It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.

Please white-list or disable AboveTopSecret.com in your ad-blocking tool.

Thank you.

 

Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.

 

Trump CLEARLY guilty of obstruction of Justice

page: 19
36
<< 16  17  18    20  21  22 >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Apr, 20 2019 @ 04:06 PM
link   

originally posted by: Bone75
The investigation concluded that the President did not conspire with the Russians. So what justice did he obstruct?

To be fair, this argument is fallacious.

Obstruction is interfering with the investgation, which has nothing to do with whether or not a law was broken.

So, it is possible for someone to interfere with an investigation, even if they were not guilty of a crime that was a part of said investigation.

Unlikely, but possible.




posted on Apr, 20 2019 @ 04:21 PM
link   
a reply to: Grambler

So it's really just whataboutism with you.

"Trump..."
"WELL HILLARY CLINTON DELETED EMAILS, WHICH IS OBVIOUSLY MUCH WORSE!"



posted on Apr, 20 2019 @ 04:23 PM
link   

originally posted by: links234
a reply to: Grambler

So it's really just whataboutism with you.

"Trump..."
"WELL HILLARY CLINTON DELETED EMAILS, WHICH IS OBVIOUSLY MUCH WORSE!"


No it’s not whataboutism

It’s about having a legal system that treats people from all sides the same

So when that system and the people pushing it say that destroying evidence is not a crime, it’s hard to believe their opinion when they say angry tweets are a crime
edit on 20-4-2019 by Grambler because: (no reason given)



posted on Apr, 20 2019 @ 04:26 PM
link   

originally posted by: Sookiechacha
a reply to: Grambler

Sounds like a deliberate referral to Congress to me. He may not be calling for impeachment hearings, but Mueller is definitely saying that it's Congress' jurisdiction to make the decision on whether or not Trump obstructed justice.

Sure... as has been the case sine our Constitutional Republic was founded.

All he was saying is, give peace a chance...



posted on Apr, 20 2019 @ 04:33 PM
link   
a reply to: Willtell

CLEARLY guilty of obstruction? Hold on stay right there while I alert the media 😂😂😂



posted on Apr, 20 2019 @ 04:41 PM
link   

originally posted by: bobs_uruncle
a reply to: Willtell

"The president engaged in... conduct involving public attacks on the investigation, non-public efforts to control it, and efforts in both private and public to encourage witnesses not cooperate with the investigation"

This statement has not appeared anywhere in the Mueller report.

Not exactly but this did:

"The President launched public attacks on the investigation and individuals involved in it who could possess evidence adverse to the President, while in private, the President engaged in a series of targeted efforts to control the investigation. For instance, the President attempted to remove the Special Counsel; he sought to have Attorney General Sessions unrecuse himself and limit the investigation; he sought to prevent public disclosure of information about the June 9, 2016 meeting between Russians and campaign officials; and he used public forums to attack potential witnesses who might offer adverse information and to praise witnesses who declined to cooperate with the government. Judgments about the nature of the President’s motives during each phase would be informed by the totality of the evidence."
Vol 2, page 158



posted on Apr, 20 2019 @ 04:43 PM
link   

originally posted by: Mikemp44
he also realized there WAS NO UNDERLYING CRIME TO OBSTRUCT,

Please stop with this garbage...

Obstruction relates to the investigation, not the underlying crime.



posted on Apr, 20 2019 @ 04:45 PM
link   

originally posted by: tanstaafl

originally posted by: Mikemp44
he also realized there WAS NO UNDERLYING CRIME TO OBSTRUCT,

Please stop with this garbage...

Obstruction relates to the investigation, not the underlying crime.


Yes but the fact there was no underlying crime severely diminishes the likelihood of proving corrupt intent, which is necessary to prove the obstruction



posted on Apr, 20 2019 @ 05:17 PM
link   

originally posted by: Grambler

originally posted by: tanstaafl

originally posted by: Mikemp44
he also realized there WAS NO UNDERLYING CRIME TO OBSTRUCT,

Please stop with this garbage...

Obstruction relates to the investigation, not the underlying crime.


Yes but the fact there was no underlying crime severely diminishes the likelihood of proving corrupt intent, which is necessary to prove the obstruction


Right. Where is the corrupt intent? A guy whose job description literally includes the ability to grant people immunity from consequences of the law in form of a pardon, a guy who committed no crime investigated, and who was told HE himself was not the target of the investigation... Show me what corrupt or extra-legal action was taken or intent.

It's near impossible without a crowd of (credible) witnesses saying, "he told me to lie to Mueller" or "he told me to burn the records". We don't have anything like that. Nothing even approaching it. In fact, not only did they not burn documents, they never once even asserted executive privilege to prevent turning over documents. Has that ever happened before? Not to my knowledge? What we have is a boat load of circumstances that are completely ambiguous without our ability to demonstrate intent.

That doesn't mean Trump is innocent necessarily by any means, but we have nothing providing actual unambiguous evidence of obstruction. Nothing at all. Mueller says, "this report does not conclude that the president committed a crime". It's right there. Black and white. To twist that into he CLEARLY committed a crime is lunacy. Or to likewise assess that they found him guilty but couldn't indict because of DOJ policy on Presidential indictment is equally dishonest. The statement is actually in the most quoted portion of the document. It is so wildly dishonest to assert otherwise, I cannot help but to question the motives (or intelligence) of people saying these things.


while this report does not conclude that the president committed a crime, it also does not exonerate him.”


