The corruption of the Justice Dept. by AG Barr

COLLINS:

At any time in the investigation, was your investigation curtailed or stopped or hindered?

MUELLER:

No.
_ NO OBSTRUCTION

COLLINS:

Thank you. Is it true, the evidence gathered during your investigation -- given the questions that you've just answered, is it true the evidence gathered during your investigation did not establish that the president was involved in the underlying crime related to Russian election interference as stated in Volume 1, page 7?

MUELLER:

We found insufficient evidence of the president's culpability.

COLLINS:

So that would be a yes.

MUELLER:

Pardon?

COLLINS:

That would be a yes.

MUELLER:

Yes.

https://www.nbcnews.com/politics/co...rt-mueller-house-committee-testimony-n1033216

 

E. Efforts to fire Mueller

Obstructive act (p. 87): Former White House Counsel Don McGahn is a “credible witness” in providing evidence that Trump indeed attempted to fire Mueller. This “would qualify as an obstructive act” if the firing “would naturally obstruct the investigation and any grand jury proceedings that might flow from the inquiry.”

Nexus (p. 89): “Substantial evidence” indicates that, at this point, Trump was aware that “his conduct was under investigation by a federal prosecutor who could present any evidence of federal crimes to a grand jury.”

Intent (p. 89): “Substantial evidence indicates that the President’s attempts to remove the Special Counsel were linked to the Special Counsel’s oversight of investigations that involved the President’s conduct[.]”
.................................................................
Mueller provides both the elements necessary to sustain a charge of obstruction and the evidence of them.The page numbers from the report are shown for anyone interested in researching the matter themselves.

‘Multiple Felony Charges’: Ex-Federal Prosecutors Call Out Trump’s Conduct
https://www.law.com/nationallawjour...-federal-prosecutors-call-out-trumps-conduct/