Mueller Finds 10 Obstruction Cases That Barr Says Aren't Crimes

Discussion in 'United States' started by Len_A, Apr 18, 2019.

  1. fmw

    fmw Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Aug 21, 2009
    Messages:
    37,762
    Likes Received:
    14,563
    Trophy Points:
    113
    I'm not getting through to you. You continue to talk past me with the same message. Conversation discontinued.
     
  2. Nemesis

    Nemesis Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    May 29, 2012
    Messages:
    16,129
    Likes Received:
    8,848
    Trophy Points:
    113
    --which is a bogus interpretation of the law pushed by trumpers who have not clue about the law.

    This interpretation suggests that it's OK to obstruct and interfere with a lawful investigation if you can cobble together an argument that you didn't really commit a crime being investigated.

    If you successfully obstruct the investigation, and your're not charged because of your obstruction, then it's "legal"? *LOL* no.
     
  3. Nemesis

    Nemesis Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    May 29, 2012
    Messages:
    16,129
    Likes Received:
    8,848
    Trophy Points:
    113
    He's correct.
     
  4. Nemesis

    Nemesis Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    May 29, 2012
    Messages:
    16,129
    Likes Received:
    8,848
    Trophy Points:
    113
    It's that goofy, pointless trumper exercise where they don't have to bother educating themselves, but demand "proof".

    It doesn't even matter what you put in front of them; they won't read it anyway, and yet will deny what's there.
     
  5. Mac-7

    Mac-7 Banned

    Joined:
    Apr 21, 2011
    Messages:
    86,664
    Likes Received:
    17,636
    Trophy Points:
    113
    You have no underlying crime for trump to obstruct the investigation of

    The original lib lie that trump colluded with the russians has been exposed as a hoax

    Any charge stemming from that is fruit from the poisoned tree
     
  6. Nemesis

    Nemesis Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    May 29, 2012
    Messages:
    16,129
    Likes Received:
    8,848
    Trophy Points:
    113
    I hate repeating myself dozens of times.

    That's a grossly incorrect interpretation of the law, my kneejerk ideological chum.
     
  7. Mac-7

    Mac-7 Banned

    Joined:
    Apr 21, 2011
    Messages:
    86,664
    Likes Received:
    17,636
    Trophy Points:
    113
    Its the plain unvarnished fact

    You made up a lie that you smeared trump with for 30 months but it failed

    Now you want to attack him for alleged process crimes that may have occurred during the failed witchhunt
     
  8. Asherah

    Asherah Well-Known Member Past Donor

    Joined:
    Aug 4, 2017
    Messages:
    1,333
    Likes Received:
    912
    Trophy Points:
    113
    Tell me how you would put it then. Mueller's investigation showed that Trump made public statements that were untrue, and I'd like to hear your reaction. Do you not accept Mueller's assessment that he was not truthful? Do you just think I'm making it up? Do you think the lies were too trivial to matter?
     
  9. Asherah

    Asherah Well-Known Member Past Donor

    Joined:
    Aug 4, 2017
    Messages:
    1,333
    Likes Received:
    912
    Trophy Points:
    113
    Mueller was not permitted to indict the President because it was contrary to Justice Dept policy. Here's what Mueller said:

    a traditional prosecution or declination decision entails a binary determination to initiate or decline a prosecution, but we determined not to make a traditional prosecutorial judgment. The Office of Legal Counsel (OLC) has issued an opinion finding that "the indictment or criminal prosecution of a sitting President would impermissibly undermine the capacity of the executive branch to perform its constitutionally assigned functions" in violation of "the constitutional separation of powers." 1 Given the role of the Special Counsel as an attorney in the Department of Justice and the framework of the Special Counsel regulations , see 28 U.S.C. § 515; 28 C.F .R. § 600.7(a), this Office accepted OLC's legal conclusion for the purpose of exercising prosecutorial jurisdiction.

