Mueller already has Collusion and Obstruction of Justice--he's going after the Trump mob now.

Oreo · Dec 4, 2017

So to-date we have 5 Federal Grand Jury indictments and 2 guilty plea's. And yet still on this board we have the "Lil Baghdad Bob's" all over the place saying "nothing is happening."

What Trump and his surrogates never realised is that they were being watched and electronically monitored by several different FOREIGN intelligence agencies since 2015. Which is why Muellers investigation is moving at the speed of light in comparison to Watergate which took 2 years 7 months before Nixon was forced to resign.

GCHQ first became aware in late 2015 of suspicious “interactions” between figures connected to Trump and known or suspected Russian agents, a source close to UK intelligence said. This intelligence was passed to the US as part of a routine exchange of information, they added.

Over the next six months, until summer 2016, a number of western agencies shared further information on contacts between Trump’s inner circle and Russians, sources said.

The European countries that passed on electronic intelligence – known as sigint – included Germany, Estonia and Poland. Australia, a member of the “Five Eyes” spying alliance that also includes the US, UK, Canada and New Zealand, also relayed material, one source said.

https://www.theguardian.com/uk-news/2017/apr/13/british-spies-first-to-spot-trump-team-links-russia

Shep Smith explains in this Feb. 2017 video that Trump surrogates were on the phone with Russian agents, the day that Russians hacked into DNC databases.

Which is why Trump Jr. couldn't pull off a secret Russian meeting in the Trump tower in June 2016.
https://youtu.be/c4eNf3dBsn4

Trump under investigation for Obstruction of Justice over firing Comey--decided to go on an NBC interview with Lestor Holt and admit that he fired Comey over the Russian investigation. Last week several Republican senators stated that Trump pressured them into dropping the Russian investigation.
https://www.nytimes.com/2017/11/30/us/politics/trump-russia-senate-intel.html?smid=tw-share

There will be many more that are indicted, probably Jerad Kushner who is up to his eyeballs in this, Trump Jr., Jeff Sessions who has lied 3 times under oath, Roger Stone, etc. etc. etc.--and others we may have never have heard of yet.
Attorney General Jeff Sessions may be facing perjury charges. | US Message Board - Political Discussion Forum
Carter Page-Trump campaign adviser-testifies he met with Russian government officials in July 2016. | US Message Board - Political Discussion Forum
http://www.cnn.com/2017/07/24/politics/kushner-russia-statement-trump-denials/index.html

But this hasn't satisfied Mueller yet--he is going after this Russian mob--and it's fairly evident in this video. Recently released court documents on Paul Manafort & Richard Gates.
https://youtu.be/yh-iaP5Sklk

I don't expect Trump to be in office for very much longer, which is probably why Republicans are trying to rush this tax bill through congress.

Captain Adverse · Dec 4, 2017

When Shep Smith gets a law degree I'll pay more attention to his points on the law.

Meanwhile I'll pay more attention to Allen Dershowitz...

...and Ben Shapiro.

Lutherf · Dec 4, 2017

You're going to go blind if you keep whacking it that hard.

Hawkeye10 · Dec 4, 2017

Mueller will get his scalp, that was a known on the day that he was hired to get it.

MovingPictures · Dec 4, 2017

He's the funny thing about the whole scandal.

Trump, Trump Jr, Stone, Kushner, Flynn, Page, Sessions, and Papadopoulos could have just turned over documents, told the truth, and there wouldn't be near the crisis.

Talking to Russian nationals isn't a crime, discussing dirt their government might have isn't a crime either.
I wouldn't even go so far as to say that Trump campaign members knowing the Russian government has hacked material being used to influence the election would be a crime.

But guess what? Once they began concealing the identities of those actors, tried to hide the outreach, and tried to undermine the investigations, they became party to a criminal conspiracy and cover-up.

Mycroft · Dec 4, 2017

Oreo said:
So to-date we have 5 Federal Grand Jury indictments and 2 guilty plea's.[/I]

The only thing this gives you is wishful thinking.

Mycroft · Dec 4, 2017

Hawkeye10 said:
Mueller will get his scalp, that was a known on the day that he was hired to get it.

Too bad it won't be the scalp all the liberals and Trump haters want.

