New Wolff book claimed Mueller had Obstruction indictments ready

[basquebromance]

If Wolff’s claim were to prove anything, it’s that Trump was right. The special counsel wasn’t an innocent fact-finding mission set up to restore the integrity of our justice system. It was a politically motivated persecution.

 

[M14 Shooter]

Agreed. It is clear as day that Mueller documented several obstructive acts by Trump that would most likely have resulted in multiple indictments being handed down, IF NOT for the fact that Mueller was investigating a sitting POTUS....

Since you know Mueller reached the conclusion he could not demonstrate the corrupt intent necessary for a conviction for obstruction, you know your statement, above, is a lie.

 

[basquebromance]

Much like Wolff did in his first book, his fun little narrative is meant to do nothing but run out of steam before converging neatly with the real world.

“Ultimately,” Mueller “concluded he could not move to prosecute a sitting president.”

Talk about a cliffhanger!

Based on his track record, there’s no reason to believe Wolff’s tale isn’t entirely made up. He did it with one brilliant piece of fiction before. But if this particular bit about the special counsel is true, Mueller has to be hoping no one can prove it.

 

[Lesh]

The way the Special Counsel charge was written...Congress was supposed to be informed of any actions that changed or impeded Mueller.
If this is true Congress was supposed to have been notified

So... one of two things is true:
- Mueller was impeded, but decided to break the law, cover it up, and not tell Congress
- Mueller was not impeded.

Nope. If Mueller was impeded it was the DOJ that broke the law by not reporting. Mueller has not been allowed to talk to Congress

 

[caddo kid]

Much like Wolff did in his first book, his fun little narrative is meant to do nothing but run out of steam before converging neatly with the real world.

“Ultimately,” Mueller “concluded he could not move to prosecute a sitting president.”

Talk about a cliffhanger!

Based on his track record, there’s no reason to believe Wolff’s tale isn’t entirely made up. He did it with one brilliant piece of fiction before. But if this particular bit about the special counsel is true, Mueller has to be hoping no one can prove it.

You obviously have not read the SC Mueller report, nor apprised yourself of any of the concepts within the report.

Mueller concluded he was not going to indict a sitting POTUS because Mueller agrees with the DOJ OLC that a sitting POTUS cannot be indicted.

You, nor anyone else requires some novel to clue you into that point; you only need to be aware of what is going on within your government to know about it, which you obviously failed at that point.

 

[M14 Shooter]

The way the Special Counsel charge was written...Congress was supposed to be informed of any actions that changed or impeded Mueller.
If this is true Congress was supposed to have been notified

So... one of two things is true:
- Mueller was impeded, but decided to break the law, cover it up, and not tell Congress
- Mueller was not impeded.

Nope. If Mueller was impeded it was the DOJ that broke the law by not reporting. Mueller has not been allowed to talk to Congress

Let me know how -this- conspiracy plays out.

 

[M14 Shooter]

You obviously have not read the SC Mueller report, nor apprised yourself of any of the concepts within the report.
Mueller concluded he was not going to indict a sitting POTUS because Mueller agrees with the DOJ OLC that a sitting POTUS cannot be indicted.

Since you know Mueller reached the conclusion he could not demonstrate the corrupt intent necessary for a conviction for obstruction, you know your statement, above, is a lie.

 

[JimH52]

Thank you for agreeing that you did not think through the implications and necessities inherent to the possibility you raised.
That being the case, why don't you admit the ridiculousness of said possibility and move on?

Admit?

Yes. That you did not think through the implications and necessities inherent to the possibility you raised.
Well?

You missed this:

I will admit that you made an ass out of yourself by putting words in my mouth that I never stated & by failing to understand the (proper) use of language.
As I previously stated, you need to become more familiar with the use of language.
That isn't my problem but it sure seems to be (one of) yours.

You are wasting your time arguing with trumpettes. They will defend the Liar in Chief until he is out of office.....all 35% of them.

Mueller clearly laid out a road map for Congress to determine the Obstruction question. Barr and Rosenstein short circuited that plan.

Mueller needs to clarify why he DID NOT bring Obstruction charges against the Liar in Chief. If it was due the DOJ memo....even in part....then there are questions to be asked.

The problem is, even now, the Liar in Chief is obstruction the duties of Congress....by ordering people to defy the law and threatening witnesses. All the while...the GOP

Agreed. It is clear as day that Mueller documented several obstructive acts by Trump that would most likely have resulted in multiple indictments being handed down, IF NOT for the fact that Mueller was investigating a sitting POTUS, and from my reading Mueller's agreement with DOJ OLC theory which is, that a sitting POTUS cannot be indicted.