    Indeed. I'm trying to find out if any Trump supporters accept reality for what it is.
     
  10. Mac-7

    Mac-7 Banned

    Joined:
    Apr 21, 2011
    Messages:
    86,664
    Likes Received:
    17,636
    Trophy Points:
    113
    I would be unimpressed

    The lies against trump are far more damaging to the nation than anything he might have said
     
  11. Asherah

    Asherah Well-Known Member Past Donor

    Joined:
    Aug 4, 2017
    Messages:
    1,333
    Likes Received:
    912
    Trophy Points:
    113
    Despite the fact that I couldn't disagree more, I appreciate your honest answer.
     
    Mac-7 likes this.
  12. Asherah

    Asherah Well-Known Member Past Donor

    Joined:
    Aug 4, 2017
    Messages:
    1,333
    Likes Received:
    912
    Trophy Points:
    113
    Should process crimes be stricken from the books?
    Did you think Republicans were off-base for impeaching Bill Clinton for a process crime?
     
  13. Mac-7

    Mac-7 Banned

    Joined:
    Apr 21, 2011
    Messages:
    86,664
    Likes Received:
    17,636
    Trophy Points:
    113
    I dont concede any crimes by trump

    But the obstruction charge is the most offensive to our intelligence

    Trump was innocent of the charge that opened the door for all the investigations that followed
     
  14. Hoosier8

    Hoosier8 Well-Known Member Past Donor

    Joined:
    Jan 16, 2012
    Messages:
    107,541
    Likes Received:
    34,488
    Trophy Points:
    113
    Or how about all of the indictments may be overturned because it is predicated on false information. Fruit of the poisoned tree.
     
  15. Mac-7

    Mac-7 Banned

    Joined:
    Apr 21, 2011
    Messages:
    86,664
    Likes Received:
    17,636
    Trophy Points:
    113
    Trump did not obstruct the witchhunt

    Muller nosed around for two years

    And ended on his own schedule after failing to find russia collusion
     
    Last edited: May 10, 2019
  16. LangleyMan

    LangleyMan Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Nov 14, 2017
    Messages:
    44,680
    Likes Received:
    12,448
    Trophy Points:
    113
    Gender:
    Male
    Your posts don't make sense on obstruction, so why would you think they would get through to me or anyone else?
     
  17. Homer J Thompson

    Homer J Thompson Banned

    Joined:
    Dec 6, 2016
    Messages:
    2,583
    Likes Received:
    1,901
    Trophy Points:
    113
    Do you feel what was done to Bill was wrong or right?
     
  18. Asherah

    Asherah Well-Known Member Past Donor

    Joined:
    Aug 4, 2017
    Messages:
    1,333
    Likes Received:
    912
    Trophy Points:
    113
    And I'm being careful to avoid claiming he's guilty of a crime. Nevertheless there is evidence that suggests he might be guilty of obstruction of justice.

    So...you're fine with mobsters intimidating witnesses?

    That is your judgment, but the evidence does not prove him innocent. Don't misunderstand - I agree it's time to drop this based on an absence of evidence of an agreement between Trump and Russians: he should neither be prosecuted nor impeached for this. But there's still plenty of behavior that seems quite suspicious.

    Regardless, the crime of obstruction applies irrespective of whether or not the investigated actions were criminal. That's the law, whether or not you think it a wise or just law. Whatever you feel about the law, I hope it is based on principle - such that your judgment would be different if it were (for example) Hillary Clinton that was subject to it.
     
    Last edited: May 10, 2019
  19. Asherah

    Asherah Well-Known Member Past Donor

    Joined:
    Aug 4, 2017
    Messages:
    1,333
    Likes Received:
    912
    Trophy Points:
    113
    Convictions get overturned on technicalities all the time, and it is upsetting when a guilty person goes free because of this. However, that's the price we pay for rule of law. If we ignore technicalities and rely on personal judgment, the results will be worse - closer to vigilante "justice" and lynchings.

