Fantasy Football - Footballguys Forums
whoknew

The Russia Investigation: Mueller - "Over the course of my career, I've seen a number of challenges to our democracy.The Russian govt's effort to interfere in our election is among the most serious."

Recommended Posts

1 minute ago, Amused to Death said:

No one can read vol. 2 and come away with the impression the president is "exonerated" of obstruction. And today's live reading only reinforces that.

I have never used the word exonerated, that is Trump talking

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
4 minutes ago, Misfit said:

There is 0% chance you have read the report from what I've seen you post.

100% chance you are wrong

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Posted (edited)
25 minutes ago, Don't Noonan said:

Won't click anything on that lying hack.

Well questions aren't lies, here's how Mueller responded:

 - Russia’s interference helped Trump.

- Trump and his campaign welcomed the assistance.

- The campaign built a messaging strategy around the stolen data. 

- The campaign lied to cover up what they had done.

- Trump was seeking to make millions in Moscow at the same time.

 - The investigation was not a witch hunt nor was it a hoax.

- Trump could be charged when he left office.

Edited by SaintsInDome2006
  • Like 3

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Posted (edited)

Schiff: “I gather you believe knowingly accepting foreign assistance during a presidential campaign is an unethical thing to do.”

Mueller: “And a crime in given circumstances."

Schiff: "...also unpatriotic."

Mueller: "True."

Viddyeo

Edited by SaintsInDome2006

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
14 minutes ago, Don't Noonan said:

Schiff is a proven liar.  HTH

So Mueller is a proven liar now too?  For agreeing with everything Schiff said?

Are you ever going to articulate something that adds to the discussion here?

Anything? I mean of substance?

  • Like 6

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Just now, zoonation said:

So Mueller is a proven liar now too?  For agreeing with everything Schiff said?

Are you ever going to articulate something that adds to the discussion here?

Anything? I mean of substance?

You are really bad at analogies.  How does Mueller agreeing with Schiff on a few questions make Mueller a liar?  

Schiff claimed Trump colluded with Russia and still thinks that.  Mueller says no.  :lmao:

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 minute ago, Don't Noonan said:

You are really bad at analogies.  How does Mueller agreeing with Schiff on a few questions make Mueller a liar?  

Schiff claimed Trump colluded with Russia and still thinks that.  Mueller says no.  :lmao:

I was talking about the hearing today. Good lord. Never mind.  

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Just now, Don't Noonan said:

You are really bad at analogies.  How does Mueller agreeing with Schiff on a few questions make Mueller a liar?  

Schiff claimed Trump colluded with Russia and still thinks that.  Mueller says no.  :lmao:

Here's a good analogy I lifted from Twitter.  Trump supporters in denial about the Mueller report are like contestants on Wheel of Fortune who continue to buy vowels after all the consonants have been turned. 

  • Like 3
  • Love 1
  • Laughing 3

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
7 minutes ago, Don't Noonan said:

You are really bad at analogies.  How does Mueller agreeing with Schiff on a few questions make Mueller a liar?  

Schiff claimed Trump colluded with Russia and still thinks that.  Mueller says no.  :lmao:

Mueller didn't say no - he said there wasn't enough evidence to get a conviction. Further, the lies and Trump's refusal to cooperate may have prevented him from collecting the necessary evidence to indict.

  • Like 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, zoonation said:

I was talking about the hearing today. Good lord. Never mind.  

I was too.  

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

keep going guys.  he's almost there.

  • Like 3
  • Laughing 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
12 hours ago, Don't Noonan said:

You are really bad at analogies.  How does Mueller agreeing with Schiff on a few questions make Mueller a liar?  

Schiff claimed Trump colluded with Russia and still thinks that.  Mueller says no.  :lmao:

You guys are just going to force everybody to say the words you want eh? 

You know what you're doing. It's obnoxious. 

  • Thanks 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
13 hours ago, Amused to Death said:

Mueller didn't say no - he said there wasn't enough evidence to get a conviction. Further, the lies and Trump's refusal to cooperate may have prevented him from collecting the necessary evidence to indict.

“It’s important to remember that the Mueller report, in its own words, “did not establish that the [Trump] campaign coordinated or conspired with the Russian government in its election-interference activities.” Mueller and his team found no “evidence that any U.S. person who coordinated or communicated with the IRA [the group that carried out Russia’s election interference efforts on social media] knew that he or she was speaking with Russian nationals engaged in criminal conspiracy.”

