What The Mueller Report ACTUALLY States

[caddo kid]

There seems to be some confusion concerning what the SC Mueller report actually contains.

Many here @ USMB seem to love to discuss the Mueller report but it is pretty obvious that 99.99% of the members here that comment on the report have NOT read the report.
I believe we need to set the record straight on a couple of the FACTS within the Mueller report.

I keep hearing members here @ USMB make really stupid statements concerning the Mueller investigation. One of the dumbest implications I constantly hear from USMB members is that there was no crime so, there could be no obstruction. That is complete baloney folks.

If we look at Volume II of the report, page 368 of the PDF, section L., Overarching Factual Issues, we can learn there is precedent law in place that precludes any underlying crime from an obstruction process. Please see the below from page 369 of the PDF of the Mueller report.

U.S. Department of Justice Atter11ey Werk Preettet // May Cetttaitt Material Preteetee U11eer Fee. R . Cril'H. P. 6(e) Second, many obstruction cases involve the attempted or actual cover-up of an underlying crime. Personal criminal conduct can furnish strong evidence that the individual had an improper obstructive purpose, see, e.g. , United States v. Willoughby, 860 F.2d 15, 24 (2d Cir. 1988), or that he contemplated an effect on an official proceeding, see, e.g., United States v. Binday, 804 F.3d 558, 591 (2d Cir. 2015). But proof of such a crime is not an element of an obstruction offense. See United States v. Greer, 872 F.3d 790, 798 (6th Cir. 2017) (stating, in applying the obstruction sentencing guideline, that "obstruction of a criminal investigation is punishable even if the prosecution is ultimately unsuccessful or even if the investigation ultimately reveals no underlying crime"). Obstruction of justice can be motivated by a desire to protect non-criminal personal interests, to protect against investigations where underlying criminal liability falls into a gray area, or to avoid personal embarrassment. The injury to the integrity of the justice system is the same regardless of whether a person committed an underlying wrong.

There you have it folks: No underlying crime need be proven for an obstruction case to be determined, and/or pursued.



Now, on to the next observation. Many members here @ USMB continue to (erroneously) voice that there was NO obstruction by Trump, and/or no attempts by Trump to obstruct the Mueller investigation.
That is COMPLETE BULLSHIT.

The numerous attempts by Trump to obstruct the Mueller investigation can be learned by reading pages 224 to 448 of the PDF.

So, in conclusion, I hope this will help to educate the many here @ USMB that continue to make erroneous claims concerning the Mueller report, Trump’s documented attempts to obstruct the investigation, and the fact that there is NO need to prove any underlying criminal activity to pursue an obstruction case.

https://www.justice.gov/storage/report.pdf

You’re welcome.

 

[Rocko]

You’re beating a decomposed horse. Enough with this shit

 

[caddo kid]

You’re beating a decomposed horse. Enough with this shit

The thread is a learning opportunity for the greater majority of USMB members; those that believe they already know what the report states, when in fact these members DON'T know what they speak of.

Thanks for letting us know you desire to stay ignorant.

 

[Oddball]

It was the Mule's job to discover what criminal acts were committed, not those which -in his opinion- were "attempted".

Likewise, it's not the job of the accused to prove that they didn't do something.

You're welcome.

 

[Oddball]

You’re beating a decomposed horse. Enough with this shit

The thread is a learning opportunity for the greater majority of USMB members; those that believe they already know what the report states, when in fact these members DON'T know what they speak of.

Thanks for letting us know you desire to stay ignorant.

Thanks for letting us all know that you know nothing about how the law actually works.

 

[Pete7469]

You’re beating a decomposed horse. Enough with this shit

Way beyond that....

These schizophrenic bed wetters are kicking at empty air, but the hallucinations have them believing the dead horse they see will come back to life with just a few more kicks.

These are not sane, cognizant human beings.


.

 

[M14 Shooter]

There you have it folks: No underlying crime need be proven for an obstruction case to be determined, and/or pursued.