    Now please answer the question I asked.
     
  20. Asherah

    Asherah Well-Known Member Past Donor

    Joined:
    Aug 4, 2017
    Messages:
    1,333
    Likes Received:
    912
    Trophy Points:
    113
    This is the biggest lie of all. There was an abundance of suspicious behavior by Trump and members of his campaign, that warranted an investigation. Investigations are intended to see if crimes WERE committed, and yet it sounds like some Trump supporters believe investigations should only be performed when there's certainty that a crime was committed.

    Personally, I never claimed Trump was guilty of conspiring with Russia. Anyone who made that assertion was wrong to do so, and I hope they learned their lesson not to pre-judge. I also hope Trump supporters will relate that sort of pre-judgment to their own prejudgment of politicians THEY despise.
     
    jack4freedom likes this.
  21. jack4freedom

    jack4freedom Well-Known Member Past Donor

    Joined:
    Oct 9, 2010
    Messages:
    19,874
    Likes Received:
    8,447
    Trophy Points:
    113
    It comes with the territory since Watergate. I think he should not have lied under oath in the Federal Court, in fact he should have settled that case before it got that far. He was a victim of his own hubris. The US Congress which was controlled by a very partisan GOP impeached him. That’s how it goes. I think the Senate was right not to remove him from office also.

    The parallels are striking with what has been going on with Trump. Shady past business dealings and serial skirt chasing in both cases. If Trump gets re-elected in 2020 and the Dems control either house you can expect more of the same. It took 6 years plus for the politically motivated investigations of Clinton to finally trap him.

    I do not think that Trump and Barr’s Nixon/Mitchell screw congress act will prevail for too long here. I suppose the Democrats are hoping to bring down Trump’s numbers among Independents the same way the GOP did to Hillary leading up to 2016 by holding endless congressional hearings and trashing her at every turn.
     
  22. Mac-7

    Mac-7 Banned

    Joined:
    Apr 21, 2011
    Messages:
    86,664
    Likes Received:
    17,636
    Trophy Points:
    113
    In political blogesphere opinions are like *******s

    Everybody has one

    Including myself and every lib on this forum

    Trump is not guilty of the lie that launched the investigation, i.e. collusion with russia

    Any misunderstanding after that during the investigation is fruit from the poisoned tree
     
  23. Asherah

    Asherah Well-Known Member Past Donor

    Joined:
    Aug 4, 2017
    Messages:
    1,333
    Likes Received:
    912
    Trophy Points:
    113
    Your first statement is true (albeit that the investigated crime was "conspiracy" not "collusion").

    Your second statement seems based on a principle similar to "illegal search and seizure" - i.e evidence that is obtained illegally cannot be used at trial. It's not actually illegal search and seizure, but it might be something like that. But is there indeed a law, or court precedent, to that? I know there's a legal principle against "fishing expeditions" - but (AFAIK) it refers to discovery, not to investigations. If there is, then I can accept that as a legal principle. But in that case, it merely means that Trump can't be prosecuted for any crimes that were uncovered - it doesn't mean he hasn't committed them.
     
    Last edited: May 10, 2019
  24. Mac-7

    Mac-7 Banned

    Joined:
    Apr 21, 2011
    Messages:
    86,664
    Likes Received:
    17,636
    Trophy Points:
    113
    We are both arguing legal issues with our political opinions and bias

    My attitude is that trump was not guilty of collusion, or conspiracy if you prefer

    Thats my Alpha and Omega
     
    Last edited: May 10, 2019
  25. Plus Ultra

    Plus Ultra Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Feb 12, 2017
    Messages:
    3,028
    Likes Received:
    1,190
    Trophy Points:
    113
    No, they said they'd impeach, they have to. I know it is pointless, but I want every Democrat in the House to have his turn denouncing Trump, great little soundbites for the campaigns of some of them.
     

Share This Page