What Crime Exactly Is Trump Guilty of 4 Impeachment?

[Marion Morrison]

I pray that the Democrats are STUPID enough to try to impeach this President. They couldn't give the Republicans a better gift than that.

They're talking about they have to politically for some reason.

Chuck Todd was talking impeachment on MTP today. He had Schiff on.

Chiffon?



When David Brody called Chuck Todd biased to his face. He got kerfluffled.

 

[cnm]

A Canadian troll. He doesn't give a ****.

Your ignorance is still as great as your lack of curiosity.

 

[cnm]

nor is Mueller's investigation the only one.

It's the only one people know or care about.

Even if that is the case, so what? The attempts Mueller's report listed are still listed.

 

[Faun]

Jesus. After all this time and you still don't get it. Are you unable to use search engines?

Did anyone interfere with your investigation? Mueller...No.
More ironic stupidity, I see.

Mueller said:

- Trump "welcomed and encouraged" Russian interference, and lied about it to cover it up

- Trump instructed McGahn to create a false record of his order to fire Mueller

- Trump didn't answer his questions truthfully

Put that incompetent geriatric case on the stand, subject to cross-examination by Republicans and see how well he holds up. Without Mueller, you have nothing. And Mueller will be destroyed if he has to testify. You know it, we all know it. Do it, and seal your fate as a political party.

Were you in a drug induced coma last Wednesday?

 

[Faun]

I pray that the Democrats are STUPID enough to try to impeach this President. They couldn't give the Republicans a better gift than that.

You mean like how Republicans gave Democrats that gift when they impeached Clinton?

 

[okfine]

Do people here answer polls any more?

Not that one. Maybe because its ridiculous.

 

[beautress]

IF Trump obstructed Justice, what crime was it that he was guilty of and is the basis for the obstruction charge?

Jesus. After all this time and you still don't get it. Are you unable to use search engines?

CHAPTER 73—OBSTRUCTION OF JUSTICE

[USC02] 18 USC Ch. 73: OBSTRUCTION OF JUSTICE

(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, shall be fined under this title or imprisoned not more than 20 years, or both.​

Those are the things that Hillary did and President Trump did not do.

 

[Third Party]

IF Trump obstructed Justice, what crime was it that he was guilty of and is the basis for the obstruction charge?

Jesus. After all this time and you still don't get it. Are you unable to use search engines?

CHAPTER 73—OBSTRUCTION OF JUSTICE

[USC02] 18 USC Ch. 73: OBSTRUCTION OF JUSTICE

(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, shall be fined under this title or imprisoned not more than 20 years, or both.​

Hillary did more of that than Nixon!

 

[toobfreak]

Mueller's Hearing has actually hurt the cause with about 50% of likely party voters saying they now support impeachment LESS.

Almost Half of House Democrats Now Support Impeachment

The Left's case for impeachment is so weak, that they themselves either can't even define it or use specious excuses that don't hold water:

The Case for Impeachment - Impeach Donald Trump Now

1). Obstruction? Undefined.
2). Trump has been cleared of emoluments violations. Someone notify the Left.
3). Undefined.
4). Undefined public remarks? Really? That's what you got?
5). Undefined. Pardoned who? How can a president abuse it? Clinton pardoned Marc Rich, that wasn't abuse?
6). Apparently a foreign policy they don't agree with.
7). Undefined actions which actually Obama was proven guilty of, not Trump.
8). Undefined. Something about not liking the media taking free license to publicly smear people without proof.
9). Apparently disagreeing with how the DHS and Border Patrol deal with the burgeoning overflow of illegals which Obama set up.
10). Undefined.

