MUELLER: "Our investigation found multiple acts by the President that were capable of exerting..."

[berni_mccoy]

From the Mueller Report, page 157:

"Our investigation found multiple acts by the President that were capable of exerting undue influence over law enforcement investigations, including Russian-interference and obstruction investigations."

So why didn't they investigate the President?

Page 160:

"The Department of Justice has taken the position that Section 1512(c)(2) states a broad, independent, and unqualified prohibition on obstruction of justice."

Mueller then argues over 22 pages that the DOJ position is legally incorrect and that the President should be investigated for obstruction.

His conclusion:

IV. Conclusion

Because we determined not to make a traditional prosecutorial judgment, we did not draw ultimate conclusions about the President's conduct. The evidence we obtained about the President's actions and intent presents difficult issues that would need to be resolved if we were making a traditional prosecutorial judgment. At the same time, if we had confidence after a thorough investigation of the facts that the President clearly did not commit obstruction of justice, we would so state. Based on the facts and the the applicable legal standards, we are unable to reach that judgment. Accordingly, while this report does not conclude that the President committed a crime, it also does not exonerate him.

Holding Trump accountable is up to Congress now.

[Takket]

1. That is the smoking gun right there...

Mueller thinks drumpf is guilty but he left it to Congress to DO THEIR JOB and deal with the faulty guidelines of DOJ. Plenty in DU predicted this and Kudos to them.

[uponit7771]

2. +1,Barr should be impeached

[triron]

5. Was this Barr's position on obstruction or a broader position?

[coti]

12. Barr said that Mueller left the conclusion for him, and that he exonerated Trump nt

[lagomorph777]

13. And in so telling that lie, Barr committed obstruction.

Lock him up!

[bdamomma]

35. they can lock up

Mnuchin too for not releasing tRumps tax returns too.

[lagomorph777]

39. That's pretty black-and-white.

Munchkin's case is very simple because (unlike obstruction) no proof of mental state is required.

[onit2day]

15. Agreed. Plus Barr cut funding to stop Mueller from further investigating. Pelosi

must follow up and impeach while the brand is hot.

[Duppers]

43. Predicting that will not happen. nt

[olegramps]

53. The most important regarding the future of the nation is the willingness of

The most important aspect of the investigation is the revelation of the willingness of Trump and his aides to welcome the assistance of our sworn enemy to win the election. I not heard one word of concern by any Republican concerning this crucial matter. It matters not to the Republicans that in doing so they are betraying the nation and putting its existence in peril. It matters not to them that Trump has repeatedly called the investigation a witch hunt and the proven involvement of Russians in securing his election as a hoax.

This not a new development, but the policy of the Republicans for the last forty years in their quest to destroy the balance of power that was instituted by the framers of the constitution that created three independent separate and equal branches of power. This issue was explored in depth in the Federal Papers which discussed the constitution. They clearly foresaw exactly what is now being attempted by the Republicans if the presidency fell into the hands of an unprincipled president who would attempt to transform the presidency into an authoritarian office with no accountability to the courts or congress.

This is not a matter of conjuncture, but one of facts clearly brought out by this investigation. We have at the helm of the nation a man who sought to impose his will on the investigation and attempted numerous times to destroy it clearly indulging in obstruction of justice. Does this matter to Republicans? Clearly their only concern is that they won the presidency and it is totally irrelevant that it was gained with the assistance of our sworn enemies.



To me this is the most important aspect of this entire disaster. It not only bridges on conspiracy, it constitutes what our nation's founders would have considered treason to the basic vision of our nation. Their willingness to disregard the most egregious behavior of the president who is without a shred of morals solely to protect their party is betrayal at the highest level. This is the depths to which a major party has allowed itself to sink into crass immorality. What has been their gift to the nation? One corrupt and lawless administration after another dating from Nixon, Regan, Bush and now Trump. The must be defeated and their party destroyed if the nation is to survive as democracy. If left to their designs the nation is domed.

[Hoyt]

3. There's a lot of damaging stuff in the report, assuming the reader cares.

[tymorial]

26. Many don't because Mueller wrote it and therefore it cannot possibly be trusted.

Purity and all that nonsense.

