U.S. CitiesCity-Data Forum Index
Go Back   City-Data Forum > General Forums > Politics and Other Controversies
 [Register]
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
View detailed profile (Advanced) or search
site with Google Custom Search

Search Forums  (Advanced)
 
Old 04-22-2019, 05:49 AM
 
Location: *
8,113 posts, read 2,424,570 times
Reputation: 2223

Advertisements

Something else that should be under consideration here. From one of the many footnotes from Mr. Mueller's report:

Quote:
"A possible remedy through impeachment for abuses of power would not substitute for potential criminal liability after a President leaves office. Impeachment would remove a President from office, but would not address the underlying culpability of the conduct or serve the usual purposes of the criminal law. Indeed, the Impeachment Judgment Clause recognizes that criminal law plays an independent role in addressing an official's conduct, distinct from the political remedy of impeachment. See U.S. CONST. ART. I, § 3, cl. 7. Impeachment is also a drastic and rarely invoked remedy, and Congress is not restricted to relying only on impeachment, rather than making criminal law applicable to a former President, as OLC has recognized. A Sitting President's Amenability to Indictment and Criminal Prosecution, 24 Op. O.L.C. at 255 ('Recognizing an immunity from prosecution for a sitting President would not preclude such prosecution once the President's term is over or he is otherwise removed from office by resignation or impeachment.')."

 
Old 04-22-2019, 05:49 AM
 
37,005 posts, read 16,141,015 times
Reputation: 8413
Quote:
Originally Posted by Ariadne22 View Post
A good piece on why the investigation ended so quickly - and with no conclusion on obstruction - the short answer Mueller knew he would be overruled by Barr:

https://www.washingtonpost.com/world...=.e00ab304d273

If one takes the time to read the salient sections in Mueller's Report - which I have - Barr's argument on "document destruction" (put forth in his very flawed June 2018 Job Interview Memo and debunked by legal experts) being the limits of "obstruction" are laughable and in no way comport with the language in the statute.

See Vol. II, pp. 162-163, Mueller Report. You can download, here:

https://www.washingtonian.com/2019/0...er-report-pdf/
Has the Trump hating owner EVER let the Post print a POSITIVE story about Trump?

Need you need to find a NON biased source if you want your posts to have any credibility.
 
Old 04-22-2019, 06:20 AM
 
Location: Long Island
33,102 posts, read 13,972,929 times
Reputation: 7059
Quote:
Originally Posted by Blondy View Post
There was no criminal deletion of emails or other messages or there would be charges.

Mueller chose not to subpoena the Pres. Likely because he knew it would not change the outcome. He already had "unprecedented cooperation" from the administration.

There were no grey areas with regard to conspiracy.

Mueller unequivocably stated there was insufficient evidence to charge conspiracy.

Bottom line NO CONSPIRACY. Spin it however you like, there is no changing that.

Given the fact there was no conspiracy, there is no way to reach corrupt intent on the obstruction of justice issue.
I didn't say the deletion of emails was criminal just that it happened in addition to the many lies.


Yes there is not enough evidence for conspiracy charges but if you can believe that all these secretive meetings with the Russians who were close to Putin. Why did they need to lie and attempt to hide these meetings, what was the point.


Its up to congress if they want to proceed with obstruction, I don't see it as clear and it is doubtful the GOP would do anything even if they saw Putin handing him briefcase filled with cash.


Trump did his best to undermine this investigation at every point and even his written responses were lacking so no, I don't see the cooperation part.
 
Old 04-22-2019, 06:23 AM
 
Location: *
8,113 posts, read 2,424,570 times
Reputation: 2223
Why also the obstruction of an investigation into a foreign country's interference with our election processes?
 
Old 04-22-2019, 06:25 AM
 
Location: Long Island
33,102 posts, read 13,972,929 times
Reputation: 7059
Quote:
Originally Posted by Quick Enough View Post
"there was no basis for Sessions to recused himself." I agree.