That is from CNN

Also, Mueller said his investigation was never hindered. Meaning he feels his investigation was complete.

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
48 minutes ago, John Blutarsky said:

“It’s important to remember that the Mueller report, in its own words, “did not establish that the [Trump] campaign coordinated or conspired with the Russian government in its election-interference activities.” Mueller and his team found no “evidence that any U.S. person who coordinated or communicated with the IRA [the group that carried out Russia’s election interference efforts on social media] knew that he or she was speaking with Russian nationals engaged in criminal conspiracy.”

That is from CNN

Also, Mueller said his investigation was never hindered. Meaning he feels his investigation was complete.

Problematic is an understatement.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Posted (edited)
50 minutes ago, John Blutarsky said:

Also, Mueller said his investigation was never hindered.

And this is not the definition of criminal obstruction.

If criminal obstruction was that an investigation was hindered then an investigation would never get to prosecute anyone for obstruction because (you guessed it) it has been obstructed.

Edited by SaintsInDome2006
  • Like 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2 hours ago, joffer said:

keep going guys.  he's almost there.

It's like a mule with a spinning wheel. 

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
14 minutes ago, SaintsInDome2006 said:

And this is not the definition of criminal obstruction.

If criminal obstruction was that an investigation was hindered then an investigation would never get to prosecute anyone for obstruction because (you guessed it) it has been obstructed.

I never said it was. It means Mueller feels his investigation was thorough and accurate.

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
20 hours ago, Amused to Death said:

No one can read vol. 2 and come away with the impression the president is "exonerated" of obstruction. And today's live reading only reinforces that.

ETA: in fact, Mueller used the exact words that Trump was most definitely NOT exonerated. 

Here's the thing- without an actual finding of collusion this thing was always toast.  The bar was set too high because people got carried away with the more salacious aspects of the TrumpRussia narrative. 

It made all the other tangible, demonstrably corrupt #### that Trump does everyday look normal by comparison.  Most people just want to move on to things that actually affect their lives- not Russia, or whether Trump tried to stop an investigation into a bogus conspiracy theory.  It's over. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Posted (edited)
4 minutes ago, ren hoek said:

It made all the other tangible, demonstrably corrupt #### that Trump does everyday look normal by comparison. 

Sorry, but how is what is described in Vol I any different from Trump’s every day corruption? The whole volume is a litany of vignettes about unseemly people grifting and avoiding public notice.

Edited by SaintsInDome2006
  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
4 minutes ago, SaintsInDome2006 said:

Sorry, but how is what is described in Vol I any different from Trump’s every day corruption? The whole volume is a litany of vignettes about unseemly people grifting and avoiding public notice.

You put Cohen/Sater failing to make a building in Moscow on the same footing as Trump supporting Bonesaw's war crimes in Yemen?    

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
4 minutes ago, ren hoek said:

You put Cohen/Sater failing to make a building in Moscow on the same footing as Trump supporting Bonesaw's war crimes in Yemen?    

Ignore Russia entirely. I’d put Flynn selling nuclear projects with an ex-general to the Saudis in a pretty bad zone. Or him getting paid by the Turks while serving as PNSA for the US, Yaknow, also pretty bad. Prince, Nader, Manafort, it’s a cast of nasty characters who fit perfectly in the corruption motif you’re describing.

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
22 hours ago, Don't Noonan said:

Schiff is a proven liar.  HTH

I must ask: do you believe that Trump is a proven liar? If so, then do you dismiss out of hand his comments before vetting them? If you do not, then I don’t even know what to say.

  • Like 2
  • Love 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
23 hours ago, SaintsInDome2006 said:

Schiff: “I gather you believe knowingly accepting foreign assistance during a presidential campaign is an unethical thing to do.”

Mueller: “And a crime in given circumstances."

Schiff: "...also unpatriotic."

Mueller: "True."

Viddyeo

Schiff had the clearest and most cogent presentation of all those involved that i've seen so far.

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, pecorino said:

I must ask: do you believe that Trump is a proven liar? If so, then do you dismiss out of hand his comments before vetting them? If you do not, then I don’t even know what to say.

