Trump not criminal target says Mueller

a reply to: JBurns

Hah. He is a subject at the moment.

Of course I'm not pleased with President Pence.

originally posted by: Gothmog

originally posted by: JBurns
a reply to: Gothmog

In what way did he obstruct justice allegedly? Can you articulate such allegations?

Because carrying out his Constitutional duty (and common practice) of replacing the FBI director is not obstruction. Making public comments is not obstruction. Making allegedly false statements in public is not obstruction. Every case of hypothetical obstruction I have read involve extreme stretches of legal theory and obscure logical jumps that just don't meet the high burden required to prove obstruction.

Proving intent is notoriously difficult.

And no one who cares about their reputation would argue that exercise of a Constitutionally lawful discharge of Presidential office is a crime. To do so would be saying the FBI director doesn't serve at the pleasure of the President, which they clearly do. FBI specifically...given law enforcement authority by executive order. Once again, POTUS could theoretically repeal this EO at the stroke of a pen. In no way could this be considered obstruction, however. Because our Constitution (as affirmed by SCOTUS) empowers the President to take such action. And especially for firing Comey, replacing the FBI director is a common practice between new administrations.

Wait , what ?
I was just stating that if Mueller really is saying Trump is not under criminal charges , then why are others stating they could still bring obstruction of justice charges ? Obstruction of justice is still considered a crime. So , it can only be one way or the other. Not both.
Clear ?

The report says that Mueller is preparing a report on obstruction of justice... which sounds like he is done with it. If he is saying Trump is not a criminal subject of his investigation at this time and is preparing a report on obstruction of justice, it means that report is going to clear the President.

What I read from this is:

1) No evidence of any collusion between Trump and Russia has been found
2) There is no case of obstruction of justice
3) Mueller is continuing to try and find something/anything to get Trump on.

It kills the hope some people had that there was evidence that had not been leaked yet and that Mueller had an obstruction of justice case.
Bad day for the anti-Trumpers.

Tick tock - the countdown clock...to the day anti-Trumpers have to face up to their delusion and start asking questions as to why the investigation was ever started. Quite apart from Trump, we've also seen zero evidence of any Russian govt. involvement in the hacking of the DNC.

a reply to: UKTruth

your 1,2 3 appear spot on

But , what if , the man is guilty in the court of public opinion !?

Here layeth the block affixed ; put thine chin into the carved groove

a reply to: JBurns



Well it is awful funny, that Muller just started looking into trump himself in the past week. My prediction is this president will be indicted. On what charges who knows. He has been dealing with Russia for decades. I am just patently waiting, and waiting to see what comes out of this.

Like I have said if Muller is investigating trump on one charge and finds something completely different but criminal, trump will go down.


If the Police investigatet a lets say, domestic disturbance call, walk into to the house, and there are bags of drugs on the table, more than the domestic disturbance would be investigated.

a reply to: kurthall

If the Police investigate lets say, domestic disturbance call, walk into to the house, and there are bags of drugs on the table, more than the domestic disturbance would be investigated.

The NY AG will has a field day with documented Trump financial crimes.

a reply to: Gothmog

I'm not saying that, you were I believe...

Yeah, IMO he's in no danger of any charges. Especially not obstruction. If he weren't POTUS, maybe I could see an angle go after him. But POTUS exercising his Constitutional duties is never a crime, for any reason.

The pursuit of justice rarely takes a back seat. But it does in the case of a lawfully installed POTUS exercising their Constitutional powers.

a reply to: kurthall

You've been predicting this. You've also been stating so matter-of-factly that Trump has been a target for a year now.

Why the sudden change?

He has been dealing with Russia for decades.

Too bad, not a crime. He can deal with Russia, praise Russia, visit Russia, make deals with Russia and pursue relations with Russia to his heart's content. HE is the President, not you and not your Hillary

that Muller just started looking into trump himself in the past week.

You're delusional. Then you admit you've been pushing a false narrative against Trump, right?

No one has any reason to believe your lies and innuendo now.

a reply to: kurthall

If the Police investigate lets say, domestic disturbance call, walk into to the house, and there are bags of drugs on the table, more than the domestic disturbance would be investigated.

Wrong, mostly.

What you're looking for is "scope"

If you call me to your residence (or a neighbor does) for a domestic disturbance, and narcotics are in plain view YES you can be arrested/charged. If you grant permission to search (waive your 4A rights), then you could be charged for anything found during the search

If, however, I'm executing a search warrant on your residence for a stolen vehicle, I can't start looking in kitchen drawers and under your bed (since no reasonable person would believe a stolen vehicle could be hidden under a bed)

On the other hand, if I search your garage under the same warrant and happen to find a drug distribution operation or a cache of illegal machine guns, then it is fair game. Probably. Up to a judge

In any case, "scope" is an important part of any search

a reply to: gariac

Keep on believing that

But I thought Mueller was going to be the one who brought Trump down?