MaggieD · Dec 4, 2017

Oreo said:
So to-date we have 5 Federal Grand Jury indictments and 2 guilty plea's. And yet still on this board we have the "Lil Baghdad Bob's" all over the place saying "nothing is happening."

What Trump and his surrogates never realised is that they were being watched and electronically monitored by several different FOREIGN intelligence agencies since 2015. Which is why Muellers investigation is moving at the speed of light in comparison to Watergate which took 2 years 7 months before Nixon was forced to resign.

https://www.theguardian.com/uk-news/2017/apr/13/british-spies-first-to-spot-trump-team-links-russia

Shep Smith explains in this Feb. 2017 video that Trump surrogates were on the phone with Russian agents, the day that Russians hacked into DNC databases.

Which is why Trump Jr. couldn't pull off a secret Russian meeting in the Trump tower in June 2016.
https://youtu.be/c4eNf3dBsn4

Trump under investigation for Obstruction of Justice over firing Comey--decided to go on an NBC interview with Lestor Holt and admit that he fired Comey over the Russian investigation. Last week several Republican senators stated that Trump pressured them into dropping the Russian investigation.
https://www.nytimes.com/2017/11/30/us/politics/trump-russia-senate-intel.html?smid=tw-share

There will be many more that are indicted, probably Jerad Kushner who is up to his eyeballs in this, Trump Jr., Jeff Sessions who has lied 3 times under oath, Roger Stone, etc. etc. etc.--and others we may have never have heard of yet.
Attorney General Jeff Sessions may be facing perjury charges. | US Message Board - Political Discussion Forum
Carter Page-Trump campaign adviser-testifies he met with Russian government officials in July 2016. | US Message Board - Political Discussion Forum
http://www.cnn.com/2017/07/24/politics/kushner-russia-statement-trump-denials/index.html

But this hasn't satisfied Mueller yet--he is going after this Russian mob--and it's fairly evident in this video. Recently released court documents on Paul Manafort & Richard Gates.
https://youtu.be/yh-iaP5Sklk

I don't expect Trump to be in office for very much longer, which is probably why Republicans are trying to rush this tax bill through congress.

Perhaps the special prosecutor should release more information to Congress. They’re pissed.

MovingPictures · Dec 4, 2017

Captain Adverse said:
When Shep Smith gets a law degree I'll pay more attention to his points on the law.

Meanwhile I'll pay more attention to Allen Dershowitz...

...and Ben Shapiro.

:mrgreen:

Geoist · Dec 4, 2017

MaggieD said:
Perhaps the special prosecutor should release more information to Congress. They’re pissed.

And have them leak the info to the public? Pretty sure Mueller has learned from our lessons of the past.

Hawkeye10 · Dec 4, 2017

Mycroft said:
Too bad it won't be the scalp all the liberals and Trump haters want.

Have you heard me say that America has to be taught our lessons that this is never to be done again, and that it currently looks like the plan once Trump is gone is to ramp up the sadism even more to make sure that the heathens get the message? I could be wrong, I just read a very provocative piece in the December Atlantic suggesting that the Left should be more responsible with the charge of bigotry, that they should lay back a bit, and that maybe just maybe the heathens on the Right would then be willing to come forwards and account for their sins, and get with the program of progress...but I dont expect to see any such laying back once Trump is sent packing, or in the process of sending him on his way. Hurting the people around Trump, those who threw in with this unauthorized event that is the Trump presidency, is going to be part of the lesson I am quite sure.

OldFatGuy · Dec 4, 2017

It seems Mueller is about to be confronted with a skeleton from his own closet. That is the problem with any political 15 minutes of fame, someone else starts checking your game. 8-5 Mueller steps down. A man shouldn't forget the enemies he made to get where he is. Step on someone else, and revenge is a dish best eaten cold.

Captain Adverse · Dec 4, 2017

MovingPictures said:

(Sigh) Do you watch your own video's?

She is offering her opinion. I (a criminal lawyer) disagree with it, and agree with Shapiro and Dershowitz.

In order for there to be obstruction of justice it must fall under one of these three codes:

18 U.S. Code §1503:

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 under which any pending proceeding is being had before any department or agency of the United States...

https://www.justice.gov/usam/crimin...vernment-processes-omnibus-clause-18-usc-1503

The above applies since the investigator was the FBI, not Congress.