Rosenstein had MORE involvement with the issues then Sessions did.
Someone working on the Trump campaign shouldn't recuse himself, which legal minds agree with that conclusion. They already had Nunes heading up the house investigation and Sessions with the DOJ, kind of like picking your own judge and jury. So much for objectivity.

Last edited by Goodnight; 04-22-2019 at 07:52 AM..
 
Old 04-22-2019, 07:38 AM
 
Location: Whidbey Island, WA
12,276 posts, read 11,337,192 times
Reputation: 6124
Quote:
Originally Posted by loves2read View Post
We all know the energy, money, and emotions spent trying to prove HRC was directly responsible for Benghazi...
If there had been a hint of her involvement with any foreign entities in that raid like there are obvious meetings and involvement with Russian operatives as the Trump people were in the campaign and afterward—Mueller’s investigation would be the Holy Grail to the GOP....

Muller’s report says specifically—-
when substantial, credible evidence enabled the Office to reach a conclusion with confidence, the report states that the investigation established that certain actions or events occurred. A statement that the investigation did not establish particular facts does not mean there was no evidence of those facts.

Only that the evidence was not sufficient to satisfy a court of law...when the report was PROVIDED...I really don’t like to say “concluded” because Mueller would still be investigating and wouldn’t have provided a premature version of his conclusion IF he had been allowed to pursue avenues he was still investigating as early as last month...

There are 12 ongoing investigations — that likely means more than 12 indictments are likely to come since Mueller ONLY handed off investigations to offices if there was documentation of a crime with credible evidence obtained to convict those involved...

There is a redacted passage in the Report after Mueller says he considered calling Trump via subpoena to testify and knew he would refuse...
Speculation is that the redacted Grand Jury information points to the Grand Jury WANTING to call Trump to testify—-
And Mueller didn’t feel that was possible under the current DoJ guidelines

There is strong likelihood Trump’s three oldest children will be indicted under the Foreign Corrupt Practices Act based on information around redacted passages...and the counter-intelligence investigations that Andrew McCabe had created that are going to be the focus of the House Intelligence Committee under Schiff...

Now the Congressional Committees are likely going to get to see the redacted portions of the Report—even if they have to take Barr to Court...
And those sections could be very important in making a decision to bring articles of Impeachment
We are not sorry. It's over.
 
Old 04-22-2019, 07:40 AM
 
4,199 posts, read 2,024,834 times
Reputation: 1771
Quote:
Originally Posted by ChiGeekGuest View Post
Why also the obstruction of an investigation into a foreign country's interference with our election processes?

Mueller never said what he was investigating. It was Donald Trump assuming and broadcasting that Mueller was only investigating collusion!

Even with redactions, the Mueller report contains ample evidence Trump and his campaign sought foreign help in 2016.
 
Old 04-22-2019, 07:51 AM
 
38,300 posts, read 14,974,624 times
Reputation: 24717
Despite all the excited chants of, "It's over. It's over," it most definitely is not over.

I'm not sure who Team Trump is trying to convince. Each other? But anyone with two wits to rub together knows that it's not over until Congress says it is over.

If you doubt me, read the enumerated powers section.

https://www.congress.gov/content/con...N-REV-2016.pdf Constitution.
 
Old 04-22-2019, 08:29 AM
 
11,057 posts, read 3,768,008 times
Reputation: 5197
Quote:
Originally Posted by Goodnight View Post
I didn't say the deletion of emails was criminal just that it happened in addition to the many lies.


Yes there is not enough evidence for conspiracy charges but if you can believe that all these secretive meetings with the Russians who were close to Putin. Why did they need to lie and attempt to hide these meetings, what was the point.


Its up to congress if they want to proceed with obstruction, I don't see it as clear and it is doubtful the GOP would do anything even if they saw Putin handing him briefcase filled with cash.


Trump did his best to undermine this investigation at every point and even his written responses were lacking so no, I don't see the cooperation part.



you mean like the 33,000 emails Hillary deleted under subpoena that NO Democrat even Bernie Sanders found criminal. Interesting how Democrats find a few deleted emails a crime.