[Hoyt]

27. That's the problem. Remember one trumper saying he didn't care what laws trump broke to get elected.

[bdamomma]

36. They will

fucking go over a cliff for this POS. No healthcare and no tax refunds and they still protect his ass. Disgusting.

[CincyDem]

4. These 22 pages probably have a lot more thought/analysis in them vs. the initial DoJ opinion...

..which, if I recall from Rachel's Bag Man podcast, created opinion that a sitting president couldn't be indicted as a toss off point of differentiation vs. a sitting vice-president...all for the purpose of forcing Agnew to resign.

[PragmaticLiberal]

6. I'm even more convinced Mueller's investigation was shut down.

Last edited Fri Apr 19, 2019, 08:27 AM - Edit history (1)

[Hassler]

8. +1 he wasn't done but was ordered to stop.

[mr_lebowski]

9. That is what he's saying if you read between the lines ... basically he was told he couldn't

specifically investigate Obstruction of Justice by the DoJ, but he did so anyway to the extent that he could.

"At the same time, if we had confidence after a thorough investigation of the facts that the President clearly did not commit obstruction of justice,"

Although you COULD read it otherwise, in the full context, you realize that he is saying THEY WEREN'T ABLE TO DO A THOROUGH INVESTIGATION.

He laments not being able to conduct a full and proper investigation of obstruction, basically.

No doubt ... because he was OBSTRUCTED.

[Roland99]

7. Boom!

[ismnotwasm]

10. Holy shit

More than I expected for sure

[B Stieg]

11. Just Imagine...!

If what's uncovered is this bad, what acts do the redacted parts describe?

[lagomorph777]

16. I agree with this Trump statement: "I'm fucked!"

I never thought I'd agree with Trump on anything.

[berni_mccoy]

48. I suspect the Grand Jury records show they would have charged Trump with Obstruction

[yaesu]

14. It was an organized attempt to break laws, RICO! nt

[BSdetect]

17. This is now actionable.

[EveHammond13]

19. yes. Impeach Now.

[Texin]

34. Is it? The DOJ - William Barr - said otherwise.

[berni_mccoy]

45. Congress doesn't answer to the DOJ

[EveHammond13]

18. UNFIT FOR OFFICE

[mountain grammy]

20. Impeach!

[LiberalLovinLug]

21. Sounds like Mueller wimped out

Like everything else about Trump's "special" status where only he can get away with things any other politician would never get close to surviving after, Mueller decides....

"Because we determined not to make a traditional prosecutorial judgment, we did not draw ultimate conclusions about the President's conduct."

and

"the President's actions and intent presents difficult issues that would need to be resolved if we were making a traditional prosecutorial judgment."


Um.....could someone ask the simple question...why not? And if they declined to do their "traditional prosecutorial" job, then what kind of job did they think they were doing?

[DirtEdonE]

23. A snow job. There is no excuse. Mueller is a traitor along with the rest of the gop. nt

[berni_mccoy]

24. Mueller disagreed with Barr on DOJ Policy, but ultimately he must answer to it

If Mueller pursued it, Barr could have fired him for not following policy.

[bdamomma]

38. sounds plausible

to me. It ended very abruptly, but it's in Congress court now. But it would get squashed by McConnell.

[LiberalLovinLug]

54. Well I'm confused then about what constitutes "traditional prosecutorial judgment"

If he frames it as "traditional", to me that implies that that avenue, being the "traditional" one, would be the normal route for a Special Prosecutor. And he seemingly gives no reason for NOT following traditional procedure, and just decided not to for some reason this time. I propose it was that he was following Saint Ronnie's 11th commandment. Add to that the daunting bravery it would have entailed to indict the POTUS on a criminal charge. But we were all hoping he had those kinds of cohones.

[Dem_4_Life]

22. Impeach now!

[sinkingfeeling]

25. ITTMF NOW!

[DallasNE]

28. Barr Was Truly Trump's Firewall nt

[UTUSN]

29. K&R

[Chakaconcarne]

30. Well now that this is being elucidated....and I'm sure more is to come....

Maybe this will help shutdown every FUCKING TROLL here on DU that is criticizing Mueller (and Rosenstein) just because he is Republican and they/we are not seeing the outcome (yet) we hoped?