18 U.S. Code §1512 (c):

Whoever corruptly—

(1)alters, destroys, mutilates, or conceals a record, document, or other object, or attempts to do so, with the intent to impair the object’s integrity or availability for use in an official proceeding; or

(2)otherwise obstructs, influences, or impedes any official proceeding, or attempts to do so...

Again, there must be an official proceeding.

Definition of "Official Proceeding":

According to 18 USCS § 1515 [title 18. Crimes and Criminal Procedure; Part I. Crimes; Chapter 73. Obstruction of Justice], the term "official proceeding" means--

“(A) a proceeding before a judge or court of the United States, a United States magistrate [United States magistrate judge], a bankruptcy judge, a judge of the United States Tax Court, a special trial judge of the Tax Court, a judge of the United States Claims Court [United States Court of Federal Claims], or a Federal grand jury;

(B) a proceeding before the Congress;

(C) a proceeding before a Federal Government agency which is authorized by law;

Mueller's investigation is an "Official Proceeding," acting as a Special Prosecutor appointed by the Justice Dept. Interference would be violation of 18 U.S. Code §1503 and §1512.

Comey's investigation was not an "Official Proceeding," any more than any other law enforcement investigation into an alleged crime. Therefore the President could legally order him to cease. NO violation of either Code.

NOTE: At worst, by Comey's own testimony, President Trump only asked him if he would drop the Flynn thing.

Comey wasn't fired until three months later.

18 U.S. Code § 1519:

Whoever knowingly alters, destroys, mutilates, conceals, covers up, falsifies, or makes a false entry in any record, document, or tangible object with the intent to impede, obstruct, or influence the investigation or proper administration of any matter within the jurisdiction of any department or agency of the United States or any case filed under title 11, or in relation to or contemplation of any such matter or case...

https://www.law.cornell.edu/uscode/text/18/1519

There is no evidence of destruction of evidence.

Soooo, where is the obstruction of justice???

But I'll give you points for at least getting a lawyer involved.

MovingPictures · Dec 4, 2017

Captain Adverse said:
(Sigh) Do you watch your own video's?

Do you watch your?

She is offering her opinion. I (a criminal lawyer) disagree with it, and agree with Shapiro and Dershowitz.

Well that settles it!

Listen everybody: this guy says he's a criminal lawyer, and he doesn't think Trump committed obstruction. You can all stop talking about this now.

Soooo, where is the obstruction of justice???

What would be the point in me arguing about it with you? You're just going to say nothing I present meets your standards, so **** it.

Captain Adverse · Dec 4, 2017

MovingPictures said:
Do you watch your?

Well that settles it!

Listen everybody: this guy says he's a criminal lawyer, and he doesn't think Trump committed obstruction. You can all stop talking about this now.

What would be the point in me arguing about it with you? You're just going to say nothing I present meets your standards, so **** it.

Sorry, I didn't have time to correct my post to add why I disagreed.

She was conflating an investigation by the Watergate Special Prosecutor, who subpoenaed evidence in an ongoing criminal investigation authorized by Congress with the FBI investigation prior to the appointment of Special Counsel in the Trump issue.

Nixon's action in response IS obstruction under the U.S. Codes I cited in my reply. Comey's firing and any lies to FBI investigators? Not so much. :shrug:

I am not arguing from authority...I am presenting the FACTS with citation to LAW.

If you can't see the difference? Take some logic and debate courses. :shrug:

MovingPictures · Dec 4, 2017

#TotallyNotObstruction

TRUMP TRIED TO CONVINCE NSA CHIEF TO ABSOLVE HIM OF ANY RUSSIAN COLLUSION: REPORT

Trump Tried to Convince NSA Chief to Absolve Him of Any Russian Collusion: Report

A recent National Security Agency memo documents a phone call in which U.S. President Donald Trump pressures agency chief Admiral Mike Rogers to state publicly that there is no evidence of collusion between his campaign and Russia, say reports.

The memo was written by Rick Ledgett, the former deputy director of the NSA, sources familiar with the memo told The Wall Street Journal. Ledgett stepped down from his job this spring.

The memo said Trump questioned the American intelligence community findings that Russia interfered in the 2016 election. American intelligence agencies issued a report early this year that found Russian intelligence agencies hacked the country’s political parties and worked to sway the election to Trump.