Federal laws states:

18 U.S. Code § 1505.
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...
18 U.S. Code § 1505 - Obstruction of proceedings before departments, agencies, and committees

For obstruction to exist, the motive for the claimed obstruction must be "corrupt".
For a conviction of obstruction, the prosecutor must prove said motive was "corrupt".
Trump knew the Mueller investigation would find nothing on collusion with Russia; the Trump administration cooperated with the Mueller investigation in innumerable ways.

Prove Trump's motives were corrupt..

 

[Penelope]

You’re beating a decomposed horse. Enough with this shit

The thread is a learning opportunity for the greater majority of USMB members; those that believe they already know what the report states, when in fact these members DON'T know what they speak of.

Thanks for letting us know you desire to stay ignorant.

Tramp is obstructing right now, refusing to submit documents and obstructing testimonies to the House. Barr is in contempt, he should step down.

 

[M14 Shooter]

Tramp is obstructing right now, refusing to submit documents and obstructing testimonies to the House.

When does the house vote to impeach?

 

[Oddball]

You’re beating a decomposed horse. Enough with this shit

The thread is a learning opportunity for the greater majority of USMB members; those that believe they already know what the report states, when in fact these members DON'T know what they speak of.

Thanks for letting us know you desire to stay ignorant.

Tramp is obstructing right now, refusing to submit documents and obstructing testimonies to the House. Barr is in contempt, he should step down.

 

[toobfreak]

There seems to be some confusion concerning what the SC Mueller report actually contains.

ONLY on your end.

WE GET IT:

• Trump's innocent of all claims made by the Left.
• Trump's innocent of all accusations made by Adam Schiff.
• It was really the Democrats sucking Putin's dick. We always knew that.
  
• Hillary and a whole host of others REALLY DO need further investigation leading to felony prosecution.
• Trump was right to want a different, more impartial investigator.
  
• Comey was a POS all along just as Trump suspected.
• Now that Trump is fully vindicated, he and Barr will be dropping the hammer on the DNC.

Election 2020 is going to be your worst nightmare.

 

[Claudette]

You’re beating a decomposed horse. Enough with this shit

Yup. That's all they have. The just keep beating a dead horse that doesn't give a shit.

Wonder what they will say when Barr lets Durhams report out to the public??

 

[Indeependent]

There seems to be some confusion concerning what the SC Mueller report actually contains.

Many here @ USMB seem to love to discuss the Mueller report but it is pretty obvious that 99.99% of the members here that comment on the report have NOT read the report.
I believe we need to set the record straight on a couple of the FACTS within the Mueller report.

I keep hearing members here @ USMB make really stupid statements concerning the Mueller investigation. One of the dumbest implications I constantly hear from USMB members is that there was no crime so, there could be no obstruction. That is complete baloney folks.

If we look at Volume II of the report, page 368 of the PDF, section L., Overarching Factual Issues, we can learn there is precedent law in place that precludes any underlying crime from an obstruction process. Please see the below from page 369 of the PDF of the Mueller report.

U.S. Department of Justice Atter11ey Werk Preettet // May Cetttaitt Material Preteetee U11eer Fee. R . Cril'H. P. 6(e) Second, many obstruction cases involve the attempted or actual cover-up of an underlying crime. Personal criminal conduct can furnish strong evidence that the individual had an improper obstructive purpose, see, e.g. , United States v. Willoughby, 860 F.2d 15, 24 (2d Cir. 1988), or that he contemplated an effect on an official proceeding, see, e.g., United States v. Binday, 804 F.3d 558, 591 (2d Cir. 2015). But proof of such a crime is not an element of an obstruction offense. See United States v. Greer, 872 F.3d 790, 798 (6th Cir. 2017) (stating, in applying the obstruction sentencing guideline, that "obstruction of a criminal investigation is punishable even if the prosecution is ultimately unsuccessful or even if the investigation ultimately reveals no underlying crime"). Obstruction of justice can be motivated by a desire to protect non-criminal personal interests, to protect against investigations where underlying criminal liability falls into a gray area, or to avoid personal embarrassment. The injury to the integrity of the justice system is the same regardless of whether a person committed an underlying wrong.

