Trump under investigation for Obstruction of Justice.

[Lakhota]

Trump IS under criminal investigation - but Hillary is NOT. Oh happy day!

 

[Lakhota]

Joyce Vance says she doubts the FBI leaked this story. She believes it came from other sources. She's a smart lady.

Joyce White Vance - Wikipedia

 

[Lakhota]

Why isn't Trump tweeting?

 

[Siete]

Why isn't Trump tweeting?

his ass is in a crack and he knows it.

 

[TyroneSlothrop]

I am not Rand Paul...I do not believe in murder

Neither do sociopaths and psychopaths, that is how they kill with no feeling of remorse.

That is really deep dim bulb ... its wing nuts that kill with no remorse

 

[Iceweasel]

Oh no, the COLLUSION shtick didn't find any foothold, so now the LibTards have moved onto Gambit #2: Obstruction.

Mueller is a lifelong republican first appointed by Reagan and later by H.W. Bush and George W. Bush. I doubt he takes any pleasure in opening an investigation that may end the current republican president's term in office.

Trump might well survive charges that his campaign colluded with the Russians, but not Obstruction of Justice. Unless Mueller finds no evidence of obstruction, Trump will be hurt political just as Clinton was. Republican congressmen must be questioning whether Trump is becoming more of a liability than an asset.

Let me explain this to you one more time. There has to have been a crime for an obstruction of justice charge.

Please tell me what the crime is!

You cannot have the latter without the former.

I just hope all of you libs remembered to get your fishing licenses renewed!

obstruction of justice IS THE CRIME.... Obstructing an official investigation is also the crime of obstructing justice. This is what the pres is being investigated for....trying to obstruct, an official investigation by the FBI.

Whether there turns out to be a crime or not, by the investigation, matters naught!

....but why would he obstruct an investigation for something that didn't happen? Face it, you libs have been painting yourselves in a corner for months and are looking stupider by the day.

Obviously because he believed something did happen.

Obviously you just made that up.

 

[TyroneSlothrop]

This thread is scary. Anti-Donald folks sound just like the assassin who tried to kill all the republicans today.

As heinous as the shooting is, in the grand scheme of things, it's small potatoes compared to the Russian meddling in your election.

Wowsa, that is a combination of stupidity, inhumanity, and mental illness.

Triggered frightened formerly alpha male LOL what a weak sad pathetic Bimboi

 

[TyroneSlothrop]

Why isn't Trump tweeting?

They built a wall on him

 

[TyroneSlothrop]

I am not Rand Paul...I do not believe in murder

Neither do sociopaths and psychopaths, that is how they kill with no feeling of remorse.

Now that Conservatives claim that rhetoric is to blame for murders

 

[TyroneSlothrop]

I just wonder--- and I don't disagree with anything you said but ---if the Congress hasn't found a shred of evidence in nearly 11 months, just what will Mueller find?

Benghazi ....8 Investigations dragging over 4 years [2012-2016] nothing whatsoever found...someone like you is still calling for more Benghazi LOL

 

[theHawk]

The Washington Post says that the Special Prosecutor is investigating Trump for Obstruction of Justice.

It's never the crime that goes these guys in. Always the coverup.

He's not. You guys are really stretching.

Law enforcement sources tell CNN that the special counsel is gathering information and considering whether there is evidence to launch a full-scale obstruction investigation.

The interviews are some of the first indications of the efforts of Mueller's newly assembled team. Ultimately, it would be up to Mueller to decide whether there is enough evidence to recommend pursuing charges on any part of the investigation.

Source: Special counsel investigators will soon speak to senior intelligence officials - CNNPolitics.com

Even your beloved CNN has to admit, they are just gathering information. "Considering whether there is evidence" ....sounds like there is no evidence, you either have evidence of wrong-doing or you don't.

"I have never been directed to do anything I believe to be illegal, immoral, unethical or inappropriate," Rogers said. "And to the best of my recollection, during that same period of service, I do not recall ever feeling pressured to do so."

You guys reek of desperation.

 

[theHawk]

I just wonder--- and I don't disagree with anything you said but ---if the Congress hasn't found a shred of evidence in nearly 11 months, just what will Mueller find?

Benghazi ....8 Investigations dragging over 4 years [2012-2016] nothing whatsoever found...someone like you is still calling for more Benghazi LOL

Nothing found, other than four dead Americans, a destroyed compound, and documented lies by the Obama admin about the cause being a YouTube video.

 

[TyroneSlothrop]

I just wonder--- and I don't disagree with anything you said but ---if the Congress hasn't found a shred of evidence in nearly 11 months, just what will Mueller find?

Benghazi ....8 Investigations dragging over 4 years [2012-2016] nothing whatsoever found...someone like you is still calling for more Benghazi LOL

Nothing found, other than four dead Americans, a destroyed compound, and documented lies by the Obama admin about the cause being a YouTube video.

after 8 Investigations nothing and you still rant impotent...FUCK DONALD TRUMP and also FUCK YOU

 

[Lakhota]

Why is Tweety Trump so quiet?

