• 1
  • 4
  • 5
  • 6
  • 7
  • 8
  • 9
 
MikeDrop
Posts: 438
Joined: Sat Apr 21, 2018 6:21 pm

Re: Mueller Speaks: Barr Mislead the American People

Fri May 31, 2019 3:34 am

Aaron747 wrote:
Have you read about Flynn associate Smith’s activities? Pgs 61-65 of volume 1. This dude couldn’t be interviewed by Mueller because he killed himself in 2017.


The stuff I read, which may or may not be true is that he was dying and he killed himself before his insurance lapsed so his family could get the money... who knows... he offed himself in Rochester MN, which is where the Mayo Clinic is located.

Mike Drop
 
User avatar
DL717
Posts: 1391
Joined: Wed May 23, 2018 10:53 pm

Re: Mueller Speaks: Barr Mislead the American People

Fri May 31, 2019 12:17 pm

jdstJD wrote:
Dieuwer wrote:
jdstJD wrote:

Actually no, it doesn’t work that way. Impeachment is a trial conducted by the Senate. The House brings articles of impeachment and the Senate conducts the trial. The Chief Justice of the Supreme Court presides. Only after a verdict of guilty of the high crime or misdemeanor alleged can the judgment of impeachment be rendered, and only then can the congress actually have him removed as a result of the impeachment. It’s a rather complex process. Which is why it can’t be initiated lightly or on a whim.


So all the cries about "Impeachment NOW!" are just part of the Punch and Judy show on Capitol Hill?


Not necessarily. People just want the impeachment proceedings to be started...like yesterday!!


And the rest are done with this nonsense. The left can’t seem to accept anything they don’t like anymore. Boo freakin’ Hoo.
Welcome to Nothingburgers. May I take your order?
 
User avatar
DL717
Posts: 1391
Joined: Wed May 23, 2018 10:53 pm

Re: Mueller Speaks: Barr Mislead the American People

Fri May 31, 2019 12:19 pm

Tugger wrote:
trpmb6 wrote:
The thing is, the conversation has moved away from discussions about what interactions Trump and his campaign had with Russia and towards whether or not Trump was trying to obstruct the investigation into himself and his associates. It's going to be a very hard sell to people to say, we're going to impeach a president for obstructing an investigation into a crime he was wrongfully accused of. Especially considering how many documents they turned over, answering written questions and letting Mueller actually finish his report. That doesn't sound like someone who was trying to obstruct justice.

I am curious why you would think that? The Whitewater investigation moved WAAAAY away from its initial investigatory concern and then went on to provide information for impeachment when the president lied in an attempt to obstruct the investigation. The Republican's fully supported that type of investigatory latitude then, and the people (myself included) saw that the president lied and he should not have. Impeachment was the result.

Tugg


And it was stupid then, just as this is stupid now.
Welcome to Nothingburgers. May I take your order?
 
User avatar
DL717
Posts: 1391
Joined: Wed May 23, 2018 10:53 pm

Re: Mueller Speaks: Barr Mislead the American People

Fri May 31, 2019 12:26 pm

BN747 wrote:
MikeDrop wrote:
BN747 wrote:

The same Russians listed in the Mueller Report that you say is a Hoax, just as your master told you....those Russians.

BN747

Lol, try as hard as you want to smear Trump with the collusion tag, it just won’t work. Mueller stated clearly that he didn’t find evidence that Trump or anyone in his campaign colluded with the Russians.

It must suck to have nothing to get Trump with after 2.5 years of trying.

Mike Drop



Goodness, there's no hope at all for you people...you guys are so far up this guys ass it's zombie like. You guys will literally sell America for nothing. After this all said and done something must be done about these uber unAmerican types, they're more dangerous that Al Qaida could ever be.

BN747


When do you plan to get over the election results so we can all discuss something else? You didn’t get what you hoped for out of the investigation and now it’s right back to election night. And we’re up some guys ass? Good grief.
Welcome to Nothingburgers. May I take your order?
 
Magog
Posts: 785
Joined: Tue Jan 22, 2019 11:54 am

Re: Mueller Speaks: Barr Mislead the American People

Fri May 31, 2019 12:38 pm

BN747 wrote:
Goodness, there's no hope at all for you people...you guys are so far up this guys ass it's zombie like. You guys will literally sell America for nothing. After this all said and done something must be done about these uber unAmerican types, they're more dangerous that Al Qaida could ever be.


Me: "I respect Mueller's conclusion that he found no credible evidence that members of the Trump campaign conspired or coordinated with the Russian government in its election interference activities."

BN747: "You are more dangerous than Al Qaida!"

Me: :banghead: :banghead: :banghead: :banghead:
 
User avatar
trpmb6
Posts: 2513
Joined: Thu Apr 19, 2018 5:45 pm

Re: Mueller Speaks: Barr Mislead the American People

Fri May 31, 2019 2:05 pm

MikeDrop wrote:
Aaron747 wrote:
Have you read about Flynn associate Smith’s activities? Pgs 61-65 of volume 1. This dude couldn’t be interviewed by Mueller because he killed himself in 2017.


The stuff I read, which may or may not be true is that he was dying and he killed himself before his insurance lapsed so his family could get the money... who knows... he offed himself in Rochester MN, which is where the Mayo Clinic is located.

Mike Drop


Honestly I thought that type of conspiratorial talk was reserved for those of us on the right who talk about the Clintons, the Whitewater Investigation and the "suicide" of Vince Foster.... :stirthepot:
 
Magog
Posts: 785
Joined: Tue Jan 22, 2019 11:54 am

Re: Mueller Speaks: Barr Mislead the American People

Fri May 31, 2019 3:02 pm

AG Barr has weighed in.

From Politico:
“I personally felt he could’ve reached a decision,” he told CBS’s Jan Crawford in an interview set to air Friday. “The opinion says you cannot indict a president while he is in office, but he could’ve reached a decision as to whether it was criminal activity.”

https://www.politico.com/story/2019/05/ ... on-1348216

Barr is absolutely right on this one. I defy anyone to find legal authority saying that Mueller could not have offered an opinion as to whether or not a President engaged in criminal activity.
 
User avatar
Aaron747
Posts: 9047
Joined: Thu Aug 07, 2003 2:07 am

Re: Mueller Speaks: Barr Mislead the American People

Fri May 31, 2019 3:39 pm

Magog wrote:
AG Barr has weighed in.

From Politico:
“I personally felt he could’ve reached a decision,” he told CBS’s Jan Crawford in an interview set to air Friday. “The opinion says you cannot indict a president while he is in office, but he could’ve reached a decision as to whether it was criminal activity.”

https://www.politico.com/story/2019/05/ ... on-1348216

Barr is absolutely right on this one. I defy anyone to find legal authority saying that Mueller could not have offered an opinion as to whether or not a President engaged in criminal activity.


Already explained in the presser by Mueller:

The introduction to the Volume II of our report explains that decision. It explains that under longstanding department policy, a president cannot be charged with a federal crime while he is in office. That is unconstitutional. Even if the charge is kept under seal and hidden from public view, that, too, is prohibited. A special counsel’s office is part of the Department of Justice, and by regulation, it was bound by that department policy. Charging the president with a crime was therefore not an option we could consider. The department’s written opinion explaining the policy makes several important points that further informed our handling of the obstruction investigation. Those points are summarized in our report, and I will describe two of them for you.

First, the opinion explicitly permits the investigation of a sitting president, because it is important to preserve evidence while memories are fresh and documents available. Among other things, that evidence could be used if there were co-conspirators who could be charged now.

And second, the opinion says that the Constitution requires a process other than the criminal justice system to formally accuse a sitting president of wrongdoing. And beyond department policy, we were guided by principles of fairness. It would be unfair to potentially — it would be unfair to potentially accuse somebody of a crime when there can be no court resolution of the actual charge.