Donald Trump asked US Director of National Intelligence Daniel Coats to intervene in Russia probe, say officials

Donald Trump asked US Director of National Intelligence Daniel Coats to intervene in Russia probe, say officials | The Independent

The nation's top intelligence official told associates in March that President Donald Trump asked him if he could intervene with then-FBI Director James Comey to get the bureau to back off its focus on former national security adviser Michael Flynn in its Russia probe, according to officials.

On 22 March, less than a week after being confirmed by the Senate, Director of National Intelligence Daniel Coats attended a briefing at the White House together with officials from several government agencies. As the briefing was wrapping up, Trump asked everyone to leave the room except for Coats and CIA Director Mike Pompeo.

The President then started complaining about the FBI investigation and Comey's handling of it, said officials familiar with the account Coats gave to associates. Two days earlier, Comey had confirmed in a congressional hearing that the bureau was probing whether Trump's campaign coordinated with Russia during the 2016 race.

MovingPictures · Dec 4, 2017

Captain Adverse said:
Sorry, I didn't have time to correct my post.

She was conflating an investigation by the Watergate Special Prosecutor, who subpoenaed evidence in an ongoing criminal investigation authorized by Congress.

That IS obstruction under the U.S. Codes I cited in my reply.

I am not arguing from authority...I am presenting the FACTS with citation to LAW.

If you can't see the difference? Take some logic and debate courses. :shrug:

You're becoming a source of comedy.

Trump has asked three separate heads of intelligence departments to publicly exonerate and clear him of any wrong doing, and used his presidential authority as leverage in these discussions. Better still, he publicly ADMITTED that the reason he fired James Comey was due to him not clearing his name in the FBI investigation publicly.

Worse than that, he admits to knowing about Flynn's criminal background, which corroborates Comey's testimony. And we have both Coats and Rogers stating that the same requests made to Comey, were also made to them.

Then there's the cherry on top, which is his drafting of his sons public false statements on the Trump Tower meeting, and his open intimidation of Sally Yates and Comey on Twitter.

Can you seriously not understand how that's obstruction, witness tampering/intimidation, and abuse power? If you can't, maybe you should go back to law school.

Captain Adverse · Dec 4, 2017

MovingPictures said:
You're becoming a source of comedy.

Trump has asked three separate heads of intelligence departments to publicly exonerate and clear him of any wrong doing, and used his presidential authority as leverage in these discussions. Better still, he publicly ADMITTED that the reason he fired James Comey was due to him not clearing his name in the FBI investigation publicly.

Worse than that, he admits to knowing about Flynn's criminal background, which corroborates Comey's testimony. And we have both Coats and Rogers stating that the same requests made to Comey, were also made to them.

Then there's the cherry on top, which is his drafting of his sons public false statements on the Trump Tower meeting, and his open intimidation of Sally Yates and Comey on Twitter.

Can you seriously not understand how that's obstruction, witness tampering/intimidation, and abuse power? If you can't, maybe you should go back to law school.

1. ASKED is not "ORDERED." He has every right to ask his dept. heads to clear him if they have no evidence of wrongdoing.

2. What "criminal background?" What crime was Flynn convicted of prior to his recent admission to a count of lying to the FBI? Lying about something that was perfectly legal at the time btw.

3. "Drafting" statements? "Open intimidation?" (Which is all in how one looks at the evidence.) :roll:

All either perfectly legal or basic non-issues, and no evidence of obstruction.

Try again. :coffeepap:

Mr Person · Dec 4, 2017

Captain Adverse said:
When Shep Smith gets a law degree I'll pay more attention to his points on the law.

Meanwhile I'll pay more attention to Allen Dershowitz...

...and Ben Shapiro.

Whoosh...

The President almost certainly cannot be charged in criminal court while sitting. He can most certainly be impeached while sitting. And the fact that he cannot be charged criminally while sitting does not bar him from being impeached for precisely the same misconduct.

So Dershowitz's point is true but irrelevant. Nobody needs to charge Trump in federal court. As long as the info is out, the decision on impeachment can be made. After removal, he can be charged. There's no double jeopardy issue because impeachment is a political, not criminal, process.

