The Mueller report for all of us to see

a reply to: JBurns

obstruction of justice. n.
an attempt to interfere with the administration of the courts, the judicial system or law enforcement officers, including threatening witnesses, improper conversations with jurors, hiding evidence, or interfering with an arrest. Such activity is a crime.

To obtain a conviction under section 1503, the government must prove that there was a pending federal judicial proceeding, the defendant knew of the proceeding, and the defendant had corrupt intent to interfere with or attempted to interfere with the proceeding.
Two types of cases arise under the Omnibus Clause: the concealment, alteration, or destruction of documents; and the encouraging or rendering of false testimony. Actual obstruction is not needed as an element of proof to sustain a conviction. The defendant's endeavor to obstruct justice is sufficient. "Endeavor" has been defined by the courts as an effort to accomplish the purpose the statute was enacted to prevent. The courts have consistently held that "endeavor" constitutes a lesser threshold of purposeful activity than a criminal "attempt."

legal-dictionary.thefreedictionary.com...

originally posted by: oloufo

originally posted by: Arnie123
I love Trumps reaction to the independent counsel, "I'm #ed", because he had heard about all the BS it comes with.

Told Sessions, "You're suppose to protect me".

Here we learn that Trump doesn't fear about getting "caught", rather, the BS a special counsel brings with.

However, knowing Trumps cool and just go along with it hail mary, figured just let it complete.

It's totally understandable as to why he was concerned with that.

interesting quote for sure! but to be fair, after reading the whole part the reason for this reaction wasn't because he felt guilty (i think he didn't even know what guilt is). you date the most pretty girl in town and after the first kiss she is willing to come to your home, but after entering the house you learn that the toilet exploded and the # still floods the rooms - thats how trump felt, i think.

lol, interesting perspective, but yeah, I guess that works 😌

a reply to: scraedtosleep

No, that isn't probable cause. Enjoying dirt being released on your opponent doesn't mean you were involved. You would have to have evidence that there was an association with the person releasing the information before you could claim probable cause. There is no evidence of that. Put simply it's called schadenfreude. That's not illegal. Nor is is a reason for probable cause. If it was practically everyone would be under investigation.

When did Mueller shift from investigating Collusion to investigating Obstruction?

The news media was convinced for all 2 years, that the Trump family colluded/conspired.

originally posted by: scraedtosleep
a reply to: Grambler

Not a lot of new info to be honest that I see on collusion. Russians released dirt to help trump, trump liked the dirt, but no illegal activity from anyone connected to trump or any american working with russians

Would the trump admins amount of pleasure in that info coming from russia not be a good reason for some dems to suspect them? Probable cause perhaps?

Is the Dems amount of pleasure at the dirt in the dossier that came from Russians in the dossier be good reason to suspect them

Or how about the Dems pleasure at every illegal leak that made trumo look bad

No, both sides are no doubt happy when dirt is released in their opponent, that’s not unusual

a reply to: carewemust

When did Mueller shift from investigating Collusion to investigating Obstruction?

When Trump fired Comey.

a reply to: Sookiechacha

Ugh, spin it however you want, the Special thought otherwise, as did Barr. You? Well, not someone important enough in the grand scheme of things...

originally posted by: Sookiechacha
a reply to: carewemust

When did Mueller shift from investigating Collusion to investigating Obstruction?

When Trump fired Comey.

Which was ridiculous, because Rosenstien didn't see an issue with it 🤔

originally posted by: Sookiechacha
a reply to: carewemust

When did Mueller shift from investigating Collusion to investigating Obstruction?

When Trump fired Comey.

In accordance with his rights in the role or POTUS. Basically, doing his job.

Nice try sookie-baby...but neither you nor I are lawyers. And, the top people in that field just declared that point bullocks.

But, you keep that hate alive in your heart and mind. Personally, I think it will eat you from the inside and you should let it go before that is all you are.

originally posted by: Arnie123
a reply to: Sookiechacha

Ugh, spin it however you want, the Special thought otherwise, as did Barr. You? Well, not someone important enough in the grand scheme of things...

