The corruption of the Justice Dept. by AG Barr

Discussion in 'Political Opinions & Beliefs' started by Patricio Da Silva, May 20, 2020.

  1. Patricio Da Silva

    Patricio Da Silva Well-Known Member Donor

    Joined:
    Apr 26, 2020
    Messages:
    31,231
    Likes Received:
    16,926
    Trophy Points:
    113
    Gender:
    Male
    It's courtesy to link to them, or provide evidence when you make an allegation.

    Hinting that they exist does not support your argument.
     
  2. Patricio Da Silva

    Patricio Da Silva Well-Known Member Donor

    Joined:
    Apr 26, 2020
    Messages:
    31,231
    Likes Received:
    16,926
    Trophy Points:
    113
    Gender:
    Male
    I said 'evidence', not 'threads'.
     
    Last edited: May 24, 2020
  3. struth

    struth Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Oct 3, 2018
    Messages:
    33,519
    Likes Received:
    17,956
    Trophy Points:
    113
    The threads are loaded with evidence
     
  4. Patricio Da Silva

    Patricio Da Silva Well-Known Member Donor

    Joined:
    Apr 26, 2020
    Messages:
    31,231
    Likes Received:
    16,926
    Trophy Points:
    113
    Gender:
    Male
    support your arguments with evidence. Hinting it's elsewhere does not support your argument.
     
  5. struth

    struth Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Oct 3, 2018
    Messages:
    33,519
    Likes Received:
    17,956
    Trophy Points:
    113
    You would just ignore it
     
    Facts-602 likes this.
  6. TOG 6

    TOG 6 Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Oct 23, 2015
    Messages:
    47,848
    Likes Received:
    19,638
    Trophy Points:
    113
    No. It's not.
    Mueller's investigation did not make the factual determination necessary for a charge of obstruction.
    It doesn't matter what else he did or did not say, the fact remains he did not determine Trump acted with corrupt intent.
    Absent a factual demonstration of corrupt intent, he could not conclude those 10 possible obstructive acts amounted to obstruction of justice.
    :lol:
    You have not been paying attention.
    No. HIS job was to investigate and determine the matters of fact related to same.
    - He factually determined Trump took 10 possibly obstructive acts.
    - He factually determined those 10 possibly obstructive acts had a nexus with an official proceeding
    - He did not anywhere or in any way, factually determine that Trump acted with corrupt intent.
    Absent a factual demonstration of corrupt intent, he could not conclude those 10 possible obstructive acts amounted to obstruction of justice.
    You have not been paying attention.
    An investigation, Mueller's or otherwise, does not determine guilt or innocence, only the facts relevant to the case.
    He did not anywhere or in any way, factually determine that Trump acted with corrupt intent.
    Absent a factual demonstration of corrupt intent, he could not conclude those 10 possible obstructive acts amounted to obstruction of justice.
    Yes. It was toooooo haaaaarrrrrrd.
     
  7. TOG 6

    TOG 6 Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Oct 23, 2015
    Messages:
    47,848
    Likes Received:
    19,638
    Trophy Points:
    113
    Just you you understand:
    Mueller didn't investigate obstruction of Congress, and thus, the issues are separate.

    Pelosi's charge of Obstruction of Congress stems from the Administration's claim of executive privilege, however termed, from answering the subpoenas issued by Congress.
    The executive branch has the well-establish right to claim executive privilege, however termed, from such subpoenas; once claimed, Congress's only meaningful recourse is to challenge said claim in court. Should a court break the claim of executive privilege, however termed, and all possible appeals exhausted, then the executive branch is legally compelled to answer the subpoena.

    Congress chose to not to take the issue to court, no such ruling was made, and thus no such legal compulsion existed.

    As such, Trump, having invoked executive priviledge, however termed, had no legal compulsion to answer those subpoenas.
    Absent a legal compulsion to answer the subpenas, there could be no obstruction of Congress.

    Pelosi, et al, impeached Trump for a legal exercise of executive privilege, and the Republican Senate Republicans rightly acquitted him of doing so.
     
  8. Patricio Da Silva

    Patricio Da Silva Well-Known Member Donor

    Joined:
    Apr 26, 2020
    Messages:
    31,231
    Likes Received:
    16,926
    Trophy Points:
    113
    Gender:
    Male
    In other words, you have no argument you can back up, therefore. I accept you admission of defeat.

    Thank you for your participation.
     