 

[Iceweasel]

Why is Tweety Trump so quiet?

Why are the lefties so noisy? Bad upbringing?

 

[Theowl32]

Oh, remember when I brought up last week how the narrative will officially change from "COLLUSION" to "OBSTRUCTION?"

So far, no evidence of Russia tampering with the election -- and yet the media repeats the lie

They are fucking losers. Aren't they?

 

[usmbguest5318]

The Washington Post says that the Special Prosecutor is investigating Trump for Obstruction of Justice.

It's never the crime that goes these guys in. Always the coverup.

Okay...Well that the WaPo says so doesn't exactly make it be so, but it does suggest there's a better chance now than before now that it is so. Did Mueller or one of his team explicitly say that is the case? If so, well, then, it is indeed so.

If they leaked that information, whoever it is, Trump should fire them as they are no better than those they are allegedly investigating for leaks,

That's a different matter than whether Trump is under investigation for possible obstruction of justice.

I don't know the extent to which the general public has a need to know whether Trump is under investigation for possibly having obstructed justice. That is what it is, but as the information has been released, it's moot whether extant be the public's need to know that.

What I strongly believe is that many of the people -- without regard to their political affinity -- who will attempt to discount the significance of Trump's being under investigation for a felony are the same people who feel that if a liberal is under investigation for something, s/he is guilty of that for which they under investigation, and that's with regard to subjects who don't have a long track record of being shady, actually breaking laws, lying about things great and small, pretending to be someone they literally are not, etc. What will they think about this latest revelation?

I know what has always been my position in such situations, so I don't have a dissensus that compromises my integrity because of what I think about Trump as a result of his being investigated for possibly having committed a (or several) felony and what I think of others whom I knew to be under investigation for possibly having committed felonies. Of course, that only is so because I'm principled, not partisan.

For about the 10th time in this thread alone, you cannot obstruct justice if no crime is committed.

Obstruction of justice
Obstruction of justice is defined in the omnibus clause of 18 U.S.C. § 1503, which provides that "whoever . . . . corruptly or by threats or force, or by any threatening letter or communication, influences, obstructs, or impedes, or endeavors to influence, obstruct, or impede, the due administration of justice, shall be (guilty of an offense)." Persons are charged under this statute based on allegations that a defendant intended to intefere with an official proceeding, by doing things such as destroying evidence, or intefering with the duties of jurors or court officers.

A person obstructs justice when they have a specific intent to obstruct or interfere with a judicial proceeding. For a person to be convicted of obstructing justice, they must not only have the specific intent to obstruct the proceeding, but the person must know (1) that a proceeding was actually pending at the time; and (2) there must be a nexus between the defendant’s endeavor to obstruct justice and the proceeding, and the defendant must have knowledge of this nexus.

§ 1503 applies only to federal judicial proceedings. Under § 1505, however, a defendant can be convicted of obstruction of justice by obstructing a pending proceeding before Congress or a federal agency.
Source

 

[usmbguest5318]

Who? Me or Care4all?

She's not that bad. We aren't going to see eye-to-eye on many things, though.

I've seen the stupidest thread of the year today.

Did you write the red text?

No sir!

The idiot liberal did and that was to whom my comments were addressed!

It must be raining cats and dogs where you are.....

Uh, that's not a dog, nor is it a cat. I hate to break it to you, but you are stupid.

The fact that you don't understand or recognize the reference does not between us two make me the stupid one.

 

[usmbguest5318]

The Washington Post says that the Special Prosecutor is investigating Trump for Obstruction of Justice.

It's never the crime that goes these guys in. Always the coverup.

Okay...Well that the WaPo says so doesn't exactly make it be so, but it does suggest there's a better chance now than before now that it is so. Did Mueller or one of his team explicitly say that is the case? If so, well, then, it is indeed so.

The Washington Post is certainly better than most but it's not perfect. It is a center left paper. It has the distinction of being one of the most respected papers in the country with 47 Pulitzer Prizes, 18 Nieman awards and 368 White House Photography Awards. Articles are well sourced but sometimes in a rush to publish they get it wrong as they did in 2016. However when they do, they are quick to publish corrections and apologies, something many publications ignore these days.
Washington Post

I'm not taking exception with the WaPo. The Post is a fine paper and I do trust them.I just know that sometimes the leaked info is accurate and sometimes it's not.

Yes, The Post will surely post a correction if the leak proves to be inaccurate.

 

[Marion Morrison]

Did you write the red text?

No sir!

The idiot liberal did and that was to whom my comments were addressed!

It must be raining cats and dogs where you are.....

Uh, that's not a dog, nor is it a cat. I hate to break it to you, but you are stupid.

The fact that you don't understand or recognize the reference does not between us two make me the stupid one.

In all fairness, would this not have been better?