GOP lawmaker takes out textbook, tells Mueller he doesn't have 'power to exonerate'

Just googled

Trump's Golf Costs: $102 Million And Counting, With Taxpayers ...

https://www.huffpost.com/.../trump-golf-102-million-taxpayers_n_5ce46727e4b09b2...

In addition, Trump said that he would play no golf since he would be too busy working in the Whitehouse. And Trump spends weekends
relaxing and not in the Whitehouse.

 

Good lord Huff post. At least it came down from the ridiculous 200 million. JW sued the government for the actual records. You probably dont want actual records because it wouldn't make you feel good like Huff post makes you feel.

https://www.judicialwatch.org/press...-secret-service-trump-travel-expense-records/

 

"they have a different case". Yes their "case" was about contradicting Barr's misrepresentation of the report and concisely articulating why.

And it was absolutely clear both in the report and in the hearings that trump committed crimes. Or do you think a demand to create a fake paper trail to protect hissownself is not an attempt at obstruction of justice? If that is the case, then it would appear as tho you a) don't know what obstruction is, b) didn't read the report c) refuse to believe what is in it, despite barr himself saying he had confidence in the report's summarization of the underlying evidence that he did not bother to review in making his "determination".



But no worries, this is all going to be determined as the impeach process evolves.

 

No, he spoke about exoneration in the context of "I can't charge but that isn't an exoneration as the President and his mob has repeatedly claimed. I gave you the definition of the word exoneration, but it seems you can't quite grasp its general usage.

But I do get how if a lie is repeated often enough then it can become "truth". It is afterall, a classic technique, codified in 20th century propaganda.

 

Funny how that escaped Rosenstein, Barr, and Mueller. The LW is like the boy who cried wolf.

The impeach process just ended, only getting 95 votes in the House.

 

Seems you can't grasp the US system of laws and justice and criminal investigations. Prosecutors cannot and do not exonerate people. Juries do not exonerate people. Judges do not exonerated. It was a hyperbolic statement someone inserted into the report because as hard as they tried they could not bring a criminal charge.

 

That was in response to a NYT article which claimed Trump ordered McGhan to fire Mueller and insinuating it was to shutdown the investigation. It was to make sure the historical record was accurate that he did not order him fired but discussed replacing which would not obstruct or end the investigation. In the end he took the advice of counsel and did nothing.



"According to reporting from Fox News' John Roberts, Trump did ask about the option of firing Mueller and whether he had to authority to do so, but did not order it be done. McGahn denies threatening to quit over the conversation."

https://townhall.com/tipsheet/katie...rump-didnt-order-mueller-to-be-fired-n2440204

That is not OOJ.

 

Trump said no golf, remember? Obama went to a golf course and played golf. Trump goes to Mara Largo for the long weekend.
Trump goes to Ireland on taxpayer money and of course to check on his golf course.

How many times has President Donald Trump played golf while in ...

https://thegolfnewsnet.com/golfnewsnetteam/.../how-many-times-president-donald-tru...


How many times has President Donald Trump played golf while in ...

https://thegolfnewsnet.com/golfnewsnetteam/.../how-many-times-president-donald-tru...

Waddya think now?

 

Here are 18 reasons Trump could be a Russian asset
https://www.washingtonpost.com/opin...b1b250-174f-11e9-88fe-f9f77a3bcb6c_story.html

And that is just the first search result.

He discussed with his legal counsel Mueller's conflicts of interest and how he could be replaced. His legal counsel and others advised against so no action taken. No crime no obstruction of justice.
Now tell me how many times the Mueller investigation had to go to court to get documents or testimony? How many times did Trump inject executive privilege? How many times did we hear the investigation claim the Trump administration was doing the slow walk on releasing documents? None.

And you don't even know what the "Russia are listening" joke was about.

 

He found

I don't care, I was just correcting the 200 million number it's off a little bit.

 

If he had the evidence to do so it was his duty to inform the AG of the specific charges. He had none.

 

I just shake my head when I see TDS.

 

That was not a joke. It is his excuse for making that statement and then announcing that he would have something very important to say in a week or so. That was after his son told him about the e-mails. Why are you all so easily conned by this charlatan?

 

Last time I checked it was $106,000,000, which is out of sight. About 8 months ago, and I am certain that it has increased.
He complains about $50,000,000 to investigate Russian interference? That is necessary, and millions to play golf is not. He could spend that money on our homeless veterans or on his wall. He watches a lot of tv for relaxation.

 

didn't escape mueller at all. I see you didn't bother reading the report or watching the hearings. But I do understand how that makes it so much easier to tow the Trumpian line.

Premature adjudication. The impeachment process has not yet begun, and it doesn't start with a bill in congress. It starts within congressional committees. Which is why all those subpoena's are being issued and fought over in court, by both intell and justice.

Don't go counting the chickens before the eggs have hatched.

 

I totally understand. Prosecutors make a determination whether or not to indict and then they "prosecute" their case in a court of law. EXCEPT when dealing with a sitting President of the United States.

It was not a hyperbolic statement, it was a refutation of Trump's constant No Collusion, No obstruction and repeated claims of exoneration.