Trump is a liar too, most politicians are.  Schiff is far more of a liar though.

  • Laughing 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
5 minutes ago, Don't Noonan said:

Trump is a liar too, most politicians are.  Schiff is far more of a liar though.

This is what I come to the PSF for. Greatness.

  • Like 2
  • Thanks 1
  • Love 1
  • Laughing 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
6 minutes ago, Don't Noonan said:

Trump is a liar too, most politicians are.  Schiff is far more of a liar though.

lmfao.  Trump literally lies every time he opens his mouth.  Best economy ever?  Most accomplishments ever?

Please go. 

  • Like 1
  • Thanks 1
  • Laughing 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Just now, James Daulton said:

lmfao.  Trump literally lies every time he opens his mouth.  Best economy ever?  Most accomplishments ever?

Please go. 

The difference is one of these guys is President and is restoring America's greatness and the other is too butthurt that Hillary lost and has been making up lies of collusion for the past 3 years.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 minute ago, Don't Noonan said:

The difference is one of these guys is President and is restoring America's greatness and the other is too butthurt that Hillary lost and has been making up lies of collusion for the past 3 years.

Did you see just a few days ago where the Indian government called Trump out for lying?  In the same meeting, he suggested that he just doesn't want to kill 10 million Afghans, but he could, but he won't.  Later, Afghanistan's president demands an explanation from Trump about just what he meant when he threatened his country.

Making America great?  You don't make America great by being a bumbling fool insulting, threatening or lying about our allies.  

He makes a mockery of the USA almost every time he opens his mouth.

  • Like 9

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Posted (edited)
22 minutes ago, adonis said:
29 minutes ago, Don't Noonan said:

The difference is one of these guys is President and is restoring America's greatness and the other is too butthurt that Hillary lost and has been making up lies of collusion for the past 3 years.

Did you see just a few days ago where the Indian government called Trump out for lying?  In the same meeting, he suggested that he just doesn't want to kill 10 million Afghans, but he could, but he won't.  Later, Afghanistan's president demands an explanation from Trump about just what he meant when he threatened his country.

Making America great?  You don't make America great by being a bumbling fool insulting, threatening or lying about our allies.  

He makes a mockery of the USA almost every time he opens his mouth.

Also, did you see where Trump was speaking earlier this week and was standing in front of a photoshopped presidential seal?

The photoshopped seal had:

  • An eagle with two heads, similar to the Russian emblem
  • Golf clubs instead of arrows in one claw
  • Money instead of an olive branch
  • "45 es un titere" (45 is a puppet (in Spanish)) instead of e pluribus unum
  • The stars on the shield have been replaced with the hammer & sickle

We should really have a thread dedicated to Trump making america great again, by his pure idiocy, lies, insults, crimes, and embarrassing behavior.  A chronicle of how he's making a mockery of our country.

Edited by adonis
  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
28 minutes ago, Don't Noonan said:

The difference is one of these guys is President and is restoring America's greatness and the other is too butthurt that Hillary lost and has been making up lies of collusion for the past 3 years.

How is Trump "restoring America's greatness"? Drained the swamp? Nope. Worst swamp in history. Eliminated Obamacare? Nope. Built the wall? Nope. Brought all the jobs back from overseas? Nope. I mean, has he done anything that directly benefits those people? 

  • Like 3

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 minute ago, Patrick Bateman said:

How is Trump "restoring America's greatness"? Drained the swamp? Nope. Worst swamp in history. Eliminated Obamacare? Nope. Built the wall? Nope. Brought all the jobs back from overseas? Nope. I mean, has he done anything that directly benefits those people? 

Oh I now.  America is now more respected throughout the world.  GDP has crushed 3% each year of Trump's term.  The debt is on the way to being eliminate.  Healthcare is better and cheaper than ever.  Mexico has sent us a check for the wall.  Illegal immigration is at all time lows....

  • Like 2
  • Laughing 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
8 minutes ago, Patrick Bateman said:

How is Trump "restoring America's greatness"? Drained the swamp? Nope. Worst swamp in history. Eliminated Obamacare? Nope. Built the wall? Nope. Brought all the jobs back from overseas? Nope. I mean, has he done anything that directly benefits those people? 

He is uses the worst words. And the uneducated prefer those.

