any further than documenting them. His purview was whether Trump and his people conspired (a very definite legal term) with the Russians, to illegally influence the 2016 election (foreigners are not permitted to participate in any way).

Mueller concluded there was no actual conspiracy despite all the other connections to Russia. But it is what he documented in the way of those connections that is so alarming: they make the President vulnerable to Russian influence.

That is a matter for others to resolve, and the most informative sources will be Trump’s financial and tax records. His publicly-known extreme resistance to disclosing them is very, very disturbing, therefore. The risk here is Trump behavior that might actually have strayed into something treasonous. Mueller does not go there. Others should, in my opinion.

Volume 2 dealt with obstruction of justice, particularly about a dozen counts or cases, to include attempting influence on the trials of associates, and attempts to illegally remove Mueller. There is a huge mountain of evidence in Volume 2 to support the notion that at least some (if not all) of those cases really are obstruction of justice on the part of Trump, or those associated with him.

It is the grey area of whether it was Trump himself, or his associates, that precludes a final conclusion in most of these cases (the decision of actually whom to prosecute).

Mueller includes a very detailed legal analysis of what might be prosecutable and what might not, tending toward prosecution of President Trump on the counts, but he does not recommend actual indictments for some legal-technical reasons I do not yet fully comprehend, although the whom-to-prosecute question is the biggest part of that.

Mueller presents a convincing argument that the President’s Article 2 Constitutional powers do not constitute a defense. That would have definite application to impeachment inquiries or proceedings. That I do understand.

But he very specifically does NOT exonerate the President! In more than one place in his report. Instead, he leaves the matter to others to decide, while providing some very convincing evidence that obstruction crimes actually occurred.

My reading and initial interpretation of the executive summary to Volume 2 includes what I interpret as two calls to Congress to impeach, using the evidence he uncovered, for obstruction of justice. That is my initial impression, and I definitely noticed this was NOT in AG Barr’s summary.

I might yet change my mind about impeachability for obstruction of justice after reflection, but right now, I don’t think so.

Countering that, anybody reading the full report will understand that some sort of obstruction really did occur (and according to recent news reports, is still occurring). I am quite disappointed in AG Barr’s summary which leaves all this out, explaining quite understandably why Mueller and his team are unhappy with Barr’s summary.

Barr does have a history of supporting the “imperial presidency” notion. With this President, I think that is a really bad choice, but that is just my personal opinion.

For those interested, I saw nothing in Mueller’s report that confirms or denies the Steele dossier on Trump. It was mentioned once or twice, but not used in Mueller’s analysis, or included in his data. Other sources I have seen largely (but not totally) confirm it.

Personally, I find the strong links between Trump and Russia far more disturbing than the obstruction-of-justice counts, serious crimes that they are, in and of themselves. My best guess (and only a guess it is) is that other investigations into Trump finances and tax returns will reveal disturbingly-strong connections between the Trump Organization and Russia, in that Russian bank money is Trump’s primary source of investment funds and income, and has been, for some years now.

That makes him vulnerable to Putin’s wishes, since the same Russian banks keep Putin in power, and by that, themselves. It would certainly explain how Trump consistently believes Putin’s claims over the findings of the US intelligence community, and why he has consistently acted to degrade our relations with our allies in favor of “better relations with Russia”.

That’s just my opinion. None of that is in Mueller’s report. But it would be treason of the “aid and comfort” type. And that really is impeachable.

My best recommendation to the House is to pursue the financial tax records via the courts, until stymied. Then use the “impeachment-related proceedings” to force other revelations. Somewhere along the line, something egregious enough will be uncovered to convince the GOP senators to throw Trump “under the bus”. They will do this to avoid being voted out when their re-elections come up.

Until that happens, actual articles of impeachment from the House are a fool’s errand, because the Senate as it is now, will not convict, because its GOP members still demonstrably value party advantage above good of the country.

Speed is important: if this egregious revelation (or revelations) occurs before the 2020 election, then Trump’s potential re-election is defeated, regardless of whether there is an impeachment trial in the Senate.