I don't think any of this crap is even in the Mueller Report except maybe (1) which they don't define, so there is no case for any of it other than: WE DON'T LIKE TRUMP. I had to hunt through article after article to actually find one which even actually stated what the real case supposedly is in Mueller's report which supports impeachment! Best I found was THIS:

Mueller Report lays out case for impeachment |Opinion

The impeachment case for obstruction of justice starts on page 208. It includes:

-- The firing of FBI Director James Comey to thwart investigation into Russian interference, and multiple attempts to get then-Attorney General Jeff Sessions to “unrecuse” and block the investigation.
James Comey actually broke the law in several ways and was shown conspiring against the President up to including leaking to the Press as well as now being shown a personal friend of Mueller's. He remains under investigation. By Mueller's own words, a president has every ability to hire and fire FBI directors and doing so in no way affected any investigation, as Mueller himself testified. Further merely asking your AG not to recuse himself from a case because you feel him better qualified to handle it isn't an obstruction, it is a merely a request in seeking one's own self-defense.

-- The drafting of a false memo about the Trump Tower meeting between Russians and senior campaign officials.
There are many questions about that meeting but one thing is clear: Trump was not directly involved nor did the Trump people set it up. Other's came to them with the offer, which they went to only to hear what they had to say, feeling that if there was actual, credible knowledge of Hillary crimes which have been so carefully suppressed here, they'd be interested to hear them. By all accounts, the meeting was a dud, short-lived and staged to set the Trump people up.

-- Trump’s efforts to remove the special counsel, or to curtail his investigation, and to pressure White House Counsel Don McGahn to change McGahn’s account of Trump’s efforts to fire Mueller.
Yep. Trump did want someone other than Mueller not only because of bad blood over some club membership affair, but because the day before, Trump turned Mueller down to replace his buddy Comey. Trump wanted someone free and clear of any partisan ties to the Democrats. It remains unclear how you can obstruct an investigation which Mueller himself said was never impeded, into an inquiry into Trump which Mueller found him not guilty of. Normally, the idea of obstruction rests upon there being some actual evidence which you are trying to conceal from discovery! What was Trump trying to hide here, his innocence?

-- “Evidence concerning the President’s conduct toward [former Trump campaign chairman Paul] Manafort indicates that the President intended to encourage Manafort to not cooperate with the government” (page 344).
Intended? So, he never actually did? Is this getting rather specious or what? It is as if we are to believe that Hillary did not sit down and discuss various details and things best said and not said with her staff concerning everything from Benghazi to Huma Abedin to the email server scandal.

-- Dangling of pardons both in the Manafort inquiry and in Trump’s role in getting lawyer Michael Cohen to give false testimony to Congress about the Trump Tower Moscow Project.
Again, maybe yes, maybe no, but oh so petty. None of these actions amounted to a hill of beans in an investigation that found Trump not guilty of what it was they were actually investigating. One can only wonder where the charges are against Hillary for taking large contributions to her Foundation from Foreign Governments then granting them huge favors they sought?

The best summary comes from page 369. “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. The incidents were often carried out through one-on-one meetings in which the President sought to use his official power outside of usual channels.
How else do you have one on one meetings with a specific individual except with a one on one meeting?

These actions ranged from efforts to remove the Special Counsel and to reverse the effect of the Attorney General's recusal; to the attempted use of official power to limit the scope of the investigation; to direct and indirect contacts with witnesses with the potential to influence their testimony. Viewing the acts collectively can help to illuminate their significance.”
So the real bulk of the case against Trump was to explore what power he had to replace an investigator which he felt had a conflict of interest, which has been shown to be valid, to limit its scope to future investigations since Trump already knew he had committed no conspiracy with Russia, and to wish to exert some influence over a few potential witnesses by sitting down to see if everyone involved all had their ducks in order. That last one kind of has some legs to it, but again, witness to an investigation in which Trump was cleared of all Russian ligatures and in which it was also shown that Trump intended no corrupt influence---- ---- you know, the same way that Comey said Hillary had CLEARLY been extremely reckless and careless in the handling of her most important and sensitive information, but hadn't done so maliciously with corrupt intent---------- she was just a hapless, incompetent clusterfuck of a Secretary of State.

If that defense holds true for a seasoned, veteran, lifelong shrewd politician like Hillary, then it must also hold true for a businessman new to politics used to doing things the business way which obviously did not fully grasp the total political machinations of his office yet.