  • Like 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2 minutes ago, BigSteelThrill said:

He is uses the worst words. And the uneducated prefer those.

:rolleyes:

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
4 minutes ago, James Daulton said:

Oh I now.  America is now more respected throughout the world.  GDP has crushed 3% each year of Trump's term.  The debt is on the way to being eliminate.  Healthcare is better and cheaper than ever.  Mexico has sent us a check for the wall.  Illegal immigration is at all time lows....

Exactly. All empty promises. The only thing that he's done is pack the courts with conservative judges. That's his big accomplishment. He's not a conservative though. He's an empty suit. He's an opportunist. A true con. 

  • Like 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

HIs supporters have to know he's a moron, who doesn't know what he's doing, but sticks it to the liberals so he's their moron and they don't care about all the ####-ups.  They don't care he's making a fool of America to the world, that he's corrupt, committed crimes, appointing terrible folks to positions of authority within government. 

They just don't care because their guy is in office.  He's one of them.  It's just the liberals complaining about little things like other countries calling our president, rightfully, a liar.  Big whoop?!?!?!  Look at the stock market?

Nevermind that the stock market would be doing this with WHOEVER was in office, but that we instead could have a person who actually would make America respected in the world, whether a conservative or progressive - just anyone not Trump.  

Folks likely think it's funny - look at how he gets under libs skin!!!! Hahah, lib tears!!!!  But good lord, they can't see that for those of us who really do care about this country, and are utterly repulsed by what Trump is doing to it, that it's not a game.  We're objectively pointing out his flaws, but his supporters aren't living in an objective world.  They are in make-believe Maga-land where Trump is winning, and libs are losing, and that's all anyone needs to know other than the stock market is rising!

  • Like 5
  • Thanks 1
  • Love 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Sorry for the #####ing here, but I'll keep it in this thread.

It's incredibly disheartening to see the Russia stuff, with collusion, obstruction of justice, and just wholly unethical behavior on the part of our President, get swept under the rug due to politics.

Our nation has something over much of the rest of the world.  We're not a corrupt country.  We have a reasonable history of holding elected officials to high standards.  And this tradition is in incredible jeopardy right now.

Rule of law is not ruling right now.  We have a President and a DOJ openly defying lawfull orders.  We have a president who we know, if he were not POTUS and granted whatever special privileges DOJ believes he has, that he'd be indicted and likely go to trial for criminal behavior.  We have an AG who basically has set himself above the law.

What the hell guys?  Are we a nation of laws or aren't we?  Does it mean anything to be unethical anymore?  Is there no price to be paid for bad behavior? For incompetency?  For lying?  For commiting crimes? Ignoring the law?

That's where we are right now.  Trump has taken us there, as a country, and far too many of us are cheering as he drives us further away from our national character.

  • Like 11
  • Thanks 1
  • Love 1
  • Laughing 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2 minutes ago, adonis said:

Sorry for the #####ing here, but I'll keep it in this thread.

It's incredibly disheartening to see the Russia stuff, with collusion, obstruction of justice, and just wholly unethical behavior on the part of our President, get swept under the rug due to politics.

Our nation has something over much of the rest of the world.  We're not a corrupt country.  We have a reasonable history of holding elected officials to high standards.  And this tradition is in incredible jeopardy right now.

Rule of law is not ruling right now.  We have a President and a DOJ openly defying lawfull orders.  We have a president who we know, if he were not POTUS and granted whatever special privileges DOJ believes he has, that he'd be indicted and likely go to trial for criminal behavior.  We have an AG who basically has set himself above the law.

What the hell guys?  Are we a nation of laws or aren't we?  Does it mean anything to be unethical anymore?  Is there no price to be paid for bad behavior? For incompetency?  For lying?  For commiting crimes? Ignoring the law?

That's where we are right now.  Trump has taken us there, as a country, and far too many of us are cheering as he drives us further away from our national character.

The last line of defense is voting. People have to turn out. Dems need to pay more attention to the Senate races. They are absolutely critical. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I get lost in the double negative word salad.

What exactly did Meuller say about the OLC with regards to obstruction?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2 hours ago, Don't Noonan said:

Trump is a liar too, most politicians are.  Schiff is far more of a liar though.

