|
Replies: 30
| visibility 700
|
Oculus Spirit [93650]
TigerPulse: 100%
Posts: 95406
Joined: 12/25/09
|
Why did Mueller end his investigation?
May 7, 2019, 3:14 PM
|
|
I don't think he finished the job.
|
|
|
|
 |
CU Medallion [73569]
TigerPulse: 100%
Posts: 78044
Joined: 11/30/98
|
well by his statement of "Cant Exonerate"
May 7, 2019, 3:17 PM
|
|
as the first ever prosecutor to try to Exonerate someone he's trying to prosecute, he needs to finish til he exonerates him 
|
|
|
|
|
|
Oculus Spirit [81889]
TigerPulse: 100%
Posts: 47113
Joined: 3/18/07
|
This feels like a sex joke. So he's a spitter!***
May 7, 2019, 3:21 PM
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Oculus Spirit [93650]
TigerPulse: 100%
Posts: 95406
Joined: 12/25/09
|
Prosecutors have a binary decision to make.
May 7, 2019, 3:31 PM
[ in reply to well by his statement of "Cant Exonerate" ] |
|
Not deciding is in itself a decision to not prosecute. If a prosecutor decided not to prosecute you do you give a chit about anything else he says?
Trump's name should even be in that report. He wasn't charged with a crime and Mueller didn't choose to accuse him of a crime. He couldn't decide, it wasn't a slow decision nor a fast decision, it was a halfast decision by a halfast prosecutor.
|
|
|
|
|
|
Legend [18018]
TigerPulse: 100%
Posts: 30150
Joined: 9/9/06
|
Re: Prosecutors have a binary decision to make.
May 7, 2019, 3:36 PM
|
|
"The Office of Legal Counsel (OLC) has issued an opinion finding that “the indictment or criminal prosecution of a sitting President would impermissibly undermine the capacity of the executive branch to perform its constitutionally assigned functions” in violation of “the constitutional separation of powers.” Given the role of the Special Counsel as an attorney in the Department of Justice and the framework of the Special Counsel regulations, see 28 U.S.C. § 515;
28 C.F.R. § 600.7 (a), this Office accepted OLC’s legal conclusion for the purpose of exercising prosecutorial jurisdiction."
|
|
|
|
|
|
Oculus Spirit [93650]
TigerPulse: 100%
Posts: 95406
Joined: 12/25/09
|
Re: Prosecutors have a binary decision to make.
May 7, 2019, 3:42 PM
|
|
Mueller said he couldn't decide. That's far from not prosecuting because of laws. All he had to do was say 'We believe he obstructed justice.' It was his only decision and he failed to make it.
Halfast job.
|
|
|
|
|
|
Legend [18018]
TigerPulse: 100%
Posts: 30150
Joined: 9/9/06
|
Mueller was very careful in his wordings (to a fault)
May 7, 2019, 4:10 PM
|
|
and he gave a ton of care to the fact that he was investigating the President of the United States which held with it an unusual standard that must be met. One he clearly didn't think he had the power to decide on because of the Justice Department policy so he punted it to Congress. But if you read how he laid out the evidence, it seems pretty clear that had this not been about the office of the President, he would have charged obstruction (similar to what over 500 other federal prosecutors have recently signed on to saying as well).
Trump has been saved time and time again because of his 1.) brashness (doing it out in the open) 2.) stupidity 3.) being ignored by his employees
|
|
|
|
|
|
All-TigerNet [12851]
TigerPulse: 100%
Posts: 15971
Joined: 10/25/02
|
your conjecture is carefully crafted as well
May 7, 2019, 4:19 PM
|
|
But if you read how he laid out the evidence, it seems pretty clear that had this not been about the office of the President, he would have charged obstruction
He didnt.
The End
|
|
|
|
|
|
Legend [18018]
TigerPulse: 100%
Posts: 30150
Joined: 9/9/06
|
lol***
May 7, 2019, 4:23 PM
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Oculus Spirit [93650]
TigerPulse: 100%
Posts: 95406
Joined: 12/25/09
|
So Rosenstein under advise and directions of congressional..
May 7, 2019, 5:31 PM
[ in reply to Mueller was very careful in his wordings (to a fault) ] |
|
dems named the wrong man for the job. Even after knowing that Mueller had a serious conflict of interest being rejected for head of the FBI one day prior to being named special counsel you can't admit that 'there's no there there.' Now you want a doover. Maybe you're thinking the 18 vicious democrat supporters were the wrong selections to help Mueller get his vengeance and that merits a doover.
I don't.
|
|
|
|
|
|
Orange Blooded [4974]
TigerPulse: 99%
Posts: 5276
Joined: 6/2/03
|
Re: Mueller was very careful in his wordings (to a fault)
May 7, 2019, 7:32 PM
[ in reply to Mueller was very careful in his wordings (to a fault) ] |
|
So Mueller is saying he had the evidence of obstruction but couldn't prosecute a sitting President?
WRONG. He said he couldn't reach a conclusion and gave no reason.
