Mueller : Trump is guilty of obstruction. Congress should handle it. Don't bother me again.

[edward37]

obviously you did not read the report; you so funny

What's wrong commie, can't answer the question. The fact is Mueller completed his investigation, NO ONE interfered with him.

.

well of course no one interfered; that's why Mueller documented at least TEN, yes, no less that TEN obstructive acts by Trump.
See my signature? You can go & read it all, right there.

Yet he couldn't make a decision, go figure. BTW which of those potential acts were not within the presidents Article 2 powers?

.

each obstructive act is thoroughly analyzed within the report; you can read it in the report

I read the report and there is no evidence or proof. Just speculation.

You mean it didn't say can't recall can't recall can't recall like the brain said?

 

[Fort Fun Indiana]

What needs to be demonstrated for any of those acts to qualify obstruction of justice?

Only the pattern of obstructionist behavior.

 

[M14 Shooter]

And that is exactly why he is leaving it to congress. The bar for impeachment and removal from office is lower than of conviction in a criminal court. The founding fathers had this crazy idea that elected officials should be held to higher standards than the public.

Except when you want to impeach the President for a crime, the burden of proof for the elements of that crime are the same - each of the elements must be proven, else the crime does not exist and no honest (ie, not a partisan bigot) person will vote to impeach or remove.

If you are a partisan bigot and want to impeach him because you hate him for beating Hillary, -that's- another story.

 

[Fort Fun Indiana]

Mueller had no proof, wonder girl.

Yeah, he had no proof that Trump wasn't a damn criminal,

Why do you think this is meaningful?
Hoe does this translate, outside your world of make-believe, that Trump is a criminal?

Mueller told you very clearly that if he could have cleared Trump of obstruction, he would have. He could not. Now given that he did so in Vol1, it's not hard to see what he meant.

That doesn't mean he could prove it in a court of law either.

.

And that is exactly why he is leaving it to congress. The bar for impeachment and removal from office is lower than of conviction in a criminal court. The founding fathers had this crazy idea that elected officials should be held to higher standards than the public.

But Mueller still punted. He still could have made the determination that trump committed a crime, and it would still be up to congress to impeach and convict.

 

[LordBrownTrout]

What's wrong commie, can't answer the question. The fact is Mueller completed his investigation, NO ONE interfered with him.

.

well of course no one interfered; that's why Mueller documented at least TEN, yes, no less that TEN obstructive acts by Trump.
See my signature? You can go & read it all, right there.

Yet he couldn't make a decision, go figure. BTW which of those potential acts were not within the presidents Article 2 powers?

.

each obstructive act is thoroughly analyzed within the report; you can read it in the report

I read the report and there is no evidence or proof. Just speculation.

You mean it didn't say can't recall can't recall can't recall like the brain said?

Bubbha was the one who couldnt recall during his tawdry affair with cigar lady. Pucker up tinkerbell, its just under 6 years and the orange man will be leaving office.

 

[edward37]

And that is exactly why he is leaving it to congress. The bar for impeachment and removal from office is lower than of conviction in a criminal court. The founding fathers had this crazy idea that elected officials should be held to higher standards than the public.

Except when you want to impeach the President for a crime, the burden of proof for the elements of that crime are the same - each of the elements must be proven, else the crime does not exist and no honest (ie, not a partisan bigot) person will vote to impeach or remove.

If you are a partisan bigot and want to impeach him because you hate him for beating Hillary, -that's- another story.

Hillary is old business I want him out of there because he's a stinking disgrace as Americas leader A vile lying bully without a plan Let him go back to what he does best cheating on his wife and ripping people off

 

[edward37]

well of course no one interfered; that's why Mueller documented at least TEN, yes, no less that TEN obstructive acts by Trump.
See my signature? You can go & read it all, right there.

Yet he couldn't make a decision, go figure. BTW which of those potential acts were not within the presidents Article 2 powers?

.

each obstructive act is thoroughly analyzed within the report; you can read it in the report

I read the report and there is no evidence or proof. Just speculation.

You mean it didn't say can't recall can't recall can't recall like the brain said?

Bubbha was the one who couldnt recall during his tawdry affair with cigar lady. Pucker up tinkerbell, its just under 6 years and the orange man will be leaving office.

Hopefully on a stretcher

 

[LordBrownTrout]

Yet he couldn't make a decision, go figure. BTW which of those potential acts were not within the presidents Article 2 powers?

.

each obstructive act is thoroughly analyzed within the report; you can read it in the report

I read the report and there is no evidence or proof. Just speculation.

You mean it didn't say can't recall can't recall can't recall like the brain said?

Bubbha was the one who couldnt recall during his tawdry affair with cigar lady. Pucker up tinkerbell, its just under 6 years and the orange man will be leaving office.

Hopefully on a stretcher

Ah....such love.

