What The Mueller Report ACTUALLY States

[easyt65]

That's OK though; I created the thread for those here such as yourself & I didn't expect your brain dead ass to learn a fucking thing from the thread.

Absent a provable crime, what do you suggest Trump be impeached for?

at a minimum, Congress has the responsibility to impeach Trump for his abuse of power as related to his documented attempts to obstruct SC Mueller's investigation

Rrepeating the same stupid shit over and over won't make it true.

Mueller found no obstruction he was willing to attach his name to. Be knew it was not there. He knew, however, if he just fed the Trump-haters with a sliver of hope he could keep that flicker of Trump-hating life alive...

Mueller was tasked with 1 job - report his finding, guilty or not for collusion and treason. Mueller failed to prove guilt of either.

Mueller committed a violation of prosecutorial ethics, according to many prosecutors across the country. He did so by not simply stating evidence of guilt was or was not found. He committed this ethics violation by giving an opinionated diatribe on a lot of stuff that he refused to use to declare 'guilt', something no prosecutor should ever do.

The investigation is over.
The report was filed.
No indictment or prosecution of ANYONE for collusion or obstruction....NONE....NEVER

So you butt-hurt Witch-Hunt Junkies can sit around whining and crying about what the report 'really' said, what Mueller 'really' meant, and cling to tour butt-hurt for another 5 years if you want...

...but that is never going to change the fact that Mueller is out of a job now, and Trump is still President.

You've been waiting for 3 years....

How's that working out for you?

 

[edward37]

Another nail in your pos trumps coffin

 

[edward37]

There seems to be some confusion concerning what the SC Mueller report actually contains.

Many here @ USMB seem to love to discuss the Mueller report but it is pretty obvious that 99.99% of the members here that comment on the report have NOT read the report.
I believe we need to set the record straight on a couple of the FACTS within the Mueller report.

I keep hearing members here @ USMB make really stupid statements concerning the Mueller investigation. One of the dumbest implications I constantly hear from USMB members is that there was no crime so, there could be no obstruction. That is complete baloney folks.

If we look at Volume II of the report, page 368 of the PDF, section L., Overarching Factual Issues, we can learn there is precedent law in place that precludes any underlying crime from an obstruction process. Please see the below from page 369 of the PDF of the Mueller report.

U.S. Department of Justice Atter11ey Werk Preettet // May Cetttaitt Material Preteetee U11eer Fee. R . Cril'H. P. 6(e) Second, many obstruction cases involve the attempted or actual cover-up of an underlying crime. Personal criminal conduct can furnish strong evidence that the individual had an improper obstructive purpose, see, e.g. , United States v. Willoughby, 860 F.2d 15, 24 (2d Cir. 1988), or that he contemplated an effect on an official proceeding, see, e.g., United States v. Binday, 804 F.3d 558, 591 (2d Cir. 2015). But proof of such a crime is not an element of an obstruction offense. See United States v. Greer, 872 F.3d 790, 798 (6th Cir. 2017) (stating, in applying the obstruction sentencing guideline, that "obstruction of a criminal investigation is punishable even if the prosecution is ultimately unsuccessful or even if the investigation ultimately reveals no underlying crime"). Obstruction of justice can be motivated by a desire to protect non-criminal personal interests, to protect against investigations where underlying criminal liability falls into a gray area, or to avoid personal embarrassment. The injury to the integrity of the justice system is the same regardless of whether a person committed an underlying wrong.

There you have it folks: No underlying crime need be proven for an obstruction case to be determined, and/or pursued.



Now, on to the next observation. Many members here @ USMB continue to (erroneously) voice that there was NO obstruction by Trump, and/or no attempts by Trump to obstruct the Mueller investigation.
That is COMPLETE BULLSHIT.

The numerous attempts by Trump to obstruct the Mueller investigation can be learned by reading pages 224 to 448 of the PDF.

So, in conclusion, I hope this will help to educate the many here @ USMB that continue to make erroneous claims concerning the Mueller report, Trump’s documented attempts to obstruct the investigation, and the fact that there is NO need to prove any underlying criminal activity to pursue an obstruction case.

https://www.justice.gov/storage/report.pdf

You’re welcome.

