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.

 

Obstruction of justice. I don’t see it .

page: 1
19

log in

join
share:
+3 more 
posted on May, 29 2019 @ 01:40 PM
link   
I put this together just after the Mueller report. Couldn’t decide whether to post it but now I’m glad I kept it .

Here’s my read .



Obstruction of Justice against Trump hinges on two words

“CORRUPT INTENT”

“This term applies to doing something with the full knowledge that it is illegal.

thelawdictionary.org...

On three separate occasions Comey told Trump he wasn’t under investigation. The dates were January 6th, January 27th and march 20th 2017.

On March 12th Trump tweeted his displeasure with Comey for refusing to make that public. Being Trump he also spoke of it many,many other times.

The last time Comey told Trump he wasn’t under investigation was March 20th


Comey wrote in his testimony that he first assured Trump that he was not personally under FBI investigation during his first meeting with the president-elect, during which he and other intelligence officials briefed him on the intelligence community's conclusions about Russia's interference in the 2016 election.


By Comey’s own words Trump welcomed the investigation into some of his campaign staff. Because he was told he wasn’t under investigation.


”The president went on to say that if there were some 'satellite' associates of his who did something wrong, it would be good to find that out, but that he hadn't done anything wrong and hoped I would find a way to get it out that we weren't investigating him," Comey wrote.


On May April 11th Comey again refused POTUS’s request to announce to the country he wasn’t under investigation.

www.businessinsider.com...

On May 9 Trump fired James Comey.


Now we’re looking back to Corrupt Intent which is needed for an obstruction of justice charge.

He was told three times he wasn’t under investigation. He welcomed the investigation into some of his campaign staff.

Basically he was under the impression he was innocent. When he fired James Comey. You can’t have corrupt intent when you think you’re innocent.

CORRUPT INTENT

“This term applies to doing something with the full knowledge that it is illegal.

The often cited phrase “That Russian thing” could just as well have been his displeasure for being told he was innocent. But Comey was not willing to make it clear Trump wasn’t under the investigation only his campaign staff.



Trump’s motivation for firing Comey probably was he was pi$$ed off and didn’t want his presidency kneecapped from the beginning. Which of course happened anyway.

As we got to know Comey better that might’ve been precisely what Comey wanted.

Comey’s written statement.


www.scribd.com...


18 U.S. Code § 1503. Influencing or injuring officer or juror generally

Pay attention to the second word.


www.law.cornell.edu...

For the matter of obstruction involving general Flynn and Jeff Sessions Barr took into consideration Trump cooperation with the probe. The fact he made the vast majority of the statements out loud and in public. Along with a lack of underlying crime.

But Barr’s four page report made it clear. The decision wasn’t done on the constitutionality of indicting a sitting president. The decision was made along department of justice guidelines. Most specifically on “ corrupt intent”. And included input from different Department of Justice officials and the Office of legal counsel. Their determination was that they could not prove corrupt intent beyond a reasonable doubt.




www.lawfareblog.com...


P.S

Did I say corrupt intent enough? Lol
edit on 29-5-2019 by Fallingdown because: (no reason given)

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

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

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

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




posted on May, 29 2019 @ 01:46 PM
link   
Bueller and his band of rouges would have indicted at least one obstruction co-conspirator had any evidence existed.

That one indictment alone would have been solid grounds for Impeachment 😎



posted on May, 29 2019 @ 01:51 PM
link   
a reply to: Fallingdown

I agree with everything you posted.

Mueller even told Barr and Rosenstein that the DOJ guidelines had nothing to do with his decision, or lack of one.

What you are going to see now in your thread is that none of this is going to matter.

Nadler got his orders from the donors and is spreading the words impeach and obstruction of justice.

So that is where they are going to go.

To 2020 and beyond!

The left coming in to prove me right in 3,2,1...


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



posted on May, 29 2019 @ 01:56 PM
link   
a reply to: Fallingdown

When you bleachbit your hard drive, when you smash cell phones with a hammer, that’s obstruction of justice.

When you are innocent of collusion and are fighting an attempted coup, that is NOT obstruction of justice.

That being said, I hope congress votes for impeachment so that the world can see the unequal levels of justice we have in America.



posted on May, 29 2019 @ 02:02 PM
link   
a reply to: Fallingdown

Riddle me this, why would anyone be indicted for talking to Russia if they were a private citizen (aka, not President) there would be no reason for an investigation.... right?



posted on May, 29 2019 @ 02:02 PM
link   
a reply to: DBCowboy

Sure hoping of watching Nadler put on a tutu and do a high wire balancing act!!!



posted on May, 29 2019 @ 02:03 PM
link   

originally posted by: manuelram16
a reply to: DBCowboy

Sure hoping of watching Nadler put on a tutu and do a high wire balancing act!!!


