Would any Trumpette like to take a swing at this?

No comparison. Get real.

 

How do you obstruck a non crime. ... could you obstruct a cop from stopping the bank robbers if nobody robbed the bank . Its ridiculous.

 

A drop in the bucket. Not nearly enough to secure our most important activity as a Democracy. Especially (as I showed) when Moscow Mitch has been blocking legislation and funds to actually deal with the problem

https://www.brennancenter.org/blog/federal-election-security-grants-dont-go-far-enough

No he didn't Congress and Obama did. Trump refused to implement them until he was forced. See link.

Wrong again: EN+, Rusal and ESE

 

Thats because Trump voters are dumb as a box of rocks. An earthworm has more intelligence.

Why should this surprise you?

 

What memo? If you mean the report, he didn't. I just explained to you why he didn't. Yes, he did not make any conclusion. Again, I just explained why he didn't put a conclusion in writing, or make a conclusive statement in public. Let me know which part you don't understand.

And no, it is not up to the DOJ and Trump's pet AG to make those conclusions, either. They could, but we know that Barr will not. Mueller would have known that, too. It is entirely up to congress to come to those conclusions, but as it now stands, Trump is refusing to comply, and won't allow staff or former staff to comply, with the legal subpoenas coming from the various congressional committees. It's a delaying tactic. Trump doesn't want certain facts to become public knowledge until after the 2020 election. He still believes he has a chance to get re-elected, and thereby stay in the White House and let the clock run out on those obstruction charges.

Come on, this isn't rocket surgery. Put yourself in Trump's shoes ... wouldn't you do the same if it meant never going to jail?

 

"No comparison" is exactly what I said! You were the one trying to make a comparison.

smh ...

 

What non-crime?

Look it up: obstruction of justice can be charged even if the underlying crime turns out to be bogus. And in this case, it isn't.

It sure would be nice if at least one Trumpster on at least one forum had actually read and understood the Mueller Report.

 

Who investigated you messiah . He got a free pass on everything. Were you a leg tingler? Of course there is no comparison. Trump they invented collusion and investigatted everything Trump. Bebop Obama breezed .

 

Huh?

I'm not religious, and don't have a messiah. If you mean Obama, what did he do that would have been indictable? And what's a leg tingler?

Sounds like just more whataboutisms to me. Stop trying to change the subject.

 

No collusion what more is there to read.

 

He certainly did have a conclusion section and made one.

It’s also up to the DOJ to determine if there are crimes

 

Collusion is not a legal term, and Mueller did not use it in the Report. Again, please read it. If you aren't up to that task, then don't try to debate the findings.

 

The DOJ will do nothing as long as Trump remains president. I already explained that Mueller went by a DOJ rule stating that a sitting president cannot be indicted.

And I also already explained why Mueller would not conclude one way or the other regarding obstruction. He detailed each action that was worth investigating and found eight instances that fit the criteria for making an obstruction case against Trump.

As I told another user, if you can't or won't read the report, stop trying to debate its conclusions.

 

Mueller said repeatedly that’s not why he concluded there was no crime or why he didn’t recommend charges, like prior special counsel has

I’ve read the report and heard his testimony. No where did he say there was obstruction

 

Then a president successfully impeached would be removed from office but if the senate doesn't do that, what a complete waste of time.

 

Then lock him up!

 

FFS. Take a reading comprehension class. I already said he didn't come out and say that Trump was guilty of obstruction. I already gave you his reasons, which he also details in the report. He didn't recommend charges because he couldn't, out of an abundance of fairness to the accused. Mueller details this in the Introduction to Volume II. Read that, at the least.

You can't just go to the end of a book, read a summary, and claim that you understand the contents. Your comments make it obvious that you didn't read the whole thing. Did you try this with your grade school teachers when you were assigned to do a book report?

 

The impeachment process is not necessarily about removal. That's a common misconception. Please read the constitution.

We all know that Moscow Mitch will continue to sit on his hands, except when he's brushing them together in gleeful anticipation of perhaps filling an ailing RBG's SCOTUS seat. But that doesn't matter. The constitution is clear. I recommend you read Article I, Section 3, item 7.

Impeachment is a formal accusation backed by evidence of wrongdoing. IMO, regardless of whether or not it succeeds, it is congress' duty to prepare articles of impeachment against Trump.

 

Just as soon as he is no longer POTUS.

 

So 5.5 years . Got it...

 

Sure, we were similarly exercised over Clinton, though he committed actual crimes and worked with others to do so as well, but, the public wasn't behind his removal and the voters did not treat the GOP kindly in the next election.

WHEN NARRATIVES FAIL: Poll: Support for impeachment at lowest level ever.

“While some 2020 Democrats and House leaders are eager to open impeachment hearings against President Trump, the public has lost interest.”
​

 

It's enough to open any mainstream media outlet in order to see how much they brainwash the public and how much passion they put into promoting despise and hate towards the people who dare to vote with Trump.
The mainstream media is disgusting beyond imagination. For them, the production of fake news is just business as usual - http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Claas_Relotius

 

ATTEMPTED obstruction is a crime in itself

 

He's running for a second term above all...to stay out of jail

 

He certainly could, and everything you said for the reasons why he specifically said was not true. You apparently didn’t watch his testimony