The DOJ cannot insinuate a crime which cannot be adjudicated - out of fairness to both accused and the system, in short.
If you need someone to blame / throw a rock in the air / you'll hit someone guilty
 
Magog
Posts: 785
Joined: Tue Jan 22, 2019 11:54 am

Re: Mueller Speaks: Barr Mislead the American People

Fri May 31, 2019 3:48 pm

You didn't answer my question. My question was whether or not you could produce any legal authority saying that Mueller cannot give an opinion as to whether or not Trump engaged in criminal activity. You provided no legal authority. Mueller saying that it would be "unfair" is his opinion. It is not legal authority.

So Barr was correct. Mueller could have given an opinion.
 
seb146
Posts: 19830
Joined: Wed Dec 01, 1999 7:19 am

Re: Mueller Speaks: Barr Mislead the American People

Fri May 31, 2019 4:45 pm

Magog wrote:
You didn't answer my question. My question was whether or not you could produce any legal authority saying that Mueller cannot give an opinion as to whether or not Trump engaged in criminal activity. You provided no legal authority. Mueller saying that it would be "unfair" is his opinion. It is not legal authority.

So Barr was correct. Mueller could have given an opinion.


The Mueller Report is facts and reports of what happened. It was not up to Mueller himself to charge anyone. He left that to the district courts and Congress. As we know from Watergate and Ken Starr, it is Congress' Constitutional duty to investigate if there are crimes that must be adjudicated. We still have to hear how Hillary is guilty and must be investigated with zero reason or proof or anything of substance other than sheer hatred by one political party. However, we have a hundreds page document listing what Congress should look at that are probably crimes. Mueller's opinion. That must be investigated or Congress is not doing their Constitutional duty.
You bet I'm pumped!!! I just had a green tea!!!
 
Magog
Posts: 785
Joined: Tue Jan 22, 2019 11:54 am

Re: Mueller Speaks: Barr Mislead the American People

Fri May 31, 2019 5:14 pm

Mueller gave multiple opinions as to the criminal liability of various actors. I have still yet to hear a shred of legal authority as to why he couldn't give his opinion in regard to Trump.

Understand where I am coming from. As a Democrat, I WANT Mueller to say that Trump committed a crime.
 
User avatar
jdstJD
Posts: 81
Joined: Sun Jun 03, 2018 1:40 am

Re: Mueller Speaks: Barr Mislead the American People

Fri May 31, 2019 7:13 pm

seb146 wrote:
Magog wrote:
You didn't answer my question. My question was whether or not you could produce any legal authority saying that Mueller cannot give an opinion as to whether or not Trump engaged in criminal activity. You provided no legal authority. Mueller saying that it would be "unfair" is his opinion. It is not legal authority.

So Barr was correct. Mueller could have given an opinion.


The Mueller Report is facts and reports of what happened. It was not up to Mueller himself to charge anyone. He left that to the district courts and Congress. As we know from Watergate and Ken Starr, it is Congress' Constitutional duty to investigate if there are crimes that must be adjudicated. We still have to hear how Hillary is guilty and must be investigated with zero reason or proof or anything of substance other than sheer hatred by one political party. However, we have a hundreds page document listing what Congress should look at that are probably crimes. Mueller's opinion. That must be investigated or Congress is not doing their Constitutional duty.


Yep.
Lawyer, frequent air traveler and aviation enthusiast.
 
Magog
Posts: 785
Joined: Tue Jan 22, 2019 11:54 am

Re: Mueller Speaks: Barr Mislead the American People

Fri May 31, 2019 7:16 pm

So far nobody has produced actual legal authority. I was looking for more than, "Yep."
Last edited by Magog on Fri May 31, 2019 7:18 pm, edited 2 times in total.
 
User avatar
jdstJD
Posts: 81
Joined: Sun Jun 03, 2018 1:40 am

Re: Mueller Speaks: Barr Mislead the American People

Fri May 31, 2019 7:17 pm

Magog wrote:
Mueller gave multiple opinions as to the criminal liability of various actors. I have still yet to hear a shred of legal authority as to why he couldn't give his opinion in regard to Trump.

Understand where I am coming from. As a Democrat, I WANT Mueller to say that Trump committed a crime.


He provided the legal authority he was relying on which was the office of legal counsels opinion. It is not in and of itself binding legal “authority”, but it is used as a basis for the DOJ’s indictment policy for persons serving in the office of the presidency. In addition to referencing the opinion, he stated that he relies on his own interpretation of the Constitution that he believes prohibited him from charging a president with a crime while in office and that instead of doing that the Constitution provides congress with that authority through the impeachment process.
Lawyer, frequent air traveler and aviation enthusiast.
 
Magog
Posts: 785
Joined: Tue Jan 22, 2019 11:54 am

Re: Mueller Speaks: Barr Mislead the American People

Fri May 31, 2019 7:20 pm

jdstJD wrote:
Magog wrote:
Mueller gave multiple opinions as to the criminal liability of various actors. I have still yet to hear a shred of legal authority as to why he couldn't give his opinion in regard to Trump.

Understand where I am coming from. As a Democrat, I WANT Mueller to say that Trump committed a crime.


He provided the legal authority he was relying on which was the office of legal counsels opinion. It is not in and of itself binding legal “authority”, but it is used as a basis for the DOJ’s indictment policy for persons serving in the office of the presidency. In addition to referencing the opinion, he stated that he relies on his own interpretation of the Constitution that he believes prohibited him from charging a president with a crime while in office and that instead of doing that the Constitution provides congress with that authority through the impeachment process.

The DOJ opinion says that a sitting President cannot be indicted. It does not say that a Special Counsel cannot give an opinion as to whether or not the President engaged in criminal behavior. Huge difference. And Mueller's personal interpretation of the Constitution is not binding legal authority. What authority did he rely on to develop that opinion? It looks like he had nothing. It's a very simple question that I have yet to get an answer to.
 
alfa164
Posts: 2796
Joined: Sat Oct 06, 2012 2:47 am

Re: Mueller Speaks: Barr Mislead the American People

Fri May 31, 2019 7:22 pm

Aaron747 wrote:
The simple antidote to that is: read the damn report. They didn’t get the whole story, because Russia’s good at what they do. But there’s plenty there that leads anyone with critical thinking skills down an awfully curious path. I’ll quote from myself:

My only problem with Mueller is it seems he's still living in some kind of fantasy America of the past where people respect service like his, read newspapers every day, and have the class, patience, and ability to carefully spend a few Sunday mornings sifting through a now-public 448 page report.

And I’ll add that’s where AG Barr is cynical and crass. He knows many Americans won’t read it, and that was part of the calculus of its release. The WH will continue talking about the investigation’s origin, 45 will continue spinning yarns about a guy like Mueller being pissed at him over a golf club membership, and nobody will talk about the actual fundings of the report - which are quite alarming if one actually READS it.


:checkmark: This should be required reading before anyone is ever allowed to [ost a comment on this topic.


jdstJD wrote:
What exactly has you so passionately supportive of trump? I’m really curious. What about him is actually worthy of your support? Of Republicans’ support? Conservatives’ support?


...being paid in rubles...

;)
Last edited by alfa164 on Fri May 31, 2019 7:28 pm, edited 1 time in total.
I'm going to have a smokin' hot body again!
I have decided to be cremated....
 
Magog
Posts: 785
Joined: Tue Jan 22, 2019 11:54 am

Re: Mueller Speaks: Barr Mislead the American People

Fri May 31, 2019 7:25 pm

alfa164 wrote:
jdstJD wrote:
What exactly has you so passionately supportive of trump? I’m really curious. What about him is actually worthy of your support? Of Republicans’ support? Conservatives’ support?


...being paid in rubles...

;)

This is such a tired, old trope. I may be a Democrat, but I certainly understand that people are able to have a different opinion without accusing anyone who does of being a Russian agent. It's just so silly. And it's a way to avoid debate, which never makes your argument look strong.
 
User avatar
jdstJD
Posts: 81
Joined: Sun Jun 03, 2018 1:40 am

Re: Mueller Speaks: Barr Mislead the American People

Fri May 31, 2019 7:50 pm

Magog wrote:
jdstJD wrote:
Magog wrote:
Mueller gave multiple opinions as to the criminal liability of various actors. I have still yet to hear a shred of legal authority as to why he couldn't give his opinion in regard to Trump.

