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.

 

Mueller plays his hand, pushes for impeachment.

page: 4
39
<< 1  2  3    5  6  7 >>

log in

join
share:

posted on May, 29 2019 @ 03:59 PM
link   

originally posted by: xuenchen

originally posted by: Sookiechacha

originally posted by: xuenchen

originally posted by: Sookiechacha
a reply to: bigfatfurrytexan

He obstructed, mostly unsuccessfully according the Mueller report, the investigation itself.



Unsuccessful obstruction proves Innocence doesn't it 😎


In what world?



The Legal World 🤣



Nope. Plenty of stupid criminals that tried, but failed, to commit crimes are sitting in jails.




posted on May, 29 2019 @ 04:07 PM
link   
a reply to: bigfatfurrytexan




This means what it says: that it could not be considered. Full stop.


No, not "full stop". Mueller kicked the issue over to Congress, as its their jurisdiction, not his, to determine if the president is guilty of high crimes and misdemeanors.

Mueller covers this extensively in volume 2 of his report.



posted on May, 29 2019 @ 04:12 PM
link   

originally posted by: Sookiechacha
a reply to: bigfatfurrytexan




This means what it says: that it could not be considered. Full stop.


No, not "full stop". Mueller kicked the issue over to Congress, as its their jurisdiction, not his, to determine if the president is guilty of high crimes and misdemeanors.

Mueller covers this extensively in volume 2 of his report.
It's done.

Congress doesn't have the support and Americans overwhelmingly disapprove.

McConnell has said that any impeachment proceedings will be squashed at the Senate.

In other words, It's DONE.

Stop grasping, it's pitiful.



posted on May, 29 2019 @ 04:16 PM
link   
a reply to: Arnie123

That doesn't matter. It's Congress' constitutional duty, and it's been plopped in their lap. Regardless of how it turns out, they have to review the allegations. They can't just say "Who cares about the rule of law and our constitutional duty?"



posted on May, 29 2019 @ 04:16 PM
link   
Mueller can be hauled in and indicted for obstructing justice. Assuming he is aware of a crime and did not disclose it.



posted on May, 29 2019 @ 04:18 PM
link   
a reply to: Sookiechacha

So why didn't he kick collusion their way too? Oh, maybe because they already all investigated it and found none.

But here's the most important part, at what point did mueller know there was no collusion? Peter strzok knew before mueller was appointed AND he was on mueller's team. At the point in which mueller determined there was no collusion, his entire investigation should have ended. Keeping an investigation going, with no underlying crime, with the hope of getting someone on obstruction is a very sick perversion of american justice. Wouldn't you agree?



posted on May, 29 2019 @ 04:19 PM
link   
a reply to: Sookiechacha

Please point me to these cases, where people were found innocent on the underlying crime (to the point that the prosecutor said, yeah he didn't do it) but found guilty of obstruction.



posted on May, 29 2019 @ 04:30 PM
link   
a reply to: Dfairlite

The law speaks for itself.


Obstruction of justice in the federal courts is governed by a series of criminal statutes (18 U.S.C.A. §§ 1501–1517), which aim to protect the integrity of federal judicial proceedings as well as agency and congressional proceedings. Section 1503 is the primary vehicle for punishing those who obstruct or who endeavor to obstruct federal judicial proceedings.
.........
Besides these specific prohibitions, section 1503 contains the Omnibus Clause, which states that a person who "corruptly or by threats of force, or by threatening letter or communication, influences, obstructs, or impedes, or endeavors to influence, obstruct, or impede, the due administration of justice" is guilty of the crime of obstruction of justice.
legal-dictionary.thefreedictionary.com...


edit on 29-5-2019 by Sookiechacha because: (no reason given)



posted on May, 29 2019 @ 04:38 PM
link   
I'm sure all this comes down to lying. These people frame questions in such a way as to get you to "lie". Twisting things until you cant see straight and then railroading you with "you lied!". Its ridiculous and the people are over this witch hunt. 2 years have been wasted by people who cant accept an election. Thats the real crime here.



posted on May, 29 2019 @ 04:38 PM
link   

originally posted by: Sookiechacha
a reply to: Arnie123

That doesn't matter. It's Congress' constitutional duty, and it's been plopped in their lap. Regardless of how it turns out, they have to review the allegations. They can't just say "Who cares about the rule of law and our constitutional duty?"


If it's their Constitutional duty to review the allegations, then why have none of them read the unredacted report made available to them?



posted on May, 29 2019 @ 04:43 PM
link   
a reply to: ketsuko

Because if they did, they would not be able to discuss those things at all, not during congressional hearings, not in private meetings, not with congressional lawyers, nobody, period.