 

[M14 Shooter]

And that is exactly why he is leaving it to congress. The bar for impeachment and removal from office is lower than of conviction in a criminal court. The founding fathers had this crazy idea that elected officials should be held to higher standards than the public.

Except when you want to impeach the President for a crime, the burden of proof for the elements of that crime are the same - each of the elements must be proven, else the crime does not exist and no honest (ie, not a partisan bigot) person will vote to impeach or remove.

If you are a partisan bigot and want to impeach him because you hate him for beating Hillary, -that's- another story.

Hillary is old business I want him out of there because he's a stinking disgrace as Americas leader A vile lying bully without a plan Let him go back to what he does best cheating on his wife and ripping people off

Trump will remain your President until at least January 2021 and there's nothing you or your feelings you can do about it.

 

[edward37]

And that is exactly why he is leaving it to congress. The bar for impeachment and removal from office is lower than of conviction in a criminal court. The founding fathers had this crazy idea that elected officials should be held to higher standards than the public.

Except when you want to impeach the President for a crime, the burden of proof for the elements of that crime are the same - each of the elements must be proven, else the crime does not exist and no honest (ie, not a partisan bigot) person will vote to impeach or remove.

If you are a partisan bigot and want to impeach him because you hate him for beating Hillary, -that's- another story.

Hillary is old business I want him out of there because he's a stinking disgrace as Americas leader A vile lying bully without a plan Let him go back to what he does best cheating on his wife and ripping people off

Trump will remain your President until at least January 2021 and there's nothing you or your feelings you can do about it.

I got killed in the markets today and what you said makes me feel worse

 

[M14 Shooter]

And that is exactly why he is leaving it to congress. The bar for impeachment and removal from office is lower than of conviction in a criminal court. The founding fathers had this crazy idea that elected officials should be held to higher standards than the public.

Except when you want to impeach the President for a crime, the burden of proof for the elements of that crime are the same - each of the elements must be proven, else the crime does not exist and no honest (ie, not a partisan bigot) person will vote to impeach or remove.

If you are a partisan bigot and want to impeach him because you hate him for beating Hillary, -that's- another story.

Hillary is old business I want him out of there because he's a stinking disgrace as Americas leader A vile lying bully without a plan Let him go back to what he does best cheating on his wife and ripping people off

Trump will remain your President until at least January 2021 and there's nothing you or your feelings you can do about it.

I got killed in the markets today and what you said makes me feel worse

Mission accomplished.

 

[WEATHER53]

“Our investigation found multiple acts by the President that were capable of exerting undue influence over law enforcement investigations, including the Russian-interference and obstruction investigations,”

Yawn.

"Three basic elements are common to most of the relevant obstruction statutes: (1) an obstructive act; (2) a nexus between the obstructive act and an official proceeding; and (3) a corrupt intent."

"As an initial matter, the term “corruptly” sets a demanding standard. It requires a concrete showing that a person acted with an intent to obtain an “improper advantage for [him]self or someone else, inconsistent with official duty and the rights of others.”

Please cite the text of the report where Mueller concretely demonstrates Trump acted corruptly - with an intent to obtain an “improper advantage for [him]self or someone else, inconsistent with official duty and the rights of others in relation of ANY of those 10 "possibly obstructive" acts.

Let me save you some time:
You won't.
Because you can't.
Because it isn't there.

The key is that they don’t care that it isn’t there. They do care that it isn’t but they feel it should be.

 

[OKTexas]

From tigerreds post
The Trump team is now daring Mueller to testify, after .....keep this in mind....after the shit for brains said, he does not want to testify.....So leave it to team Trump to now go on record and say to his American Stupid.....Mueller doesn't want to testify and say to my face and my adoring Nazi Nuts, in the senate and congressional GOP lap dogs that I'm guilty as hell.

So to Robert Mueller, please call this clown on his dare, agree to testify and put a period behind a history that will leave you and the country victorious in getting rid of a treasonous low life clown who should be behind bars having his butt hole pierced, by every minority he's bravely attacked with secret service looking on!!

I am so excited for any momentum to get Mules to talk more because last time he did the info he provided stated he knew it was a witch hunt from the start.

Guess you didn't read the report either 10 charges of obstruction

The AG and AAG didn't see it that way, since they actually know the law, I think their word is better than yours.

.

 

[Flopper]

And that is exactly why he is leaving it to congress. The bar for impeachment and removal from office is lower than of conviction in a criminal court. The founding fathers had this crazy idea that elected officials should be held to higher standards than the public.

Except when you want to impeach the President for a crime, the burden of proof for the elements of that crime are the same - each of the elements must be proven, else the crime does not exist and no honest (ie, not a partisan bigot) person will vote to impeach or remove.

If you are a partisan bigot and want to impeach him because you hate him for beating Hillary, -that's- another story.

