Do you not see? Democrats OBSTRUCTING JUSTICE!

because democrats wanted to have a lawyer ask him questions, totally unprecedented and cowardly. The dems who are on tv 24/7 attacking Barr don't have the courage to face him and ask him questions? What a disgraceful group of people.

 

And you say that right after I quoted two calls McGahn received from Trump ordering him to call Rosenstein to have him fire Mueller? Which, BTW, was corroborated by (at least) Rob Porter and Hope Hicks.

You are debating against the Mueller Report. Not against me.

.
Wrong! For the third time!! Here is the complete quote. Which you will not read anyway.,,,

And, at the end, I will quote how he "felt"

Third, we considered whether to evaluate the conduct we investigated under the Justice Manual standards governing prosecution and declination decisions, but we determined not to apply an approach that could potentially result in a judgment that the President committed crimes. The threshold step under the Justice Manual standards is to assess whether a person's conduct "constitutes a federal offense." U.S. Dep't of Justice, Justice Manual§ 9-27.220 (201 (Justice Manual). Fairness concerns counseled against potentially reaching that judgment when no charges can be brought. The ordinary means for an individual to respond to an accusation is through a speedy and public trial, with all the procedural protections that surround a criminal case. An individual who believes he was wrongly accused can use that process to seek to clear his name. In contrast , a prosecutor's judgment that crimes were committed, but that no charges will be brought , affords no such adversarial opportunity for public name-clearing before an impartial adjudicator .

The concerns about the fairness of such a determination would be heightened in the case of a sitting President, where a federal prosecutor's accusation of a crime, even in an internal report, could carry consequences that extend beyond the realm of criminal justice. OLC noted similar concerns about sealed indictments. Even if an indictment were sealed during the President's term, OLC reasoned, "it would be very difficult to preserve [an indictment 's] secrecy, " and if an indictment became public, "[t]he stigma and opprobrium" could imperil the President's ability to govern." 6 Although a prosecutor's internal report would not represent a formal public accusation akin to an indictment, the possibility of the report 's public disclosure and the absence of a neutral adjudicatory forum to review its findings counseled against potentially determining "that the person's conduct constitutes a federal offense ." Justice Manual § 9-27.220.​

.
And how he felt?

Fourth, if we had confidence after a thorough investigation of the facts that the President clearly did not commit obstruction of justice , we would so state. Based on the facts and the applicable legal standards , however , we are unable to reach that judgment.​

 

he never used word ‘fired’ as this would imply firing special counsel and thus ending investigation. He wanted mueller removed, meaning replaced by another person but investigation to continue. THIS IS NOT OBSTRUCTION. The president had every right to question mueller as mueller assembled a team of people who were proven to be hostile and biased against trump. Wanting to replace mueller but allow investigation to continue is NOT OBSTRUCTION, this is a no brainer!

.

i read it, WHERE does he explicitly state trump committed crimes but mueller didn’t charge per OLC? NOWHERE! Again, you are drawing your own conclusion, playing a game of putting a puzzle together. And i have already told you numerous times that barr said he asked mueller very pointedly if mueller didn’t charge per OLC and mueller told him NO, you keep ignoring this very important factoid!

​

and neither was a judgment made that he did commit obstruction, where is it? But DOJ did make a definitive conclusion so i actually have more facts supporting no obstruction than you!

You keep coming up empty because you are very confused about what is fact and what is your conclusions. Your conclusions are not facts..

 

dems know there was legit reason for the investigation, the Muller report proves that, and Comey and Mueller are republicans anyways

 

the power to obstruct

 

you mean like republicans did during the SC nomination?

and then when it was mr. "I like beer", they got rid of her....

 

Oh, you mean no collusion with Russians? That valid reason?

 

doesn't say that, says because it was a failed attempt, he was not recommending charges as he thought Trump was too stupid to know it was a crime

he also showed many examples of Obstruction.... which he wants congress to handle as Presidents can not be indicted

 

Perpetrators

 

Must suck to get curb stomped by a 13 year old.

 

How'd they do that? How's he doing that? He has the right to try and quash subponeas...

 

Lol, they keep attacking trump’s mental state yet look at them! Totally lost it emotionally, suffering from severe TDS. They also claim he’s stupid, yet they can’t beat him!! Bhahahahhahaa you can’t make this up!