There you have it folks: No underlying crime need be proven for an obstruction case to be determined, and/or pursued.



Now, on to the next observation. Many members here @ USMB continue to (erroneously) voice that there was NO obstruction by Trump, and/or no attempts by Trump to obstruct the Mueller investigation.
That is COMPLETE BULLSHIT.

The numerous attempts by Trump to obstruct the Mueller investigation can be learned by reading pages 224 to 448 of the PDF.

So, in conclusion, I hope this will help to educate the many here @ USMB that continue to make erroneous claims concerning the Mueller report, Trump’s documented attempts to obstruct the investigation, and the fact that there is NO need to prove any underlying criminal activity to pursue an obstruction case.

https://www.justice.gov/storage/report.pdf

You’re welcome.

YAWN...

 

[Oldstyle]

There seems to be some confusion concerning what the SC Mueller report actually contains.

Many here @ USMB seem to love to discuss the Mueller report but it is pretty obvious that 99.99% of the members here that comment on the report have NOT read the report.
I believe we need to set the record straight on a couple of the FACTS within the Mueller report.

I keep hearing members here @ USMB make really stupid statements concerning the Mueller investigation. One of the dumbest implications I constantly hear from USMB members is that there was no crime so, there could be no obstruction. That is complete baloney folks.

If we look at Volume II of the report, page 368 of the PDF, section L., Overarching Factual Issues, we can learn there is precedent law in place that precludes any underlying crime from an obstruction process. Please see the below from page 369 of the PDF of the Mueller report.

U.S. Department of Justice Atter11ey Werk Preettet // May Cetttaitt Material Preteetee U11eer Fee. R . Cril'H. P. 6(e) Second, many obstruction cases involve the attempted or actual cover-up of an underlying crime. Personal criminal conduct can furnish strong evidence that the individual had an improper obstructive purpose, see, e.g. , United States v. Willoughby, 860 F.2d 15, 24 (2d Cir. 1988), or that he contemplated an effect on an official proceeding, see, e.g., United States v. Binday, 804 F.3d 558, 591 (2d Cir. 2015). But proof of such a crime is not an element of an obstruction offense. See United States v. Greer, 872 F.3d 790, 798 (6th Cir. 2017) (stating, in applying the obstruction sentencing guideline, that "obstruction of a criminal investigation is punishable even if the prosecution is ultimately unsuccessful or even if the investigation ultimately reveals no underlying crime"). Obstruction of justice can be motivated by a desire to protect non-criminal personal interests, to protect against investigations where underlying criminal liability falls into a gray area, or to avoid personal embarrassment. The injury to the integrity of the justice system is the same regardless of whether a person committed an underlying wrong.

There you have it folks: No underlying crime need be proven for an obstruction case to be determined, and/or pursued.



Now, on to the next observation. Many members here @ USMB continue to (erroneously) voice that there was NO obstruction by Trump, and/or no attempts by Trump to obstruct the Mueller investigation.
That is COMPLETE BULLSHIT.

The numerous attempts by Trump to obstruct the Mueller investigation can be learned by reading pages 224 to 448 of the PDF.

So, in conclusion, I hope this will help to educate the many here @ USMB that continue to make erroneous claims concerning the Mueller report, Trump’s documented attempts to obstruct the investigation, and the fact that there is NO need to prove any underlying criminal activity to pursue an obstruction case.

https://www.justice.gov/storage/report.pdf

You’re welcome.

Oh, bullshit! What you liberals have deemed "obstruction" was simply Trump fighting back against the smears that you poor losers were hitting him with from the day that Hillary lost! What the Mueller Report states quite clearly is that there never was collusion between the Trump campaign and the Russian Government and that people like Schiff, Brennan and Comey were lying to us all along that it existed!

You scumbags scammed us for two years and then when that scam was finally exposed...you want to move the goal posts! It's no longer "collusion"...now it's "obstruction"...another charge that you've made up out of whole cloth to keep this same bullshit coming from CNN and MSNBC!