Understand where I am coming from. As a Democrat, I WANT Mueller to say that Trump committed a crime.


He provided the legal authority he was relying on which was the office of legal counsels opinion. It is not in and of itself binding legal “authority”, but it is used as a basis for the DOJ’s indictment policy for persons serving in the office of the presidency. In addition to referencing the opinion, he stated that he relies on his own interpretation of the Constitution that he believes prohibited him from charging a president with a crime while in office and that instead of doing that the Constitution provides congress with that authority through the impeachment process.

The DOJ opinion says that a sitting President cannot be indicted. It does not say that a Special Counsel cannot give an opinion as to whether or not the President engaged in criminal behavior. Huge difference. And Mueller's personal interpretation of the Constitution is not binding legal authority. What authority did he rely on to develop that opinion? It looks like he had nothing. It's a very simple question that I have yet to get an answer to.


I'm telling you what the legal authority is that Mueller is relying on. It's the Constitution. He said that he believes that BASED ON THE CONSTITUTION a president cannot be indicted while in office. That in the event of a suspicion of criminal activity of the president, the Constitution affords the Congress the authority to conduct impeachment proceedings which may result in removal from office. He also said that the same Constitutional principle that he believes dictates that he could not indict the president also means that he could not even make the accusation that the president committed a crime since the president would not have the opportunity to defend himself in a court of law. How would he have made it known that he personally believed a crime was committed by the president without violating the Constitutional principle he is relying on???

This answers your question. It just appears that you are not accepting the answer as satisfying what you want the answer to be.
Lawyer, frequent air traveler and aviation enthusiast.
 
D L X
Posts: 12427
Joined: Thu May 27, 1999 3:30 am

Re: Mueller Speaks: Barr Mislead the American People

Fri May 31, 2019 8:10 pm

Magog wrote:
So far nobody has produced actual legal authority. I was looking for more than, "Yep."

What "legal authority" are you looking for?

Did you read the Mueller Report?
 
User avatar
trpmb6
Posts: 2513
Joined: Thu Apr 19, 2018 5:45 pm

Re: Mueller Speaks: Barr Mislead the American People

Fri May 31, 2019 8:11 pm

jdstJD wrote:
Magog wrote:
jdstJD wrote:

He provided the legal authority he was relying on which was the office of legal counsels opinion. It is not in and of itself binding legal “authority”, but it is used as a basis for the DOJ’s indictment policy for persons serving in the office of the presidency. In addition to referencing the opinion, he stated that he relies on his own interpretation of the Constitution that he believes prohibited him from charging a president with a crime while in office and that instead of doing that the Constitution provides congress with that authority through the impeachment process.

The DOJ opinion says that a sitting President cannot be indicted. It does not say that a Special Counsel cannot give an opinion as to whether or not the President engaged in criminal behavior. Huge difference. And Mueller's personal interpretation of the Constitution is not binding legal authority. What authority did he rely on to develop that opinion? It looks like he had nothing. It's a very simple question that I have yet to get an answer to.


I'm telling you what the legal authority is that Mueller is relying on. It's the Constitution. He said that he believes that BASED ON THE CONSTITUTION a president cannot be indicted while in office. That in the event of a suspicion of criminal activity of the president, the Constitution affords the Congress the authority to conduct impeachment proceedings which may result in removal from office. He also said that the same Constitutional principle that he believes dictates that he could not indict the president also means that he could not even make the accusation that the president committed a crime since the president would not have the opportunity to defend himself in a court of law. How would he have made it known that he personally believed a crime was committed by the president without violating the Constitutional principle he is relying on???

This answers your question. It just appears that you are not accepting the answer as satisfying what you want the answer to be.



This is kind of just a devil's advocate question here so don't feel obligated to answer. But if Mueller's team never intended to make a suggestion, or recommendation or what have you, about obstruction, why did they even investigate it? It seems to me that they should have immediately, following the conclusion of the Russian conspiracy investigation, issued a report (basically volume 1) and informed congress that there was no point in investigating any "obstruction" charges as the office of the Special Counsel would not be able to make a recommendation one way or another. In fact, the mere act of continuing the investigation opened up additional opportunities for appearances of obstruction. Why close the investigation now, just keep it open until the president calls for his resignation, then BOOM AHA! Gotcha Sucker! That's obstruction of justice!
 
stratclub
Posts: 1223
Joined: Fri Jan 05, 2018 10:38 pm

Re: Mueller Speaks: Barr Mislead the American People

Fri May 31, 2019 8:19 pm

Mueller's report and the Demos witch hunt are a complete disregard for the 14th Amendment of the Constitution (Innocent until proven guilty). Mueller's job was to determine if there is probable cause that crimes had been committed, not to prove innocence or exonerate and his fairy tale musings in the report were purely a political attack. Mueller could actually be investigated for ethical violations of the Constitution and disbarred for his hack job of a report.

"The presumption of innocence is a cornerstone of the American legal system and a foundational principle of criminal procedures. This presumption shifts the burden of proof to the prosecution to affirmatively prove that you committed the criminal act. This has several ramifications that may not be apparent at first glance.

First, it means that you won't be constantly harassed by the state filing criminal charges against you that require you to prove your innocence. Without the presumption of innocence, there would be little to prevent the state from charging you with crimes and forcing you to constantly prove your innocence. With the presumption in place, the state has an incentive to only bring charges where it believes there is sufficient evidence to prove that a suspect committed a crime.

Second, it means you don't have to say a single thing, or prove a single thing in your defense. You could be silent the entire trial and put on no defense whatsoever. Unless the prosecution can prove that you committed all of the required elements of the crime, you should be judged not guilty".
 
Magog
Posts: 785
Joined: Tue Jan 22, 2019 11:54 am

Re: Mueller Speaks: Barr Mislead the American People

Fri May 31, 2019 8:47 pm

jdstJD wrote:
Magog wrote:
jdstJD wrote:

He provided the legal authority he was relying on which was the office of legal counsels opinion. It is not in and of itself binding legal “authority”, but it is used as a basis for the DOJ’s indictment policy for persons serving in the office of the presidency. In addition to referencing the opinion, he stated that he relies on his own interpretation of the Constitution that he believes prohibited him from charging a president with a crime while in office and that instead of doing that the Constitution provides congress with that authority through the impeachment process.

The DOJ opinion says that a sitting President cannot be indicted. It does not say that a Special Counsel cannot give an opinion as to whether or not the President engaged in criminal behavior. Huge difference. And Mueller's personal interpretation of the Constitution is not binding legal authority. What authority did he rely on to develop that opinion? It looks like he had nothing. It's a very simple question that I have yet to get an answer to.


I'm telling you what the legal authority is that Mueller is relying on. It's the Constitution. He said that he believes that BASED ON THE CONSTITUTION a president cannot be indicted while in office. That in the event of a suspicion of criminal activity of the president, the Constitution affords the Congress the authority to conduct impeachment proceedings which may result in removal from office. He also said that the same Constitutional principle that he believes dictates that he could not indict the president also means that he could not even make the accusation that the president committed a crime since the president would not have the opportunity to defend himself in a court of law. How would he have made it known that he personally believed a crime was committed by the president without violating the Constitutional principle he is relying on???

This answers your question. It just appears that you are not accepting the answer as satisfying what you want the answer to be.

So once again it boils down to Mueller's opinion and not any actual binding authority. This is especially true since the Constitution does not say that Mueller cannot give an opinion. Mueller had to interpret that. At best that's a VERY flimsy excuse not to give an opinion. He didn't cite any statutory law, case law or administrative opinion in support of his contention - which he really ought to have been able to do.
 
D L X
Posts: 12427
Joined: Thu May 27, 1999 3:30 am

Re: Mueller Speaks: Barr Mislead the American People

Fri May 31, 2019 9:11 pm

Magog wrote:
He didn't cite any statutory law, case law or administrative opinion in support of his contention - which he really ought to have been able to do.


