What The Mueller Report ACTUALLY States

[jc456]

Or understanding of the law, or willingness to accept the truth.

Or have an actual discussion

I have brought the greater majority of factual info to the thread

All you have brought is your bullshit troll scheme

Name one fact you brought in that shows a crime?

caddo kid , where’d you go? Where’s that fact I asked from you?

plenty of FACTS within the thread & I am the one member that brought ~90% of factual info to the thread

But I would not expect some brain dead ass hole like you to know that

So the answer is no facts! Got it! I didn’t think so

 

[caddo kid]

Or understanding of the law, or willingness to accept the truth.

Or have an actual discussion

I have brought the greater majority of factual info to the thread

All you have brought is your bullshit troll scheme

Name one fact you brought in that shows a crime?

For the last time, there needn't be a crime for someone to obstruct justice. Look up on your computer the US Code which defines the crime of obstruction. Not only has Trump worked to defend himself, he and Barr are working to establish the Investigation was a witch hunt.

Well, Mr. Mueller never found any witches, but his job description was not to indict, but to seek the truth. I have no doubt Mueller and his team were ethical, and Trump and his hand picked team are not.

Then what would he have obstructed? Can’t obstruct a nothing burger. And mueller knew that. I get you don’t understand why would you, you don’t think for yourself

Looks like you MISSED the OP. Try paying attention dumb ass.

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.

 

[jc456]

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

When does the house vote to impeach?

When Mueller testifies to the House.

He did, gave them their report they asked for! No charges , it’s over. No honest blood cell in their bodies

 

[jc456]

Or have an actual discussion

I have brought the greater majority of factual info to the thread

All you have brought is your bullshit troll scheme

Name one fact you brought in that shows a crime?

For the last time, there needn't be a crime for someone to obstruct justice. Look up on your computer the US Code which defines the crime of obstruction. Not only has Trump worked to defend himself, he and Barr are working to establish the Investigation was a witch hunt.

Well, Mr. Mueller never found any witches, but his job description was not to indict, but to seek the truth. I have no doubt Mueller and his team were ethical, and Trump and his hand picked team are not.

Then what would he have obstructed? Can’t obstruct a nothing burger. And mueller knew that. I get you don’t understand why would you, you don’t think for yourself

Looks like you MISSED the OP. Try paying attention dumb ass.

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.

What’s the underlying crime? I asked you for those facts

 

[caddo kid]

I have brought the greater majority of factual info to the thread

All you have brought is your bullshit troll scheme

Name one fact you brought in that shows a crime?

For the last time, there needn't be a crime for someone to obstruct justice. Look up on your computer the US Code which defines the crime of obstruction. Not only has Trump worked to defend himself, he and Barr are working to establish the Investigation was a witch hunt.

Well, Mr. Mueller never found any witches, but his job description was not to indict, but to seek the truth. I have no doubt Mueller and his team were ethical, and Trump and his hand picked team are not.

Then what would he have obstructed? Can’t obstruct a nothing burger. And mueller knew that. I get you don’t understand why would you, you don’t think for yourself

Looks like you MISSED the OP. Try paying attention dumb ass.

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.

What’s the underlying crime? I asked you for those facts

God; you have to be dumber than a shit sandwich; seriously?

You can not even ******* READ.

You are a complete waste of ******* (anyone's) time.

 

[jc456]

Name one fact you brought in that shows a crime?

For the last time, there needn't be a crime for someone to obstruct justice. Look up on your computer the US Code which defines the crime of obstruction. Not only has Trump worked to defend himself, he and Barr are working to establish the Investigation was a witch hunt.

Well, Mr. Mueller never found any witches, but his job description was not to indict, but to seek the truth. I have no doubt Mueller and his team were ethical, and Trump and his hand picked team are not.

Then what would he have obstructed? Can’t obstruct a nothing burger. And mueller knew that. I get you don’t understand why would you, you don’t think for yourself

Looks like you MISSED the OP. Try paying attention dumb ass.

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.

What’s the underlying crime? I asked you for those facts

God; you have to be dumber than a shit sandwich; seriously?

You can not even ******* READ.

You are a complete waste of ******* (anyone's) time.

What’s the crime punk? Give me that fact

 

[dudmuck]

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

When does the house vote to impeach?

When Mueller testifies to the House.

He did, gave them their report they asked for! No charges , it’s over. No honest blood cell in their bodies

Trump is so innocent, he's trying to block Mueller from testifying.

What the Mueller Report Says About Obstruction

Mueller left open the door for congressional consideration of Trump’s conduct. “With respect to whether the President can be found to have obstructed justice by exercising his powers under Article II of the Constitution, we concluded that Congress has authority to prohibit a President’s corrupt use of his authority in order to protect the integrity of the administration of justice,” Mueller wrote.

 

[Jantje_Smit]

I have brought the greater majority of factual info to the thread...

Doesn't look like the factual info will change anything though, the Mueller inquisition made the #resistance look like a bunch of traumatized Hillary disciples desperately trying to blame the screwup of the psycho princess on the evil Russians so they won't have to admit she sucked so much that even a ridiculous orange clown could beat her...

 

[Faun]

I have brought the greater majority of factual info to the thread

All you have brought is your bullshit troll scheme

Name one fact you brought in that shows a crime?

For the last time, there needn't be a crime for someone to obstruct justice. Look up on your computer the US Code which defines the crime of obstruction. Not only has Trump worked to defend himself, he and Barr are working to establish the Investigation was a witch hunt.

Well, Mr. Mueller never found any witches, but his job description was not to indict, but to seek the truth. I have no doubt Mueller and his team were ethical, and Trump and his hand picked team are not.

Then what would he have obstructed? Can’t obstruct a nothing burger. And mueller knew that. I get you don’t understand why would you, you don’t think for yourself

Looks like you MISSED the OP. Try paying attention dumb ass.