That is counterproductive to their oversight duties.



posted on May, 29 2019 @ 04:48 PM
link   

originally posted by: Sookiechacha
a reply to: ketsuko

Because if they did, they would not be able to discuss those things at all, not during congressional hearings, not in private meetings, not with congressional lawyers, nobody, period.

That is counterproductive to their oversight duties.



Derp.

If they are conducting oversite and investigations, they would be busy looking at all the evidence and leads ... like that report.

You know, to think otherwise, it would be like Mueller conducting his entire investigation without reading the Steele Dossier.



posted on May, 29 2019 @ 04:50 PM
link   

originally posted by: Sookiechacha
a reply to: Arnie123

That doesn't matter. It's Congress' constitutional duty, and it's been plopped in their lap. Regardless of how it turns out, they have to review the allegations. They can't just say "Who cares about the rule of law and our constitutional duty?"
😂😂😂😂😂
Haven't you heard? The Mueller investigation has been over with.

Mueller coming before the cameras to essentially say, "Hey, I'm resigning and retiring, leave me alone", isn't indicative of anything.

Ultimately, NO COLLUSION found, fact and in report.

Obstruction? Could not determine, lacking evidence, could not come to a conclusion, therefore it fell onto the AGs lap.

He along RR and a cooperative WH determined no obstruction and no collusion either.

It's done.



posted on May, 29 2019 @ 04:55 PM
link   
a reply to: Sookiechacha

In other words, you can't find a single case.

What threat of force, threatening letter or communication did trump use? (Pro tip: look up what a threat is in your legal dictionary).



posted on May, 29 2019 @ 04:58 PM
link   
a reply to: Arnie123




Obstruction? Could not determine, lacking evidence, could not come to a conclusion, therefore it fell onto the AGs lap.


Can't you read, or hear? That's not at all what Mueller said today, or in his report. Mueller makes a hard case for congressional oversight in the case of the president's corruption regarding his episodes of obstruction of justice, throughout volume 2 of his report, and his speech today.



posted on May, 29 2019 @ 05:06 PM
link   
a reply to: Dfairlite

Oh for christ's sake!

Redditor finds three US legal cases where individuals were convicted of obstruction of justice even while using the phrase "I hope," www.reddit.com...

State police special agent convicted of bribery, obstruction apnews.com...

Although, Trump has made threats, it's more about his intent in committing most of the actions and if they were corrupt intentions. The Mueller report speculates how his intentions could have been corrupt. Barr makes the excuse that Trump illegal actions were committed out of frustration, not corruption.



posted on May, 29 2019 @ 05:15 PM
link   
a reply to: ketsuko

Derp.
Make up your mind.
Should they have the unredacted Mueller report, to do oversight, or not?



posted on May, 29 2019 @ 05:15 PM
link   
a reply to: Sookiechacha

You were asked for cases where the person was found guilty of obstruction where there was no crime in the first place.



posted on May, 29 2019 @ 05:16 PM
link   
a reply to: Sookiechacha

They do except for the stuff the laws they helped pass made illegal for them to have. Barr could not leave that unredacted without breaking those laws. We've been over this. All they don't have access to is the grand jury stuff, but they haven't even read the stuff they can see.



posted on May, 29 2019 @ 05:17 PM
link   
a reply to: Sookiechacha

Your first link doesn't work (just takes me to a general reddit thread that gives no information) and is irrelevant to my point. Trump cannot have obstructed justice while being exonerated of the underlying crime, which brings me to your next link. It bolsters my point, he was accused of threatening to jail people (physical/property harm) to cover up his crimes, which is also a form of corruption. Do you think every time a cop tells someone it would suck to go to jail and lose your kids (which they do all of the time to get confessions) they're obstructing justice? Of course you don't.



Although, Trump has made threats, it's more about his intent in committing most of the actions and if they were corrupt intentions.


Trump has made ZERO threats. Again, look up the legal definition of threats. Again, his intentions could not have been corrupt if he was exonerated of the underlying crime. Look up the legal definition of corrupt intent. Furthermore trump has to have done something illegal for it to be obstruction. Saying he wants a subordinate (mueller) fired, is not illegal, it is his constitutional prerogative.


Mueller is a partisan hack. Nothing more, nothing less. No prosecutor should ever say or do anything for the purpose of helping one party or the other. I cannot imagine a plausible reason why Mueller went beyond his report and gratuitously suggested that President Trump might be guilty, except to help Democrats in Congress and to encourage impeachment talk and action. Shame on Mueller for abusing his position of trust and for allowing himself to be used for such partisan advantage.




top topics



 
39
<< 1  2  3    5  6  7 >>

log in

join