You realize there are other sources of law other than cases, administrative opinions, and statutes, right? What I haven't heard you say is why the DOJ guidance is not binding on Mueller. If your bosses tell you you must do something a certain way and that you're prohibited from doing something else, do you do it anyway?
 
Magog
Posts: 785
Joined: Tue Jan 22, 2019 11:54 am

Re: Mueller Speaks: Barr Mislead the American People

Fri May 31, 2019 9:34 pm

D L X wrote:
Magog wrote:
He didn't cite any statutory law, case law or administrative opinion in support of his contention - which he really ought to have been able to do.


You realize there are other sources of law other than cases, administrative opinions, and statutes, right? What I haven't heard you say is why the DOJ guidance is not binding on Mueller. If your bosses tell you you must do something a certain way and that you're prohibited from doing something else, do you do it anyway?

Of course I realize there are other sources of law. But I’ve yet to hear anyone cite any such source. I’ve been asking for quite a while. I am questioning whether or not the DOJ guidance is not binding on Mueller, although I will point out that it is untested. The DOJ guidance only deals with whether or not a sitting president may be indicted. It does not address whether or not Mueller could give his opinion on the criminality of conduct.
 
User avatar
jdstJD
Posts: 81
Joined: Sun Jun 03, 2018 1:40 am

Re: Mueller Speaks: Barr Mislead the American People

Fri May 31, 2019 9:40 pm

trpmb6 wrote:
jdstJD wrote:
Magog wrote:
The DOJ opinion says that a sitting President cannot be indicted. It does not say that a Special Counsel cannot give an opinion as to whether or not the President engaged in criminal behavior. Huge difference. And Mueller's personal interpretation of the Constitution is not binding legal authority. What authority did he rely on to develop that opinion? It looks like he had nothing. It's a very simple question that I have yet to get an answer to.


I'm telling you what the legal authority is that Mueller is relying on. It's the Constitution. He said that he believes that BASED ON THE CONSTITUTION a president cannot be indicted while in office. That in the event of a suspicion of criminal activity of the president, the Constitution affords the Congress the authority to conduct impeachment proceedings which may result in removal from office. He also said that the same Constitutional principle that he believes dictates that he could not indict the president also means that he could not even make the accusation that the president committed a crime since the president would not have the opportunity to defend himself in a court of law. How would he have made it known that he personally believed a crime was committed by the president without violating the Constitutional principle he is relying on???

This answers your question. It just appears that you are not accepting the answer as satisfying what you want the answer to be.



This is kind of just a devil's advocate question here so don't feel obligated to answer. But if Mueller's team never intended to make a suggestion, or recommendation or what have you, about obstruction, why did they even investigate it? It seems to me that they should have immediately, following the conclusion of the Russian conspiracy investigation, issued a report (basically volume 1) and informed congress that there was no point in investigating any "obstruction" charges as the office of the Special Counsel would not be able to make a recommendation one way or another. In fact, the mere act of continuing the investigation opened up additional opportunities for appearances of obstruction. Why close the investigation now, just keep it open until the president calls for his resignation, then BOOM AHA! Gotcha Sucker! That's obstruction of justice!


The point of the investigation was to conduct the fact finding to find out what evidence, if any, existed that either (1) there was a conspiracy between the trump campaign and russia and (2) any other criminal activity found during the course of that investigation. It is the second part of the investigation that resulted in evidence of criminal activity. All Mueller was supposed to do was develop the nature of the evidence. In normal situations, like in a regular criminal investigation undertaken by law enforcement or a prosecutor, the evidence is gathered and then a decision is made by the prosecutor to file charges or not. In this unique situation, the evidence was collected, but the DOJ policy didn't allow Mueller to charge or make a public announcement that he believed a crime had occurred. So what he did, which I understand and agree with, was collect the evidence and present it so that the body who could make the charging decision would, meaning the congress. Its not his place in this scenario to make the charging decision. The congress has to.If the DOJ policy is being followed, I dont think it would have been appropriate for Barr to have made a charging decision either. Barr's main problem though was not only was he bound by the DOJ policy, but he shouldn't have had any involvement at all since he wrote the unsolicited memo months before he became AG.
Lawyer, frequent air traveler and aviation enthusiast.
 
User avatar
jdstJD
Posts: 81
Joined: Sun Jun 03, 2018 1:40 am

Re: Mueller Speaks: Barr Mislead the American People

Fri May 31, 2019 9:42 pm

Magog wrote:
jdstJD wrote:
Magog wrote:
The DOJ opinion says that a sitting President cannot be indicted. It does not say that a Special Counsel cannot give an opinion as to whether or not the President engaged in criminal behavior. Huge difference. And Mueller's personal interpretation of the Constitution is not binding legal authority. What authority did he rely on to develop that opinion? It looks like he had nothing. It's a very simple question that I have yet to get an answer to.


I'm telling you what the legal authority is that Mueller is relying on. It's the Constitution. He said that he believes that BASED ON THE CONSTITUTION a president cannot be indicted while in office. That in the event of a suspicion of criminal activity of the president, the Constitution affords the Congress the authority to conduct impeachment proceedings which may result in removal from office. He also said that the same Constitutional principle that he believes dictates that he could not indict the president also means that he could not even make the accusation that the president committed a crime since the president would not have the opportunity to defend himself in a court of law. How would he have made it known that he personally believed a crime was committed by the president without violating the Constitutional principle he is relying on???

This answers your question. It just appears that you are not accepting the answer as satisfying what you want the answer to be.

So once again it boils down to Mueller's opinion and not any actual binding authority. This is especially true since the Constitution does not say that Mueller cannot give an opinion. Mueller had to interpret that. At best that's a VERY flimsy excuse not to give an opinion. He didn't cite any statutory law, case law or administrative opinion in support of his contention - which he really ought to have been able to do.


Magog, he DID cite to an administrative opinion...the DOJ office of legal counsel opinion!!
Lawyer, frequent air traveler and aviation enthusiast.
 
User avatar
jdstJD
Posts: 81
Joined: Sun Jun 03, 2018 1:40 am

Re: Mueller Speaks: Barr Mislead the American People

Fri May 31, 2019 9:44 pm

Magog wrote:
D L X wrote:
Magog wrote:
He didn't cite any statutory law, case law or administrative opinion in support of his contention - which he really ought to have been able to do.


You realize there are other sources of law other than cases, administrative opinions, and statutes, right? What I haven't heard you say is why the DOJ guidance is not binding on Mueller. If your bosses tell you you must do something a certain way and that you're prohibited from doing something else, do you do it anyway?

Of course I realize there are other sources of law. But I’ve yet to hear anyone cite any such source. I’ve been asking for quite a while. I am questioning whether or not the DOJ guidance is not binding on Mueller, although I will point out that it is untested. The DOJ guidance only deals with whether or not a sitting president may be indicted. It does not address whether or not Mueller could give his opinion on the criminality of conduct.


Go to youtube, pull up Mueller's statement and listen to it very carefully. He explains why not only was he not able to formally indict trump per the DOJ policy, but that he also could not publicly opine as to whether he thought the evidence was sufficient or not to charge him.
Lawyer, frequent air traveler and aviation enthusiast.
 
Magog
Posts: 785
Joined: Tue Jan 22, 2019 11:54 am

Re: Mueller Speaks: Barr Mislead the American People

Fri May 31, 2019 9:47 pm

jdstJD wrote:
All Mueller was supposed to do was develop the nature of the evidence.

That is simply not true since he brought indictments.

jdstJD wrote:
but the DOJ policy didn't allow Mueller to charge or make a public announcement that he believed a crime had occurred.

Show me the policy for the latter. So far absolutely no one has been able to do that.
 
Magog
Posts: 785
Joined: Tue Jan 22, 2019 11:54 am

Re: Mueller Speaks: Barr Mislead the American People

Fri May 31, 2019 9:48 pm

jdstJD wrote:
Magog wrote:
jdstJD wrote:

I'm telling you what the legal authority is that Mueller is relying on. It's the Constitution. He said that he believes that BASED ON THE CONSTITUTION a president cannot be indicted while in office. That in the event of a suspicion of criminal activity of the president, the Constitution affords the Congress the authority to conduct impeachment proceedings which may result in removal from office. He also said that the same Constitutional principle that he believes dictates that he could not indict the president also means that he could not even make the accusation that the president committed a crime since the president would not have the opportunity to defend himself in a court of law. How would he have made it known that he personally believed a crime was committed by the president without violating the Constitutional principle he is relying on???

