Toronto Escorts

Full Mueller Report

Anbarandy

Bitter House****
Apr 27, 2006
10,088
2,738
113
Reading the Mueller report was like watching a movie you've seen a 1000 x's and you know the ending. We knew this already at the end of March.



Goodness gracious are you ever dug in hard on this Russian Collusion Delusion narrative! Wowzers

You can't obstruct a crime that DID NOT HAPPEN TO BEGIN WITH!!

Mueller with his band of democrat Trump haters wrote that report and STILL NO OBSTRUCTION AND/OR COLLUSION

Time for you to get over it.

Next up on the docket - Spygate and indictments are coming!

Tick Tock
So why is Trump then not either being:

1. Arrested
2. Impeached
3. Censured
As I said, I do not like Trump and have thought him to be a scoundrel since I first read his book 25+ years ago. So I am not excusing him.

his failed, unfulfilled attempts do not constitute the offence of obstruction of justice. Maybe you are conflating this with conspiracy where the mere act of discussing a proposed criminal act constitutes an offence?

I think the other, inevitable, shoe(s) will drop when he is voted out of office and his many past misdeeds will come back to haunt him and he will face charges then.
For the factually challenged among us:

Definition

18 U.S.C. § 1503 defines "obstruction of justice" as an act that "corruptly or by threats or force, or by any threatening letter or communication, influences, obstructs, or impedes, or endeavors to influence, obstruct, or impede, the due administration of justice."

Overview

Someone obstructs justice when that person has a specific intent to obstruct or interfere with a judicial proceeding. For a person to be convicted of obstructing justice, that person must not only have the specific intent to obstruct the proceeding, but that person must know (1) that a proceeding was actually pending at the time; and (2) there must be a connection between the endeavor to obstruct justice and the proceeding, and the person must have knowledge of this connection.

§ 1503 applies only to federal judicial proceedings. Under 18 U.S.C. § 1505, however, a defendant can be convicted of obstruction of justice by obstructing a pending proceeding before Congress or a federal administrative agency. A pending proceeding could include an informal investigation by an executive agency.



Honestly 'SchlongConery, I expect 'WarGames' and 'Phil C McNasty' and a few others on this board to be totally 'clueless' regarding facts, but you should know better.

Codified U.S. law states that an "endeavour" to obstruct justice is considered an obstruction of justice. There is NO argument otherwise. It's quite plain, simple and factual.

Mueller lists 10 endeavours by Trump obstruct justice. All 10 endeavours failed because Trump's orders were rightfully not acted upon by his underlings because 'they' knew the legal consequences they would face had they acted upon Trump's orders. And as U.S. codified law states, an endeavour, just one endeavour to obstruct justice is obstruction of justice according to U.S. law.

Mueller, contrary to Barr's televised LIE stating otherwise, clearly stated in the report that though he found Trump endeavoured to commit obstruction of justice on at least 10 occasions, he could not proceed with any indictments of a sitting President, Trump in this case, because of long standing DOJ and it's of Office of Legal Counsel policy and guideline, and thus Mueller clearly stated that the obstruction of justice 'crimes' committed by Trump is a matter for Congress, not AG Barr, to address.

These are the facts.
 

K Douglas

Half Man Half Amazing
Jan 5, 2005
26,135
6,346
113
Room 112
As I said, I do not like Trump and have thought him to be a scoundrel since I first read his book 25+ years ago. So I am not excusing him.

his failed, unfulfilled attempts do not constitute the offence of obstruction of justice. Maybe you are conflating this with conspiracy where the mere act of discussing a proposed criminal act constitutes an offence?

I think the other, inevitable, shoe(s) will drop when he is voted out of office and his many past misdeeds will come back to haunt him and he will face charges then.
He will not be voted out of office. The Un Democrats are a mess of a party.
 

Anbarandy

Bitter House****
Apr 27, 2006
10,088
2,738
113
In addition to Mueller laying out the groundwork for Congress to take over the disposition of obstruction of justice as an abuse of power by Donald Trump he also, get this, states in a footnote:

That the evidence of the Special Counsel Investigation be preserved so that once the sitting President leaves office, criminal indictments for obstruction of justice may be brought forward.
 