I'm tired of it. It's time to start putting the people behind this sham in jail for the lies that they've told and the way they abused the power of their offices. Appoint a special prosecutor and start subpoenaing the whole sorry list of coconspirators! Start with the little fish like Page and Strozk...and work your way up through McCabe...Comey...Brennan...Clapper...Lynch...Clinton...and he knew about it...even Barry!

 

[Markle]

You’re beating a decomposed horse. Enough with this shit

The thread is a learning opportunity for the greater majority of USMB members; those that believe they already know what the report states, when in fact these members DON'T know what they speak of.

Thanks for letting us know you desire to stay ignorant.

Tramp is obstructing right now, refusing to submit documents and obstructing testimonies to the House. Barr is in contempt, he should step down.

Tune in tomorrow (5/17/2019) to Fox News at 9 am for a live interview of Bill Barr. Perhaps your questions will be answered.

 

[Claudette]

There seems to be some confusion concerning what the SC Mueller report actually contains.

Many here @ USMB seem to love to discuss the Mueller report but it is pretty obvious that 99.99% of the members here that comment on the report have NOT read the report.
I believe we need to set the record straight on a couple of the FACTS within the Mueller report.

I keep hearing members here @ USMB make really stupid statements concerning the Mueller investigation. One of the dumbest implications I constantly hear from USMB members is that there was no crime so, there could be no obstruction. That is complete baloney folks.

If we look at Volume II of the report, page 368 of the PDF, section L., Overarching Factual Issues, we can learn there is precedent law in place that precludes any underlying crime from an obstruction process. Please see the below from page 369 of the PDF of the Mueller report.

U.S. Department of Justice Atter11ey Werk Preettet // May Cetttaitt Material Preteetee U11eer Fee. R . Cril'H. P. 6(e) Second, many obstruction cases involve the attempted or actual cover-up of an underlying crime. Personal criminal conduct can furnish strong evidence that the individual had an improper obstructive purpose, see, e.g. , United States v. Willoughby, 860 F.2d 15, 24 (2d Cir. 1988), or that he contemplated an effect on an official proceeding, see, e.g., United States v. Binday, 804 F.3d 558, 591 (2d Cir. 2015). But proof of such a crime is not an element of an obstruction offense. See United States v. Greer, 872 F.3d 790, 798 (6th Cir. 2017) (stating, in applying the obstruction sentencing guideline, that "obstruction of a criminal investigation is punishable even if the prosecution is ultimately unsuccessful or even if the investigation ultimately reveals no underlying crime"). Obstruction of justice can be motivated by a desire to protect non-criminal personal interests, to protect against investigations where underlying criminal liability falls into a gray area, or to avoid personal embarrassment. The injury to the integrity of the justice system is the same regardless of whether a person committed an underlying wrong.

There you have it folks: No underlying crime need be proven for an obstruction case to be determined, and/or pursued.



Now, on to the next observation. Many members here @ USMB continue to (erroneously) voice that there was NO obstruction by Trump, and/or no attempts by Trump to obstruct the Mueller investigation.
That is COMPLETE BULLSHIT.

The numerous attempts by Trump to obstruct the Mueller investigation can be learned by reading pages 224 to 448 of the PDF.

So, in conclusion, I hope this will help to educate the many here @ USMB that continue to make erroneous claims concerning the Mueller report, Trump’s documented attempts to obstruct the investigation, and the fact that there is NO need to prove any underlying criminal activity to pursue an obstruction case.

https://www.justice.gov/storage/report.pdf

You’re welcome.

Oh, bullshit! What you liberals have deemed "obstruction" was simply Trump fighting back against the smears that you poor losers were hitting him with from the day that Hillary lost! What the Mueller Report states quite clearly is that there never was collusion between the Trump campaign and the Russian Government and that people like Schiff, Brennan and Comey were lying to us all along that it existed!

You scumbags scammed us for two years and then when that scam was finally exposed...you want to move the goal posts! It's no longer "collusion"...now it's "obstruction"...another charge that you've made up out of whole cloth to keep this same bullshit coming from CNN and MSNBC!