This answers your question. It just appears that you are not accepting the answer as satisfying what you want the answer to be.

So once again it boils down to Mueller's opinion and not any actual binding authority. This is especially true since the Constitution does not say that Mueller cannot give an opinion. Mueller had to interpret that. At best that's a VERY flimsy excuse not to give an opinion. He didn't cite any statutory law, case law or administrative opinion in support of his contention - which he really ought to have been able to do.


Magog, he DID cite to an administrative opinion...the DOJ office of legal counsel opinion!!

And that opinion does not address whatsoever whether or not Mueller could state his belief as to the criminality of Trump’s conduct. It only says that the president cannot be indicted.
 
User avatar
jdstJD
Posts: 81
Joined: Sun Jun 03, 2018 1:40 am

Re: Mueller Speaks: Barr Mislead the American People

Fri May 31, 2019 10:43 pm

MikeDrop wrote:
jdstJD wrote:
What exactly has you so passionately supportive of trump? I’m really curious. What about him is actually worthy of your support? Of Republicans’ support? Conservatives’ support?


Excellent question. First, I don't consider myself passionate about Trump. I don't particularly like him. To put it simply, for me and all of the Trump supporters I know, he is simply sand in the gears of the deep state govt/media machine that would sell out our country for profit and/or power (on both sides of the aisle). He is also the instrument that we would use to destroy the Republican party of George W Bush, John McCain, William Kristol, and their despicable ilk.


1. Looks to me like its TRUMP who clearly would sell the county out for profit and/or power. He has shown time and time again how he will side with abhorrent dictators over the county's intelligence apparatus and officials. He will disregard the nation's military brass, members of his cabinet, leaders of our government agencies, all of whom have the expertise and training to understand these issues and the people/countries we're dealing with. None of the positions or attitudes he has taken on foreign policy issues have been in the best interest of the country. They have all been in his own vain self interest with respect to how he wants to be seen around the country and the world and to ensure his financial solvency after he leaves office. His whole presidency thing was a marketing effort for Trump Enterprises. He could give less than a damn about this country and our people.


As far as what I like about Trump, for me, it was initially about saving the country from Ted Cruz, Jeb Bush, and Hillary Clinton. I don't like Ted Cruz at all, Jeb, meh, Hillary, I don't care or her much, but she would have made a reputable and distinguished president. It was also about reducing regulations He is completely conflicted when it comes to what regulations should be modified and to what extent they should be. Once again, there are career policy makers who have developed regulations over the decades based on experts, data, research, and a host of other objective guidance that led to the regulations we have in place today that protect us from the horrors we had to deal with over the years that the country was developing and becoming more modern from the "dog eat dog" ways of the industrial era in American history where capitalist ideals were win at all costs to the detriment of public health and safety and employee rights. , and his list of 25 judges that he would nominate Any republican could have nominated judges. trump didn't make the list. he took a sheet of paper filled out by other republicans and read the names off to the camera. Rather than electing a republican who could have just as easily furthered the republicans' causes, you all chose a bafoon totally devoid of any morals or character, let alone sense of intelligence or understanding of history or any other discipline one needs to know about in order to properly run the most sophisticated and powerful country on the face of the earth. The fact that so many people so recklessly elected him is more disappointing than anything because it says that there is such a large number of people in the country who don't feel the importance of who we need to put in that office. . But I agreed with many of his positions during the election. Here is a brief list of positions/accomplishments of the Trump administration that I support:
• The Tax Cuts and Jobs Act The tax "cuts" is a farce. They were funds that were shifted from one budget line item to another. The money coming in from the largest segment of the population is used to pay for services we all, including the wealthy, need provided by the government, but the wealthy with more money, but who have the most tax deductions available to them pay less in taxes. All the tax bill did was increase the money the rich save at tax time which due to the percentage of taxes that come out of their gross income being adjusted due to their deductions and credits, but it did nothing to actually increase the net income or tax savings for the bulk of the nation's tax paying population
• Positions on better trade deals (with China, Canada, Mexico, Europe, etc...)He is talking into a microphone saying over-simplified platitudes about how these countries have been taking advantage of America and then blowing up agreements we've negotiated over decades like a bull in a China shop with absolutely not idea how these issues really work. He thinks he's the first person to ever evaluate and develop policy on these issues. Like he woke up one day and was the only person on earth who had ever thought about global trade and how to manage it
• Focus on apprenticeships for young paople Where has he ever come out with a policy on that?
• Reducing regulations in broad sectors of the economySee my comment above. His cronies have be put into leadership in federal agencies when their careers have been spent in industries antithetical to what the agencies were put in place to regulate.
• Focus on a more secure border - I want him to build the wall, but Congress won't let him...I agree there is a huge flaw in the immigration system in this county. But I think it has more to do with a fork in the road that the country is at as a result of our history and development since the founding being based on immigration (forced and voluntary) and the current modern issues associated with the causes of the influx of people from south and central America. Its not the numbers coming in thats the problem. Its been a steady in flow into the country since its inception. The problem is the element that is coming in. What pisses people off and causes them to think its racial is that there were just as many ruthless crime and gang ridden immigrants coming into the country from Russia, Ireland and Italy throughout the entire 19th and 20th centuries and there wasn't such an outcry. Why is there now such a moralistic outrage of these "criminals" coming in from the South and Central American regions?[i]
• Replacing Obamacare with something better (this will never happen thanks to John McCain)[i]Nothing better than the ACA ( I hate it when people call it obamacare) has been proposed and anything that has come close has been rejected by the people. trump has no clue what to do about health care. Once again, you all are looking for something this man is not equipped to give you

• Tariffs to protect US industries Tariffs will ruin US industries...which is why that hasn't been US policy before now. It seems like an easy fix but it isn't.
• Rolled back Obama’s deals with CubaI am not knowledgable enough about this policy issue as I need to be to give an opinion so I won't.
• Support for Israel, recognizing Jerusalem as its capitalthe US has long had a one sided position on the Israel/Palestinian conflict which it shouldn't have. The issue is not longer just a religious/moral/ geopolitical issue for the U.S. because Israel's interests and conduct throughout the world has changed. The U.S. should adopt a more neutral position because its blind loyalty to that country allows Israel to be a bad actor without the same consequences that we would impose on any other country
• Reducing tension with North Koreathe tension with N. Korea has not changed at all. Kim jung un has played trump like a fiddle because he knows how vain he is and that he can manipulate him simply by flattering him and making him feel good and he knows trump will ignore all of the country's intelligence and geopolitical experts just because kim wrote him a love letter
• Avoiding new foreign warsUmmmm, have you not been watching what's going on? We on the verge of nuclear war with Iran, in a trade war with China, now in a trade war with Mexico, f...ing around with Syria...all of which we had no reason to do. We better hope these countries do get together an gang up on us while our politics are in a flux because trump has pissed off our allies so we won't have anyone to turn to for help
• Defeat of ISISIsis was on the way out long before trump started his presidency fiasco
• Set terms for peace with the TalibanWut??? No he didn't.
• Pushing (successfully) to get NATO members to spend more on their national defenseNATO hasn't changed their policies yet. Also, its not as simple as these countries writing bigger checks...again, something may other people have tried to explain to him but he has no capability to comprehend complex information...unfortunately, neither does his supporters so here we are...the blind leading the blind and the ignorant following the ignorant. They bought into his over-simplified "build the wall", "lock her up" phrases and think that's all there is to the world
• Increased prosecutions of criminals for unlawful use of fire arms Where the hell are you getting this from?
• Support for US energy independence The only energy independence we have gotten is from the modern efficient energy efforts we were on the trajectory of achieving along with the rest of the world before trump weasled his way into the white house. Now with his crony Rick Perry leading the dept of energy, we are DEpendant on the oil and gas industry for our energy needs, which is taking us backwards
• Signed an Executive Order that placed a five-year ban on lobbying and a lifetime ban on lobbying for foreign countries for people working in his administration.I dont know where you got this from either
• SCOTUS nominationsYeah, I was somewhat ok with Gorsuch but Kavanaugh makes me ill
• Focus on STEM and school choiceI havent heard trump once articulate a policy on this. And considering who he put in charge of the Dept of Ed, no parent in this country should place any faith in his administration's ability to effectively run the education system or implement serious public education policy

