He couldn't hinder it because none of the people he told to do so agreed to do it.
Telling someone to obstruct justice is still a crime, even if they don't end up doing it.
That's what you don't seem to understand.
"Did you actually totally exonerate the President? No."
- Thread starter LV426
- Start date
He couldn't hinder it because none of the people he told to do so agreed to do it.
Telling someone to obstruct justice is still a crime, even if they don't end up doing it.
That's what you don't seem to understand.
Teflon Don
I'm back baby
He did not say that. You lie
That was a quote you Moron, he said he didn't not charge him because of the OLC you mook.
If it is so evident why aren't your Socialist prick party impeaching him? Because there is no impeachable offenses. Get on the hook with Nancy and demand she start the proceedings you imbecile!
You are a lying sack of crap you want me to stop pay me a visit and make me you absolute mental disorder
Can't defend the content of what was revealed yesterday, so instead you're daring us to act.
Let's say we do impeach him, how is he going to defend himself...how are Conservatives going to defend him, given Mueller said he didn't indict because of OLC guidelines?
Please refrain from telling us what you had for breakfast.
You first. Be the leader.
Buck’s reaction was hilarious, to me, he didn’t get the answer he was expecting.
You just thanked LV426 when he told a poster to kill himself.
You must be a lowlife slug to do that, Snowflake.
They did not do that. They all pointed out that Trump can be nailed the day he is out of office. He was not exonerated and there were 10 incidents of Trump obstruction. Mueller did not provide a killing blow as many hoped, but he chopped up Trump and his minions into small pieces. Mueller made it clear he was staying within the report. The left was disappointed that he did not expand the report. However, many who did not read the report and rightys who did not understand it , were shown the foulness of Trump and his people.
Teflon Don
I'm back baby
Sounds like Cuntsly Pelosi has all she needs to bring impeachment proceedings. What do you think she is waiting on?
Your response here is a goalpost shift.
You've given up on defending Trump in good faith because you know he's guilty of this shit.
You tried the tactic of just pretending you never read or heard what happened, and when that tactic failed, you tried a different one where you just called video tape and actual quotes "lies."
Now, you are at this point...where you are basically daring action. But if your bluff is called, what is your next move? Mass shooting.
PostmodernProphet
fully immersed in faith..
true......but if you stupid fucks start behaving yourself, we may forgive you.....
Sure can.
“Fourth, if we had confidence after a thorough investigation of the facts that the President clearly did not commit obstruction of justice, we would so state. Based on the facts and the applicable legal standards, however, we are unable to reach that judgment. The evidence we obtained about the President’s actions and intent presents difficult issues that prevent us from conclusively determining that no criminal conduct occurred. Accordingly, while this report does not conclude that the President committed a crime, it also does not exonerate him.
“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.” 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.
Fourth, if we had confidence after a thorough investigation of the facts that the President clearly did not commit obstruction of justice, we would so state. Based on the facts and the applicable legal standards, however, we are unable to reach that judgment. The evidence we obtained about the President’s actions and intent presents difficult issues that prevent us from conclusively determining that no criminal conduct occurred. Accordingly, while this report does not conclude that the President committed a crime, it also does not exonerate him.”
Mueller says:
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.” 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.
And if individuals other than the President committed an obstruction offense, they may be prosecuted at this time. Given those considerations, the facts known to us, and the strong public interest in safeguarding the integrity of the criminal justice system, we conducted a thorough factual investigation in order to preserve the evidence when memories were fresh and documentary materials were available.
Third, we considered whether to evaluate the conduct we investigated under the Justice Manual standards governing prosecution and declination decisions, but we determined not to apply an approach that could potentially result in a judgment that the President committed crimes. The threshold step under the Justice Manual standards is to assess whether a person’s conduct “constitutes a federal offense.” U.S. Dep’t of Justice, Justice Manual § 9-27.220 (2018) (Justice Manual). Fairness concerns counseled against potentially reaching that judgment when no charges can be brought. The ordinary means for an individual to respond to an accusation is through a speedy and public trial, with all the procedural protections that surround a criminal case. An individual who believes he was wrongly accused can use that process to seek to clear his name. In contrast, a prosecutor’s judgment that crimes were committed, but that no charges will be brought, affords no such adversarial opportunity for public name-clearing before an impartial adjudicator.
The concerns about the fairness of such a determination would be heightened in the case of a sitting President, where a federal prosecutor’s accusation of a crime, even in an internal report, could carry consequences that extend beyond the realm of criminal justice. OLC noted similar concerns about sealed indictments. Even if an indictment were sealed during the President’s term, OLC reasoned, “it would be very difficult to preserve [an indictment’s] secrecy,” and if an indictment became public, “[t]he stigma and opprobrium” could imperil the President’s ability to govern.” Although a prosecutor’s internal report would not represent a formal public accusation akin to an indictment, the possibility of the report’s public disclosure and the absence of a neutral adjudicatory forum to review its findings counseled against potentially determining “that the person’s conduct constitutes a federal offense.” Justice Manual § 9-27.220.
Fourth, if we had confidence after a thorough investigation of the facts that the President clearly did not commit obstruction of justice, we would so state. Based on the facts and the applicable legal standards, however, we are unable to reach that judgment. The evidence we obtained about the President’s actions and intent presents difficult issues that prevent us from conclusively determining that no criminal conduct occurred. Accordingly, while this report does not conclude that the President committed a crime, it also does not exonerate him.