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.

What’s the underlying crime? I asked you for those facts

That's irrelevant as we witnessed with Scooter Libby.

 

[Ambivalent1]

/——/,What lies?

"What lies?" That's the stupidest rebuttal yet.

From the get go: "Mexico will pay for the wall", followed by 10,000 plus other efforts to mislead the public:

• on his taxes,
• the size of the crowd when he took the other of office,
• on his wealth,
• on his extra-marital affairs,
• on his successes with Kim, Putin and XI.

/——/ prove they are lies and we need more that you’d warped opinion. Did Trump give a deadline for paying for the wall? Did he say how they would pay? He’s under constant audit, so he got you there. Did anyone make an exact crowd headcount? Then it’s his opinion, Ok on the extra material affairs if you count lying to his wife about them. He is in process with negotiations. How is that a lie?

Q. Did Trump give a deadline for paying for the wall?
A. Nope.

Q. Did he say how he would pay
A. Nope.

Q. He's under audit, so he got you there
A. Huh, only Trump, and he has zero credibility.

Q. Do you know the meaning of biddable
A. Look in a mirror'

Q. on the extra material affairs if you count lying to his wife about them (Extra Martial Affairs).
A. Only his wives, you believe that too?

"extra material affairs"

Awww, you're not quite as educated as you made out.

I'm not perfect: I'm reading posts; watching the Sharks and Blues; responding to nitwits like you; and taking some time to read a novel.

BTW: Blues are up 2-0 at the end of the first period and I can smell my wife's casserole which is very aromatic; I only had a yogurt, some unsalted nuts and an apple for lunch.

Sorry son, you're a fraud.

 

[M14 Shooter]

For the last time, there needn't be a crime for someone to obstruct justice.

Nope.
But there does need to be corrupt intent.
Mueller said , absent collusion/conspiracy with the Russians, other motives for Trump's possibly obstructive actions must be considered, and thus corrupt intent, necessary for the crime of obstruction, cannot te proven.

 

[M14 Shooter]

plenty of FACTS within the thread & I am the one member that brought ~90% of factual info to the thread

And it took 12.2365 seconds to render that information irrelevant.
No corrupt intent = no obstruction of justice.

 

[M14 Shooter]

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

When does the house vote to impeach?

When Mueller testifies to the House.

What does Mueller have to tell the house that he did not include in the report?
If it is relevant, and compelling enough to trigger impeachment, why was it not in the report?

I love the open, unmitigated desperation of the left. Just love it.

 

[M14 Shooter]

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

Why do you refuse to understand for obstruction to exist, the supposed obstructive acts must be made with corrupt intent?
Why do you refuse to understand , absent collusion with the Russians, corrupt intent is impossible to prove?
When will you cite the text of report where Mueller describes, declares, or even implies Trump acted with corrupt intent?

Like all your hyper-partisan bigots, your pre-conceived hatred for Trump means more to you than the truth.

 

[Penelope]

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

When does the house vote to impeach?

When Mueller testifies to the House.

What does Mueller have to tell the house that he did not include in the report?
If it is relevant, and compelling enough to trigger impeachment, why was it not in the report?

I love the open, unmitigated desperation of the left. Just love it.

You have not read the report.

 

[Faun]

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

Why do you refuse to understand for obstruction to exist, the supposed obstructive acts must be made with corrupt intent?
Why do you refuse to understand , absent collusion with the Russians, corrupt intent is impossible to prove?
When will you cite the text of report where Mueller describes, declares, or even implies Trump acted with corrupt intent?

Like all your hyper-partisan bigots, your pre-conceived hatred for Trump means more to you than the truth.

”absent collusion with the Russians, corrupt intent is impossible to prove”

Utter bullshit. If trump thought he, or anyone connected to him, could be indicted; and if he took measures to impede the investigation because of such a belief, then he may expose himself to obstruction of justice charges, even if there turned out to be no underlying crime.

 

[caddo kid]

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

When does the house vote to impeach?

When Mueller testifies to the House.

What does Mueller have to tell the house that he did not include in the report?
If it is relevant, and compelling enough to trigger impeachment, why was it not in the report?

I love the open, unmitigated desperation of the left. Just love it.

You have not read the report.

No he hasn't read the report but he sure as Hell has spammed the shit outta this thread

I have been gone for 12 hours & the insane asylum moron keeps screaming about intent even when he has spammed the thread with that 'intent' shit ad infinitum

I guess that's the knda shit they allow around here now

 

[M14 Shooter]

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

When does the house vote to impeach?

When Mueller testifies to the House.

What does Mueller have to tell the house that he did not include in the report?
If it is relevant, and compelling enough to trigger impeachment, why was it not in the report?
I love the open, unmitigated desperation of the left. Just love it.

You have not read the report.

You cannot answer my questions.

 

[M14 Shooter]

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

When does the house vote to impeach?

When Mueller testifies to the House.

What does Mueller have to tell the house that he did not include in the report?
If it is relevant, and compelling enough to trigger impeachment, why was it not in the report?
I love the open, unmitigated desperation of the left. Just love it.

You have not read the report.

No he hasn't read the report but he sure as Hell has spammed the shit outta this thread

You cannot cite a single line from the report that negates what I said.
And you know it.

 

[Faun]

When does the house vote to impeach?

When Mueller testifies to the House.

What does Mueller have to tell the house that he did not include in the report?
If it is relevant, and compelling enough to trigger impeachment, why was it not in the report?
I love the open, unmitigated desperation of the left. Just love it.

You have not read the report.

No he hasn't read the report but he sure as Hell has spammed the shit outta this thread

You cannot cite a single line from the report that negates what I said.
And you know it.

The law negates what you said.