IMO this is the only thing that kept Mueller from sending Trump to a court room to make a plea; guilty, not guilty.

Trump supporters really are too stupid to see the simplicity of the scenario & they are too stubborn to admit that yes, Trump really did obstruct the investigation.

I always said AmeriKKKans are stupid.

As they say....."Ya can't fix Stupid..."

 

[M14 Shooter]

As they say....."Ya can't fix Stupid..."

True - but we hold out hope for you leftists, none the less.

 

[JimH52]

The way the Special Counsel charge was written...Congress was supposed to be informed of any actions that changed or impeded Mueller.
If this is true Congress was supposed to have been notified

So... one of two things is true:
- Mueller was impeded, but decided to break the law, cover it up, and not tell Congress
- Mueller was not impeded.

Nope. If Mueller was impeded it was the DOJ that broke the law by not reporting. Mueller has not been allowed to talk to Congress

The trump-DOJ coverup continues....

 

[blackhawk]

His credibility is slightly below that of BuzzFeed.

 

[caddo kid]

You obviously have not read the SC Mueller report, nor apprised yourself of any of the concepts within the report.
Mueller concluded he was not going to indict a sitting POTUS because Mueller agrees with the DOJ OLC that a sitting POTUS cannot be indicted.

Since you know Mueller reached the conclusion he could not demonstrate the corrupt intent necessary for a conviction for obstruction, you know your statement, above, is a lie.

Let's read my statement AGAIN.
You obviously have not read the SC Mueller report, nor apprised yourself of any of the concepts within the report.
Mueller concluded he was not going to indict a sitting POTUS because Mueller agrees with the DOJ OLC that a sitting POTUS cannot be indicted.

There is absolutely nothing in that statement that is false, or as you claim "a lie."

Let's look at the actual verbiage from the SC Mueller report: Introduction To Volume II, page 213 of the PDF.
First, a traditional prosecution or declination decision entails a binary determination to initiate or decline a prosecution, but we determined not to make a traditional prosecutorial judgment. The Office of Legal Counsel (OLC) has issued an opinion finding that "the indictment or criminal prosecution of a sitting President would impermissibly undermine the capacity of the executive branch to perform its constitutionally assigned functions" in violation of "the constitutional separation of powers."1 Given the role of the Special Counsel as an attorney in the Department of Justice and the framework of the Special Counsel regulations, see 28 U.S.C. § 515; 28 C.F.R. § 600.7(a), this Office accepted OLC's legal conclusion for the purpose of exercising prosecutorial jurisdiction. And apart from OLC's constitutional view, we recognized that a federal criminal accusation against a sitting President would place burdens on the President's capacity to govern and potentially preempt constitutional processes for addressing presidential misconduct.

So, there it is: Mueller is stating that he plans to abide by the current DOJ OLC theory that no sitting POTUS should be indicted, period.

So, here is what YOU FAIL TO UNDERSTAND: No matter if Mueller did, or did not make any determination concerning 'intent' there was no way in Hell Mueller was about to indict a sitting POTUS, based on nothing more than the above paragraph.

OK you dumb ass little girl, now STOP making your lame ass attempts at discussing points you obviously have no idea WTF you are bloviating about.

 

[M14 Shooter]

Since you know Mueller reached the conclusion he could not demonstrate the corrupt intent necessary for a conviction for obstruction, you know your statement, above, is a lie.

Let's read my statement AGAIN.

It does not matter how many times you restate your lie, it remains a lie.

-You are fully aware of the fact Mueller reached the conclusion he could not demonstrate the corrupt intent necessary for a conviction for obstruction
-Thus, you are also fully aware of the fact that he did not indict Trump because he agrees with, or even followed the OLC opinion, but because he knew he could not show the necessary intent.

Therefore, you know your statement is a lie.

 

[McRocket]

"New book claims Mueller drew up an obstruction indictment against Trump" New book claims Mueller drew up an obstruction indictment against Trump

Much of Fast and Furious has been proven. I expect this is true. The lawyer from Mueller's team picked his words carefully....

Congress needs to find out why Mueller shelved the indictment....if it existed. Barr and Rosenstein running protection for Donald?

Imagine how all this would have turned out if Mueller just took more initiative? Would think more about the country and less about rules as he saw them.

I am sorry - but my opinion of Mueller is not that amazing. He seems rock solid in many ways...but his report took WAY too long to finish and was written WAY too safely.

And his reluctance to testify before America in Congress is ridiculous, IMO.

