Mueller for Dummies: A Brief Summary

Question answered on the OP. Note that the explanation is "for dummies". As I said before, to dumb it down further would probably require a degree in Abnormal Psychology which I do not hold.

 

Yes your bumperstickers are just the right kind of simplification trump people desperately need since an actual reality check is existential to their Dear Leader.

 

What the hell is a "perjury trap"? You lie, you commit perjury.

The only smart way to not "fall" into perjury is to not lie under oath. This is not the smart way. Because he's running a huge huge risk. Democrats could potentially do a lot of bad things to him.

 

And the Illuminati are controlling the world

 

Absolutely it does. It has relevance, for example, to the oversight of the IRS and to the methods used to audit a high income government official.

Trump says they are still under audit. So it's relevant. I don't know. You'd have to show where the law says that they can't subpoena before a certain number of years before they are involved with the government.

I'll tell you this: As a simple typical American citizen, I think anybody in high positions of government should make their tax returns public. At a bare minimum, they should be analyzed by Congress. Very specially in an administration that has shielded itself so tightly from all types of scrutiny of any illegal activities. .

Again: you can quote the law. But as a simple typical American citizen that just wants transparency from the people who govern us.... I really don't care. As a citizen, I have no reason to give any presumption of innocence to the people who govern me. I am not a court of justice.

The only thing that is unconstitutional is the way he is being protected by Republicans for purely political reasons. Because it is clear that he has committed, not only high crimes and misdemeanors, but actual judicial crimes.

 

I'll refrain from a rational explanation of congressional oversight since it would be a complete waste of time. But if you honestly believe the House is only interested in how well the IRS handles high income government officials -- without any probable cause and for the first time ever -- I got a bridge in Brooklyn I'd like to sell you.

Tell me something nobody knows. It is perfectly obvious that the Trump hating coup has not a care in the world for the legal system or justice or quaint little concepts like the presumption of innocence. I'm not talking about you subpoenaing tax records -- you cannot. I'm talking about our rogue congresspeople.

Bay at the moon to your heart's content that the moon is really a bicycle, but Trump has committed no impeachable High Crimes and Misdemeanors nor committed any crime.

 

Not to mention that, right now, I'm sure you're aware it's the only thing that really matters.

http://www.politicalforum.com/index...es-or-impeachment-this-is-about-power.555214/

"Honestly"? Hmmm such a novel idea. . I like it! I'll take the challenge. Yes! Let's do honesty.

I'll start. I honestly do not believe even for a second that the House is one bit interested in how the IRS handles high income government officials' audits. I honestly think its a ruse to get Trump's Tax returns. I honestly do believe it's a legal demand, though. I honestly believe that the Treasury Department and any court to which this case goes to has any grounds to repeal the request. And I honestly believe that there are no moral grounds for Mnuchin to deny them. As none of them, I honestly believe, have any authority to even question the motive.

Now, your turn. If you honestly believe that there are not multiple financial crimes that would be discovered in those tax returns, I got an Alien Flying Saucer in the Mojavi Desert I'd like to sell you.

Remember. Your challenge was honesty.

 

There is no reasonable suspicion -- that's no as in none, nada, zilch, zip -- of any crime in Trump's tax returns or his financial records. Reasonable suspicion is the standard iron-clad bar for any law enforcement investigation. There is not even a hint or diffused smell of any reasonable suspicion. A congressional criminal investigation without any basis whatsoever is, by definition, a witch hunt carried out by a police state.

 

The real issue is that Trump likely didn;t directly assist Russia.

The more likely scenerio is that Russia was interfering to help Trump win, and his campaign knew about it, but didn't have ant directly part to play. For example, if they knew Russia was illegally paying to put up political ads on facebook and other social media, or that they were making illegal contributions to PACs,, and other such things. Even if the Trump campaign didn't directly assist Russia, if they knew it was happening and didn't report it, that constitutes BOTH obstruction of justice, and acting as an accomplice to the crimes.


Then there were all the secret meetings between Russian spies....Oops I mean "Intelligence officials", and Trump staffers, including Sessions, Kushner, Flynn, Trump Jr., etc.... If they discussed anything related to Russia's inteference, and proof that they knew about it, and had even the smallest communications with Russians over it, that means they also could be charged with conspiracy, even if they still didn't give any directly assistance to committ the crimes.


And heres the majorly important part. If there was a conspiracy, it can be charged under RICO.

 

In the very worst scenario it would only be a violation of campaign finance laws.

 

WRONG. It would be no different than if you knew someone was going to rob a bank and didn't call the police to turn them in. You would be an accomplice to the crime. Prior knowledge, and a willingness to let a crime be committed is all that is needed to be charged as an indirect accomplice.

 

He colluded. He obstructed. And, charges should have been filed.

Charges were not filed precisely for the reason I stated in my OP after reading the full Mueller Report. Mueller, said at the outset, that his was not to impeach the president nor indict a sitting president. His was a fact finding mission. He found facts. He reported those facts. The facts show that Trump's Campaign coordinated, cooperated and sought to maintain communications with Foreign Agents associated with what it thought to be both Russia and the Ukraine, over material that it knew to be deleterious to Trump's opponent and beneficial to Trump himself. These contacts were repeated, consistent, persistent and pervasive throughout the Trump Campaign for the White House.

Mueller, was well aware of and respectful of the Nixon era standard that held, we do not indict our president on criminal charges while in office. He provided congress with the information it needed to draft articles of impeachment. However, congress is now completely dysfunctional, highly corrupt itself and incapable of doing the right thing. Ergo, there will be no impeachment of this president though he clearly has earned it.

In a nutshell.

 

There goes honesty.... down the drain.

Good news is you got a brand new alien spaceship to play with.

BTW. I know the owner of a $291 million dollar mansion in Seven Springs, New York. I can get it for you for just $100 million. Great deal, isn't it.

 

Failure to report a crime is not a crime, with a few exceptions in some state laws. Only if there is active concealment or conscious abetting would it be a crime. It is especially not a crime to not report if you don't know some observed action is a crime or you just suspect someone might be getting ready to commit a crime.

 

No, people are asked a multitude of questions and when they cannot recall or reply erroneously they are charged with perjury. Bill Clinton realised it with Chinagate and Trump has taken his lead.

 

Still true

 

Then it's jim dandy that Bonespurs campaign marched merrily along accepting Russian help and not telling the FBI about it. Yay!

 

@Bluesguy

 

Again the serving on an indictment comes AFTER HE HAS CHARGED HIM IN HIS REPORT AND REFERRING TO CONGRESS FOR IMPEACHMANT AND REMOVAL. ONCE OUT OF OFFICE THEN THE INDICTMENT IS SERVED.

Presidents are not above the law why do you keep asserting they are. They OLC memo ONLY refers to when a prosecution can begin it does not grant some immunity to a President. You and the MSM totally misread it and misinterpret what could have happened had Mueller found criminal charges.