That’s all for now. I need to think about this a while. These are my first impressions. Whether my opinions might change is yet to be seen. But right now, I think not.

GW

SpaceNut · 2019-05-23 19:47:07

Crime hidden under collusion are the bribes, money laundering, conspiracy to commit acts that are not ethical... The probe was ended just to stop this from getting into the reports which are now instead coming out in the media...Trump+Taxes+Deutsche Bank+Mnuchin+Barr = Cover-Up For a White House that’s as dedicated to “transparency” as this one, there sure are a lot of things being kept under wraps. Anti-money laundering specialists at Deutsche Bank AG recommended in 2016 and 2017 that multiple transactions involving entities controlled by U.S. President Donald Trump and his son-in-law, Jared Kushner, be reported to a federal financial-crimes watchdog,

The wall of concealment Trump built around his finances is beginning to crumble

The inner circle crowd of stone, gates, manaford and cohen did the dirty work in this aspect maybe more...

The taxes and money trail is now just being gotten into Banker gave Manafort a sweetheart $16M loan in hopes of landing job with Trump administration

The bank at the center of Trump’s finances may soon be turning over its records

Trump’s Impeachment Finger Trap
Only by maneuvering gently, and not pulling too hard, could you extract yourself. He isn’t certain to be impeached—but every step he’s taking to try to squirm out of it seems to tighten the bind he’s in.

SpaceNut · 2019-05-26 21:00:40

Amping up the counter response to the Mueller probe in the spying game. 2016 was an attempt to find out who was doing what to whom and thats not spying even when it may take a long time to figure it out. White House claims without proof that FBI has 'outrageous' corruption Barr will uncover

New Mars Forums

Announcement

#1 2019-05-06 22:02:41

Trump would have been charged with obstruction were he not president,

#2 2019-05-08 11:02:17

Re: Trump would have been charged with obstruction were he not president,

#3 2019-05-08 16:37:23

Re: Trump would have been charged with obstruction were he not president,

#4 2019-05-08 18:26:11

Re: Trump would have been charged with obstruction were he not president,

#5 2019-05-08 19:22:16

Re: Trump would have been charged with obstruction were he not president,

#6 2019-05-08 19:40:20

Re: Trump would have been charged with obstruction were he not president,

#7 2019-05-08 21:39:02

Re: Trump would have been charged with obstruction were he not president,

#8 2019-05-09 16:42:16

Re: Trump would have been charged with obstruction were he not president,

#9 2019-05-09 18:23:34

Re: Trump would have been charged with obstruction were he not president,

#10 2019-05-09 20:08:28

Re: Trump would have been charged with obstruction were he not president,

#11 2019-05-10 10:42:03

Re: Trump would have been charged with obstruction were he not president,

#12 2019-05-10 20:00:12

Re: Trump would have been charged with obstruction were he not president,

#13 2019-05-10 21:01:49

Re: Trump would have been charged with obstruction were he not president,

#14 2019-05-12 19:59:05

Re: Trump would have been charged with obstruction were he not president,

#15 2019-05-12 20:32:09

Re: Trump would have been charged with obstruction were he not president,

#16 2019-05-13 18:55:45

Re: Trump would have been charged with obstruction were he not president,

#17 2019-05-13 19:45:29

Re: Trump would have been charged with obstruction were he not president,

#18 2019-05-14 08:19:26

Re: Trump would have been charged with obstruction were he not president,

#19 2019-05-14 21:18:51

Re: Trump would have been charged with obstruction were he not president,

#20 2019-05-21 19:57:15

Re: Trump would have been charged with obstruction were he not president,

#21 2019-05-22 14:30:45

Re: Trump would have been charged with obstruction were he not president,

#22 2019-05-22 17:26:18

Re: Trump would have been charged with obstruction were he not president,

#23 2019-05-23 18:26:52

Re: Trump would have been charged with obstruction were he not president,

#24 2019-05-23 19:47:07

Re: Trump would have been charged with obstruction were he not president,

#25 2019-05-26 21:00:40

Re: Trump would have been charged with obstruction were he not president,

Board footer