Fascinating. Thanks for responding, I thought you might not. If you don’t mind digging deeper, I’m curious about your perceptions of 1) a typical American, 2) a typical politician, 3) Adam Schiff and 4) President Trump on a lying scale. I wish we had Offdee, but short of that: on a scale of 1 to 10 with ten being “middle name is ‘pants on fire’” and one being a Lawful Good Paladin, how would you rank those four people? Again, thanks, and I am happy to give you my rankings if you like.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, Patrick Bateman said:

The last line of defense is voting. People have to turn out. Dems need to pay more attention to the Senate races. They are absolutely critical. 

So many people running for president should be doing it for Senate

  • Like 2
  • Sad 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Posted (edited)
10 hours ago, Daywalker said:

I get lost in the double negative word salad.

What exactly did Meuller say about the OLC with regards to obstruction?

 

10 hours ago, Daywalker said:

Flush out the meuller/liu exchange for me.

Here's the situation - obstruction as a crime requires three elements: 1. obstructive act, 2. criminal intent, and 3. a nexus of the act and some official proceeding.

And as you likely know the Mueller report lays out at least 10 obstructive acts this way, explaining how each has an obstructive act, the criminal intent, and the nexus of the two to a public proceeding, and the arguments and permutations of those. 

So Lieu walked Mueller through one of the stronger examples, where Trump ordered McGahn to fire Mueller. 

Mueller indeed agreed with Lieu that one by one each of the elements existed in that instance. So naturally Lieu asked Mueller to simply agree that yes of course criminal obstruction had taken place and that Mueller would have indicted Trump for that if not for the DOJ policy prohibiting it. Which Mueller did.

It would have been better if Lieu had simply stopped at confirming that the three elements of the crime had been met rather than blending in the point about the OLC memo, but regardless the point was made.

 

LIEU: OK. I’d like to direct you to page 97 of Volume 2 of your report, and you wrote there on page 97, quote, “Sessions was being instructed to tell the special counsel to end the existing investigation into the president and his campaign,” unquote. That’s in the report, correct?

MUELLER: Correct.

LIEU: That would be evidence of an obstructive act because it would naturally obstruct their investigation, correct?

MUELLER: Correct.

LIEU: OK. Let’s turn now to the second element of the crime of obstruction of justice which requires a nexus to an official proceeding. Again, I’m going to direct you to page 97, the same page of Volume 2. And you wrote, quote, “by the time of the president’s initial one-on-one meeting with Lewandowski on June 19, 2017, the existence of a grand jury investigation supervised by the special counsel was public knowledge.” That’s in the report, correct?

MUELLER: Correct.

LIEU: That would constitute evidence of a nexus to an official proceeding because a grand jury investigation is an official proceeding, correct?

MUELLER: Yes.

LIEU: OK. I’d like to now turn to the final element of the crime of obstruction to justice. On that same page, page 97, do you see where there is the intent section on that page?

MUELLER: I do see that.

LIEU: All right. Would you be willing to read the first sentence?

MUELLER: And that was starting with...

LIEU: Substantial evidence.

MUELLER: Indicates that the president...

LIEU: If you read that first sentence, would you be willing to do that?

MUELLER: I’m happy to have you read it.

LIEU: OK. I will read it. You wrote, quote, “substantial evidence indicates that the president’s effort to have Sessions limit the scope of the special counsel’s investigation be featuring (ph) election interference was intended to prevent further investigative scrutiny of the president and his campaign’s conduct,” unquote. That’s in the report, correct?

MUELLER: That is in the report, and I rely what’s in the report to indicate what’s happened in the paragraphs that we’ve been discussing.

LIEU: Thank you. So to recap what we’ve heard, we have heard today that the president ordered former White House Counsel, Don McGahn, to fire you. The president ordered Don McGahn to then cover that up and create a false paper trail. And now we’ve heard the president ordered Corey Lewandowski to tell Jeff Sessions to limit your investigation so that he -- you stop investigating the president.

I believe any reasonable person looking at these facts could conclude that all three elements of the crime of obstruction of justice have been met. And I’d like to ask you the reason, again, that you did not indict Donald Trump is because of OLC opinion stating that you cannot indict a sitting president, correct?

MUELLER: That is correct.