K Douglas

Half Man Half Amazing
Jan 5, 2005
26,135
6,346
113
Room 112
No conspiracy by Trump or his campaign associates with Russia to influence the 2016 election.
Collusion is not a crime but there is very little evidence of that either. Despite traps being set.
Given those facts how can one argue for an obstruction of justice indictment?
Mueller knows that which is why his report does not make a recommendation for such a charge.
Instead he left it open ended for Congress to decide. And he did that, I believe, out of vindictiveness.
He doesn't like Trump personally. He doesn't like how Trump has treated his buddy Comey. He doesn't like that the FBI's reputation at leadership level is in ruins.
He doesn't like the fact that his investigation turned up squat on Trump. No conspiracy. No campaign finance violations. Nothing.
And since he's been doing the bidding of the Un Democrats from the get go (which is reflected in the team he hired) he needed to at least throw them a bone.
Which is why he issued a 200 page supplemental report that has very little legal substance to it.
 

Phil C. McNasty

Go Jays Go
Dec 27, 2010
25,138
3,573
113
The report says that the Russians stopped any compromising tapes of Trump from becoming public while in negotiations for the Moscow Trump tower project.
Than they said the tapes never existed.

So that means you'll have to rely on Trump's Russian connections to get them now
You know whats ironic, the Dem party colluded with a foreign agent (Steele) to get this alleged piss tape :spit:

And lets assume this tape is even real (which is assuming a lot), since when is it illegal to get a golden shower from some Russian chick??
 

doggystyle99

Well-known member
May 23, 2010
7,906
1,205
113
As I said, I do not like Trump and have thought him to be a scoundrel since I first read his book 25+ years ago. So I am not excusing him.
his failed, unfulfilled attempts do not constitute the offence of obstruction of justice. Maybe you are conflating this with conspiracy where the mere act of discussing a proposed criminal act constitutes an offence?
I think the other, inevitable, shoe(s) will drop when he is voted out of office and his many past misdeeds will come back to haunt him and he will face charges then.
You're wrong on this Anbarandy has the definition of obstruction of justice below. Trump not only attempted (Endeavors) to obstruct justice once but he attempted (Endeavors) 10 different times as per the Mueller report.

For the factually challenged among us:

Definition

18 U.S.C. § 1503 defines "obstruction of justice" as an act that "corruptly or by threats or force, or by any threatening letter or communication, influences, obstructs, or impedes, or endeavors to influence, obstruct, or impede, the due administration of justice."

Overview

Someone obstructs justice when that person has a specific intent to obstruct or interfere with a judicial proceeding. For a person to be convicted of obstructing justice, that person must not only have the specific intent to obstruct the proceeding, but that person must know (1) that a proceeding was actually pending at the time; and (2) there must be a connection between the endeavor to obstruct justice and the proceeding, and the person must have knowledge of this connection.

§ 1503 applies only to federal judicial proceedings. Under 18 U.S.C. § 1505, however, a defendant can be convicted of obstruction of justice by obstructing a pending proceeding before Congress or a federal administrative agency. A pending proceeding could include an informal investigation by an executive agency.


Honestly 'SchlongConery, I expect 'WarGames' and 'Phil C McNasty' and a few others on this board to be totally 'clueless' regarding facts, but you should know better.

Codified U.S. law states that an "endeavour" to obstruct justice is considered an obstruction of justice. There is NO argument otherwise. It's quite plain, simple and factual.

Mueller lists 10 endeavours by Trump obstruct justice. All 10 endeavours failed because Trump's orders were rightfully not acted upon by his underlings because 'they' knew the legal consequences they would face had they acted upon Trump's orders. And as U.S. codified law states, an endeavour, just one endeavour to obstruct justice is obstruction of justice according to U.S. law.

Mueller, contrary to Barr's televised LIE stating otherwise, clearly stated in the report that though he found Trump endeavoured to commit obstruction of justice on at least 10 occasions, he could not proceed with any indictments of a sitting President, Trump in this case, because of long standing DOJ and it's of Office of Legal Counsel policy and guideline, and thus Mueller clearly stated that the obstruction of justice 'crimes' committed by Trump is a matter for Congress, not AG Barr, to address.

These are the facts.
 

Anbarandy

Bitter House****
Apr 27, 2006
10,088
2,738
113
You know whats ironic, the Dem party colluded with a foreign agent (Steele) to get this alleged piss tape :spit:

And lets assume this tape is even real (which is assuming a lot), since when is it illegal to get a golden shower from some Russian chick??
I'll bite.

"Since when is it illegal to endeavour to commit obstruction of justice times 10?"
 

Phil C. McNasty

Go Jays Go
Dec 27, 2010
25,138
3,573
113
I'll bite.

"Since when is it illegal to endeavour to commit obstruction of justice times 10?"
You never answered this question:

Why isnt Trump?

1. Arrested
2. Impeached
3. Censured
 

Anbarandy

Bitter House****
Apr 27, 2006
10,088
2,738
113
You never answered this question:

Why isnt Trump?