  9. Patricio Da Silva

    Patricio Da Silva Well-Known Member Donor

    Joined:
    Apr 26, 2020
    Messages:
    31,231
    Likes Received:
    16,926
    Trophy Points:
    113
    Gender:
    Male
    No, you are NOT paying attention:

    I repeat, for the last time:
    “If we had had confidence that the president clearly did not commit a crime, we would have said so,” Mueller declared.

    What crime? Obstruction, given 10 incidents reported.



    And




    END OF ARGUMENT. That's it, we are done.
     
    Last edited: May 24, 2020
  10. Patricio Da Silva

    Patricio Da Silva Well-Known Member Donor

    Joined:
    Apr 26, 2020
    Messages:
    31,231
    Likes Received:
    16,926
    Trophy Points:
    113
    Gender:
    Male
    Not at issue, I explained why she didn't include obstruction of justice per MR, though she could have.
     
  11. struth

    struth Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Oct 3, 2018
    Messages:
    33,519
    Likes Received:
    17,956
    Trophy Points:
    113
    The fact remains, they were well aware that their was no Russian conspiracy. There was nothin to obstruct
     
    Facts-602 likes this.
  12. Facts-602

    Facts-602 Banned

    Joined:
    Mar 22, 2020
    Messages:
    1,281
    Likes Received:
    963
    Trophy Points:
    113
    Mueller finds no collusion with Russia, leaves obstruction question open
    https://www.americanbar.org/news/abanews/aba-news-archives/2019/03/mueller-concludes-investigation/

    Mueller concluded his 22-month investigation and submitted a report to Attorney General William Barr on Friday, March 22. Barr and Deputy Attorney General Rod Rosenstein reviewed the report over the weekend and filed a four-page summary of the report to Congress Sunday afternoon that was also released to the public.

    In his letter to Congress, Barr summarizes the Mueller investigation as looking at two areas: Interference by Russia in the 2016 presidential election and obstruction of justice.

    The special counsel found that Russia did interfere with the election, but “did not find that the Trump campaign, or anyone associated with it, conspired or coordinated with the Russian government in these efforts, despite multiple efforts from Russian-affiliated individuals to assist the Trump campaign.”

    As far as obstruction, the Mueller report laid out facts on both sides but did not reach a conclusion. Barr’s letter said that “the Special Counsel states that ‘while this report does not conclude that the President committed a crime, it also does not exonerate him.’”


     
  13. Patricio Da Silva

    Patricio Da Silva Well-Known Member Donor

    Joined:
    Apr 26, 2020
    Messages:
    31,231
    Likes Received:
    16,926
    Trophy Points:
    113
    Gender:
    Male
    Obstruction Of Justice is a stand alone crime, does not require an underlying crime. Trump no doubt had other reasons to obstruct justice other than 'collusion' and those reasons do not matter, obstruction as an illegal act is all that matters.
     
  14. struth

    struth Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Oct 3, 2018
    Messages:
    33,519
    Likes Received:
    17,956
    Trophy Points:
    113
    And mueller said he wasn’t obstructed.
     
  15. Patricio Da Silva

    Patricio Da Silva Well-Known Member Donor

    Joined:
    Apr 26, 2020
    Messages:
    31,231
    Likes Received:
    16,926
    Trophy Points:
    113
    Gender:
    Male
    Correct, 10 incidents of Obstruction provided, leaving determination of crime to congress and future prosecutors.
    The aspect that Mueller 'did not find evidence of obstruction" in the Barr memo was largely considered a joke by a majority of legal professionals, as evidenced by over 1000 former prosecutors signing that letter. Moreover, Mueller refuted it by a letter he sent to Barr, that he erred in his statement.
    If it does not exonerate him, and mueller said if there were definitely no crime, he would have said so.

    Therefore, any allegation that Mueller's absence of determinative language could or should be construed as there were no crimes must be discarded,


    That's it. beyond that, there is no argument.
     
    Last edited: May 24, 2020
  16. struth

    struth Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Oct 3, 2018
    Messages:
    33,519
    Likes Received:
    17,956
    Trophy Points:
    113
    Of course I’im not arguing...I’m stating a fact
     
  17. struth

    struth Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Oct 3, 2018
    Messages:
    33,519
    Likes Received:
    17,956
    Trophy Points:
    113
    1000 people is a majority of legal professionals?
     