[Edit: Oh right, and because of that, not only do they need not convict on proof beyond a reasonable doubt, they don't even need to prove every bloody element. They could convict him for stupid hair so long as they'd be willing to face electoral consequences. There is no review of conviction on articles of impeachment]

Whether the congressional GOPers can find a scruple between them is another matter.

And before you get smug, yeah, I've kind of fulfilled the requirement you layed down for Shep already. A coffeepap won't make either that or my points incorrect.

Meanwhile, the OP is about the people around Trump, who most certainly can be charged with federal crimes.

MovingPictures · Dec 4, 2017

Captain Adverse said:
All perfectly legal and no evidence of obstruction.

Try again. :coffeepap:

No thanks, I don't wish waste my time with you anymore.

Trump could write "I'm guilty" in the sky, and you'd still not believe it.

MrShangles · Dec 4, 2017

MovingPictures said:
You're becoming a source of comedy.

Trump has asked three separate heads of intelligence departments to publicly exonerate and clear him of any wrong doing, and used his presidential authority as leverage in these discussions. Better still, he publicly ADMITTED that the reason he fired James Comey was due to him not clearing his name in the FBI investigation publicly.

Worse than that, he admits to knowing about Flynn's criminal background, which corroborates Comey's testimony. And we have both Coats and Rogers stating that the same requests made to Comey, were also made to them.

Then there's the cherry on top, which is his drafting of his sons public false statements on the Trump Tower meeting, and his open intimidation of Sally Yates and Comey on Twitter.

Can you seriously not understand how that's obstruction, witness tampering/intimidation, and abuse power? If you can't, maybe you should go back to law school.

Can the president be charged with obstruction, he is the top law man. He could just pardon folks, he could stop the investigation, but he hasn’t.

Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

Captain Adverse · Dec 4, 2017

MovingPictures said:
No thanks, I don't wish waste my time with you anymore.

Trump could write "I'm guilty" in the sky, and you'd still not believe it.

I accept your surrender.

Meanwhile, I bet you'd wish you had a defense attorney with my frame of mind. :lamo

MovingPictures · Dec 4, 2017

Captain Adverse said:
I accept your surrender.

Meanwhile, I bet you'd wish you had a defense attorney with my frame of mind. :lamo

If I ever desire going to jail, I'll give you a call.

SonOfDaedalus · Dec 4, 2017

Captain Adverse said:
When Shep Smith gets a law degree I'll pay more attention to his points on the law.

Meanwhile I'll pay more attention to Allen Dershowitz...

If Obama had asked Comey to stop investigating Hillary and then fired him you and Dershowitz are saying that would have been perfectly legal.

You're advocating to give the president unlimited power to commit crimes and cover them up.

Mr Person · Dec 4, 2017

MrShangles said:
Can the president be charged with obstruction, he is the top law man. He could just pardon folks, he could stop the investigation, but he hasn’t.

Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

It isn't simply about being the top law man. Although nothing prohibits it and there is no court decision on it, every indication is that the framers did not intend a sitting President to be subject to criminal charges.

However, he can be impeached. That was the intended framework. Impeachment does not come with the protections a criminal defendant "enjoys".

So the only sense in which some people have a point is that he cannot be indicted, arrested, and hauled off to jail. But he's not out of hot water by any measure. And Mueller can most certainly chase the people around him.

He needs to calculate what it's worth to pardon people AND what that might mean for congress critters deciding whether the pardon is evidence of obstruction. Does that sound weird? Maybe but that's our system. Even if he constitutionally can pardon, they could in fact impeach him and rely on evidence of pardons, among other evidence. Because again, there's no judicial review of conviction on articles of impeachment.

They don't need any evidence. All that matters, for better or worse, is how they think the voters will react.

Mueller already has Collusion and Obstruction of Justice--he's going after the Trump mob now.

Well-known member

Classical Liberal Sage

Buttermilk Man

WE'LL DO IT LIVE!

Genius is where you find it.

Genius is where you find it.

WE'LL DO IT LIVE!

Buttermilk Man

Classical Liberal Sage

WE'LL DO IT LIVE!

Classical Liberal Sage

WE'LL DO IT LIVE!

WE'LL DO IT LIVE!

Classical Liberal Sage

A Little Bitter

WE'LL DO IT LIVE!

Classical Liberal Sage

WE'LL DO IT LIVE!

A Little Bitter