1. Arrested
2. Impeached
3. Censured
Ok I'll bite.


1) DOJ and it's Office of Legal Counsel have a long standing policy that they cannot indict a sitting President irregardless of that President has committed criminal acts that any other 330million people in America would be indicted for.

2) The DOJ cannot impeach a President.

3) The DOJ cannot censure a President.
 

Phil C. McNasty

Go Jays Go
Dec 27, 2010
25,138
3,573
113
Ok I'll bite.


1) DOJ and it's Office of Legal Counsel have a long standing policy that they cannot indict a sitting President irregardless of that President has committed criminal acts that any other 330million people in America would be indicted for.

2) The DOJ cannot impeach a President.

3) The DOJ cannot censure a President
No, but the opposition party can. Why are they not at least moving for a censure or impeachment if Trump is so guilty of obstruction??
They did it Nixon, didnt they??

I'll tell you why, the evidence against Trump is so weak its simply not worth it.
And even if they did try to impeach if would never get passed the Senate anyways
 

Anbarandy

Bitter House****
Apr 27, 2006
10,088
2,738
113
No, but the opposition party can. Why are they not at least moving for a censure or impeachment if Trump is so guilty of obstruction??
They did it Nixon, didnt they??

I'll tell you why, the evidence against Trump is so weak its simply not worth it.
And even if they did try to impeach if would never get passed the Senate anyways
The foundational evidence is so overwhelming and unshakable; the Republicans however are so weak kneed and cowering in fear.
 

doggystyle99

Well-known member
May 23, 2010
7,906
1,205
113
It's this simple. I understand the only and best way to remove him from office is to put up a real, uncorrupted by money candidate with a policy agenda that will appeal to the majority of Americans.
And the worst thing to do is continue to give Trump ammunition to his "outsider" status narrative and make his record the issue.
Congress only looks foolish and weaker every day this continues.
Take a look at what Senator Sanders did on his Fox News Town Hall. That is how you get rid of Trump and win an Election.
Trump has been, is and will always be a Charlatan, and yet you continuously keep standing up against those that speak of it and stand up for your supreme leader Trump, excusing everything he does.
He has diminished the office of the presidency of the United States by his constant lies, his constant attacks against minorities, his constant spats with anyone and everyone that dares to criticize him, his constant attacks on the media, as well as many other actions internationally that make the U.S.A look foolish and untrustworthy, But most importantly during the Mueller investigation he has made multiple attempts at obstruction of justice, yet here you are again telling people that the worst thing to do is make his record the issue.
When are you going to be a real Sanders supporter and criticize him for what he has done?
 

doggystyle99

Well-known member
May 23, 2010
7,906
1,205
113
This is all total horseshit! There was no obstruction of justice.
If there had been they wouldve moved for at least a censure, if not impeachment.

Why can't you just admit you got it wrong.
Take Schlong or Knuckle Ball for example, they can at least admit it sometimes when they get it wrong.
You are of less character I'm sorry to say
Incorrect there were 10 attempts (Endeavors) of obstruction of justice by Trump. Attempts (Endeavors) of obstruction of justice is considered obstruction of justice.
No matter how you try to spin this it won't work.
 

K Douglas

Half Man Half Amazing
Jan 5, 2005
26,135
6,346
113
Room 112
Incorrect there were 10 attempts (Endeavors) of obstruction of justice by Trump. Attempts (Endeavors) of obstruction of justice is considered obstruction of justice.
No matter how you try to spin this it won't work.
Attempted obstruction of justice is not obstruction of justice. Just like attempted murder is not murder. Furthermore, attempted obstruction of justice in this case would be very hard, if not impossible, to prove. Which is why no reasonable prosecutor would go there.
 

bver_hunter

Well-known member
Nov 5, 2005
27,340
5,560
113
Don't cherry pick quotations. It doesn't serve any purpose, aside from making you look like a propagandist.
You must be out of touch with reality if you think I just cherry picked from a report that made a certain President look like a saint!!
 

Phil C. McNasty

Go Jays Go
Dec 27, 2010
25,138
3,573
113
Ol bugger needs some attention, he can always ask an SP to tell everyone and vouch for how nice of a condo he lives in :bump2:
She did so voluntarily, I never asked her to vouch for anything

Incorrect there were 10 attempts (Endeavors) of obstruction of justice by Trump. Attempts (Endeavors) of obstruction of justice is considered obstruction of justice.
No matter how you try to spin this it won't work
You're the one who can't accept there was no collusion or (attempts) of obstruction of justice.

I find your TDS hilarious though, so please dont stop posting :nod:
 
Ashley Madison
Toronto Escorts