So Barr is going release heavily redacted copy of the Mueller report in April. Going to hide all the evidence beneath black ink. If there is nothing to hide release it all. The Starr Report about Clinton was not redacted
"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." "The investigation identified two different forms of connections between the IRA and members of the Trump Campaign. (The investigation identified no similar connections between the IRA and the Clinton Campaign.) First, on multiple occasions, members and surrogates of the Trump Campaign promoted—typically by linking, retweeting, or similar methods of reposting—pro-Trump or anti-Clinton content published by the IRA or through IRA-controlled social media accounts. Additionally, in a few instances, IRA employees represented themselves as U.S. persons to communicate with members of the Trump Campaign in an effort to seek assistance and coordination on IRA-organized political rallies inside the United States." “Within approximately five hours of Trump's statement [on July 27, 2016 that Russia find Clinton's emails], GRU officers targeted for the first time Clinton's personal office." “Trump engaged in efforts to curtail the Special Counsel's investigation and prevent the disclosure of evidence to it, including through public and private contacts with potential witnesses.” “when Sessions told the President that a Special Counsel had been appointed, the President slumped back in his chair and said, 'Oh my God. This is terrible. This is the end of my Presidency. I'm f***ed.'" Mueller
Isn't that exactly why congress replaced the Independent counsel law with the now, Special counsel law?
Just listened to Nadler, speaking like the gotcha moment it just about to come. Obstruction! I can't get past just one simple question, the answer to which should stop a sane man from proceeding down that road. If there was no crime of collusion, and Mueller clearly says there was not. How in the world could a Chief executive be guilty of Obstruction of Justice in trying to pull his people back from investigation of a crime the he knows did not occurs? That would be prudent management, not obstruction. If you apply the same logic to Nixon, then Nixon would be guilty. Applied to Trump, then he has to be not guilty. If it were Clinton, I don't know what the answer would be, but it was stupid to go down that road and attempt to impeach that President.
"With respect to whether the President can be found to have obstructed justice by exercising his powers under Article II of the Constitution, we concluded that Congress has the authority to prohibit a President's corrupt use of his authority in order to protect the integrity of the administration of justice."
pg 158: "The President's efforts to influence the investigation were mostly unsuccessful, but that is largely because the persons who surrounded the President declined to carry out orders or accede to his requests."
I guess so, but I'm pretty certain I've never stated that "I'm fucked" when I hadn't done anything to be "fucked" over but that's just me I suppose.
No crime, no corrupt use of authority. With no crime, it is illogical think of corrupt influence in regard to the investigation, Since he absolutely knew there was no need, Only political enemies needed an investigation. Fuck them!