Throw in Trump’s effective status as an unindicted co-conspirator in a felony campaign finance violation and near-daily violations of the emoluments clause, and you’ve got a very strong case for impeachment.
Again, unindicted means not guilty and he has already been cleared of the emoluments accusations!

Don’t believe me? Read the report yourself. Hearings now must begin to explore further and to highlight the presidential criminality.
Of what value is public opinion by a public largely wholly ignorant of law and presidential and constitutional powers, other than to try to sway public support away from Trump leading into the next election? Is public opinion actually part of the impeachment process? Is this really what the Democrat's entire case rests on? If these charges are so just and clear, why don't any of these articles hellbent on proving the case against Trump ever mention or skate over the fact that:

1. The entire investigation was based on a fraudulent dossier paid for by Hillary and the DNC done in concert with a foreign power whose nature was hidden from the FISA court to base the investigation on, and to which Mueller refuses to comment about?
2. Mueller himself had a conflict of interest in investigating Trump which also involved James Comey whom he was close friends with?
3. Mueller just happened to build up a team of Trump investigators that nearly all ended up being (surpise of prises) friends of Hillary, big donors to Hillary, and some of whom had sworn to stop Trump from ever getting elected? In most annals, that alone would call for the entire investigation being thrown out as corrupt and started over.
4. Several important elements of Mueller's report violated DOJ and prosecutorial procedure and conduct. Not only don't prosecutors "exonerate" defendants, but they don't write 200 pages of material on what they were found not guilty of so that they can then hand it off to another body for continued investigation. Funny how Mueller made sure to do that despite not being part of his mandate yet he could not look into any of the fake dossier paid for by Hillary and the DNC that the whole thing was based on because THAT wasn't part of his mandate!
5. Mueller made sure to charge, indict and prosecute EVERY last person distantly related to Trump for any small omission to the FBI no matter how small and old the charges were, yet stopped short of charging, indicting or prosecuting a SINGLE other person outside Trump's circle, including the infamous Joseph Mifsud who ALSO lied to the FBI and was central to the case?
6. That in the final analysis, Trump was found not guilty of criminal conspiracy with Russia, that Russia acted on its own, that Russia had been doing this sort of thing for many years, and to this day, not one vote has been shown affected or changed as a result of any of this. But having been found not guilty of the accusations, now the Democrats will move on to further, deeper investigation of Trump for simply not wishing to be investigated.
7. That since NO ONE IS ABOVE THE LAW, that if either Hillary or Barack been exposed to this same level of proctological scrutiny, they both would be doing 200 years in Leavenworth.
8. After all is said and done, any effort to impeach Trump will fail in the House and die in the Senate and just bring new-found resolve on the voters to keep Trump in office until the full involvement in the Democrats roles in all of this is fully prosecuted!

 

[toobfreak]

Jesus. After all this time and you still don't get it. Are you unable to use search engines?

Did anyone interfere with your investigation? Mueller...No.
More ironic stupidity, I see.

Mueller said:

- Trump "welcomed and encouraged" Russian interference, and lied about it to cover it up

- Trump instructed McGahn to create a false record of his order to fire Mueller

- Trump didn't answer his questions truthfully

Put that incompetent geriatric case on the stand, subject to cross-examination by Republicans and see how well he holds up. Without Mueller, you have nothing. And Mueller will be destroyed if he has to testify. You know it, we all know it. Do it, and seal your fate as a political party.

Were you in a drug induced coma last Wednesday?

Apparently you were. Mueller was by all accounts eviscerated by the Republicans, disemboweled, totally unprepared, he was red in the face with embarrassment at times, and the more the democrats shake the tree, the more of their own bad apples will only fall out.

 

[toobfreak]

I pray that the Democrats are STUPID enough to try to impeach this President. They couldn't give the Republicans a better gift than that.

You mean like how Republicans gave Democrats that gift when they impeached Clinton?