I'm tired of it. It's time to start putting the people behind this sham in jail for the lies that they've told and the way they abused the power of their offices. Appoint a special prosecutor and start subpoenaing the whole sorry list of coconspirators! Start with the little fish like Page and Strozk...and work your way up through McCabe...Comey...Brennan...Clapper...Lynch...Clinton...and he knew about it...even Barry!

Great post and spot on.

Durham will be investigating the whole shit show that was the Mueller investigation and I sure hope we all get to read that report because it will be a dandy.

Trump will win in 2020 and all the lefty loon assholes on this board will have four more years to moan, groan, complain and grasp at any straw they can find to try and hang something, anything on Trump.

I'm going to sit back and LMFAO.

 

[Oddball]

 

[Ambivalent1]

There seems to be some confusion concerning what the SC Mueller report actually contains.

Many here @ USMB seem to love to discuss the Mueller report but it is pretty obvious that 99.99% of the members here that comment on the report have NOT read the report.
I believe we need to set the record straight on a couple of the FACTS within the Mueller report.

I keep hearing members here @ USMB make really stupid statements concerning the Mueller investigation. One of the dumbest implications I constantly hear from USMB members is that there was no crime so, there could be no obstruction. That is complete baloney folks.

If we look at Volume II of the report, page 368 of the PDF, section L., Overarching Factual Issues, we can learn there is precedent law in place that precludes any underlying crime from an obstruction process. Please see the below from page 369 of the PDF of the Mueller report.

U.S. Department of Justice Atter11ey Werk Preettet // May Cetttaitt Material Preteetee U11eer Fee. R . Cril'H. P. 6(e) Second, many obstruction cases involve the attempted or actual cover-up of an underlying crime. Personal criminal conduct can furnish strong evidence that the individual had an improper obstructive purpose, see, e.g. , United States v. Willoughby, 860 F.2d 15, 24 (2d Cir. 1988), or that he contemplated an effect on an official proceeding, see, e.g., United States v. Binday, 804 F.3d 558, 591 (2d Cir. 2015). But proof of such a crime is not an element of an obstruction offense. See United States v. Greer, 872 F.3d 790, 798 (6th Cir. 2017) (stating, in applying the obstruction sentencing guideline, that "obstruction of a criminal investigation is punishable even if the prosecution is ultimately unsuccessful or even if the investigation ultimately reveals no underlying crime"). Obstruction of justice can be motivated by a desire to protect non-criminal personal interests, to protect against investigations where underlying criminal liability falls into a gray area, or to avoid personal embarrassment. The injury to the integrity of the justice system is the same regardless of whether a person committed an underlying wrong.

There you have it folks: No underlying crime need be proven for an obstruction case to be determined, and/or pursued.



Now, on to the next observation. Many members here @ USMB continue to (erroneously) voice that there was NO obstruction by Trump, and/or no attempts by Trump to obstruct the Mueller investigation.
That is COMPLETE BULLSHIT.

The numerous attempts by Trump to obstruct the Mueller investigation can be learned by reading pages 224 to 448 of the PDF.

So, in conclusion, I hope this will help to educate the many here @ USMB that continue to make erroneous claims concerning the Mueller report, Trump’s documented attempts to obstruct the investigation, and the fact that there is NO need to prove any underlying criminal activity to pursue an obstruction case.

https://www.justice.gov/storage/report.pdf

You’re welcome.

LOL, you poor progs* just can't take losing.

 

[caddo kid]

There you have it folks: No underlying crime need be proven for an obstruction case to be determined, and/or pursued.

Federal laws states:

18 U.S. Code § 1505.
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...
18 U.S. Code § 1505 - Obstruction of proceedings before departments, agencies, and committees

For obstruction to exist, the motive for the claimed obstruction must be "corrupt".
For a conviction of obstruction, the prosecutor must prove said motive was "corrupt".
Trump knew the Mueller investigation would find nothing on collusion with Russia; the Trump administration cooperated with the Mueller investigation in innumerable ways.

Prove Trump's motives were corrupt..

odd that you would sight 18 U.S. Code § 1505. but then proceed to ask the questions that you ask BECAUSE there is no stipulation within 18 U.S. Code § 1505. that takes into consideration the concept of 'motive.'