Federal judicial procedures and laws do not address a Senate impeachment trial because it operates outside of the criminal justice system. Senate rules govern the trial procedure. An impeachment trial has little resemblance to a criminal trial. Since there is no punishment associated with conviction just removal from office. The trial operates more like a civil service removal proceeding than a criminal trial.

There are a number of rules that make an impeachment trial unique. Senate rules make no distinction as to whether an article of impeachment is a violation of the law or not. There are no strict rules of evidence. The presiding officer may disallow evidence or make other rulings. However any Senator may challenge a ruling and call for a vote of the Senate. Senators, can submit questions to witnesses. Unlike a trial in the legal system, the jury get's to make the rules which are often changed during or prior to the trial.
https://www.law.cornell.edu/background/impeach/senaterules.pdf

 

[Flopper]

Yeah, he had no proof that Trump wasn't a damn criminal,

Why do you think this is meaningful?
Hoe does this translate, outside your world of make-believe, that Trump is a criminal?

Mueller told you very clearly that if he could have cleared Trump of obstruction, he would have. He could not. Now given that he did so in Vol1, it's not hard to see what he meant.

That doesn't mean he could prove it in a court of law either.

.

And that is exactly why he is leaving it to congress. The bar for impeachment and removal from office is lower than of conviction in a criminal court. The founding fathers had this crazy idea that elected officials should be held to higher standards than the public.

But Mueller still punted. He still could have made the determination that trump committed a crime, and it would still be up to congress to impeach and convict.

Mueller had no way knowing whether or not an impeachment would occur. As he said, it would not be fair for an officer of the court to accuse the president of a crime without charging him since he would have no legal recourse for clearing himself of the crime.

 

[LeftofLeft]

Mueller is playing you and helping himself.

Helping himself to what hack?

Helping himself. Avoid name calling and you can think more critically, analytically, and not have your fury blind your logic.

 

[OKTexas]

Mueller had no proof, wonder girl.

Yeah, he had no proof that Trump wasn't a damn criminal,

Why do you think this is meaningful?
Hoe does this translate, outside your world of make-believe, that Trump is a criminal?

Mueller told you very clearly that if he could have cleared Trump of obstruction, he would have. He could not. Now given that he did so in Vol1, it's not hard to see what he meant.

That doesn't mean he could prove it in a court of law either.

.

And that is exactly why Mueller is leaving it to congress. The bar for impeachment and removal from office is lower than conviction in a criminal court because many of the possible charges fall under the category of bad conduct. The founding fathers had this crazy idea that elected officials should be held to higher standards than the public.

Bad conduct is not the Constitutional standard for impeachment, it's nothing but a subjective term you folks have invented.

.

 

[Ray From Cleveland]

And that is exactly why he is leaving it to congress. The bar for impeachment and removal from office is lower than of conviction in a criminal court. The founding fathers had this crazy idea that elected officials should be held to higher standards than the public.

Except when you want to impeach the President for a crime, the burden of proof for the elements of that crime are the same - each of the elements must be proven, else the crime does not exist and no honest (ie, not a partisan bigot) person will vote to impeach or remove.

If you are a partisan bigot and want to impeach him because you hate him for beating Hillary, -that's- another story.

Hillary is old business I want him out of there because he's a stinking disgrace as Americas leader A vile lying bully without a plan Let him go back to what he does best cheating on his wife and ripping people off

Looking at our economy today, it seems he is doing what he does best.

 

[Ray From Cleveland]

Mueller had no proof, wonder girl.

Yeah, he had no proof that Trump wasn't a damn criminal,

Why do you think this is meaningful?
Hoe does this translate, outside your world of make-believe, that Trump is a criminal?

Mueller told you very clearly that if he could have cleared Trump of obstruction, he would have. He could not. Now given that he did so in Vol1, it's not hard to see what he meant.

That doesn't mean he could prove it in a court of law either.

.

And that is exactly why Mueller is leaving it to congress. The bar for impeachment and removal from office is lower than conviction in a criminal court because many of the possible charges fall under the category of bad conduct. The founding fathers had this crazy idea that elected officials should be held to higher standards than the public.

The founders also stated that a President can only be impeached for high crimes or misdemeanors.

 

[Hutch Starskey]

Yeah, he had no proof that Trump wasn't a damn criminal,

Why do you think this is meaningful?
Hoe does this translate, outside your world of make-believe, that Trump is a criminal?

Mueller told you very clearly that if he could have cleared Trump of obstruction, he would have. He could not. Now given that he did so in Vol1, it's not hard to see what he meant.

That doesn't mean he could prove it in a court of law either.

.

And that is exactly why Mueller is leaving it to congress. The bar for impeachment and removal from office is lower than conviction in a criminal court because many of the possible charges fall under the category of bad conduct. The founding fathers had this crazy idea that elected officials should be held to higher standards than the public.

The founders also stated that a President can only be impeached for high crimes or misdemeanors.

Which are what in your limited understanding?