[Honeycombe8]

31. Mueller could have recommended prosecution for one of these charges...

given the substantial evidence.

It was a matter of judgment. In Mueller's judgment, the evidence was not provable beyond a reasonable doubt.

He can be impeached after a finding of guilt by a preponderance of the evidence (the burden of proof in a civil lawsuit), but unless we win the Senate, we can't remove him. The House can impeach him, for that to be on his record. Would it hurt the Democrats in the election? I don't know.

In one way, it's over. Trump has no recommendation of prosecution for anything, and no declaration of guilt for anything. Anything the Democrats do in Congress will be seen as partisan. That doesn't mean we shouldn't do it. As long as we realize how it'll be seen by part of the public. People are also just exhausted.

But we need to pursue the wrongs that have been done against the country. I don't see there's an option. SOMEONE has to do it. The Republicans won't.

[berni_mccoy]

44. Actually he couldn't

Because Barr said he couldn’t.

[Honeycombe8]

46. Oh, yeah. I failed to mention, "Except for no permission from the boss." :) nt

[harumph]

32. The important question to ask: if it were anybody else doing what Trump

did - would it be obvious obstruction? In other words - is this simply a case of the justice dept.
carving out an EXCEPTION for the president. If so, they're saying that the president is ABOVE
the law. He is no ordinary citizen and can't be held to the same standards. That's a dictatorship
my friends.

[Honeycombe8]

47. Under the standard in the Report, Nixon was wrongly threatened w/impeachment.

It seems to me.

Prosecutors bring cases to juries every day that have substantial evidence, but not a slam dunk. Mueller seems to be saying, "there's no slam dunk here...it's the way you look at it...no smoking gun...because Trump was unsuccessful in obstructing...." I thought it was up to a jury to determine guilt, if charges are brought. You just need good evidence to take it before a jury. Not necessarily a slam dunk.

[Chin music]

51. +1

[Raven123]

33. Time for Congress to pass a few laws

Soliciting or using illegally obtained info for a political campaign should be illegal.

Special Counsels must have access to any and all witnesses and targets. To have spent money on an investigation and come up incomplete because the rules won't permit an interview with POTUS or the question of an interview is ambiguous presents an imminent threat to our democracy

[Texin]

37. I listened to NPR on the release and I was flabberghasted.

When you're driving down the road and listening to NPfuckin'R twisting themselves into pretzels covering for this load of horse shit, you know we're in trouble.

Mueller's report took 22 damned pages to argue his case that the DOJ's stance on being unable to investigate a sitting president for obstruction of justice was a perverted and twisted fallacy under existing laws and constitutionally. That is stating his view that the preponderance of the evidence he uncovered should have been enough to criminally prosecute Trump and his family and his entire cabal had it not been for the DOJ's arcane argument otherwise. Essentially, he was telling the people that his hands were bound to his sides by a so-called rule that prevented him from being able to indict Shitler because...reasons.

[Rizen]

40. If we hadn't taken the house this would have been buried.

We'll probably have to vote him out in 2020 so don't expect this to solve everything but it's a good step in exposing Trump.

[Still In Wisconsin]

41. None of this will matter, because all the MAGAts will hear is "NO COLLUSION and NO OBSTRUCTION"

Also, I'd bet good money that at some point before the 2020 election Barr will launch a Special Counsel investigation into whomever wins the Democratic Party nomination for President. He will find something to allege.

[berni_mccoy]

42. Mueller couldn't conclude collusion because trump committed Obstruction

[Chin music]

52. +1

[TNNurse]

49. So Trump is "innocent" only because

he could not find people who would carry out his criminal plans????

[berni_mccoy]

50. No. Mueller couldn't make a determination to prosecute because of DoJ Policy

Which he felt he was required to follow.

The fact that Trump wasn't successful in obstruction doesn't remove criminal malfeasance.