- My Forums
- Tiger Rant
- LSU Recruiting
- SEC Rant
- Saints Talk
- Pelicans Talk
- More Sports Board
- Fantasy Sports
- Golf Board
- Soccer Board
- O-T Lounge
- Tech Board
- Home/Garden Board
- Outdoor Board
- Health/Fitness Board
- Movie/TV Board
- Book Board
- Music Board
- Political Talk
- Money Talk
- Fark Board
- Gaming Board
- Travel Board
- Food/Drink Board
- Ticket Exchange
- TD Help Board
Customize My Forums- View All Forums
- Show Left Links
- Topic Sort Options
- Trending Topics
- Recent Topics
- Active Topics
Started By
Message
re: Mueller: Trump is still under investigation but not a criminal target
Posted on 4/4/18 at 10:04 am to Decatur
Posted on 4/4/18 at 10:04 am to Decatur
quote:
Well that’s why I added the hypothetical tweet basically admitting he’s trying to shut down an investigation that includes a piece focused on him. Kinda assuming corrupt intent here.
Incorrect, because if he just says "this is a waste of time, end it" that's not criminal intent. You would have to PROVE that Trump did it in attempt to cover up a crime.
in other words, suppose Mueller found proof that Trump had an affair and Trump had him fired in an attempt to keep that information from being made public. Well, having an affair isn't' illegal, so having Mueller fired is within Trump's legal authority AND there is no question of legality about having an affair so firing the guy to cover that up simply isn't an obstruction.
The obstruction laws are very complicated, and with good reason. I mean would you want to cops get charged with obstruction of justice if they stopped someone for speeding, but didn't write a ticket, for example?
Posted on 4/4/18 at 10:05 am to Decatur
quote:
FBI has a counterintelligence mission as well.
Of course ,but Mueller is running a CRIMINAL investigation. Allegedly.
Posted on 4/4/18 at 10:09 am to HeyHeyHogsAllTheWay
quote:
Trump's civil rights , and those of people around him, have been violated here
This investigation was launched by his own hand picked deputy AG after Trump's own hand picked AG-campaign member lied about his contacts with Russians and also lied about knowing about others' contacts with Russians.
Trump's just going to have to deal with it
This post was edited on 4/4/18 at 10:11 am
Posted on 4/4/18 at 10:11 am to Vacherie Saint
quote:Where is he? Been 17 days since he last smeared, er.. posted here.
NT74 melt squad: [engaged] disengaged
Posted on 4/4/18 at 10:12 am to HubbaBubba
He could be embedded with the Honduran marchers and unable to text
Posted on 4/4/18 at 10:13 am to HeyHeyHogsAllTheWay
quote:
There will be no obstruction of justice charges lol Trump has every legal right to do everything he did in regard to this investigation. He could fire Rod Rosenstein today, announce it was so he could replace him with someone who would fire Bob Mueller and that still wouldn't be obstruction of justice, because the POTUS has every right to fire Rosenstein and you would have a hard time proving he had intent to cover up a crime.
quote:
Article I
In his conduct of the office of the President of the United States, Richard M. Nixon, in violation of his constitutional oath faithfully to execute the office of President ofthe United States and, to the best of his ability, preserve, protect, and defend the Constitution of the United States, and in violation of his constitutional duty to take care that the laws be faithfully executed, has prevented, obstructed, and impeded the administration of justice, in that: On June 17, 1972, and prior thereto, agents of the Committee for the Re-Election of the President committed unlawful entry of the headquarters of the Democratic National Committee in Washington, District of Columbia, for the purpose of securing political intelligence. Subsequent thereto, Richard M. Nixon, using the powers of his high office, engaged personally and through his subordinates and agents, in a course of conduct or plan designed to delay, impede and obstruct investigations of such unlawful entry; to cover up, conceal and protect those responsible; and to conceal the existence and scope of other unlawful covert activities.
The means used to implement this course of conduct or plan have included one or more of the following:
(1) making or causing to be made false or misleading statements to lawfully authorized investigative officers and employees of the United States;
(2) withholding relevant and material evidence or information from lawfully authorized investigative officers and employees of the United States;
(3) approving, condoning, acquiescing in, and counseling witnesses with respect to the giving of false or misleading statements to lawfully authorized investigative officers and employees of the United States and false or misleading testimony in duly instituted judicial and congressional proceedings;
(4) interfering or endeavoring to interfere with the conduct of investigations by the Department of Justice of the United States, the Federal Bureau of Investigation, the Office of Watergate Special Prosecution Force and Congressional Committees;
(5) approving, condoning, and acquiescing in, the surreptitious payments of substantial sums of money for the purpose of obtaining the silence or influencing the testimony of witnesses, potential witnesses or individuals who participated in such unlawful entry and other illegal activities;
(6) endeavoring to misuse the Central Intelligence Agency, an agency of the United States;
(7) disseminating information received from officers of the Department of Justice of the United States to subjects of investigations conducted by lawfully authorized investigative officers and employees of the United States for the purpose of aiding and assisting such subjects in their attempts to avoid criminal liability;
(8) making false or misleadingpublic statements for the purpose of deceiving the veople of the United States into believing that a thorough and complete
..--
investigation has been conducted with respect to allegation of misconduct on the Dart of personnel of the Executive Branch of the United States and personnel of the commiitee forthe Re-Election of the President, and that there was'no involvement of such personnel in such misconduct; or
(9) endeavoring to cause prospective defendants, and individuals duly tried and convicted, to expect favored treatment and consideration in return for their silence or false testimony, or rewarding individuals for their silence or false testimony.