"The Special" tossed it Congress.

"With respect to whether the President can be found to have obstructed justice by exercising his powers under Article II of the Constitution, we concluded that Congress has the authority to prohibit a President's corrupt use of his authority in order to protect the integrity of the administration of justice,"

www.msn.com...

a reply to: Arnie123

we won. 'nuff said and done, lets get back to work

Seconded

A freshly emboldened Trump is on a roll. Bet Dems wish they'd have just taken Barr's summary and shut up

Instead, they re-opened gaping embarrassing wounds and simply proved they were once again wrong - there was no "deeper truth" hiding in some 4D chess game that if only you read between the lines would be revealed. What a joke, by a bunch of jokers. Petty, sour grape, sore loser jokers.

MAGA

a reply to: Krakatoa

McCabe, Rosenstein opened obstruction probe after Trump fired Comey, before Mueller was hired: report thehill.com...

originally posted by: Sookiechacha
a reply to: Krakatoa

McCabe, Rosenstein opened obstruction probe after Trump fired Comey, before Mueller was hired: report thehill.com...

McCabe? Let me stop you right there 😂

Just quit, you're making a fool of yourself.

a reply to: Sookiechacha

It takes quite a bit of faith to not see something nefarious in Rosenstein recommending termination for Comey, then turning around and using the termination as a grounds for investigation.

Especially when, after Comey was fired, he was roasted by the IG for being the turd that Trump said he was.

originally posted by: Sookiechacha
a reply to: Krakatoa

McCabe, Rosenstein opened obstruction probe after Trump fired Comey, before Mueller was hired: report thehill.com...

Ok? What was the result of the investigation?

a reply to: Sookiechacha

the defendant had corrupt intent

Care to explain how he can have the requisite corrupt intent when he knew for an absolute fact the underlying crime was invented/fake/entirely untrue?

Regardless, the findings were clearly stated: "No evidence of a conspiracy involving Trump working with the Russians" "No evidence to support obstruction of justice"

There isn't any wiggle room left here. Your Mueller savior was a bust, and you should accept it and move on. Frankly, I think you owe some folks an apology but whether you own up to that or not is on you. I will say this, our ability to admit mistakes and come clean about them says a lot about who we are as individuals and where our moral compass lays

The truth will set you free

Why do you think it is that Mueller, his team, Rosenstein and AG Barr came to this conclusion? Is it some grandiose conspiracy of unprecedented complexity? Or is it more likely this was *largely* motivated by political/personal retribution and revenge and the media fueled hysteria got the better of most?

Again, I don't blame Dem voters and private citizens. I do blame politicians, pundits and the various foreign actors involved and support holding their feet quite literally to the fire.

a reply to: Arnie123

The question was "When did the investigation shift to obstruction", or something like that. I simply answered the question.

a reply to: Sookiechacha

Right. Mueller is not in a position to apply congressional checks/balances to presidential power.

Michael Cohen vows to fill in Mueller report’s redactions, ‘tell it myself’

Former Trump lawyer Michael Cohen on Thursday promised to fill in the blanks on Special Counsel Robert Mueller’s Russia investigation, hours before a redacted version of his report was due to be made public.

“Soon I will be ready to address the American people again...tell it all...and tell it myself!” Cohen tweeted.

😆

a reply to: Sookiechacha

Rosenstein wrote the letter recommending Comey's termination.
OIG recommended McCabes.

Did you miss all the corruption and nefarious acts exposed during the past 2 years? Too busy looking for your self-styled "collusion" (conspiracy and conspiracy to defraud the US, actually) to see the heaping pile of dirty laundry aired out I guess.

Regardless.... no evidence of a conspiracy between Trump/Russia, no evidence to support obstruction and no forthcoming indictments. It's a bust. Time for a come to Jesus moment.....................