Ever stop to think there simply isn't anything there? Surely *some type* of evidence would've turned up by now.

Despite what the Dem liars in congress (like Schiff/Feinstein) have claimed, now provably false...

Despite what the liars on this very site and others have claimed, now provably false...

Do I need to start digging up old posts? I will, if needed, to prove how ridiculous some of you (even members here) are...

And regardless, too bad the NY AG can't touch a sitting US President (just as Mueller could not). As I've already stated (correctly), nothing outweighs a sitting POTUS discharging their Constitutional duties. Nothing is more important, and nothing can interrupt that. That is part of USSS's job, actually. And those guys are pretty tough. Toughest in the world, actually.

a reply to: RazorV66
That was the very first time I got to see that
creature front a full band. Six stars for you
if I could, maybe 6.66... best laugh all year.

Back to the thread: if I was a betting bassist,
I've got a 2 1/2 Kw Canadian power amp that
says Mueller is running out of friends everywhere.

It seems Rosenstein gave secret instructions to
the SC and everybody principally -- that were
beyond not only beyond the customary scope
of an SC's job but the letter of the law as well.
If you're doing an espionage-geared dig, it's
overall bad form to take out a minion for an
almost totally unrelated matter. There I said it.

Add to this the acting Dragon Lady before our
present FBI Director Wray who shall not be named:
was in no position to start anything like this purge.

PS At the risk of some privacy I downloaded a free
downloader so the YT vid can be used for educational
porpoises.

a reply to: UKTruth

Way to be a Debbie downer for the left out progressives.

LOL

originally posted by: TheMadTitan

originally posted by: Liquesence

WAPO reporting Trump NOT a criminal target in his probe.

No, but he's subject of the probe.

That just means he and his actions are under investigation, hence being a subject, not that he is, as of yet, the target, until the ongoing investigation uncovers conduct to place him as a target.

That's it. The investigation is ongoing.

Wow, Do you want a glass to go with all those straws?

You don't seem to understand what a "Subject" of an investigation verse "Target" of an investigation is.

A "Target" is someone you plan to indict and are building a case against.
A "Subject" is someone you are investigating to determine whether it warrants indictment.

That said, regardless of outcome, given Trump is a sitting President and separation of powers, he will remain a "Subject" regardless of what is uncovered.

What is interesting is the larger reveal that Mueller is preparing a report where Trump potentially illicit activities and connections are the "Subject". That would not be done unless there was something there worth presenting to Congress.

Here you go from a non-political source unrelated to Trump, Mueller et al:

The first status you have to worry about is being a target. A target is the person to the prosecutor is gunning for, that's the target of investigation. It's the person who the prosecutor believes has committed a crime and their trying to figure out what the crime was and how to build a case against them.

A witness, on the other hand, is somebody who has really got very little exposure. The prosecutor believes that the person hasn't done it wrong, they simply have information, they were there, they saw something, they have documents that relate to something. They're not caught up in it.

The last status is in-between the two, you’re a subject. And so if you're subject in an investigation what that means is that you're not a target, so they're not gunning for you, but the prosecutor thinks that there is good reason to believe you may have done something wrong. You may have committed a crime or been a part of a criminal activity or part of a conspiracy.

www.whitecollarcrimeresources.com...

originally posted by: JBurns
a reply to: Gothmog

But POTUS exercising his Constitutional duties is never a crime, for any reason.

Within the bounds of the law. Nothing in the constitution affords a President to be immune from the law, just the opposite.

a reply to: JBurns

Mueller will get Trump on obstruction. What Trump needs is a good lawyer, but he is so toxic that no one good will represent him.

Polls? He should have waiting until the quarter ended to ruin the stock market. Sp500 under the 200 MA.

POST REMOVED BY STAFF

originally posted by: gariac
a reply to: JBurns

Mueller will get Trump on obstruction. What Trump needs is a good lawyer, but he is so toxic that no one good will represent him.

Polls? He should have waiting until the quarter ended to ruin the stock market. Sp500 under the 200 MA.

Then why not just run with obstruction? If that's enough to take him down, why the dog and pony show hoping for the little fish to rat?

The market needed a correction, and will need another one at some point. Don't act like the sky is falling just because Krazy told you too.

Pahahaha

This is going to be epic when liberals realise how stupid they've been m

You know they're still not going to care until western civilisation vanishes due to their stupidity

Pahahaha

This is going to be epic when liberals realise how stupid they've been m

You know they're still not going to care until western civilisation vanishes due to their stupidity

a reply to: soberbacchus

I starred you. You are correct that this news is meaningless and a simple dog show. It does say that currently Mueller has found absolutely nothing to target Trump....he is holding out hope and still trying to find something to pin on him. This is all simple bs to appease the masses with some response. Nothing has really changed.