But Willy actually committed crimes. He suborned perjury after molesting and sexually abusing employees in the Oval Office then blatantly lied to try to cover it up. But they gifted us back by trying to rob the White House of all its most valuable items and haul them out in a truck after selling top secret Lorell technology to China.

 

[toobfreak]

It's the only one people know or care about.

Really? How so? People still don't really know much about the Mueller report, you think the average person sits down to read 400 pages of bullshit? That is why it was up to Mueller to hand the report to the AG to summarize, you're not even supposed to see the Mueller report (yet did anyway). And do investigations depend on whether people care about them? And how have you certified that no one cares about the further investigations into how the democrats set up the whole investigation with lies to frame Trump? Have you personally ASKED every one? I bet the people of America will be MOST interested in that, to be sure to come out just in time for next year's election. You are so screwed.

 

[toobfreak]

2020's coming. You will see what happens when you've squandered 2 years with your obsession

A Canadian troll. He doesn't give a ****.

We'll keep the presidency, retake the House, and add a couple seats to the Senate. Michigan has one up for reelection

Hitting the bottle early today.

Another erudite counter by another leftard troll. Weren't you saying the same thing three years ago when people said Trump would be the next president?

 

[toobfreak]

Jesus. After all this time and you still don't get it. Are you unable to use search engines?

Did anyone interfere with your investigation? Mueller...No.
More ironic stupidity, I see.

Mueller said:

- Trump "welcomed and encouraged" Russian interference, and lied about it to cover it up

Mueller never said that. But if Trump welcomes an asteroid impact and one occurs, is he to blame for that too?

- Trump instructed McGahn to create a false record of his order to fire Mueller

- Trump didn't answer his questions truthfully

Mueller never said that. I swear all you Tards having hearing impediments. You all hear what you want. All he said is that Trump's written answers didn't fully give him everything he wanted and preferred he have spoken in person. You know, like all the times Obama appeared to answer in person every question about his using the IRS to suppress voters for Romney in 2012.

 

[toobfreak]

Face it, lefties. Everything you had you put into the Mueller report. For two ******* years you kept saying Mueller was gonna hang Trump. He was gonna get the goods on him, he was gonna nail his ass to the cross. He was de man, if he couldn't do it, nobody could. You kept stressing how great a prosecutor he was, how brilliant he was, how thorough he was, and he was gonna be the guy who ended the Trump presidency for you.
Well guess what? Your "savior" couldn't deliver the goods for you, could he? Now what do you do? Instead of trying to beat Trump in 2020 with ideas, you double down on the insanity you've been forcing on the American people for two years. You dumb shits just don't know when to give it up, do you? You keep investigating as if you're gonna uncover something your A team couldn't find. You are all idiots.
You deserve to get the shit kicked out of you next year and I for one will be laughing my ass off when you idiots realize you ******* blew it AGAIN!!! You just don't know when you've met your match, do you?

All the Democrats have ever had is their delusion and lies. A year and a half ago long before the investigation was even over, Adam Schiff was already declaring Trump a hung and guilty man:

Schiff: House Russia probe has evidence of collusion, obstruction

Adam Schiff: We've Never Ever Said That There Was Proof of Collusion

Top Intel Democrat: 'Circumstantial evidence of collusion' between Trump and Russia

Rep. Adam Schiff Ought to Apologize for Claiming Proof Exhibits Collusion with Trump Marketing campaign - Theweeklyn News

Putting democrats in charge of anything is only an invitation for them to commit crimes all the while trying to lie, deflect and point fingers at others.

 

[Faun]

Jesus. After all this time and you still don't get it. Are you unable to use search engines?

Did anyone interfere with your investigation? Mueller...No.
More ironic stupidity, I see.

Mueller said:

- Trump "welcomed and encouraged" Russian interference, and lied about it to cover it up

- Trump instructed McGahn to create a false record of his order to fire Mueller

- Trump didn't answer his questions truthfully

Put that incompetent geriatric case on the stand, subject to cross-examination by Republicans and see how well he holds up. Without Mueller, you have nothing. And Mueller will be destroyed if he has to testify. You know it, we all know it. Do it, and seal your fate as a political party.