I'm sure 5,000 attorneys would argue that a President by position cannot obstruct justice as he is the top law enforcement officer in the country.
This whole collusion and obstruction claim against Trump is nothing but politics and a disgrace. Any child can see it. Unless of course that child has been programmed by the left.
|
|
|
|
|
|
Legend [15492]
TigerPulse: 100%
Posts: 18413
Joined: 12/10/14
|
Re: Prosecutors have a binary decision to make.
May 7, 2019, 6:20 PM
[ in reply to Re: Prosecutors have a binary decision to make. ] |
|
Mueller said he couldn't decide. That's far from not prosecuting because of laws. All he had to do was say 'We believe he obstructed justice.' It was his only decision and he failed to make it.
Halfast job.
Again I have to remind you of the facts my friend. "Mueler said he couldn't decide"... That is not what Mueller said at all.
What he said was "here are 10 good examples of obstruction and I'm turning it over to Congress". (paraphrasing). He was, in fact, constrained by the Justice Dept. guide line that no sitting President can be indicted. He couldn't indict him, there was nothing left for him to do BUT turn it over to Congress.
Here, this will help you.
https://www.tigernet.com/forum/thread/Well-the-number-has-gotten-over-700-1902464
Geeez leweeeez.
|
|
|
|
|
|
Oculus Spirit [93650]
TigerPulse: 100%
Posts: 95406
Joined: 12/25/09
|
That is false.
May 7, 2019, 7:32 PM
|
|
It doesn't matter that you like it, that Mueller said it or that dems are claiming it as law, it's not. Trump could have been indicted just as easily as assembling a grand jury and presenting the case to them. The following article discusses the history behind the theory that a POTUS can't be indicted.
"But here’s the thing: There is not a syllable in the text of the Constitution that supports the conclusion reached by either the Nixon-appointed OLC lawyer that Nixon was immune or the Clinton-appointed OLC lawyer that Clinton was immune. The foundation of Mueller’s reluctance to indict is rotten to the core...."
http://time.com/5574520/mueller-report-trump-indictment-obstruction-justice/
So why didn't dems press this matter to the full extent of the law? Because they have no motive by which to prove beyond a reasonable doubt that Trump obstructed justice. Barr addressed this in his hearing before the Senate.
Barr gave one reason which would be used in an impeachment hearing for Trump's telling McGhan to fire Mueller. Trump, he said, instructed McGhan to open a dialogue with Rosenstien about Mueller's conflict of interest. He was addressing the fact that Mueller had been named Special Counsel one day after being rejected for the head of the FBI. That's enough for a reasonable person to doubt Trump's action was obstruction of justice.
Then to add insult to injury to the dems who were torturing Trump by dragging Barr into the hearing Barr said, firing Mueller would not have ended the investigation if he were replace. If Mueller was replaced the investigation would continue so even if Mueller was fired it would not have necessarily been obstructing the investigation.
Trump doesn't need to be exonerated, he only needs to cast doubt on each of the items on Mueller's list of possible obstruction actions.
|
|
|
|
|
|
Orange Blooded [4974]
TigerPulse: 99%
Posts: 5276
Joined: 6/2/03
|
|
|
|
|
|
All-In [34580]
TigerPulse: 100%
Posts: 41406
Joined: 4/20/01
|
libbies attacking a war hero...***
May 7, 2019, 8:44 PM
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Oculus Spirit [93650]
TigerPulse: 100%
Posts: 95406
Joined: 12/25/09
|
Re: Prosecutors have a binary decision to make.
May 9, 2019, 12:35 AM
[ in reply to Re: Prosecutors have a binary decision to make. ] |
|
He said he couldn't exonerate Trump. That's not a lie. It's almost impossible to prove someone is innocent. That's why the burden of proof is on the prosecutor. He couldn't prove Trump was guilty of anything or he would have said so. Mueller could not determine Trump's motive behind the actions suspected of being obstructive of justice.
Mueller didn't lie, technically, but exoneration wasn't part of his job and it was misconduct to make mention of it in the formal report.
|
|
|
|
|
|
All-In [31887]
TigerPulse: 100%
Posts: 37176
Joined: 11/22/03
|
I think a better question is "why did he start it"...
May 7, 2019, 3:48 PM
|
|
at least based on the rules he seemed to self-impose.
According to the report, Trump was never in direct legal jeopardy from the probe. The report clearly says that it was never going to make a legal determination because it wouldn't be fair to the POTUS since he can't defend himself in a court of law due to not being able to be indicted.
I sure would have liked to have known that before, or as, the investigation started.
|
|
|
|
|
|
Heisman Winner [119684]
TigerPulse: 100%
Posts: 54457
Joined: 6/24/09
|
DAYEM RIGHT POD!!!***
May 7, 2019, 3:54 PM
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
CU Medallion [73569]
TigerPulse: 100%
Posts: 78044
Joined: 11/30/98
|
|
|
|
|
|
All-In [31887]
TigerPulse: 100%
Posts: 37176
Joined: 11/22/03
|
Then why not say it at the outset....
