What The Mueller Report ACTUALLY States

[Wry Catcher]

Colluded: cooperate in a secret or unlawful way in order to deceive or gain an advantage over others.
Conspiracy: a secret plan by a group to do something unlawful or harmful; the action of plotting or conspiring.

Mueller: The investigation did not establish that the Trump Campaign coordinated with the Russian government in its election interference activities.

You lost. Suck it up, buttercup.

That said, I see you didn't address the issue of motive where obstruction is concerned.
Why?

Opportunity and means are easily understood when Trump's Tweets (the media reports on his every tweet=) and broadcast his every comments. Motive is obvious, he knows he is guilty.

 

[Wry Catcher]

That is quite telling when a Republican refers to over 220 pages of the Mueller report that documents at least 10 attempts by Trump to obstruct the Mueller investigation as "fantasy"

Mueller understood obstruction only exists if intent can be proven -- and he could not prove intent.
Why do you refuse to understand this?

Yes, it's obvious now that Nunes is referring to the Mueller report as the Mueller dossier & fantasy, a document the GOP talking heads has already declared DOA, that the GOP is becoming desperate because they know Congress is gonna ream Trump's lying, obstructing ass.

LOFL ...................

I really hope Nunes is indicted for obstruction of justice and witness tampering.

 

[Oddball]

That is quite telling when a Republican refers to over 220 pages of the Mueller report that documents at least 10 attempts by Trump to obstruct the Mueller investigation as "fantasy"

Mueller understood obstruction only exists if intent can be proven -- and he could not prove intent.
Why do you refuse to understand this?

Yes, it's obvious now that Nunes is referring to the Mueller report as the Mueller dossier & fantasy, a document the GOP talking heads has already declared DOA, that the GOP is becoming desperate because they know Congress is gonna ream Trump's lying, obstructing ass.

LOFL ...................

I really hope Nunes is indicted for obstruction of justice and witness tampering.

 

[SmokeALib]

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.

Who gives a shit.

 

[basquebromance]

Mueller is gonna get Trump re-elected, more than any other person in the world!

 

[Faun]

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

Federal laws states:

18 U.S. Code § 1505.
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 and proper administration of the law...
18 U.S. Code § 1505 - Obstruction of proceedings before departments, agencies, and committees

For obstruction to exist, the motive for the claimed obstruction must be "corrupt".
For a conviction of obstruction, the prosecutor must prove said motive was "corrupt".
Trump knew the Mueller investigation would find nothing on collusion with Russia; the Trump administration cooperated with the Mueller investigation in innumerable ways.

Prove Trump's motives were corrupt..

You don't know the meaning of the word, "OR," do ya, Spunky?

 

[Faun]

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.

Thank you for attempting to educate the illiterate low IQ cons.

One can lead a Trumper to enlightenment but one cannot force a Trumper to flee the cave of stupidity ........

Did Mueller find any snitches or tattle tales?

Flynn.

 

[Cellblock2429]

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.

/——-/ Give it up ham bone. You clowns got nothing. Bwhahahaha Bwhahahaha

 

[Jantje_Smit]

..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....

Sounds reasonable, the #resistance didn't need to prove the underlying vast Russian conspiracy either to pursue the Mueller inquisition.... and I kind of miss the daily breaking bombshells that promise the downfall of individual 1...

You’re welcome.

Comedy is always appreciated, most people are taking the swamp circus much too seriously... thanks for the laugh

 

[CowboyTed]

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

Federal laws states:

18 U.S. Code § 1505.
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 and proper administration of the law...
18 U.S. Code § 1505 - Obstruction of proceedings before departments, agencies, and committees

For obstruction to exist, the motive for the claimed obstruction must be "corrupt".
For a conviction of obstruction, the prosecutor must prove said motive was "corrupt".
Trump knew the Mueller investigation would find nothing on collusion with Russia; the Trump administration cooperated with the Mueller investigation in innumerable ways.

Prove Trump's motives were corrupt..

He said it... He clearly said he fired Comey over the 'Russian Thing'... He clearly said he did not fire Comey for his job performance...

 

[georgephillip]

View attachment 261228

Better catch up on your reading:

The Latest: Judge orders parts of Mueller report unredacted

"WASHINGTON — The Latest on former White House national security adviser Michael Flynn (all times local):

"6:55 p.m.

"A federal judge has ordered portions of special counsel Robert Mueller's report to be unredacted and made public in the criminal case against former national security adviser Michael Flynn.

"U.S. District Judge Emmet Sullivan issued the limited order Thursday. Portions of the report relating to Flynn are redacted and would be made public under the order.

"It is the first time a federal judge has ordered the Justice Department to make public portions of the report the agency had kept secret."

Read the Mueller Report: Searchable Document and Index

You best get your resume to Fat Jerry, so you can tell him of all their very important nuances in the law you've discovered...Your country needs you, Corky!

You best get your resume to Fat Jerry, so you can tell him of all their very important nuances in the law you've discovered...Your country needs you, Corky!

You and "Bone Spurs" better brush up on your Russian, Comrade.