Trump always felt the investigation was a hoax and after he found out FBI agents and Obama head of intel agencies were biased against him and were spying on him since the 2016 election campaign, WELL OF COURSE!!! , Trump made his feelings heard but feelings and his opinions are not crimes.


Trump felt it was a political investigation and a hoax and at the end he was correct but he didn't break the law. He let Mueller do his job which at the end he found NO evidence of any American colluding and conspiracy with Russia. So now the question is how did all this got started and why?



Trump is setting the Democrats for a trap, again. Trump has the FISA warrants card in how all of this was started and he is going to cash it in before the 2020 election to show how the investigation was a hoax and the players behind it.


If I was the Democrats, I punt and move on but they are too stubborn and will keep at it hoping for a different result.
 
Old 04-22-2019, 08:39 AM
 
7,178 posts, read 5,438,012 times
Reputation: 5376
We know the term "collusion" was the Kremlin's president talking points to spin his narrative to his followers. The rest of America knew Mueller won't find "collusion" because that's not what he was investigating. Mueller stated it on the 1st page of his report. Collusion is not a legal term. Some of the president's supporters are gullible. Glad to see #ImpeachTrump trending all weekend. He also has the lowest approval rating of any president during this time after only 2 years. It's well deserved.

SDNY continues to label the president an unindicted co-conspirator. Trump has a lot of legal issues ahead. It's far from over. He can be indicted in both cases after he leaves office.

Mr. Cohen implicated the president in a crime
Quote:
Federal prosecutors in Manhattan effectively characterized Mr. Trump as an unindicted co-conspirator in the hush money payments, which violated campaign finance laws because they were made to influence the outcome of the election.

At his plea hearing, Mr. Cohen said he had made the payments at Mr. Trump’s direction, which was consistent with other evidence prosecutors had gathered.

Under current Justice Department policy, a president cannot be charged with a crime. But when a president is no longer in office, prosecutors are free to bring charges — a possibility cited in the Mueller report released on Thursday.
https://www.nytimes.com/2019/04/21/u...p-history.html

It is wrong to say 'no collusion'
Quote:
Mueller, a careful lawyer using lawyerly terms precisely, found that he was commissioned by the Justice Department to investigate whether federal crimes occurred, that “collusion” is not a legal term and is not itself a federal judge crime, that in making decisions about prosecutions he must interpret “collusion” as engaging in a “conspiracy” to violate campaign finance laws, and that such felony conspiracy charges require prosecutors to show “beyond a reasonable doubt” the individuals “knowingly and willfully” broke the law.
Quote:
Mueller then detailed at length why he does not think the evidence meets this appropriately high prosecutorial standard for bringing criminal felony charges. This is very different than saying no collusion occurred. The report does, however, provide a roadmap for the changes the Federal Election Commission and Congress must make in our laws to ensure that foreign nations, as well as American candidates and campaigns, never engage in this sort of activity in future elections.
Quote:
The Russian actions and connivance shown by the Trump team threaten our basic values of American democracy. The kind of foreign interference we witnessed in the 2016 election was an expressed fear of the Founders dating back to the 1796 election. Mueller established that the Russian government perceived it would benefit from a Trump presidency and worked to secure that outcome. Russian actors leveraged the business relationships of candidate Trump to access his inner circle.
https://thehill.com/opinion/judiciar...y-no-collusion
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.

Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.


Closed Thread

Over $104,000 in prizes was already given out to active posters on our forum and additional giveaways are planned!

Go Back   City-Data Forum > General Forums > Politics and Other Controversies
Similar Threads
Follow City-Data.com founder on our Forum or

All times are GMT -6. The time now is 04:25 AM.

© 2005-2019, Advameg, Inc. · Please obey Forum Rules · Terms of Use and Privacy Policy · Bug Bounty

City-Data.com - Archive 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9, 10, 11, 12, 13, 14, 15, 16, 17, 18, 19, 20, 21, 22, 23, 24, 25, 26, 27, 28, 29, 30, 31, 32, 33, 34, 35 - Top