Nadler says that he has proof of both obstruction and collusion. So much evidence that he no longer needs to call Bob Mueller to testify.



posted on May, 29 2019 @ 02:04 PM
link   
a reply to: Fallingdown

you cant see it because it is simply not there

if it were mueller would have recommended charges
mueller did not



posted on May, 29 2019 @ 02:05 PM
link   
a reply to: carewemust

We've been hearing that scratched record for....two years!!!, Nah I want Nadler in a tutu!!!



posted on May, 29 2019 @ 02:07 PM
link   
a reply to: xuenchen

Exactly if Mueller thought any part of obstruction of justice was Prosecutable. He would’ve listed it then left the decision up to Barr over the constitutionality of indicting a president.

All the announcement did today was make me wonder about motive on Mueller‘s part.

It wasn’t clear at all why he even had it. All he did was reiterated what he said in the report .

Did he try to throw gas on the fire ?

Is this his way of avoiding a subpoena ?

Was it a way of prodding the Democrats towards impeachment ?

Or is it pushback for Barrs investigation into the FBI and intelligence community. Which could make one think Muellers but on the line too.

I wish he would’ve gave us some answers, all he gave us was more questions .



posted on May, 29 2019 @ 02:22 PM
link   
I think it is time for some declassification.
Not everything.... but some.



posted on May, 29 2019 @ 02:25 PM
link   
Firing comey because he was messing things up was not a problem, he put someone better in the job. Comey was not really that good, Mueller did a better job and was much less bias than Comey was.

I thought Comey was let go because he mishandled other investigations in the past, I could be wrong on that.

Comey quickly discovered there was no trump collusion, they focused on that right away and found no links. The business dealings Trump had going on in russia was not collusion, maybe the coverup of the ongoing deal which happened before the primaries would be considered obstruction of justice, but why would someone who has millions invested just walk out before they even knew they would make the ticket and have a chance at a presidential run.

Bush Sr had many ties to foreign countries and business interests. that never was considered collusion before. They never investigated JR about his dads interests in oil. If you are going to change the laws don't go retroactive, change them from that point forward. They are backtracking lately, I think they are nuts.



posted on May, 29 2019 @ 02:39 PM
link   

originally posted by: carewemust

originally posted by: manuelram16
a reply to: DBCowboy

Sure hoping of watching Nadler put on a tutu and do a high wire balancing act!!!


Nadler says that he has proof of both obstruction and collusion. So much evidence that he no longer needs to call Bob Mueller to testify.


How convenient eh 😎



posted on May, 29 2019 @ 03:49 PM
link   
a reply to: Lumenari

The Mueller report fractured the Democratic base. Debate of Impeachment widen that fracture .

Trump can’t be removed from office and history shows impeachment favors the incumbent .

Democrats can get a impeachment to help heal their party.

Trump can try to ride impeachment to victory.

It looks like a win-win for everybody .

I’ll bet my house that it’s going to happen .



posted on May, 29 2019 @ 03:53 PM
link   

originally posted by: carewemust

originally posted by: manuelram16
a reply to: DBCowboy

Sure hoping of watching Nadler put on a tutu and do a high wire balancing act!!!


Nadler says that he has proof of both obstruction and collusion. So much evidence that he no longer needs to call Bob Mueller to testify.


Then perhaps Barr needs to depose him.

Another thing I don't understand.

I'm a girl in the oilfield so I should know a lot less about law than an actual lawyer... for instance Nadler.

But even I know that the obstruction statutes do not apply to a President exercising his Article 2 powers unless the statute specifically references the President.

So they literally have nothing but are going forward.

/facepalm



posted on May, 29 2019 @ 04:00 PM
link   
a reply to: DBCowboy

I agree 100% .

BTW

Did you steal that first paragraph from a Sean Hannity monologue ?



posted on May, 29 2019 @ 04:11 PM
link   
a reply to: jhn7537

A day ago I developed a standard answer to that question . Lol

“They didn’t have a reason they made one up”.

Looking back on this mess. I’m sure if it wasn’t Russia it would’ve been something else .

But to answer your question no none of it was right .



posted on May, 29 2019 @ 04:52 PM
link   

originally posted by: Fallingdown
a reply to: DBCowboy

I agree 100% .

BTW

Did you steal that first paragraph from a Sean Hannity monologue ?


LOLZ

I should have sourced it.

Apologies.



posted on May, 29 2019 @ 06:53 PM
link   
a reply to: DBCowboy

No worries, the words are compelling no matter the platform .


I was thinking of something earlier.

When something breaking or significant happens I usually watch Tucker and Hannity .

Not tonight, nothing has changed since yesterday .

Half Democrats are going to want impeachment the other half ain’t.

All Mueller did was give CNN and DTS suffers a fix to feed their addiction for anger.

But just like any drug it won’t last long .



posted on May, 30 2019 @ 05:35 AM
link   
a reply to: Fallingdown

intent is an important word. I believe it helped another high ranking political person, not long ago.



new topics

top topics



 
19

log in

join