I know that many of these things like tax cuts, energy independence, and fair trade would be reversed by any of the Dems that will run in 2020, and most of the RINO Repubs that might challenge Trump. So, I will continue to support him, unless a better choice comes along.I truly think any other person, other than donald trump, would be supported by dems and repubicans at this point. This is probably the best possible time for a good strong competitor to trump from the republican party to challenge him. I think they would get broad support from both parties. I am not really liking any of the dem candidates, except joe biden, so there is still room for a republican to get in there...but the more support your party puts behind trump, the less the rest of the country will have any respect for republicans because they seem like a bunch of hypocrits. All the values you all have touted for so long and moral conservatism, etc. etc. went out the window when you all supported trump as your leader. He stands for nothing republicans have been preaching for generations. Even though dems or liberals don't agree with republicans, at least we always knew where you all stood. Its really sad

Thoughts?

I finally had the time and energy to respond to all of this. Sorry for the delay. I'm sure you're gonna give me an "eye" full so I will await your responses :tongue2:

Mike Drop
Lawyer, frequent air traveler and aviation enthusiast.
 
User avatar
jdstJD
Posts: 81
Joined: Sun Jun 03, 2018 1:40 am

Re: Mueller Speaks: Barr Mislead the American People

Fri May 31, 2019 10:44 pm

Magog wrote:
jdstJD wrote:
All Mueller was supposed to do was develop the nature of the evidence.

That is simply not true since he brought indictments.

jdstJD wrote:
but the DOJ policy didn't allow Mueller to charge or make a public announcement that he believed a crime had occurred.

Show me the policy for the latter. So far absolutely no one has been able to do that.


He brought indictments against those he could constitutionally indict.

I'm sure the policy itself is available online.
Last edited by jdstJD on Fri May 31, 2019 10:50 pm, edited 1 time in total.
Lawyer, frequent air traveler and aviation enthusiast.
 
User avatar
jdstJD
Posts: 81
Joined: Sun Jun 03, 2018 1:40 am

Re: Mueller Speaks: Barr Mislead the American People

Fri May 31, 2019 10:49 pm

Magog wrote:
jdstJD wrote:
Magog wrote:
So once again it boils down to Mueller's opinion and not any actual binding authority. This is especially true since the Constitution does not say that Mueller cannot give an opinion. Mueller had to interpret that. At best that's a VERY flimsy excuse not to give an opinion. He didn't cite any statutory law, case law or administrative opinion in support of his contention - which he really ought to have been able to do.


Magog, he DID cite to an administrative opinion...the DOJ office of legal counsel opinion!!

And that opinion does not address whatsoever whether or not Mueller could state his belief as to the criminality of Trump’s conduct. It only says that the president cannot be indicted.


Ok. Last time and then I give up. He relies on 2 things. The DOJ opinion that he says instructs that he can't indict a pres. The other is his own belief that the constitution does not allow for him to make any public comment as to whether the pres, committed a crime because that is tantamount to making an allegation that he believes the president could not provide a legal defense to while in office. Had he publicly said, sooo, I can't legally indict trump, folks, but ya know I know that you know that I know he did it. ;) , he would have run afoul of what the constitution prohibited him from doing.
Lawyer, frequent air traveler and aviation enthusiast.
 
Magog
Posts: 785
Joined: Tue Jan 22, 2019 11:54 am

Re: Mueller Speaks: Barr Mislead the American People

Fri May 31, 2019 10:55 pm

jdstJD wrote:
Magog wrote:
jdstJD wrote:

Magog, he DID cite to an administrative opinion...the DOJ office of legal counsel opinion!!

And that opinion does not address whatsoever whether or not Mueller could state his belief as to the criminality of Trump’s conduct. It only says that the president cannot be indicted.


Ok. Last time and then I give up. He relies on 2 things. The DOJ opinion that he says instructs that he can't indict a pres. The other is his own belief that the constitution does not allow for him to make any public comment as to whether the pres, committed a crime because that is tantamount to making an allegation that he believes the president could not provide a legal defense to while in office. Had he publicly said, sooo, I can't legally indict trump, folks, but ya know I know that you know that I know he did it. ;) , he would have run afoul of what the constitution prohibited him from doing.

OK. So we are in agreement. There’s no actual authority that specifically says that Mueller could not give his opinion.
 
User avatar
Aaron747
Posts: 9047
Joined: Thu Aug 07, 2003 2:07 am

Re: Mueller Speaks: Barr Mislead the American People

Fri May 31, 2019 11:23 pm

Magog wrote:
jdstJD wrote:
Magog wrote:
And that opinion does not address whatsoever whether or not Mueller could state his belief as to the criminality of Trump’s conduct. It only says that the president cannot be indicted.


Ok. Last time and then I give up. He relies on 2 things. The DOJ opinion that he says instructs that he can't indict a pres. The other is his own belief that the constitution does not allow for him to make any public comment as to whether the pres, committed a crime because that is tantamount to making an allegation that he believes the president could not provide a legal defense to while in office. Had he publicly said, sooo, I can't legally indict trump, folks, but ya know I know that you know that I know he did it. ;) , he would have run afoul of what the constitution prohibited him from doing.

OK. So we are in agreement. There’s no actual authority that specifically says that Mueller could not give his opinion.


You’ll find the basis for his opinion in the 2000 OLC update memo, pages 228-232.

https://www.justice.gov/file/19351/download
If you need someone to blame / throw a rock in the air / you'll hit someone guilty
 
seb146
Posts: 19830
Joined: Wed Dec 01, 1999 7:19 am

Re: Mueller Speaks: Barr Mislead the American People

Fri May 31, 2019 11:35 pm

Magog wrote:
So far nobody has produced actual legal authority. I was looking for more than, "Yep."


There are enough attorneys in both chambers of Congress and even some probably who studied the Constitution. IIRC, we had a Constitutional scholar as president at one point. The same one who pulled himself up by his bootstraps to become a lawyer and editor of Harvard Law Review. Be that as it may, there are lawyers in Congress. Instead of simply grabbing pitchforks and screaming "LOCK HIM UP!!!" they are actually following the Constitution and letting investigations happen.

However, those in the swamp are not testifying and/or ignoring subpoenas. As a Democrat, Magog, you have to acknowledge how fishy that looks. Being told not to testify by someone who does not know the law at all?
You bet I'm pumped!!! I just had a green tea!!!
 
Magog
Posts: 785
Joined: Tue Jan 22, 2019 11:54 am

Re: Mueller Speaks: Barr Mislead the American People

Sat Jun 01, 2019 12:10 am

Aaron747 wrote:

You’ll find the basis for his opinion in the 2000 OLC update memo, pages 228-232.

https://www.justice.gov/file/19351/download

I just read it. There is definitely nothing in there saying that Mueller was prohibited from opining. Thanks so much for the link. Fascinating reading.
 
User avatar
Aaron747
Posts: 9047
Joined: Thu Aug 07, 2003 2:07 am

Re: Mueller Speaks: Barr Mislead the American People

Sat Jun 01, 2019 12:26 am

Magog wrote:
Aaron747 wrote:

You’ll find the basis for his opinion in the 2000 OLC update memo, pages 228-232.

https://www.justice.gov/file/19351/download

I just read it. There is definitely nothing in there saying that Mueller was prohibited from opining. Thanks so much for the link. Fascinating reading.


