Mueller Report Released. Thoughts?

[Revoltingest]

It is difficult to quote without quoting incredibly large sections. If you would just read it you would understand. And you have a history of demanding other do work for you and then just ignoring it.

But fine. Here is some.

On June 14, 2017, the press reported that the President was being personally investigated for obstruction of justice and the President responded with a series of tweets criticizing the Special Counsel’s investigation. That weekend, the President called McGahn and directed him to have the Special Counsel removed because of asserted conflicts of interest. McGahn did not carry out the instruction for fear of being seen as triggering another Saturday Night Massacre and instead prepared to resign. McGahn ultimately did not quit and the President did not follow up with McGahn on his request to have the Special Counsel removed.

...

There you go...now was that so painful?
It was informative.
I promise no more "demands" until you've had a good rest.
I wonder about how a prosecutor would address a failed attempt at obstruction?

 

[fantome profane]

There you go...now was that so painful?
It was informative.
I promise no more "demands" until you've had a good rest.
I wonder about how a prosecutor would address a failed attempt at obstruction?

Any thoughts about a President who attempted to prevent serious crimes from being prosecuted and tried to protect the Russians and conceal their interference in the U.S. election?

Or am I wasting my time?

 

[Revoltingest]

Any thoughts about a President who attempted to prevent serious crimes from being prosecuted....

This is wrongful behavior.

..... and tried to protect the Russians and conceal their interference in the U.S. election?

This begs the question, did he do that?
I've not seen either claim supported.
And given the plethora of unsupported & outrageous claims regarding
Trump's guilt of this or that made on RF, I don't want to assume anyone's
damning or exculpating claims to be cromulent without citing evidence.

Or am I wasting my time?

Well, you have been spinning your wheels in that other thread where
you objected to my post #44, but only by addressing things I didn't post,
but not the things I did. I'll chalk it up to your being tired.

 

[fantome profane]

I've not seen either claim supported.

I just showed it to you. You choose to ignore it. As I predicted you would.

 

[Revoltingest]

I just showed it to you. You choose to ignore it. As I predicted you would.

I directly addressed what you posted.
I even posed the question about how a prosecutor
would handled his failed attempt at obstruction.

Get some sleep.
We can try this tomorrow.

 

[fantome profane]

I directly addressed what you posted.
I even posed the question about how a prosecutor
would handled his failed attempt at obstruction.

Get some sleep.
We can try this tomorrow.

Any attempt to interfere with an investigation is obstruction of justice, regardless of whether or not is successful.

And you are still ignoring the point. If you accept that Trump tried to interfere with the Mueller probe into Russian interference in the U.S. election that means he attempted to protect the Russians and cover it up.

 

[Revoltingest]

Any attempt to interfere with an investigation is obstruction of justice, regardless of whether or not is successful.

I understand what you're saying.
But my question remains.

And you are still ignoring the point.

I'm not ignoring your point by asking for evidence
But you've offered none to show he protected the Russians, & concealed their involvement.
Are you ignoring my request for something stronger than your personal opinion?

 

[fantome profane]

I understand what you're saying.
But my question remains.

I'm not ignoring your point by asking for evidence

HERE IS THE EVIDENCE!!!

On June 14, 2017, the press reported that the President was being personally investigated for obstruction of justice and the President responded with a series of tweets criticizing the Special Counsel’s investigation. That weekend, the President called McGahn and directed him to have the Special Counsel removed because of asserted conflicts of interest. McGahn did not carry out the instruction for fear of being seen as triggering another Saturday Night Massacre and instead prepared to resign. McGahn ultimately did not quit and the President did not follow up with McGahn on his request to have the Special Counsel removed.

 

[Subduction Zone]

HERE IS THE EVIDENCE!!!

On June 14, 2017, the press reported that the President was being personally investigated for obstruction of justice and the President responded with a series of tweets criticizing the Special Counsel’s investigation. That weekend, the President called McGahn and directed him to have the Special Counsel removed because of asserted conflicts of interest. McGahn did not carry out the instruction for fear of being seen as triggering another Saturday Night Massacre and instead prepared to resign. McGahn ultimately did not quit and the President did not follow up with McGahn on his request to have the Special Counsel removed.

From what I understand of the Mueller report is that Trump may have some plausible deniability, not from what he ordered, but based on how his staff refused to follow his orders. More than once Trump's staff saved his sorry donkey by not doing what he ordered them to do.

 

[Revoltingest]

HERE IS THE EVIDENCE!!!

On June 14, 2017, the press reported that the President was being personally investigated for obstruction of justice and the President responded with a series of tweets criticizing the Special Counsel’s investigation. That weekend, the President called McGahn and directed him to have the Special Counsel removed because of asserted conflicts of interest. McGahn did not carry out the instruction for fear of being seen as triggering another Saturday Night Massacre and instead prepared to resign. McGahn ultimately did not quit and the President did not follow up with McGahn on his request to have the Special Counsel removed.

This does not support your claim that he protected the Russians, & concealed their involvement.

 

[Ponder This]

Have you read the report? Because if you have read the report I would call you qualified.

First of all, if you aren't a lawyer, then you are already less qualified than Alan Dershowitz.
Second of all, there needs to be a reason your opinion of the report is considered credible.

I'm honored that you think I'm qualified simply by reading the Mueller Report, but the reality is that there are people who are more qualified than myself to properly assess the document.

 

[Dan From Smithville]

From what I understand of the Mueller report is that Trump may have some plausible deniability, not from what he ordered, but based on how his staff refused to follow his orders. More than once Trump's staff saved his sorry donkey by not doing what he ordered them to do.

That is my favorite part.

 

[Shadow Link]

Many have predicted proof of guilt....or proof of innocence.
What have you seen?

What are the chances of the "Mueller Report" just being a strategic cover for the wire tapping of Trump from 2016 while simultaneously creating a legal form of probing for a further continuation of spying?


"spygate" = MAGA 2020

 

[Revoltingest]

What are the chances of the "Mueller Report" just being a strategic cover for the wire tapping of Trump from 2016 while simultaneously creating a legal form of probing for a further continuation of spying?


"spygate" = MAGA 2020

Almost anything is possible.
We'll see where evidence leads.