You've proven something here, beyond all doubt: You are totally ignorant.

hale put the fn dunce cap on and stand in the corner

 

[caddo kid]

at a minimum, Congress has the responsibility to impeach Trump for his abuse of power as related to his documented attempts to obstruct SC Mueller's investigation

There's nothing documented besides "we can't prove he didn't do X", which runs completely counter to proper rules of jurisprudence.

You poor, hapless, deluded kook.

The various attempts by Trump to obstruct the SC Mueller investigation are documented within Volume II, pages 15 -167, pages 224 - 448 of the PDF. https://www.justice.gov/storage/report.pdf

Within that section of the report are at least 10 (documented) attempts by Trump to obstruct Mueller's investigation.

Congress has the responsibility to hold any POTUS accountable for such abuses of power.

I understand you are only seven years old so, I know this stuff is over your head.

You can leave now .............

It's over, fuckface....You bedwetting crackpots lost.

Over....Done....Finis...Terminated.
Grow the fuck up and move on.

It will be over once Congress decides to pursue impeachment, or not to.

Until then, keep up your incessant whining like the three year old you are.

 

[caddo kid]

That's OK though; I created the thread for those here such as yourself & I didn't expect your brain dead ass to learn a fucking thing from the thread.

Absent a provable crime, what do you suggest Trump be impeached for?

at a minimum, Congress has the responsibility to impeach Trump for his abuse of power as related to his documented attempts to obstruct SC Mueller's investigation

Rrepeating the same stupid shit over and over won't make it true.

Mueller found no obstruction he was willing to attach his name to. Be knew it was not there. He knew, however, if he just fed the Trump-haters with a sliver of hope he could keep that flicker of Trump-hating life alive...

Mueller was tasked with 1 job - report his finding, guilty or not for collusion and treason. Mueller failed to prove guilt of either.

Mueller committed a violation of prosecutorial ethics, according to many prosecutors across the country. He did so by not simply stating evidence of guilt was or was not found. He committed this ethics violation by giving an opinionated diatribe on a lot of stuff that he refused to use to declare 'guilt', something no prosecutor should ever do.

The investigation is over.
The report was filed.
No indictment or prosecution of ANYONE for collusion or obstruction....NONE....NEVER

So you butt-hurt Witch-Hunt Junkies can sit around whining and crying about what the report 'really' said, what Mueller 'really' meant, and cling to tour butt-hurt for another 5 years if you want...

...but that is never going to change the fact that Mueller is out of a job now, and Trump is still President.

You've been waiting for 3 years....

How's that working out for you?

the other member asked a question; I replied

you don't like it; tuff shit

besides that you obviously didn't read post #31, nor post #39.

Also, If you would have read the report, you would have seen this, from page 213.

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.

Knowing this there is no doubt that the SC was never going to bring any indictment against Trump, and that is beside the OLC consideration that does not allow for the indictment of s sitting POTUS.

So, keep your head buried like a good little ostrich ...........

 

[easyt65]

the other member asked a question; I replied

And I asked you a simple question, too, but you won't answer....

You have waited 3 years for Mueller to deliver, for Trump to be Impeached, for Trump to be dragged from the WH in chains...

HOW'S THAT WORKING OUT?

 

[imawhosure]

at a minimum, Congress has the responsibility to impeach Trump for his abuse of power as related to his documented attempts to obstruct SC Mueller's investigation

There's nothing documented besides "we can't prove he didn't do X", which runs completely counter to proper rules of jurisprudence.

You poor, hapless, deluded kook.

The various attempts by Trump to obstruct the SC Mueller investigation are documented within Volume II, pages 15 -167, pages 224 - 448 of the PDF. https://www.justice.gov/storage/report.pdf

Within that section of the report are at least 10 (documented) attempts by Trump to obstruct Mueller's investigation.

Congress has the responsibility to hold any POTUS accountable for such abuses of power.

I understand you are only seven years old so, I know this stuff is over your head.

You can leave now .............

It's over, fuckface....You bedwetting crackpots lost.

Over....Done....Finis...Terminated.
Grow the fuck up and move on.

It will be over once Congress decides to pursue impeachment, or not to.

Until then, keep up your incessant whining like the three year old you are.

And they won't impeach, as YOUR HOMEY COMEY, Brennan, and Rice, walk the plank! How ya liking that new prosecutor Boseaphus-) (wait, let me add Lynch to that plank)

You can put on a brave face all you want, but if you were smart, you would make a new sock, cause we are going to be laughing you off this board within a month.