And judges sure as hell do exonerate people. I gave you both the legal and general definitions. Do you regularly ignore or faile to process actual facts are presented to you? Backfire in action, it seems.

 

So, what you are saying is that the McGahn testimony under oath was in fact a lie? I guess you didn't get the message that even Barr believes the accurately represents the underlying mountain of evidence and testimony.

Not that I am surprised that your link does not quote anyone specific about McGahn's supposed denial and refutation of the original report, let alone McGahn himself.

But it seems you don't know that what you are saying is that Meuller LIED about McGahn's evidence. Sure thing there bud.

 

When ya got nuthin' else you can always resort to rolling around on the floor which at least cleans it up a bit, if nothing else.

 

No, I was quite clear in what I said along the cites I provided and I don't think Mueller knows much about what is in the report anyway.

AND IT IS A MOOT POINT. Trump had full statutory and constitutional authority to replace Mueller with someone else. That is not an obstruction of justice.

 

There is no exception when dealing with Presidents it is merely a matter of timing. If Mueller found clear convincing evidence of a crime it was his DUTY, legal obligation to report that to the AG.

How Mueller’s Lawyers Spun the OLC Guidance on Indicting a Sitting President

.....From this commonsense proposition, Mueller’s staff leapt to an untenable conclusion: Because the OLC guidance prevents the Justice Department from formally charging a sitting president, poor President Trump would have been denied his due process protections if Mueller had recommended an indictment: It would be as if the government slimed him by publicizing the evidence but denied him his day in court to clear his name.

If this doesn’t insult the intelligence, nothing will. Sliming the uncharged president by publicizing the evidence is exactly what Mueller’s team did.

The special counsel’s staff wrote a 448-page tome, overflowing with details about a traitorous collusion plot that never happened and the obstruction of an investigation that was never actually impeded in the slightest. Even though the regulations call for a confidential report from the special counsel to the attorney general, the Mueller report was patently written with the intention that it would be transmitted to Congress and the public. (Indeed, even before the report was submitted to the Justice Department, various industrious publishers planned to make it available for sale.) Moreover, when AG Barr undertook to announce only the special counsel’s bottom-line conclusions, Mueller’s staff threw a fit, grousing to the media that Barr was wrongly withholding the report and denying the public the condemnatory narrative in which they had couched these benign conclusions.

Another of many reasons the Mueller staff’s claim to be protecting Trump is laughable: If Mueller and his staff were actually playing by the rules, they would have demanded that their report to Barr be kept confidential — like a normal consultation between a prosecutor and a supervisor about whether an indictment should be sought. If they had done that, there would have been no need for their touching expression of concern about the president’s rights. Any recommendation to indict or other prosecutorial deliberations would have remained non-public; only the indictment, if one were ever filed, would become public. But Mueller’s staff wrote a report that was patently intended to be the antithesis of confidential. Due process is protected when the regulations are followed, not when they are flouted."
https://www.nationalreview.com/2019/07/the-olc-guidance-against-indicting-a-sitting-president/

It was not a hyperbolic statement, it was a refutation of Trump's constant No Collusion, No obstruction and repeated claims of exoneration.

No they do not, juries make determinations on guilt beyond a reasonable and nothing more, courts do not find people innocent in this country.

 

I don't think you know as much about the his own report than he does, but it you seem to believe you do.

I it doesn't matter if he has the authority if he is motivated by the desire to end the investigation in order to protect himself. That is obstruction of justice. And for damn sure his demand for fake documentation after the fact fits the legal definition of OOJ.

Seems you think Meuller and McGahn were lying and trump is being honest. What next, insistence that the sun rises in the west in the evening after a long dark day?

 

Again, you point to an opinion from a single former prosecutor. Seems he disagrees with Mueller's rationale. So naturally that makes his opinion the right one, despite NOBODY in the DOJ has disputed Meuller's position on not indicting a sitting president.

And I totally agree that judges or juries make determinations of guilt beyond a reasonable doubt. I totally agree that a jury doesn't find anyone "innocent", only not guilty.

That whole trial by jury thing is a basic tenet of common law, just like "innocent" until proven guilty. Trump is technically innocent, in the same fashion that Manafort, Flynn, Gates, and the rest of the crew were innocent until was convicted.

Its obvious that when it came to the President, Mueller's report was written with the expectation that it would be up to Congress an their constitutional responsibility when it comes to the high crimes and misdemeanors of the President, or failing that at worst preserving the evidence until Trump is out of office.

But I get how whitewashing is imperative to maintaining support for the 46th Best president in history.

 

::

 

No one has less confidence in the DNC than Bob Mueller has. Mueller would have never left something of such importance in the hands of DNC buffoons. It's the sole reason Mueller accepted appointment as special counsel. The DNC botched a landslide victory, and botched a coup meant to rectify that. Despite Bob's biased agenda, his willingness to conceal exculpatory evidence and lie ... Bob could only manage ambiguity, and vagueness in his inconconclusive non findings. I guess Trump haters are totally desensitized to their own humiliation at this point. Must be an emotional defense mechanism or something.