Pelosi tells Dems she wants to see Trump ‘in prison’

No, she’s merely listening to the evidence. No crimes, no impeachment

 

The SOL on his crime as Individual 1 began before he was President, so that likely has to be handled in the fall of 2021, at which point I fully expect him to be a private citizen.

 

Hmm... then I wonder why hundreds of former federal prosecutors say he would be indicted if he wasn't president? Isn't it considered likely, in our criminal justice system, that you committed a crime if you are indicted? Oooooooo... Looky......I'm right....

SNIP
Simply stated, an indictment is a formal accusation against someone who is suspected of committing a serious crime
ENDSNIP

https://criminal.findlaw.com/criminal-procedure/what-is-an-indictment.html

Just hard to square that one up, isn't it?

 

Not really, former prosecutors with no actual connection to the investigation aren’t relevant to anything. More over that really a small fraction of the amount of people that are former prosecutors let alone attorneys.

And indictment is merely an accusation not proof someone is guilty. I will say in the federal system one isn’t brought or recommended without a likely conviction, that could be mueller’s thinking and why Nancy won’t. Impeach.

 

What will that make whichever clown he defeats in 2020? You folks realize that what goes around comes around. Any calls or actions to put Trump in prison will have reprisals, even calling for such a thing could have reprisals for the last administration. Do you folks really want to open this can of worms?

 

Trump opened the can.. D's just have to decide if they want to fish...

 

They just had a two year long fishing expedition, but if they play this game, they will get burned by it...

 

Not really.... The D's have only had 1/3 of the levers of power for 5 months.. Was Republicans investigating their own, and wisely so...

 

Comey, Mueller, McCabe, and most of Mueller's witch hunters were die hard anti-Trump scum. Democrats couldn't have asked for better witch hunters...

 

Cite the clear and convincing evidence supporting a Mueller charge of collusion or conspiracy or obstruction. What did he say constituted a crime and by who?

 

Thanks anti- Trump scum!!...

D's will take it from here..

 

Take Mueller out of the equation...

https://medium.com/@dojalumni/statement-by-former-federal-prosecutors-8ab7691c2aa1

Don't just skip down to the list of signatures (1006) and READ it this time...

 

He would have to prove corrupt intent to begin with and the PRESIDENT has clear authority to fire a Special Counsel and fire his AG and clearly as the person the AG reports to question his sudden recusal when he never indicated during his interviews that he intended to do so. He had every right to discuss with legal counsel everything about the investigation which concerned him but yet, not one claim of executive privilege and instructions everyone give testimony freely. Not one time did Mueller have to go before a judge to gain ANYTHING he sought. And the fact is he found no crime, he issued no charges, he had no indictments sealed or otherwise, he ended the legal proceedings with NOTHING.

 

You can't take Mueller out of the equation nor his report, THAT was the investigation, THAT is what you and others including all the leading Democrats have said would prove it all and it had NOTHING. And I can quote former prosecutors and legal scholars you say so save you links.

Give me the clear and convincing evidence Trump committed a crime and where is the charge made in the report. When Starr issued his report he had 11 felonies with the clear and convincing evidence laid and indictments drawn up. Mueller turned in a nothingburger.

 

There is nothing in the Constitution that requires that, if Mueller had clear and convincing evidence Trump committed a crime he could clearly and concisely say so and lay out the case and await either impeachment and removal or until Trump leaves office other wise.

And again

A double negative how do you prove a crime was not committed? The new standard a persons stands accused if investigators could not prove a crime was not committed? That's what you want applied to you?

 

Mueller: "The President’s efforts to influence the investigation were mostly unsuccessful, but that is largely because the persons who surrounded the President declined to carry out orders or accede to his requests."

Such orders are crimes of obstruction of justice. You and I both also know that Trump has ordered others recently to not cooperate and not testify after they received a subpoena from congress. That's a crime too.

Mueller notes that after Trump learned that his own conduct regarding obstruction was being investigated after appointment of the special counsel, “the President engaged in a second phase of conduct, involving public attacks on the investigation, non-public efforts to control it, and efforts in both public and private to encourage witnesses not to cooperate with the investigation.”

Again, that is obstruction of justice.

The report notes that prosecutors need to establish “three basic elements” for an obstruction charge: “an obstructive act; some form of nexus between the obstructive act and an official proceeding; and criminal (i.e., corrupt) intent.”.

Note that effectiveness in actually obstructing/stopping/preventing justice is not necessary. A clear attempt is all that is needed.

 

That's an incorrect conclusion and the House impeachment proceedings that will soon begin will prove it so.

"He would have to prove corrupt intent to begin with "

That's why there will be an impeachment inquiry and process.

 

struth is wrong, period. Since Trump cannot be indicted at this time, the clock begins running the day he is out of office.

Any other counter suggestion is false.

And Mueller can be contradicted by others who don't know the law, as we have seen, and all of that contradiction meaneth nothing.

 

If all they get him on is paying off the slut, he will get no more than a fine, if that.

 

In a criminal court, it would be very hard to prove corrupt intent regarding the obstruction of justice counts. Trump is naturally corrupt to the core and has been for decades. I honestly don’t believe he thinks there is anything wrong with anything he has done in his life.

 

it really depends on Trump, if he goes silently into the night, your right, but this is Trump were talking about...

it cost a lot to go after a billionaire, let alone a ex-president, so like Nixon, he could just slither away unscathed

 

Nixon got pardoned. The only way Trump could pull that off is to resign after getting a guarantee from Pence of a pardon before he leaves office. If the evidence of real Federal crimes like money laundering or tax fraud is strong, Trump might bail and get pardoned. That’s what Dick Nixon did.

 

I believe, .... and hope, ... he will learn otherwise soon. If we don't make an example of him, someone else will try to convert democracy to despotism and will eventually succeed!

 

Blah Blah Blah.... your theories are crap... Mueller didn't go as far as most would like but he documented a ton of evidence that will be used someday... I know it and you know it....

 

Yeah, I'm sure that's what Cohen thought about 1 year ago....