"In a filing attached to his sentencing memorandum, federal prosecutors said Flynn 'informed the government of multiple instances, both before and after his guilty plea, where either he or his attorneys received communications from persons connected to the Administration or Congress that could have affected both his willingness to cooperate and the completeness of that cooperation.'"

Flynn Told Mueller About Trump Efforts To Obstruct Probe, Provided Evidence: Court Filing

 

[Jantje_Smit]

.."In a filing attached to his sentencing memorandum, federal prosecutors said Flynn 'informed the government of multiple instances, both before and after his guilty plea, where either he or his attorneys received communications from persons connected to the Administration or Congress that could have affected both his willingness to cooperate and the completeness of that cooperation.'"

The Guardians of Democracy???

We got him for sure now...

 

[georgephillip]

.."In a filing attached to his sentencing memorandum, federal prosecutors said Flynn 'informed the government of multiple instances, both before and after his guilty plea, where either he or his attorneys received communications from persons connected to the Administration or Congress that could have affected both his willingness to cooperate and the completeness of that cooperation.'"

The Guardians of Democracy???

We got him for sure now...

The Guardians of Democracy???

We got him for sure now...

Feel free to point any inaccuracies in my link if you can find them.

Flynn Told Mueller About Trump Efforts To Obstruct Probe, Provided Evidence: Court Filing

"The former national security advisor provided the special counsel’s office with a voicemail recording of a member of the Trump administration reaching out to Flynn and his lawyers while he was cooperating with Mueller, reports CNN."

 

[caddo kid]

That is quite telling when a Republican refers to over 220 pages of the Mueller report that documents at least 10 attempts by Trump to obstruct the Mueller investigation as "fantasy"

Mueller understood obstruction only exists if intent can be proven -- and he could not prove intent.
Why do you refuse to understand this?

Yes, it's obvious now that Nunes is referring to the Mueller report as the Mueller dossier & fantasy, a document the GOP talking heads has already declared DOA, that the GOP is becoming desperate because they know Congress is gonna ream Trump's lying, obstructing ass.

LOFL ...................

I really hope Nunes is indicted for obstruction of justice and witness tampering.

It states members of Congress contacted Flynn in attempts to influence his position in regard to the Mueller investigation.

The question begs: If Trump & his associates were innocent of any conspiracy with any Russian persons, why did these people act like they were guilty?

 

[caddo kid]

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.

Who gives a shit.

You obviously give a shit because you replied, jack ass

 

[Bootney Lee Farnsworth]

Congress most certainly has PLENTY reason to impeach the asshole; pay attention

What are those dumbasses waiting on?

Get on it.

.

I would say at a minimum they would like Mueller himself to extrapolate his opinion of the report before committee.

Of course other factors are required but Mueller's own testimony would be a minimum requirement, IMO.

Then, tell those fucking idiots in the Democrat party to quit masturbating in front of the world and get his testimony on record, so they can start their dumb ass, useless impeachment process and lose the 2020 election.

Please, for the sake of our nation, try to impeach him so you will never have power again. You fucking commies.

 

[caddo kid]

Congress most certainly has PLENTY reason to impeach the asshole; pay attention

What are those dumbasses waiting on?

Get on it.

.

I would say at a minimum they would like Mueller himself to extrapolate his opinion of the report before committee.

Of course other factors are required but Mueller's own testimony would be a minimum requirement, IMO.

Jen, tell those fucking idiots in the Democrat party to quit masturbating in front of the world and get his testimony on record, so they can start their dumb ass useless impeachment process and lose the 2020 election.

Please, for the sake of our nation, try to impeach him so you will never have power again. You fucking commies.

So, you, along with many others, hate the fact that The Constitution requires Congress to be a check on the executive.

Just go ahead and tell everyone here that you really hate OUR Constitution.

That IS your implication, that you HATE The Constitution.

 

[Bootney Lee Farnsworth]

You fucking pussies have gotten nothing.

All of the shit is the Hail Mary of Hail Marys.

Your communist bullshit sucks and nobody wants it. Go fucking kill yourselves please.


.

 

[Bootney Lee Farnsworth]

So, you, along with many others, hate the fact that The Constitution requires Congress to be a check on the executive.

Just go ahead and tell everyone here that you really hate OUR Constitution.

That IS your implication, that you HATE The Constitution.

Where did I say don't do it?

I said do it, you fucking idiot.

You're the pussies who don't like the constitution, because you won't accept a duly elected president.

Impeach or shut your pussy mouth.

.

 

[caddo kid]

So, you, along with many others, hate the fact that The Constitution requires Congress to be a check on the executive.

Just go ahead and tell everyone here that you really hate OUR Constitution.

That IS your implication, that you HATE The Constitution.

Where did I say don't do it?

I said do it, you fucking idiot.

You're the pussies who don't like the constitution, because you won't accept a duly elected president.

Impeach or shut your pussy mouth.

.

I bet you were screaming the same bloviation of utter bullshit when Nixon was threatened with impeachment & resigned, and when Clinton was impeached, right. LOFL, you fucking loser ..............