In all of this, Richard M. Nixon has acted in a manner contrary to his trust as President and subversive of constitutional government, to the great prejudice of the cause of law and justice and to the manifest injury of the people of the United States.
Wherefore Richard M. Nixon, by such conduct, warrants impeachment and trial, and removal from office. (Approvedby the House Judicary Committee, July 30, 1974, 27 to 11.)
We as a nation levy a broad level of power and trust to an elected president, a scope and reach unlike any other office in our government. And we give him wide deference to execute those responsibilities. As such, many constitutional scholars do not even believe a sitting president can be prosecuted criminally in a criminal court while in office. For any crime.
HOWEVER, and the framers of the constitution were very clear on this, that does not mean the president is above the law or above justice. It is just that the recourse for justice when it comes to a sitting president is not conducted through the criminal courts, but through the legislature. And this is done for very specific reasons. For as the founders rightfully saw, a corrupt government could simply corrupt the courts in a way to make any abuse of power technically legal.
Legality and authority are not immunizations from abuse of power.
Richard Nixon learned this lesson the hard way. Trump has seemingly not learned this lesson, nor many of his ardent followers. The question before us is not whether obstruction of justice is grounds for removal from office, the precedent on that is already crystal clear, the question is whether the Mueller team believes there is a similar preponderance of evidence to draw that conclusion and recommend such steps be taken.
.
This post was edited on 4/4/18 at 10:14 am
Posted on 4/4/18 at 10:14 am to ItsMuellerTime
Decatur nice alter name.
Posted on 4/4/18 at 10:14 am to JuiceTerry
quote:
Trump lied about his campaign and contacts with Russians. His campaign staff lied about contacts with Russians. Trump admitted to firing the FBI director because he was investigating these things.
This investigation was launched by his own hand picked deputy AG after Trump's own hand picked AG-campaign member lied about his contacts with Russians and also lied about knowing about others' contacts with Russians.
Trump's just going to have to deal with it
Did you really just attempt to justify a fellow American's civil rights being violated by the government?
What an ignorant excuse of a human being you are.
Posted on 4/4/18 at 10:14 am to ItsMuellerTime
More to this case:
On the left, I think people are not giving enough respect for how hard it will be to prove intent. Which Mueller clearly finds necessary to make a final determination on recommendations and conclusions with regards to this part of the investigation. As evidenced in Mueller asserting why he wants an interview with Trump in the Washington Post piece. As a side note to this, this is also seemingly a final straw of why Dowd quit. Dowd thinks the mix of Trump’s undisciplined and poorly focused demeanor would all but put him in legal jeopardy if Trump acquiesces to Mueller’s request for a sit down interview. He seemingly tried but failed to impress upon the president that just because you are not a target at this moment for obstruction, that can change very fast. That Mueller may just be calling you a subject simply because he agrees with court precedent that a president can’t be a criminal target. A technicality without the clearance space he is perceiving.
On the right, there is a ton of willful ignorance to the level of evidence we do have at this point. From Trump firing Comey and admiting on national tv he was thinking about the Russia investigation when he did it. The next day bragging to Lavrov how he perceived that took pressure off himself from the Russia investigation by firing Fomey. To the reported threats of firing Mueller last summer, Trump and his lawyers reportedly floating the idea of pardons to get people to not flip(which could be witness tampering). To Trump demanding not to and furious over Sessions recusing himself because he wanted him to protect him(run interference basically). The infamous tweet that came from Trump’s account(that his lawyer tried to take ownership of) that stated foreknowledge of Flynn’s crimes and lying to the FBI before he asked Comey to drop the investigation. And those are just some highlights
On the left, I think people are not giving enough respect for how hard it will be to prove intent. Which Mueller clearly finds necessary to make a final determination on recommendations and conclusions with regards to this part of the investigation. As evidenced in Mueller asserting why he wants an interview with Trump in the Washington Post piece. As a side note to this, this is also seemingly a final straw of why Dowd quit. Dowd thinks the mix of Trump’s undisciplined and poorly focused demeanor would all but put him in legal jeopardy if Trump acquiesces to Mueller’s request for a sit down interview. He seemingly tried but failed to impress upon the president that just because you are not a target at this moment for obstruction, that can change very fast. That Mueller may just be calling you a subject simply because he agrees with court precedent that a president can’t be a criminal target. A technicality without the clearance space he is perceiving.