Hey Mueller - you know what your report means to America. I don't give a shit whether you want to testify in public or not OR what your reasons are...you fucking OWE IT to America to tell her what you think on this issue (whether it's good or bad for Trump).
So get off your ass, get to Congress and start talking...IN FRONT OF AMERICA.

 

[caddo kid]

Since you know Mueller reached the conclusion he could not demonstrate the corrupt intent necessary for a conviction for obstruction, you know your statement, above, is a lie.

Let's read my statement AGAIN.

Therefore, you know your statement is a lie.

You can call anyone, any time, anywhere, a liar. It is however ONLY YOU that is lying here.

Let's review Mueller's report again:
Let's look at the actual verbiage from the SC Mueller report: Introduction To Volume II, page 213 of the PDF.
First, a traditional prosecution or declination decision entails a binary determination to initiate or decline a prosecution, but we determined not to make a traditional prosecutorial judgment. The Office of Legal Counsel (OLC) has issued an opinion finding that "the indictment or criminal prosecution of a sitting President would impermissibly undermine the capacity of the executive branch to perform its constitutionally assigned functions" in violation of "the constitutional separation of powers."1 Given the role of the Special Counsel as an attorney in the Department of Justice and the framework of the Special Counsel regulations, see 28 U.S.C. § 515; 28 C.F.R. § 600.7(a), this Office accepted OLC's legal conclusion for the purpose of exercising prosecutorial jurisdiction. And apart from OLC's constitutional view, we recognized that a federal criminal accusation against a sitting President would place burdens on the President's capacity to govern and potentially preempt constitutional processes for addressing presidential misconduct.

Again; Mueller was in no way planning to indict Trump based on his opinion & agreement with DOJ OLC theory that a sitting POTUS should not be indicted.

And again: No matter if Mueller did, or did not make any determination concerning 'intent' there was no way in Hell Mueller was about to indict a sitting POTUS, based on nothing more than the above paragraph.

So, just go ahead & keep repeating your dumb ass little girl drivel about intent & lies.
No one here gives two shitz about your dumb ass opinion on either topic.

 

[caddo kid]

"New book claims Mueller drew up an obstruction indictment against Trump" New book claims Mueller drew up an obstruction indictment against Trump

Much of Fast and Furious has been proven. I expect this is true. The lawyer from Mueller's team picked his words carefully....

Congress needs to find out why Mueller shelved the indictment....if it existed. Barr and Rosenstein running protection for Donald?

Imagine how all this would have turned out if Mueller just took more initiative? Would think more about the country and less about rules as he saw them.

I am sorry - but my opinion of Mueller is not that amazing. He seems rock solid in many ways...but his report took WAY too long to finish and was written WAY too safely.

And his reluctance to testify before America in Congress is VERY poor judgement, IMO.

Hey Mueller - you know what your report means to America, I don't give a shit whether you want to testify in public or not or what your reasons are...you fucking OWE IT to America to tell them what you think on this issue (whether it's good or bad for Trump).
So get off your ass, get to Congress and start talking.

IMO Mueller should have disagreed with the DOJ OLC opinion concerning the concept of indicting a sitting POTUS.

The DOJ OLC theory that a sitting POTUS cannot be indicted is basically stating that any POTUS is above the law.
That is just pure bullshit to hold up a judicial theory that any POTUS is 'above the law' but that is in essence exactly what that theory does.

Mueller agreed with it & IMO that is not a good thing.

 

[edward37]

"New book claims Mueller drew up an obstruction indictment against Trump" New book claims Mueller drew up an obstruction indictment against Trump

Much of Fast and Furious has been proven. I expect this is true. The lawyer from Mueller's team picked his words carefully....

Congress needs to find out why Mueller shelved the indictment....if it existed. Barr and Rosenstein running protection for Donald?

You're so deeply deluded you'll fall for any idiotic bullshit.

As all trump lovers have fallen for all the BS he's handed out

 

[Markle]

"New book claims Mueller drew up an obstruction indictment against Trump" New book claims Mueller drew up an obstruction indictment against Trump

Much of Fast and Furious has been proven. I expect this is true. The lawyer from Mueller's team picked his words carefully....

Congress needs to find out why Mueller shelved the indictment....if it existed. Barr and Rosenstein running protection for Donald?

Once again, my far left Progressive good friends desperately leap to the wrong conclusion.

Mueller’s office shoots down key claim in Michael Wolff’s new book 'Siege'

 

[Markle]

Mueller says he's full of shit

That's a technical term, isn't it?

 

[Markle]

All the while.... trump is retweeting a doctored video.....Faker in Chief

What doctored video?