Not only that, we are going to be adding your arrogant posts to links, EVERYWHERE; and we thank you for being a bedwetter, who is incompetent, irrelevant, and immaterial...……..and DUMB enough to post it!

 

[caddo kid]

the other member asked a question; I replied

And I asked you a simple question, too, but you won't answer....

You have waited 3 years for Mueller to deliver, for Trump to be Impeached, for Trump to be dragged from the WH in chains...

HOW'S THAT WORKING OUT?

You missed the good part of my quote: Couldn't stand the truth, huh?


Also, If you would have read the report, you would have seen this, from page 213.

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.

Knowing this there is no doubt that the SC was never going to bring any indictment against Trump, and that is beside the OLC consideration that does not allow for the indictment of s sitting POTUS.

You & 99% of everyone in this thread could learn something but you are too fucking bull headed ..........

 

[Oddball]

Trump breaks record No access to briefing with lying Sanders

 

[caddo kid]

at a minimum, Congress has the responsibility to impeach Trump for his abuse of power as related to his documented attempts to obstruct SC Mueller's investigation

There's nothing documented besides "we can't prove he didn't do X", which runs completely counter to proper rules of jurisprudence.

You poor, hapless, deluded kook.

The various attempts by Trump to obstruct the SC Mueller investigation are documented within Volume II, pages 15 -167, pages 224 - 448 of the PDF. https://www.justice.gov/storage/report.pdf

Within that section of the report are at least 10 (documented) attempts by Trump to obstruct Mueller's investigation.

Congress has the responsibility to hold any POTUS accountable for such abuses of power.

I understand you are only seven years old so, I know this stuff is over your head.

You can leave now .............

It's over, fuckface....You bedwetting crackpots lost.

Over....Done....Finis...Terminated.
Grow the fuck up and move on.

It will be over once Congress decides to pursue impeachment, or not to.

Until then, keep up your incessant whining like the three year old you are.

And they won't impeach, as YOUR HOMEY COMEY, Brennan, and Rice, walk the plank! How ya liking that new prosecutor Boseaphus-) (wait, let me add Lynch to that plank)

You can put on a brave face all you want, but if you were smart, you would make a new sock, cause we are going to be laughing you off this board within a month.

Not only that, we are going to be adding your arrogant posts to links, EVERYWHERE; and we thank you for being a bedwetter, who is incompetent, irrelevant, and immaterial...……..and DUMB enough to post it!

IMO I don't believe Congress has the ballz to impeach Trump, even tho' they have the responsibility to do just that.

We shall see ..........

 

[Oddball]

You missed the good part of my quote: Couldn't stand the truth, huh?


Also, If you would have read the report, you would have seen this, from page 213.

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.

Knowing this there is no doubt that the SC was never going to bring any indictment against Trump, and that is beside the OLC consideration that does not allow for the indictment of s sitting POTUS.

You & 99% of everyone in this thread could learn something but you are too fucking bull headed ..........

They determined not to make such a prosecutorial judgement, so they could give insane crackpots like you some last straws to grasp at.

 

[easyt65]

the other member asked a question; I replied

And I asked you a simple question, too, but you won't answer....

You have waited 3 years for Mueller to deliver, for Trump to be Impeached, for Trump to be dragged from the WH in chains...

HOW'S THAT WORKING OUT?

You missed the good part of my quote: Couldn't stand the truth, huh?


Also, If you would have read the report, you would have seen this, from page 213.

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.

Knowing this there is no doubt that the SC was never going to bring any indictment against Trump, and that is beside the OLC consideration that does not allow for the indictment of s sitting POTUS.

You & 99% of everyone in this thread could learn something but you are too fucking bull headed ..........

Forget the BS about not being able to indict a President - there was no real evidence to indict. Prosecutors in the past have not refused to declare if a crime was committed or not. Mueller is not a pu$$y - he CHOSE to make a no-call because he knew there was no evidence to prosecute.

You're talking about a man who withheld evidence to send an innocent man to jail once.