On the right, there is a ton of willful ignorance to the level of evidence we do have at this point. From Trump firing Comey and admiting on national tv he was thinking about the Russia investigation when he did it. The next day bragging to Lavrov how he perceived that took pressure off himself from the Russia investigation by firing Fomey. To the reported threats of firing Mueller last summer, Trump and his lawyers reportedly floating the idea of pardons to get people to not flip(which could be witness tampering). To Trump demanding not to and furious over Sessions recusing himself because he wanted him to protect him(run interference basically). The infamous tweet that came from Trump’s account(that his lawyer tried to take ownership of) that stated foreknowledge of Flynn’s crimes and lying to the FBI before he asked Comey to drop the investigation. And those are just some highlights
Posted on 4/4/18 at 10:15 am to HeyHeyHogsAllTheWay
quote:
Of course ,but Mueller is running a CRIMINAL investigation. Allegedly.
quote:
I have been authorized by the Department of Justice to confirm that the FBI, as part of our counterintelligence mission, is investigating the Russian government's efforts to interfere in the 2016 presidential election and that includes investigating the nature of any links between individuals associated with the Trump campaign and the Russian government and whether there was any coordination between the campaign and Russia's efforts. As with any counterintelligence investigation, this will also include an assessment of whether any crimes were committed.
Per Comey this is a counterintelligence investigation.
Posted on 4/4/18 at 10:22 am to flyAU
Pres needs to end this shite now it is beyond ridiculous.
Posted on 4/4/18 at 10:28 am to stelly1025
quote:
Pres needs to end this shite now it is beyond ridiculous.
After Mueller made it known he is a subject of investigation on obstruction charges?
That would be a very unwise decision. At best you buy yourself some time like Nixon, but more than likely congress passes now or after November, an independent counsel that will pick up where Mueller left off. Like with Nixon. Where all you’ve done now is strengthened the case of obstruction, making it even harder for congress to justify not seeing that as abuse of power and not taking action.
Posted on 4/4/18 at 10:29 am to HeyHeyHogsAllTheWay
quote:No
Did you really just attempt to justify a fellow American's civil rights being violated by the government?
Trump's civil rights have not been violated at all
You should know this, Princeton
Posted on 4/4/18 at 10:29 am to Mephistopheles
quote:
Not a criminal target is in the headline.
As someone who has dealt with US Attorneys, that translates into...."of course you are a criminal target, we just want to formalize it by talking to you."
Trump should say nothing about it and for once let his attorneys handle all of this by saying that the only way they would consider talking to Mueller is if he sends them a subpoena and said subpoena must be narrow in scope and only pertain to issues directly associated with the 2016 campaign as it applies to any foreign interference. Then stipulate that questions pertaining to his finances are not going to be entertained.
Then move to quash the subpoena and then put the heat on Rosenstein by publicly criticizing him and since Rosenstein answers to either Sessions or the President, if he bitches about it, fire him and leave Mueller twisting in the wind
Posted on 4/4/18 at 10:34 am to KiwiHead
quote:My suspicion is that this leak is part of a fight between Sekulow and Cobb as to whether Trump should interview or not.
As someone who has dealt with US Attorneys, that translates into...."of course you are a criminal target, we just want to formalize it by talking to you."
Posted on 4/4/18 at 10:36 am to Decatur
quote:
Per Comey this is a counterintelligence investigation.
Comey was referring to the FBI investigation Pre Mueller in that quote. Mueller is running a CRIMINAL investigation.
Posted on 4/4/18 at 10:37 am to JuiceTerry
quote:
No
Trump's civil rights have not been violated at all
You should know this, Princeton
Alan Dersowhitz disagrees with you, trade school dropout.
Posted on 4/4/18 at 10:39 am to HeyHeyHogsAllTheWay
Ok we’re in hypothetical land. Let’s assume criminal/corrupt intent is present and provable.
Can a President commit a crime when some of the conduct involved is within the authority of his office but the conduct implicates criminal/corrupt intent?
Can a President commit a crime when some of the conduct involved is within the authority of his office but the conduct implicates criminal/corrupt intent?
Posted on 4/4/18 at 10:39 am to HubbaBubba
I hope he didn't run afoul of the wrong manicemopixie girl.
Posted on 4/4/18 at 10:40 am to Mephistopheles
quote:
The question is what happens if Mueller goes through with what he's claiming, and then subpoenas Trump and specifically asks him to dish on Flynn, Kushner etc. Pleading the 5th is politically unpalatable, throwing them under the bus means that he's been employing crooks, and denying he knew they ever did anything wrong will mean Mueller has an easy target for perjury.
So this is what you’re left hoping will happen.
Sounds like a Hail Mary lob into the end zone to me. To a receiver being covered by four defenders.
This post was edited on 4/4/18 at 10:41 am
Popular
Back to top


1






