QUOTE="Here4money, "Here4money, post: 4844554, member: 496573"] Your post has been edited to address error message that said to please limit post to five pieces of media. Congress has the unredacted investigation. If they want to initiate impeachment proceedings based on it, I say go for it. After all, hundreds of pages and two years of investigations that may have involved violating the civil rights of defendents should have turned something up, right? Could it be the source behind initiating the investigation in the first place is getting cold feet? Did the investigation turn up questions that prominent Democrats really do not want to answer? The investigation was most likely an Democratic attempt to divert FBI resources and focus from their likely illegal dealing with Russia and maybe other entities. At this point, I’d wager the Democrats would be all too happy to let this thing sunset out. I hope Trump and Republicans are willing to prove they have a pair and enable Trump to fulfill a campaign promise to “Drain to swamp” by initiating an investigation of their own. Obama’s political career is surrounded by criminallity such as payoffs, influence pedaling, and campaign finance violations. Prominent Democratic politicians present a target rich environment and audit of their tax returns should prove most fruitful. While we are at it, audit Trump’s and both political parties as well. Then using supoena powers, cross reference those documents with external sources. Yes, I know this last idea is fantasy. Unless, during the course of an investigation a strong legal argument could be presented fot tax returns. Let’s blow the lid off of long term political corruption in the United States and make necessary reforms such that partisanship never becomes more important than representing voters ever again. P.S. Please refresh my memory, what crime(s) did Trump and associates allegedly commit? Please cite the appropiate CFRs. Thanks in advance. Edit: Looks like I accidently inserted my comments within your post and this may have caused the error message.
The ten incidents are detailed here. https://www.breitbart.com/politics/...pisodes-special-counsel-mueller-investigated/ They strike me as incredibly minor, particularly when judged against the backdrop of rampant misconduct by the FBI and DOJ, not to mention Obama's senior aides. We had Obama's AG meeting privately with Bill Clinton at a critical point in the FBI's pretend investigation of his wife. The AG had already issued instructions to the FBI not to call it an investigation but a "matter", which sent a pretty clear signal what the expected outcome was to be. It is an interesting question what the Constitutional standard is for obstruction of justice by the sitting president, who has the unfettered power to pardon anyone at any time for any crime for any reason whatsoever. The only real check on him is the impeachment power given to the congress. The critical point here however is that Trump's actions were examined under a microscope for the slightest hint of impropriety while Obama's were essentially whitewashed. Whatever the standard is, it must be applied evenhandedly and it clearly has not been in this whole sordid episode. I suspect as we descend into third world status, we will have to get used to this sort of corruption and perversion of justice. Like they do in Chicago.
VIDEO: "Neal Katyal, the man who wrote the rule on special counsel investigations, wants to point everyone's attention to footnote #1,091 of the Mueller report."
https://www.washingtonexaminer.com/...-york-mueller-trump-and-two-years-of-bullshit Byron York: Mueller, Trump, and 'two years of bullshit' And now Mueller has determined there was no collusion. Not that there was no criminalcollusion. Or no prove-beyond-a-reasonable-doubt collusion. Just no collusion. Mueller's report says it over and over and over again. Here are seven examples: 1. "The investigation did not establish that members of the Trump Campaign conspired or coordinated with the Russian government in its election interference activities." 2. "The investigation examined whether [contacts between Russia and Trump figures] involved or resulted in coordination or a conspiracy with the Trump Campaign and Russia, including with respect to Russia providing assistance to the Campaign in exchange for any sort of favorable treatment in the future. Based on the available information, the investigation did not establish such coordination." 3. "The investigation did not establish that [Carter] Page coordinated with the Russian government in its efforts to interfere with the 2016 election." 4. "The Office did not identify evidence in those [contacts between Russians and people around Trump after the GOP convention] of coordination between the Campaign and the Russian government." 5. "The Office did not identify evidence of a connection between Manafort's sharing polling data and Russia's interference in the election ... [and] the investigation did not establish that Manafort otherwise coordinated with the Russian government on its election-interference efforts." 6. "The investigation did not establish that these [contacts between Russians and people around Trump during the transition] reflected or constituted coordination between the Trump Campaign and Russia in its election interference activities." 7. "The investigation did not identify evidence that any U.S. persons conspired or coordinated with the [Russian disinformation campaign]." That is definitive. It is not kinda, sorta. It is definitive. As far as Mueller's conclusions are concerned — and remember, he was long considered the gold standard of Trump investigations — there was no collusion. The Mueller report is divided into two volumes. Volume I covers the collusion question. Volume II considers whether the president obstructed the investigation. But of course there would have been no obstruction investigation had there not been the collusion allegation to begin with. There would be no Volume II if there were no Volume I. The report covers a lot of ground. Everyone knew, or should have known, that it would include details that Trump's detractors could use against him and details the president's supporters could cite in his defense. And it does. Certainly some House Democrats hope to use it as a road map to impeachment, and many, many Democrats hope to use it as a road map to defeating Trump in 2020. But remember what the investigation was about. It was about something that did not happen. And that should matter now that Mueller has finished his work.