May 7, 2019, 4:46 PM
|
|
frankly, I have a hard time believing that this POTUS can't defend himself...as he unleashes twitter barrages on a daily basis.
|
|
|
|
|
|
Orange Blooded [4974]
TigerPulse: 99%
Posts: 5276
Joined: 6/2/03
|
Re: Then why not say it at the outset....
May 7, 2019, 7:41 PM
|
|
Just like no one can believe the House can't question Barr without staff attorneys.
|
|
|
|
|
|
Legend [18018]
TigerPulse: 100%
Posts: 30150
Joined: 9/9/06
|
It's why he left it to Congress
May 7, 2019, 4:16 PM
[ in reply to I think a better question is "why did he start it"... ] |
|
which some say was his way of saying, my hands are tied here because of Department of Justice policy, but if the president isn't president any more then there's enough here to charge obstruction, hint hint.
Who knows though, it's why I would like him to testify to see what he really felt about everything.
As for the "why the investigation started" it was also to investigate Russian meddling/hacking in the election (which was verified) but extended to Trump because of the more than 100 known contacts between his administration and Russia and Trump's openness to that meddling.
|
|
|
|
|
|
Orange Blooded [4974]
TigerPulse: 99%
Posts: 5276
Joined: 6/2/03
|
Re: It's why he left it to Congress
May 7, 2019, 7:43 PM
|
|
Trumps campaign and transition teams contact with Russians does not equal collusion, regardless of Russian intent. Give it up.
|
|
|
|
|
|
Oculus Spirit [93650]
TigerPulse: 100%
Posts: 95406
Joined: 12/25/09
|
|
|
|
|
|
All-In [34102]
TigerPulse: 100%
Posts: 33606
Joined: 9/13/99
|
|
|
|
|
|
All-In [31887]
TigerPulse: 100%
Posts: 37176
Joined: 11/22/03
|
Yeah, my point was why start this if he was not going to....
May 8, 2019, 9:33 PM
|
|
Bring charges regardless of the findings. Frankly, I think he shirked his duty and made up a standard that didn't previously exist.
I didn't mean to imply I didn't support an investigation in general.
|
|
|
|
|
|
All-In [34102]
TigerPulse: 100%
Posts: 33606
Joined: 9/13/99
|
Re: Yeah, my point was why start this if he was not going to....
May 8, 2019, 11:57 PM
|
|
I think Trump himself was part of the investigation insofar as he was part of the campaign, but (as Comey told him long ago) he was not the focus.
|
|
|
|
|
|
Oculus Spirit [93650]
TigerPulse: 100%
Posts: 95406
Joined: 12/25/09
|
He did, Mueller brought everything forward but he didn't...
May 9, 2019, 12:30 AM
[ in reply to Yeah, my point was why start this if he was not going to.... ] |
|
have enough to even accuse Trump of obstruction of justice. I've been sharing Alan Dershowitz' opinion for a couple months. In order to prove obstruction of justice when there's no underlying crime a prosecutor must prove malicious motive. That's to say the action taken by the suspect must be motivated by his desire to obstruct justice.
Mueller couldn't get that without talking to Trump. That's not to say that Trump would have been honest and divulged his true motive if he wanted to obstruct the investigation. Trump responded to every question which inquired about the time before his inauguration. He ignore those regarding the time during his presidency.
Everyone has a right to silence when accused of a crime. Spooneye is wrong. The investigation was all about Trump. When an special counsel interrogates you remaining silent is your 5th amendment right.
|
|
|
|
|
|
Oculus Spirit [93650]
TigerPulse: 100%
Posts: 95406
Joined: 12/25/09
|
A witch hunt results in catching a few familiars.
May 9, 2019, 12:20 AM
[ in reply to Because it was about the whole of the Trump campaign... ] |
|
Not one person conspired with Russia. You can claim it was worth a special counsel but you and I know the Mueller report was an epic fail. They got more on Bill than they got on Trump and he survived and even thrived. Epic fail.
|
|
|
|
|
|
Orange Blooded [4974]
TigerPulse: 99%
Posts: 5276
Joined: 6/2/03
|
|
|
|
|
|
110%er [5623]
TigerPulse: 98%
Posts: 3320
Joined: 9/12/16
|
Re: Why did Mueller end his investigation?
May 9, 2019, 8:26 AM
|
|
1. Mueller knew from day one that collusion did not exist
2. The so called investigation was part of a process to overthrow a duly elected president
3. AG Barr ordered Mueller to wrap his circus up
4. The Obama Justice Dept, FBI, CIA and NIA committed crimes against American citizens
5. HRC conspired and colluded with Russia for dirt on Trump
6. HRC obstructed justice a. destroyed 33,000 emails b. destroyed laptops and communication devices c. wiped
an illegal server clean
7. AG Barr is now investigating the investigators and indictments will be forthcoming
8. The dems that have been giving cover for and involved with this now failed coup d'etat are scared to
death
|
|
|
|
|
|
Replies: 30
| visibility 700
|
|
|
50