Obviously Mueller clearly takes a very conservative interpretation of the analysis that overlaps pages 230-232. Raising the spectre of criminality in a matter that cannot be adjudicated would impair the executive branch, in particular “damage flowing from unrefuted charges” - as a matter of principle, he was clearly neither willing to countermand or take on such guidance.
If you need someone to blame / throw a rock in the air / you'll hit someone guilty
 
stratclub
Posts: 1223
Joined: Fri Jan 05, 2018 10:38 pm

Re: Mueller Speaks: Barr Mislead the American People

Sat Jun 01, 2019 12:31 am

Aaron747 wrote:
Magog wrote:
jdstJD wrote:

Ok. Last time and then I give up. He relies on 2 things. The DOJ opinion that he says instructs that he can't indict a pres. The other is his own belief that the constitution does not allow for him to make any public comment as to whether the pres, committed a crime because that is tantamount to making an allegation that he believes the president could not provide a legal defense to while in office. Had he publicly said, sooo, I can't legally indict trump, folks, but ya know I know that you know that I know he did it. ;) , he would have run afoul of what the constitution prohibited him from doing.

OK. So we are in agreement. There’s no actual authority that specifically says that Mueller could not give his opinion.


You’ll find the basis for his opinion in the 2000 OLC update memo, pages 228-232.

https://www.justice.gov/file/19351/download

Mueller's only responsibility was to make a judgment of probable cause for aledged crimes, which he failed to do for obstruction of justice. He was not tasked by the DOJ to offer opinions or fairy tale "what if" light fiction that was not based on probable cause evidence.

Clearly, the President cannot be indicted, prosecuted or participate in a trial while in office, but still Mueller could have made findings in the investigation and impeachment could have begun immediately or indictments could be issued after the President left office. As best as I can tell from the 2000 OLC update memo pages 228-232, Mueller lied during his press conference. It will be hard to impeach when the articles of impeachment are empty folders...............

Former Texas Prosecutor Sidney Powell, Mueller’s words stood the rule of law and the presumption of innocence on their heads. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=udRqsEa2N9E
 
seb146
Posts: 19830
Joined: Wed Dec 01, 1999 7:19 am

Re: Mueller Speaks: Barr Mislead the American People

Sat Jun 01, 2019 1:21 am

stratclub wrote:
Mueller's only responsibility was to make a judgment of probable cause for aledged crimes, which he failed to do for obstruction of justice. He was not tasked by the DOJ to offer opinions or fairy tale "what if" light fiction that was not based on probable cause evidence.


Except there is evidence for obstruction of justice. There is also evidence of using campaign funds to pay at least one bribe that We The People know about. The House MUST investigate these allegations. No one but NO ONE is above the law.

stratclub wrote:
Clearly, the President cannot be indicted, prosecuted or participate in a trial while in office


I keep seeing righties say this but didn't we have at least two presidents put on trial while they were in office? Clinton and.... I think Jackson? IIRC, Nixon left office before he could stand trial in the Senate. I don't want to google it because I want the MAGA fan boys who keep saying this to do research. I want to see their homework.
You bet I'm pumped!!! I just had a green tea!!!
 
stratclub
Posts: 1223
Joined: Fri Jan 05, 2018 10:38 pm

Re: Mueller Speaks: Barr Mislead the American People

Sat Jun 01, 2019 2:45 am

seb146 wrote:
stratclub wrote:
Mueller's only responsibility was to make a judgment of probable cause for aledged crimes, which he failed to do for obstruction of justice. He was not tasked by the DOJ to offer opinions or fairy tale "what if" light fiction that was not based on probable cause evidence.


Except there is evidence for obstruction of justice. There is also evidence of using campaign funds to pay at least one bribe that We The People know about. The House MUST investigate these allegations. No one but NO ONE is above the law.

stratclub wrote:
Clearly, the President cannot be indicted, prosecuted or participate in a trial while in office


I keep seeing righties say this but didn't we have at least two presidents put on trial while they were in office? Clinton and.... I think Jackson? IIRC, Nixon left office before he could stand trial in the Senate. I don't want to google it because I want the MAGA fan boys who keep saying this to do research. I want to see their homework.

If there was evidence that would meet probable cause for the crime of obstruction, Mueller would have said so and he didn't. Clinton was not indicted for crimes by a court of law. He was charged with articles of impeachment which congress could do right now to President Trump if they didn't have a bunch of empty folders for articles of impeachment. Nancy Pelosi is fully aware that impeachment of President Trump is a nothing burger and would be political suicide for the Democratic party.

For your homework, read what Aaron747 posted: 2000 OLC update memo, pages 228-232. It explains why a sitting President cant be indicted, prosecuted or participate in a criminal trial. https://www.justice.gov/file/19351/download[/quote]
 
seb146
Posts: 19830
Joined: Wed Dec 01, 1999 7:19 am

Re: Mueller Speaks: Barr Mislead the American People

Sat Jun 01, 2019 2:53 am

stratclub wrote:
seb146 wrote:
stratclub wrote:
Mueller's only responsibility was to make a judgment of probable cause for aledged crimes, which he failed to do for obstruction of justice. He was not tasked by the DOJ to offer opinions or fairy tale "what if" light fiction that was not based on probable cause evidence.


Except there is evidence for obstruction of justice. There is also evidence of using campaign funds to pay at least one bribe that We The People know about. The House MUST investigate these allegations. No one but NO ONE is above the law.

stratclub wrote:
Clearly, the President cannot be indicted, prosecuted or participate in a trial while in office


I keep seeing righties say this but didn't we have at least two presidents put on trial while they were in office? Clinton and.... I think Jackson? IIRC, Nixon left office before he could stand trial in the Senate. I don't want to google it because I want the MAGA fan boys who keep saying this to do research. I want to see their homework.

If there was evidence that would meet probable cause for the crime of obstruction, Mueller would have said so and he didn't. Clinton was not indicted for crimes by a court of law. He was charged with articles of impeachment which congress could do right now to President Trump if they didn't have a bunch of empty folders for articles of impeachment. Nancy Pelosi is fully aware that impeachment of President Trump is a nothing burger and would be political suicide for the Democratic party.

For your homework, read what Aaron747 posted: 2000 OLC update memo, pages 228-232. It explains why a sitting President cant be indicted, prosecuted or participate in a criminal trial. https://www.justice.gov/file/19351/download
[/quote]

I just listed two reasons he could be impeached: Bribery and illegal use of campaign funds. Those do not sound like empty folders to me. I guess it would be easier to remove him from office and put him on trial (something a president can not do even though it has been done) if he stained a blue dress.....
You bet I'm pumped!!! I just had a green tea!!!
 
stratclub
Posts: 1223
Joined: Fri Jan 05, 2018 10:38 pm

Re: Mueller Speaks: Barr Mislead the American People

Sat Jun 01, 2019 3:18 am

Clinton was not put on trial. he was impeached by congress but not removed from office. Once a President is impeached AND removed from office OR leaves office he can be indicted for criminal acts in a court of law.

Where are the criminal convictions or investigations for the alleged crimes DJT as a private citizen, Candidate Trump or President Trump committed? Even though the Democrats are trying their best by throwing the Constitution out the window and to throw the President out of office at any cost, they have nothing and they know it. So much for their "insurance policy" to railroad DJT out of office if he got elected.
 
User avatar
Aaron747
Posts: 9047
Joined: Thu Aug 07, 2003 2:07 am

Re: Mueller Speaks: Barr Mislead the American People

Sat Jun 01, 2019 3:30 am

stratclub wrote:
If there was evidence that would meet probable cause for the crime of obstruction, Mueller would have said so and he didn't.


Not necessarily so, due to DOJ limits. Reading comprehension issues aside, you can’t simply make something fact by saying it repeatedly, especially when Mueller’s statements in the report and presser and both 1973 and 2000 OLC memoranda say otherwise.
If you need someone to blame / throw a rock in the air / you'll hit someone guilty
 
stratclub
Posts: 1223
Joined: Fri Jan 05, 2018 10:38 pm

Re: Mueller Speaks: Barr Mislead the American People

Sat Jun 01, 2019 5:37 am

Go back and read what you posted. Apparently you missed something. An actual Federal Prosecutor can explain point of law to you about Mueller's Disregard for the Constitution and his disregard for his duty as a prosecutor.

