You avoided the point. The crime of obstruction requires a demonstration of intent. Given the administration's wide-ranging cooperation, intent cannot be shown.
It does not for the reasons given in the report. It's disturbing those who appear willing to stop at nothing to eliminate the President don't believe the words "this report does not conclude that the President committed a crime...", exist. What could Congress do, that Mueller, the Grand Jury, and all the deep investigators didn't do?
By Seth rich right? Lol They tried to convince everyone it wasn’t their pals in Moscow when they knew all along.
Ramesh Ponnuru Retweeted White House Press Secretary Sarah Sanders told investigators she lied to the press after Comey firing https://www.nationalreview.com/corner/nr-tweets-the-mueller-report/
As typical you are all over the place and try to cover it up with random Lol's.. You.... were.... wrong... Get over it.. Move on ( irony eh?)
"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."
No evidence someone did not hear something Sounds like something Snopes would do its sad Mueller stooped to that level.
He was advised not to. It's impossible to fall into a perjury trap if you don't do the interview. Mulehead made a two year career out of that without ever finding collusion.
So what. Expecting to benefit from the "dirt" being released by a third party is not a crime or even unethical.
the investigation established several individuals affiliated with the Trump Campaign lied to the [Special Counsel] Office, and to Congress.. those lies materially impaired the investigation of Russian election interference.
No but it sure explains the campaign kissing Russia’s ass and trying to find someone else to blame for it. Seth rich!
What page has your quote been taken from? Is the source redacted? Who's investigation, into what aspect of the investigation? I'm asking for clarification because my reading hasn't gotten me that far. But it sounds like a whiny intel community crybaby talking about the DNC hack.
No sitting President would have spoken to investigators in this type of investigation. It would have been foolish to do so.
The fact Trump did not speak to Mueller does not mean the administration did not otherwise cooperate with the investigation. Cooperation disproves obstruction.