Were you in a drug induced coma last Wednesday?

Apparently you were. Mueller was by all accounts eviscerated by the Republicans, disemboweled, totally unprepared, he was red in the face with embarrassment at times, and the more the democrats shake the tree, the more of their own bad apples will only fall out.

LOL

Boobtoob, 74% said his testimony either didn't sway their opinion or increased their support for impeachment. Compared to 26% who said his testimony decreased their support. Meaning overall, his testimony didn't change anything. You know, what you idiotically delude yourself as eviscerated and disemboweled.

More saliently, the number of House Democrats in favor of impeachment has grown since Wednesday. Fortunately, it's still shy of a majority.

 

[Bruce_T_Laney]

The main crime is a Republican won in the Year of Queen Hillary.

After eight years of Obama and six years of a GOP House investigating Obama Administration did you think the Democrats were not going to return the favor?

God could win the Oval Office and if he ran GOP the Democrats would call for his Impeachment and the GOP would do the same if he ran as a Democrat...

So what law did Trump break?

I am sure there are many he has broken like all politicians but let be factual Trump is being attacked first because he is Trump and secondly he is a Republican...

I feel pity for Nancy Pelosi and the clown car she drives with those like Cortez and Cummings screaming impeachment out the window while she tries to steer the clown car away from Impeachment talks...

 

[playtime]

10 times Trump may have obstructed justice, according to Mueller

Key words MAY HAVE.

which is congress' job to take up since the OLC is the only thing preventing mueller from doing... otherwise YES.

HE



DID.


according to mueller & 1000 current & former (D) AND (R) DOJ federal prosecutors.


DOJ Alumni Statement
May 6 · 4 min read

STATEMENT BY FORMER FEDERAL PROSECUTORS

 

[playtime]

10 times Trump may have obstructed justice, according to Mueller
By Will Rahn
July 23, 2019 / 6:56 PM / CBS News

10 times Trump may have obstructed justice, according to Mueller

Trump’s latest tweets cross clear lines, experts say: Obstruction of justice and witness tampering
Deanna Paul
04/12/2018

Trump’s latest tweets cross clear lines, experts say: Obstruction of justice and witness tampering


If the latest report is true, which crimes might Trump have committed?
[...]

The two main perjury statutes are 18 USC § 1621, and § 1623. The first, Section 1621, criminalizes material false statements, under oath, in federal official proceedings. Section 1621 really contains two offenses, one for testimony, which requires an oath, and the other for written statements made under penalty of perjury.

The second perjury statute, Section 1623, prohibits material false statements under oath in federal court proceedings.

Subornation of perjury, as that crime is defined in the U.S. Code (18 USC § 1622), criminalizes "(procuring) another to commit any perjury." An underlying perjury is required to convict someone of suborning perjury, under federal law.
(don mcGahn & probably others)
[...]
If the latest report is true, which crimes might Trump have committed?

you're welcome.

... and still no Russian connection

in the bizarro world that you live in perhaps..... there have been well over 100 DOCUMENTED instances where members of trump's swamp had been in contact with the roooskies.

& uh... some are in jail, or pleaded guilty & are waiting to go to jail.

 

[playtime]

A failed attempt is still an attempt, nor is Mueller's investigation the only one.

See if you can get Trump impeached with that weak shit.

Impeaching him would be easy. It's getting the Senate to convict that's nearly impossible.

probably true given the pathetic yellow spines in the majority. but, just before watergate blew up, a mere 4 months or so....the (R)s were square behind nixon. when the hearings began & first person witness' HAD to appear & testify- that changed the game. get mcghan up on capital hill & lewindowsky & the house pump - hope hicks... & that may all change. the (R) senate has a ton of seats up come 2020... they may want to bail on donny if the winds of change is blowing against their sorry asses.