Former Texas Prosecutor Sidney Powell, Mueller’s words stood the rule of law and the presumption of innocence on their heads. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=udRqsEa2N9E
 
User avatar
Aaron747
Posts: 9047
Joined: Thu Aug 07, 2003 2:07 am

Re: Mueller Speaks: Barr Mislead the American People

Sat Jun 01, 2019 6:24 am

stratclub wrote:
Go back and read what you posted. Apparently you missed something. An actual Federal Prosecutor can explain point of law to you about Mueller's Disregard for the Constitution and his disregard for his duty as a prosecutor.

Former Texas Prosecutor Sidney Powell, Mueller’s words stood the rule of law and the presumption of innocence on their heads. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=udRqsEa2N9E


This whackjob lady is about as credible as Tom Fitton - immediately found she’s associated with a tacky website selling ‘creeps on a mission’ t-shirts at $30/pop. She’s using a hot button issue to finance her grandkids’ college funds, maintain a boating/golf habit or something of that nature. Get back when you have someone less partisan and hackneyed as a resource. An independent former prosecutor or investigative journalist will do.
If you need someone to blame / throw a rock in the air / you'll hit someone guilty
 
D L X
Posts: 12427
Joined: Thu May 27, 1999 3:30 am

Re: Mueller Speaks: Barr Mislead the American People

Sat Jun 01, 2019 11:19 am

Magog wrote:
jdstJD wrote:
All Mueller was supposed to do was develop the nature of the evidence.

That is simply not true since he brought indictments.

jdstJD wrote:
but the DOJ policy didn't allow Mueller to charge or make a public announcement that he believed a crime had occurred.

Show me the policy for the latter. So far absolutely no one has been able to do that.

It really sounds like you want others to do your homework for you. People have shown you Mueller’s citation and you’ve consistently responded “that’s not law. Show me something else.”
 
Magog
Posts: 785
Joined: Tue Jan 22, 2019 11:54 am

Re: Mueller Speaks: Barr Mislead the American People

Sat Jun 01, 2019 11:21 am

D L X wrote:
Magog wrote:
jdstJD wrote:
All Mueller was supposed to do was develop the nature of the evidence.

That is simply not true since he brought indictments.

jdstJD wrote:
but the DOJ policy didn't allow Mueller to charge or make a public announcement that he believed a crime had occurred.

Show me the policy for the latter. So far absolutely no one has been able to do that.

It really sounds like you want others to do your homework for you. People have shown you Mueller’s citation and you’ve consistently responded “that’s not law. Show me something else.”

I just want people to back up their claims.
 
stratclub
Posts: 1223
Joined: Fri Jan 05, 2018 10:38 pm

Re: Mueller Speaks: Barr Mislead the American People

Sat Jun 01, 2019 4:13 pm

Aaron747 wrote:
stratclub wrote:
If there was evidence that would meet probable cause for the crime of obstruction, Mueller would have said so and he didn't.


Not necessarily so, due to DOJ limits. Reading comprehension issues aside, you can’t simply make something fact by saying it repeatedly, especially when Mueller’s statements in the report and presser and both 1973 and 2000 OLC memoranda say otherwise.

No. I think I'll go back to this gem you posted. Attacking me because actual law differs from your opinion certainly isn't a way to debate something. Mueller lied. Pure and simple. He said his report was his final word and then he walked out the nonsense that he couldn't make a finding because of DOJ policy. The policy does not prohibit Mueller from making a determination of probable cause to request an indictment.

Extrajudicial statements (opinions) that Mueller made in volume II carry the same weight as hearsay evidence and should not have been included in the report because they don't support burden of proof. A prosecutors job is not to exonerate/prove innocence, it is to find a burden of proof for a crime. This is because presumed innocence according to the Constitution is a given. I thought Sidney Powell explained that very well. Attacking her credibility isn't a very effective way to prove a point either.

Please do find point of law that invalidates my statements. And please no "investigative journalists."
 
seb146
Posts: 19830
Joined: Wed Dec 01, 1999 7:19 am

Re: Mueller Speaks: Barr Mislead the American People

Sat Jun 01, 2019 4:23 pm

stratclub wrote:
Aaron747 wrote:
stratclub wrote:
If there was evidence that would meet probable cause for the crime of obstruction, Mueller would have said so and he didn't.


Not necessarily so, due to DOJ limits. Reading comprehension issues aside, you can’t simply make something fact by saying it repeatedly, especially when Mueller’s statements in the report and presser and both 1973 and 2000 OLC memoranda say otherwise.

No. I think I'll go back to this gem you posted. Attacking me because actual law differs from your opinion certainly isn't a way to debate something. Mueller lied. Pure and simple. He said his report was his final word and then he walked out the nonsense that he couldn't make a finding because of DOJ policy. The policy does not prohibit Mueller from making a determination of probable cause to request an indictment.

Extrajudicial statements (opinions) that Mueller made in volume II carry the same weight as hearsay evidence and should not have been included in the report because they don't support burden of proof. A prosecutors job is not to exonerate/prove innocence, it is to find a burden of proof for a crime. This is because presumed innocence according to the Constitution is a given. I thought Sidney Powell explained that very well. Attacking her credibility isn't a very effective way to prove a point either.

Please do find point of law that invalidates my statements. And please no "investigative journalists."


Individual number one and the right loves to keep repeating the same tired talking points that have been discredited

https://apnews.com/94323cfc164c4759ba6bf84ad2a46203
https://www.chicagotribune.com/nation-w ... story.html
https://www.cnn.com/2019/05/30/politics ... index.html

So where is the lie? Just because something is said over and over again does not make it truth. He was not exonerated. Period.
You bet I'm pumped!!! I just had a green tea!!!
 
alfa164
Posts: 2796
Joined: Sat Oct 06, 2012 2:47 am

Re: Mueller Speaks: Barr Mislead the American People

Sat Jun 01, 2019 4:44 pm

seb146 wrote:
Individual number one and the right loves to keep repeating the same tired talking points that have been discredited
https://apnews.com/94323cfc164c4759ba6bf84ad2a46203
https://www.chicagotribune.com/nation-w ... story.html
https://www.cnn.com/2019/05/30/politics ... index.html
So where is the lie? Just because something is said over and over again does not make it truth. He was not exonerated. Period.


:checkmark: Individual number one and the right... and the trolls who infest A.net (and most every public forum in cyberspace, for that matter). And they all seem to ignore the Special Counsel's own words:

"And as set forth in the report, after that investigation, if we had had confidence that the president clearly did not commit a crime, we would have said so."

But, of course we have much smarter and honest people here on this forum than there are in the Special Counsel's Office... right?

;)
I'm going to have a smokin' hot body again!
I have decided to be cremated....
  • 1
  • 4
  • 5
  • 6
  • 7
  • 8
  • 9

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: Aesma, Bing [Bot] and 35 guests

Popular Searches On Airliners.net

Top Photos of Last:   24 Hours  •  48 Hours  •  7 Days  •  30 Days  •  180 Days  •  365 Days  •  All Time

Military Aircraft Every type from fighters to helicopters from air forces around the globe

Classic Airliners Props and jets from the good old days

Flight Decks Views from inside the cockpit

Aircraft Cabins Passenger cabin shots showing seat arrangements as well as cargo aircraft interior

Cargo Aircraft Pictures of great freighter aircraft

Government Aircraft Aircraft flying government officials

Helicopters Our large helicopter section. Both military and civil versions

Blimps / Airships Everything from the Goodyear blimp to the Zeppelin

Night Photos Beautiful shots taken while the sun is below the horizon

Accidents Accident, incident and crash related photos

Air to Air Photos taken by airborne photographers of airborne aircraft

Special Paint Schemes Aircraft painted in beautiful and original liveries

Airport Overviews Airport overviews from the air or ground

Tails and Winglets Tail and Winglet closeups with beautiful airline logos