Now to the specific list of Mueller’s ten absurd examples of “obstruction.” Nolte: 15 Ways the Mueller Report Proves Trump Did Not Obstruct Justice https://www.breitbart.com/politics/...report-proves-trump-did-not-obstruct-justice/ On top of thoroughly debunking the establishment media’s two year Russia Collusion Hoax, in ways large and small, the Mueller Report also proved President Trump is innocent of obstructing justice. ALLEGATION: The president told disgraced former F.B.I. Director James Comey he “hoped” Comey could see his way clear of letting go of former National Security Adviser Retired Lt. Gen. Michael Flynn, who was under investigation, even after the White House fired him. TRUTH: Trump had the constitutional authority to legally put a stop to this investigation and did not use it. Expressing one’s “hope” is not an act of obstruction, nor is it an order … it is the expression of one’s hope. What’s more, Trump is expressing this hope about someone else, not himself. 2. ALLEGATION: Trump wanted his attorney general, Jeff Sessions, to not recuse himself from the Russia investigation. TRUTH: So what? Trump selected Sessions to be his attorney general because he had faith in him in that role. Once Sessions recused himself, Trump — and don’t forget we are talking about a man innocent of the treason charges being investigated — was now at the mercy of the same Deep State that was already selectively and illegally leaking to frame him for treason. Trump was not calling on Sessions to reverse his recusal and shut down the investigation. He wanted someone he trusted overseeing it. That is not obstruction, it’s common sense and the way you would expect an innocent man to act. 3. ALLEGATION: Trump fired Comey to obstruct the investigation. TRUTH: Trump fired Comey on Rod Rosenstein’s recommendation. Trump fired Comey because Comey deliberately set him up with that briefing about the phony dossier (Comey’s briefing was the hook the fake news media used to make what became known as the pee pee dossier public). Trump fired Comey because Comey refused to report the truth — that the president was not under investigation and Trump felt (for legitimate reasons) as though he were being blackmailed. Trump fired Comey, as he told Lester Holt on NBC, because he knew Comey would drag his feet with the Russian investigation and Trump wanted to put the issue behind him. The only way the firing of Comey could be construed as obstruction is if Comey’s replacement agreed to stop the investigation. That didn’t happen because Trump wanted the exact opposite: he wanted the matter resolved. 4. ALLEGATION: Trump was angry about the appointment of a special counsel and expressed a desire to fire people. TRUTH: So what? Mueller is actually attempting to claim that Trump’s tweets about the “witch hunt” and his threats to fire people (that were never followed through on) constitute obstruction. An innocent man raging against a plot to frame him is not, in any legal or moral sense, obstruction. What’s more, had Trump followed through with firing Mueller and Sessions, that would not have been obstruction because it was well within his legal authority to do so. 5. ALLEGATION: Trump asked his former campaign manager Corey Lewandowski to tell Sessions to announce that the investigation was very unfair to him, and that he had done nothing wrong. TRUTH: So what? Asking your attorney general to tell the public the truth is not obstruction. 6. ALLEGATION: Trump was not publicly forthcoming about the Trump Tower Meeting. TRUTH: Lying to the media or to the public is not obstruction of justice. All Trump did was spin the meeting in the most favorable light possible — which only proves he’s a politician. When Obama did this, the media gushed over his amazing talent at “slow-walking the truth.” If lying to the public or to the media is obstruction of justice, the jails are gunna be awfully full. 7. ALLEGATION: Trump continued to pressure Sessions to unrecuse himself. TRUTH: So what? Trying to put someone else in charge of an investigation is not obstruction. In fact, the Mueller Report notes that Trump told Sessions: “I’m not going to do anything or direct you to do anything. I just want to be treated fairly” — which tells you that Mueller including this in his childish listicle is his way of padding his non-case. 8. ALLEGATION: Trump didn’t want the public to know he had “directed McGahn to have the Special Counsel removed in June 2017 and that McGahn had threatened to resign rather than carry out the order. “ TRUTH: Again, lying to the press and to the public is not obstruction, and if Trump had truly wanted Mueller fired he could have legally done it. This entire narrative about Trump wanting people fired or wanting to put Sessions in charge of the investigation is breathtakingly desperate and dumb. 9. ALLEGATION: Trump praised former campaign manager Paul Manafort and Flynn when they held strong and criticized them when they rolled over. TRUTH: It is not obstruction of justice to express an opinion and these opinions are perfectly in line with an innocent man being falsely accused of treason while the Deep State and media attempt to frame him. What’s more, Trump was almost always publicly expressing these opinions. People do not commit crimes in front of 50 million Twitter followers. 10. ALLEGATION: Trump praised his former personal lawyer Michael Cohen when he held strong and criticized him after he rolled over. TRUTH: As you can see, to pad his non-case to number ten, rather than include Cohen with Manafort and Flynn, Mueller makes Trump’s reaction to Cohen a separate item. Sorry, but in America telling a friend to “stay strong” when he’s under investigation and then publicly calling him a “rat” when he falsely accuses you of crimes is not obstruction. Robert Mueller knows what obstruction of justice is. What he’s hoping is that the public doesn’t know. Bottom line: Just like his best pal Comey, Robert Mueller is a dirty cop who failed to frame Trump so on his way out the door he bitterly lashed out with lies, ad hominem, false accusations, and total blithering, blathering nonsense.