You pricks continue to accuse Trump and GOP what Democrats have already done & protected them from indictment for.
-- Hillary attempted to destroy official / classified SUBPOENAED documents / files, illegally destroyed official subpoenaed devices, SIM cards, and attempted to wipe her hard drive on which they recoovered over 15000 pieces of criminal evidence she attempted to destroy...and you liars and traitor defenders still claim she did nothing illegal....WTF? The only people you try to convince with that BS is yourself es.

You would not know obstruction if Hillary burned a subpoenaed document / cell phone in front of you.....

Of course back to my simple question you still refuse to answer.....how is that 3 years of working out for you?

-The coup failed and was exposed.

- The US AG is now investigating the exposed crimes

- The traitors are turning on each other

- The DC Circuit Court's recent decision proved Nadler and Pelosi demanded the US AG break the law by releasing Grand Jury info them illegally held him in Contempt for refusing to obey their order to break the law.

- Mueller is out of a job

- Trump is still President

 

[Hale]

You missed the good part of my quote: Couldn't stand the truth, huh?


Also, If you would have read the report, you would have seen this, from page 213.

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.

Knowing this there is no doubt that the SC was never going to bring any indictment against Trump, and that is beside the OLC consideration that does not allow for the indictment of s sitting POTUS.

You & 99% of everyone in this thread could learn something but you are too fucking bull headed ..........

You're hanging all your hopes on this sentence...
"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."

But sadly, you're not competent to translate it. Here you go:
"I couldn't find a shred of evidence to prosecute President Trump for anything, but I'm too much of a pussy to admit it. I know I didn't do my job, but at least this way you Dems can try to keep this hoax alive."

 

[M14 Shooter]

That's OK though; I created the thread for those here such as yourself & I didn't expect your brain dead ass to learn a fucking thing from the thread.

Absent a provable crime, what do you suggest Trump be impeached for?

at a minimum, Congress has the responsibility to impeach Trump for his abuse of power as related to his documented attempts to obstruct SC Mueller's investigation

Why do you refuse to understand it isn't possible to prove a corruptible motive and thus, obstruction?

 

[M14 Shooter]

at a minimum, Congress has the responsibility to impeach Trump for his abuse of power as related to his documented attempts to obstruct SC Mueller's investigation

There's nothing documented besides "we can't prove he didn't do X", which runs completely counter to proper rules of jurisprudence.
You poor, hapless, deluded kook.

The various attempts by Trump to obstruct the SC Mueller investigation are documented within Volume II, pages 15 -167, pages 224 - 448 of the PDF. https://www.justice.gov/storage/report.pdf
Within that section of the report are at least 10 (documented) attempts by Trump to obstruct Mueller's investigation.

Why do you refuse to understand it isn't possible to prove a corruptible motive and thus, obstruction?

 

[M14 Shooter]

[
It will be over once Congress decides to pursue impeachment, or not to.

What crime will they impeach him for?

Until then, keep up your incessant whining like the three year old you are.

The only person whining here is you, junior.

 

[bripat9643]

There seems to be some confusion concerning what the SC Mueller report actually contains.

Many here @ USMB seem to love to discuss the Mueller report but it is pretty obvious that 99.99% of the members here that comment on the report have NOT read the report.
I believe we need to set the record straight on a couple of the FACTS within the Mueller report.

I keep hearing members here @ USMB make really stupid statements concerning the Mueller investigation. One of the dumbest implications I constantly hear from USMB members is that there was no crime so, there could be no obstruction. That is complete baloney folks.

If we look at Volume II of the report, page 368 of the PDF, section L., Overarching Factual Issues, we can learn there is precedent law in place that precludes any underlying crime from an obstruction process. Please see the below from page 369 of the PDF of the Mueller report.

U.S. Department of Justice Atter11ey Werk Preettet // May Cetttaitt Material Preteetee U11eer Fee. R . Cril'H. P. 6(e) Second, many obstruction cases involve the attempted or actual cover-up of an underlying crime. Personal criminal conduct can furnish strong evidence that the individual had an improper obstructive purpose, see, e.g. , United States v. Willoughby, 860 F.2d 15, 24 (2d Cir. 1988), or that he contemplated an effect on an official proceeding, see, e.g., United States v. Binday, 804 F.3d 558, 591 (2d Cir. 2015). But proof of such a crime is not an element of an obstruction offense. See United States v. Greer, 872 F.3d 790, 798 (6th Cir. 2017) (stating, in applying the obstruction sentencing guideline, that "obstruction of a criminal investigation is punishable even if the prosecution is ultimately unsuccessful or even if the investigation ultimately reveals no underlying crime"). Obstruction of justice can be motivated by a desire to protect non-criminal personal interests, to protect against investigations where underlying criminal liability falls into a gray area, or to avoid personal embarrassment. The injury to the integrity of the justice system is the same regardless of whether a person committed an underlying wrong.