    Facts-602 likes this.
  18. Facts-602

    Facts-602 Banned

    Joined:
    Mar 22, 2020
    Messages:
    1,281
    Likes Received:
    963
    Trophy Points:
    113
    Umm, no evidence of collusion means the special couldn’t mind no evidence, because there was most likely no evidence to find. Next nobody cares about what these so called experts in the law consider to be to be valid, or not. Fact remains, you and your fellow conspiracy believers is that Mueller wasted almost two years, and millions of dollars to find no Russian collusion with the trump campaign.
    If you don’t believe me, just ask all of Obama’s former goons that testified under oath, behind closed doors about how they seen no evidence of Russian collusion with the trump campaign.
    That includes Clapper, Rice, and Powers among many others.
    Time to take off the tinfoil hat, buddy.
     
  19. Patricio Da Silva

    Patricio Da Silva Well-Known Member Donor

    Joined:
    Apr 26, 2020
    Messages:
    31,231
    Likes Received:
    16,926
    Trophy Points:
    113
    Gender:
    Male
    Mueller shot down Barr's letter.

    Mueller stated that MR did not exonerate.

    Beyond that, you're talking nonsense.

    You latter introduction is deflection, and ignores a more complex dynamic, it's the dynamic of presumption.

    For example, if I woke up in the morning and saw snow everywhere, I can presume it snowed the night before.

    If you asked me 'did you actually witness is snowing' under oath I would have no choice but to say no.

    That is where your 'seen no evidence' lies, it fails to account for the fact that 17 foreign service professionals, close enough to the action, weighing a variety of factors, were able to presume their conclusions with comparable magnitude that you can conclude it snowed the night before. IF it were only one FSP, you might have a point, but seventeen? No, your point has no merit.

    See, all you are doing is playing a lawyerly trick.
     
  20. TOG 6

    TOG 6 Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Oct 23, 2015
    Messages:
    47,848
    Likes Received:
    19,638
    Trophy Points:
    113
    I accept your concession.
    When you can meaningfully address the points made, let us know.
     
  21. TOG 6

    TOG 6 Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Oct 23, 2015
    Messages:
    47,848
    Likes Received:
    19,638
    Trophy Points:
    113
    I see you didn't address the rest of the rest of the post.
    Because you can't?
     
  22. TOG 6

    TOG 6 Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Oct 23, 2015
    Messages:
    47,848
    Likes Received:
    19,638
    Trophy Points:
    113
    Indeed.
    And Mueller did not make the factual determinations necessary for Trump's acts to qualify as obstruction of justice.
     
    Last edited: May 26, 2020
  23. TOG 6

    TOG 6 Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Oct 23, 2015
    Messages:
    47,848
    Likes Received:
    19,638
    Trophy Points:
    113
    You know this is not true.
     
    Last edited: May 26, 2020
  24. TOG 6

    TOG 6 Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Oct 23, 2015
    Messages:
    47,848
    Likes Received:
    19,638
    Trophy Points:
    113
    You say this because, somehow, you do not understand the law, despite the fact it has been made quite plain to you.
    Perhaps it is a choice on your part.
     
  25. Lee Atwater

    Lee Atwater Well-Known Member Past Donor

    Joined:
    Nov 15, 2017
    Messages:
    45,402
    Likes Received:
    26,530
    Trophy Points:
    113
    Gender:
    Male
    Unequivocally false.

    "The key question is how Robert Mueller and his team assessed the three elements “common to most of the relevant statutes” relating to obstruction of justice: an obstructive act, a nexus between the act and an official proceeding, and corrupt intent. As Mueller describes, the special counsel’s office “gathered evidence … relevant to the elements of those crimes and analyzed them within an elements framework—while refraining from reaching ultimate conclusions about whether crimes were committed,” because of the Office of Legal Counsel (OLC)’s guidelines against the indictment of a sitting president.

    The below heat map is an effort to simplify Mueller’s analysis of the evidence in relation to the three common elements of the obstruction statutes. Instances of possibly obstructive conduct are identified by their section marking in Volume II of the report. (Section A is a general overview of the Trump campaign’s response to public reporting on Russian support for Trump and does not contain an analysis.) Some sections contained varying analysis of multiple possibly obstructive acts, which are identified separately. More information about how the special counsel assessed each possible instance of obstruction is available below the chart itself, with page numbers corresponding to Volume II."

    https://www.lawfareblog.com/obstruction-justice-mueller-report-heat-map
     

Share This Page