 

 

Edited by SaintsInDome2006
  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Just now, SaintsInDome2006 said:

 

Here's the situation - obstruction as a crime requires three elements: 1. obstructive act, 2. criminal intent, and 3. a nexus of the act and intent.

And as you likely know the Mueller report lays out at least 10 obstructive acts this way, explaining how each has an obstructive act, the criminal intent, and the nexus of the two, and the arguments and permutations of those. 

So Lieu walked Mueller through one of the stronger examples, where Trump ordered McGahn to fire Mueller. 

Mueller indeed agreed with Lieu that one by one each of the elements existed in that instance. So naturally Lieu asked Mueller to simply agree that yes of course criminal obstruction had taken place and that Mueller would have indicted Trump for that if not for the DOJ policy prohibiting it. Which Mueller did.

 

  Reveal hidden contents

 

LIEU: OK. I’d like to direct you to page 97 of Volume 2 of your report, and you wrote there on page 97, quote, “Sessions was being instructed to tell the special counsel to end the existing investigation into the president and his campaign,” unquote. That’s in the report, correct?

MUELLER: Correct.

LIEU: That would be evidence of an obstructive act because it would naturally obstruct their investigation, correct?

MUELLER: Correct.

LIEU: OK. Let’s turn now to the second element of the crime of obstruction of justice which requires a nexus to an official proceeding. Again, I’m going to direct you to page 97, the same page of Volume 2. And you wrote, quote, “by the time of the president’s initial one-on-one meeting with Lewandowski on June 19, 2017, the existence of a grand jury investigation supervised by the special counsel was public knowledge.” That’s in the report, correct?

MUELLER: Correct.

LIEU: That would constitute evidence of a nexus to an official proceeding because a grand jury investigation is an official proceeding, correct?

MUELLER: Yes.

LIEU: OK. I’d like to now turn to the final element of the crime of obstruction to justice. On that same page, page 97, do you see where there is the intent section on that page?

MUELLER: I do see that.

LIEU: All right. Would you be willing to read the first sentence?

MUELLER: And that was starting with...

LIEU: Substantial evidence.

MUELLER: Indicates that the president...

LIEU: If you read that first sentence, would you be willing to do that?

MUELLER: I’m happy to have you read it.

LIEU: OK. I will read it. You wrote, quote, “substantial evidence indicates that the president’s effort to have Sessions limit the scope of the special counsel’s investigation be featuring (ph) election interference was intended to prevent further investigative scrutiny of the president and his campaign’s conduct,” unquote. That’s in the report, correct?

MUELLER: That is in the report, and I rely what’s in the report to indicate what’s happened in the paragraphs that we’ve been discussing.

LIEU: Thank you. So to recap what we’ve heard, we have heard today that the president ordered former White House Counsel, Don McGahn, to fire you. The president ordered Don McGahn to then cover that up and create a false paper trail. And now we’ve heard the president ordered Corey Lewandowski to tell Jeff Sessions to limit your investigation so that he -- you stop investigating the president.

I believe any reasonable person looking at these facts could conclude that all three elements of the crime of obstruction of justice have been met. And I’d like to ask you the reason, again, that you did not indict Donald Trump is because of OLC opinion stating that you cannot indict a sitting president, correct?

MUELLER: That is correct.

 

  Reveal hidden contents

 

Yeah but Mueller looked bad so none of this matters. "Exoneration! Stupid libs!!!".

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Posted (edited)

And it's also true that all of this already exists in the report, so sure Trump & Pals can bang the table about 'no obstruction', but there it is as many as 10 instances where Mueller lays out all three elements of the crime as all existing.

Edited by SaintsInDome2006

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Posted (edited)
34 minutes ago, SaintsInDome2006 said:

And it's also true that all of this already exists in the report, so sure Trump & Pals can bang the table about 'no obstruction', but there it is as many as 10 instances where Mueller lays out all three elements of the crime as all existing.

As a reminder, the last 2 presidential impeachment proceedings included obstruction of justice. Here are 10 detailed instances with substantial evidence against our current president.

Also, multiple countries are actively engaging in election interference and this administration is not only complacent but actively moving to block attempts to protect our democracy.

Oh, and THEY'RE the ones who call themselves "patriots".

Edited by Amused to Death
"Mueller looked awful! Suck it libs!!! LOL"

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Restore formatting

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.