There you have it folks: No underlying crime need be proven for an obstruction case to be determined, and/or pursued.



Now, on to the next observation. Many members here @ USMB continue to (erroneously) voice that there was NO obstruction by Trump, and/or no attempts by Trump to obstruct the Mueller investigation.
That is COMPLETE BULLSHIT.

The numerous attempts by Trump to obstruct the Mueller investigation can be learned by reading pages 224 to 448 of the PDF.

So, in conclusion, I hope this will help to educate the many here @ USMB that continue to make erroneous claims concerning the Mueller report, Trump’s documented attempts to obstruct the investigation, and the fact that there is NO need to prove any underlying criminal activity to pursue an obstruction case.

https://www.justice.gov/storage/report.pdf

You’re welcome.

No collusion. No obstruction. The Mueller witch hunt is dead. That's all you need to know.

Sent from my SM-N960U1 using USMessageBoard.com mobile app

 

[M14 Shooter]

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.

Because they cannot prove a corruptive motive.
Why do you refuse to understand this?

 

[Muhammed]

There seems to be some confusion concerning what the SC Mueller report actually contains.

Many here @ USMB seem to love to discuss the Mueller report but it is pretty obvious that 99.99% of the members here that comment on the report have NOT read the report.
I believe we need to set the record straight on a couple of the FACTS within the Mueller report.

I keep hearing members here @ USMB make really stupid statements concerning the Mueller investigation. One of the dumbest implications I constantly hear from USMB members is that there was no crime so, there could be no obstruction. That is complete baloney folks.

If we look at Volume II of the report, page 368 of the PDF, section L., Overarching Factual Issues, we can learn there is precedent law in place that precludes any underlying crime from an obstruction process. Please see the below from page 369 of the PDF of the Mueller report.

U.S. Department of Justice Atter11ey Werk Preettet // May Cetttaitt Material Preteetee U11eer Fee. R . Cril'H. P. 6(e) Second, many obstruction cases involve the attempted or actual cover-up of an underlying crime. Personal criminal conduct can furnish strong evidence that the individual had an improper obstructive purpose, see, e.g. , United States v. Willoughby, 860 F.2d 15, 24 (2d Cir. 1988), or that he contemplated an effect on an official proceeding, see, e.g., United States v. Binday, 804 F.3d 558, 591 (2d Cir. 2015). But proof of such a crime is not an element of an obstruction offense. See United States v. Greer, 872 F.3d 790, 798 (6th Cir. 2017) (stating, in applying the obstruction sentencing guideline, that "obstruction of a criminal investigation is punishable even if the prosecution is ultimately unsuccessful or even if the investigation ultimately reveals no underlying crime"). Obstruction of justice can be motivated by a desire to protect non-criminal personal interests, to protect against investigations where underlying criminal liability falls into a gray area, or to avoid personal embarrassment. The injury to the integrity of the justice system is the same regardless of whether a person committed an underlying wrong.

There you have it folks: No underlying crime need be proven for an obstruction case to be determined, and/or pursued.



Now, on to the next observation. Many members here @ USMB continue to (erroneously) voice that there was NO obstruction by Trump, and/or no attempts by Trump to obstruct the Mueller investigation.
That is COMPLETE BULLSHIT.

The numerous attempts by Trump to obstruct the Mueller investigation can be learned by reading pages 224 to 448 of the PDF.

So, in conclusion, I hope this will help to educate the many here @ USMB that continue to make erroneous claims concerning the Mueller report, Trump’s documented attempts to obstruct the investigation, and the fact that there is NO need to prove any underlying criminal activity to pursue an obstruction case.

https://www.justice.gov/storage/report.pdf

You’re welcome.

The [problem with your idiotic analysis is the total lack of any evidence of obstruction, jackass party of slavery supporter.

 

[Stormy Daniels]

You’re beating a decomposed horse. Enough with this shit