Did it conclude he CLEARLY committed a crime? No. It did not. Did it list a pile of ambiguous evidence that left the prosecutors stymied because of the circumstances and alternative (legal and innocent) explanations? Yes, it did.
edit on 20-4-2019 by RadioRobert because: (no reason given)



posted on Apr, 20 2019 @ 05:36 PM
link   

originally posted by: Sookiechacha
Flynn was actually charged with some very serious crimes.

Bullsnip.

He was caught in a perjury trap...

"The interview was set up directly via a phone call to Flynn from Andrew McCabe, who then was deputy director of the FBI. McCabe, by his own account, made it sound like an ordinary national-security-related briefing of the sort Flynn was accustomed to giving the FBI. Even though McCabe clearly knew that Flynn was a potential subject of investigation, he deliberately dissuaded Flynn from having attorneys present.

Moreover, when the agents arrived, they and Flynn both treated the meeting as rather informal, even “jocular,” and “the agents did not provide General Flynn with a warning of the penalties for making a false statement … before, during, or after the interview.” The agents’ decision not to so inform Flynn was made at the direct behest of McCabe because “they wanted Flynn to be relaxed.” "

Flynn was a Patriot, and what was done to him was despicable.

I'm disappointed that Trump didn't pardon him, and keep him on as National Security Advisor. I understand the argument of firing him, but I still think he should pardon him.



posted on Apr, 20 2019 @ 05:49 PM
link   
a reply to: tanstaafl

In addition, the FBI agents initially did not feel Flynn intentionally lied

Mueller reversed this decision and charged Flynn, purely in hopes of getting Flynn to give some dirt on trump

And of course if that is a serious crime

We know Hillary’s lawyers mills and abedin lied to the fbi and was not charged. And unlike with Flynn, FBI agents did feel Hillary lied to them and she wasn’t charged



posted on Apr, 20 2019 @ 05:58 PM
link   

originally posted by: links234
you all seem to take it to another level with this obsession with Hillary Clinton who is still not in prison and will never be in prison.

You could be right, her health seems to be getting worse daily, probably won't live long enough to even finish her trial.



posted on Apr, 20 2019 @ 06:29 PM
link   
a reply to: tanstaafl

Flynn took a plea deal. He was looking at some serious charges related to conspiring with the Turkish government to kidnap an American national, Pennsylvanian cleric. thinkprogress.org...

Flynn's judge extended his sentencing date because he didn't feel that Flynn had cooperated with government officials enough to offset his crimes.

www.foxnews.com...

A federal judge on Tuesday delayed sentencing once again for former national security adviser Michael Flynn -- a surprise decision at a dramatic hearing where the judge tore into the defendant and even questioned whether Flynn committed treason before walking back his comments.

The delay came after Flynn’s attorneys initially declined an offer Tuesday from U.S. District Judge Emmet G. Sullivan to delay the sentencing on charges of making false statements to the FBI, amid the judge’s questions over Flynn’s cooperation in a separate case involving illegal lobbying for Turkey. After Sullivan tore into the defendant and warned he couldn’t guarantee that Flynn wouldn’t get jail time, the defense asked for a sentencing delay.




But after the hearing began, Sullivan tore into Flynn for his "very serious" false statement plea, as well as other alleged misdeeds. The judge asked prosecutors if Flynn could have been charged with treason, telling Flynn "arguably, you sold your country out."

"I'm not hiding my disgust, my disdain for this criminal offense," Sullivan said.



posted on Apr, 20 2019 @ 07:14 PM
link   
So the take away is if you try to fight slander you are obstructing justice.


so if you are accused of beating your spouse and you get upset and say " I did NOT beat my spouse" not only is that obstruction, but you are also guilty because you got upset (Kavanaugh)

you now have to prove you DID not break the law (and be PC at the same time no less)


Why does anyone put up with this crap, no is is even getting laid for it (sex in 18-29yr olds in decline)

we need a good old fashion UFO flap




posted on Apr, 20 2019 @ 07:15 PM
link   
Still trying to figure out what "justice" Trump obstructed.

Can anyone help an old man out!



posted on Apr, 20 2019 @ 07:23 PM
link   
a reply to: DBCowboy

He obstructed "Mob justice". He's still there in spite of the mob. That's all the evidence needed!



posted on Apr, 20 2019 @ 07:25 PM
link   

originally posted by: Sookiechacha
a reply to: tanstaafl

Flynn took a plea deal.

Because he was out of money trying to fight the bogus charges.


He was looking at some serious charges related to conspiring with the Turkish government to kidnap an American national,

Was he charged? Tried? Convicted? No? Case closed.


"I'm not hiding my disgust, my disdain for this criminal offense," Sullivan said.

And that is the bull# comment he walked back when he realized it was totally unwarranted.



posted on Apr, 20 2019 @ 07:28 PM
link   
a reply to: tanstaafl

You think that secretly working as an agent for the Turkish government, and plotting to kidnap an exiled American national cleric, to take him back to Turkey to be tortured and murdered is a bull # charge?

You guys



posted on Apr, 20 2019 @ 07:36 PM
link   

originally posted by: tanstaafl

originally posted by: Bone75
The investigation concluded that the President did not conspire with the Russians. So what justice did he obstruct?


Obstruction is interfering with the investgation, which has nothing to do with whether or not a law was broken.
Unlikely, but possible.


Bob Mueller's report stated that no entity interfered with his investigation. It progressed normally, as planned.



posted on Apr, 20 2019 @ 07:39 PM
link   

originally posted by: DBCowboy
Still trying to figure out what "justice" Trump obstructed.

Can anyone help an old man out!


None 😎



new topics

top topics



 
36
<< 16  17  18    20  21  22 >>

log in

join