Isn't that funny?

Also, if you would have bothered to read Mueller's report you would have learned of the considerations within in regard to 'motive.'

Isn't that funny?

b. In considering the full scope of the conduct we investigated, the President's actions can be divided into two distinct phases reflecting a possible shift in the President's motives. In the first phase, before the President fired Corney, the President had been assured that the FBI had not opened an investigation of him personally. The President deemed it critically important to make public that he was not under investigation, and he included that information in his termination letter to Corney after other efforts to have that information disclosed were unsuccessful. Soon after he fired Corney, however, the President became aware that investigators were conducting an obstruction-of-justice inquiry into his own conduct. That awareness marked a significant change in the President's conduct and the start of a second phase of action. The President launched public attacks on the investigation and individuals involved in it who could possess evidence adverse to the President, while in private, the President engaged in a series of targeted efforts to control the investigation. For instance, the President attempted to remove the Special Counsel; he sought to have Attorney General Sessions unrecuse himself and limit the investigation; he sought to prevent public disclosure of information about the June 9, 2016 meeting between Russians and campaign officials; and he used public forums to attack potential witnesses who might offer adverse information and to praise witnesses who declined to cooperate with the government. Judgments about the nature of the President's motives during each phase would be informed by the totality of the evidence.

 

[Tax Man]

There seems to be some confusion concerning what the SC Mueller report actually contains.

Many here @ USMB seem to love to discuss the Mueller report but it is pretty obvious that 99.99% of the members here that comment on the report have NOT read the report.
I believe we need to set the record straight on a couple of the FACTS within the Mueller report.

I keep hearing members here @ USMB make really stupid statements concerning the Mueller investigation. One of the dumbest implications I constantly hear from USMB members is that there was no crime so, there could be no obstruction. That is complete baloney folks.

If we look at Volume II of the report, page 368 of the PDF, section L., Overarching Factual Issues, we can learn there is precedent law in place that precludes any underlying crime from an obstruction process. Please see the below from page 369 of the PDF of the Mueller report.

U.S. Department of Justice Atter11ey Werk Preettet // May Cetttaitt Material Preteetee U11eer Fee. R . Cril'H. P. 6(e) Second, many obstruction cases involve the attempted or actual cover-up of an underlying crime. Personal criminal conduct can furnish strong evidence that the individual had an improper obstructive purpose, see, e.g. , United States v. Willoughby, 860 F.2d 15, 24 (2d Cir. 1988), or that he contemplated an effect on an official proceeding, see, e.g., United States v. Binday, 804 F.3d 558, 591 (2d Cir. 2015). But proof of such a crime is not an element of an obstruction offense. See United States v. Greer, 872 F.3d 790, 798 (6th Cir. 2017) (stating, in applying the obstruction sentencing guideline, that "obstruction of a criminal investigation is punishable even if the prosecution is ultimately unsuccessful or even if the investigation ultimately reveals no underlying crime"). Obstruction of justice can be motivated by a desire to protect non-criminal personal interests, to protect against investigations where underlying criminal liability falls into a gray area, or to avoid personal embarrassment. The injury to the integrity of the justice system is the same regardless of whether a person committed an underlying wrong.

There you have it folks: No underlying crime need be proven for an obstruction case to be determined, and/or pursued.



Now, on to the next observation. Many members here @ USMB continue to (erroneously) voice that there was NO obstruction by Trump, and/or no attempts by Trump to obstruct the Mueller investigation.
That is COMPLETE BULLSHIT.

The numerous attempts by Trump to obstruct the Mueller investigation can be learned by reading pages 224 to 448 of the PDF.

So, in conclusion, I hope this will help to educate the many here @ USMB that continue to make erroneous claims concerning the Mueller report, Trump’s documented attempts to obstruct the investigation, and the fact that there is NO need to prove any underlying criminal activity to pursue an obstruction case.

https://www.justice.gov/storage/report.pdf

You’re welcome.

Thank you for attempting to educate the illiterate low IQ cons.