 

LOL, sure. No collusion and full cooperation with the Mueller investigation.

 

no he doesn't, he will lose in the courts

 

fake news, he never spoke to Muller like requested, Muller just gave up

 

And Mueller never subpoenaed him either. There is that.

 

Trump said he was gonna do it... I guess Mueller did not want the investigation to last another year in the courts

 

No. He used the words "can't be the special counsel", "has to go" and "Call me back when you do it!"

I don't think you're even trying to hide your cult fanaticism anymore.

Oh my God!

I wonder if cult mentality causes illiteracy.

Here... I'll highlight them for you. I'll used bold. Just so nobody confuses them with your all-caps desperation response.

Third, we considered whether to evaluate the conduct we investigated under the Justice Manual standards governing prosecution and declination decisions, but we determined not to apply an approach that could potentially result in a judgment that the President committed crimes. The threshold step under the Justice Manual standards is to assess whether a person's conduct "constitutes a federal offense." U.S. Dep't of Justice, Justice Manual§ 9-27.220 (201 (Justice Manual). Fairness concerns counseled against potentially reaching that judgment when no charges can be brought. The ordinary means for an individual to respond to an accusation is through a speedy and public trial, with all the procedural protections that surround a criminal case. An individual who believes he was wrongly accused can use that process to seek to clear his name. In contrast , a prosecutor's judgment that crimes were committed, but that no charges will be brought , affords no such adversarial opportunity for public name-clearing before an impartial adjudicator .

The concerns about the fairness of such a determination would be heightened in the case of a sitting President, where a federal prosecutor's accusation of a crime, even in an internal report, could carry consequences that extend beyond the realm of criminal justice. OLC noted similar concerns about sealed indictments. Even if an indictment were sealed during the President's term, OLC reasoned, "it would be very difficult to preserve [an indictment 's] secrecy, " and if an indictment became public, "[t]he stigma and opprobrium" could imperil the President's ability to govern." 6 Although a prosecutor's internal report would not represent a formal public accusation akin to an indictment, the possibility of the report 's public disclosure and the absence of a neutral adjudicatory forum to review its findings counseled against potentially determining "that the person's conduct constitutes a federal offense ." Justice Manual § 9-27.22​

 

again, he wanted mueller removed but investigation to continue. This is not obstruction!! Stop fantasizing!

BUT WHERE does it state mueller thought trump obstructed justice but didn’t charge per OLC? NOWHERE!! I keep asking and you fail everytime! And Barr asked mueller if he thought trump obstructed but didn’t charge per OLC and mueller answered NO. Mueller already cleared this up! Did mueller lie to barr?

 

He certainly has a right to make that motion. I don't know what the Courts will do....but he certainly has the right, just like everyone else, to go to the Courts. The fact you think he doesn't, simply because you don't like him, highlights how the left is tossing the rule of law

 

The reason, IMHO, why he didn't is that it would allow Trump's attorneys to call for discovery and by that time, Mueller knew there was no there there.

 

Not as bad as being governed by a 13 year old.

 

Mueller (Page 5): Two days after directing McGahn to have the Special Counsel removed, the President made another attempt to affect the course of the Russia investigation. On June 19, 2017, the President met one-on-one in the Oval Office with his former campaign manager Corey Lewandowski, a trusted advisor outside the government, and dictated a message for Lewandowski to deliver to Sessions. The message said that Sessions should publicly announce that, notwithstanding his recusal from the Russia investigation , the investigation was "very unfair" to the President, the President had done nothing wrong , and Sessions planned to meet with the Special Counsel and "let [him] move forward with investigating election meddling for future elections."
...
Mueller (Page 97): Substantial evidence indicates that the President 's effort to have Sessions limit the scope of the Special Counsel's investigation to future election interference was intended to prevent further investigative scrutiny of the President ' s and his campaign's conduct
.​

 

So i’m right, trump never called for investigation to end, just have mueller replaced because president didn’t think mueller could be trusted (mueller formed a team of people proven to be hostile and biased against trump).

Thank you for confirming i’m right

 

He just ordered to stop investigating him, his family, his campaign and his lackeys . A.k.a. obstruction of justice. And a.k.a. criminal.