Mueller report: Barr lied! There was was obstruction... and... surprise surprise...

Who has he wiretapped before?

 

So then why did Mueller say that the Office of Legal Counsel policy didn't prevent him from recommending prosecution?

 

Fast and Furious reporters and Congress/SCOTUS.

 

Not only that, but why didn't he indict anyone other than the POTUS that were involved, instead of saying no US citizen willfully participated in election interference/collusion with Russia.

 

He may have wanted to obstruct but he didn't. He may have tried. I don't know. Justice simply wasn't obstructed. Does intent trump activity? That really is the issue. Personally I don't like the idea of indicting people for their wishes. Since justice was not obstructed logic tells me the democrats would benefit more from finding something else to use to torment Trump.

 

The simple fact is, they'd have to explain how Trump had corrupt intent to interfere in an investigation he knew he was innocent of.

That should be hilarious.

Dems are trying to stop the river from flowing downhill at this point. They can screech and wail all they want.

 

The law makes no difference between obstructing and "trying" to obstruct.

 

No but I do. I disapprove of the concept of indicting someone for wanting something to happen without it actually happening. I view it as corrupt.

 

No, very likely he was trying to obstruct an investigation that would uncover other crimes he had committed, even if he hadn't committed the crime the investigation was looking for. That was always what motivated Trump to stop the probe. I never bought any of the collusion stuff, that was always wishful thinking, and any contact the Trump's may have had with Russia were likely related to personal business dealings and not the presidency. But investigations that go digging can turn up more than just the dirt they're looking for, and it seems this one was no different considering the amount of indictments that came down unrelated to collusion.

 

Mueller report contradicts Barr on role of OLC opinion in obstruction decisions

https://www.cnn.com/politics/live-n...ler-report/h_a1cd232666d54b9faa078f7288b50cd9

 

Yet the hoax investigation wasn't obstructed and no such other crimes were found.

 

So Mueller is obstructing Barr?

 

Oh yeah. I forgot to include a disclaimer for the imaginary crimes leftists like to envision as they fall asleep.

Sorry.

 

I see. So if somebody wants to help terrorists bring down a passenger jet, but they get caught before they board the plane, you believe that everybody should be allowed to go back home and laugh it out.

Understood.

 

I don't like to make predictions...

Whaddya think? This time next year, you'll be arguing: So they invented a hoax in order to take down a President. It failed. It's not a crime. No harm, no foul.

 

"Given the role of the special counsel as an attorney in the Department of Justice and the framework of the special counsel regulations... this office accepted OLC's legal conclusion for the purpose of exercising prosecutorial jurisdiction," (Mueller Report)

Where in that does it say that, if it wasn't for the OLC opinion he would have found obstruction? Do you want to try again?

 

They wiretapped Congress/SCOTUS? You mean individual members of Congress/SCOTUS?

 

Wrong on all points In fact a summary to congress is a requirement the report itself is not.

 

Then why did Mueller say that this didn't prevent him from prosecuting?

 

Can you support this?

 

Who are you referring to when you say "the prosecutor?"

Was it not a summary of the "principal conclusions?" Are you sure about that? When exactly did Barr say that his letter was summarising the entire 400 pages?

Do you not think that it is important to know if Mueller would've found Trump guilty if it wasn't for the OLC's legal conclusion on the prosecution of a sitting President? We already know the answer! Mueller said that it had nothing to do with his decision to not prosecute!

Do any media reports support your assertion that Barr made a contradictory statement?

 

If Donald Trump's unethical and illegal behaviors were only imaginary, folks would have a lot less problems with him. But since you and I both know who he is and that he's been caught in the past, the only imaginary thing going on here is that his supporters are pretending he's an upstanding man. And I get it, it's as necessary as a bun on a cheeseburger for those who think of themselves as moral ethical people with standards. Just be honest about it so you don't ding your own credibility in the process.

 

HE DIDN'T!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

 

He did on pages 7- 8 of Vol 2.

 

No you don't understand. Apples and oranges. You are describing an illegal conspiracy. Not all conspiracies rise to the level of crime. The report did not charge Trump with conspiracy. It simply did not.