Mueller: Letter to Barr says Summary, “Failed to Capture Context, Nature & Substance” of Report

Yes because Free College will be attained by the government forgiving Student Loans. Why are you so dense?

 

I guess I'm still having a hard time wrapping my head around "obstruction" charges when the purported underlying crime that touched off the entire investigation was found to be untrue.

How can any otherwise legal act undertaken by the President obstruct justice if the finding was he was innocent all along of the original charge collusion/conspiracy? Imagine the precedent that would set.

 

ur publicizing that ur under-informed.

u'd be well served to read the Mueller report and Mueller's letters to Barr.

 

Mmm.

 

That's not what he said, he said that while the olc guidelines would prevent him from pursuing an indictment, that even if that wasn't the case, there was insufficient evidence for an indictment.

The olc ruling wouldn't prevent a sealed indictment, it would simply prevent one from happening while he was in office (as the ruling is related to the functions of the president, not the person), and they've made statements that no sealed indictments of any kind exist.

 

It happens all the time. The underlying cause of an investigation doesn’t need to be proven for there to be obstruction of justice. You don’t even have to be successful at undermining an investigation for there to be obstruction of justice.

Andrew Napolitano put it best on Fox News. This is a classic case of obstruction of justice. The question is whether there is any real reason to impeach. The election is not too far away and the American people know what happened, they can decide. I have some constitutional attorney friends that say you impeach if you have evidence of a crime because otherwise it sets a bad precedence.

I think the the political culture in this country since Clinton has been toxic. Honestly Clinton never should have been impeached. GW Bush never should have been portrayed as an enemy of America by the left and the right shouldn’t have obstructed everything Obama did. It has only escalated the last 25 years.

 

False, he never said there was insufficient evidence for an indictment on obstruction of justice. Likewise he never said there was sufficient evidence for an indictment.

He spelled out the OLC guidelines (without offering an opinion on them), said he was bound by them as an employee. He stated that Bar confirmed that a sitting President would not be indicted.

He then spelled out 10 incidents of potential obstruction of justice... then countered with 6 counter points.

He then shot down the idea that Bar presented that a sitting President can not be guilty of obstruction of justice. He next stated that congress has the power and responsibility to impeach a public figure if they have committed a crime and no one is above the law. He also said a President could be charged criminally when no longer in office.

Mueller was very careful to be as objective as possible. For example he spelled out that an indictment against a sitting President would not be fair under the OLC guidelines because there would be no charges and the President would not be able to have his day in court.

 

Yeah because that is Cohen’s fault...

 

Is there a perjury case against Barr? Mikhaila Fogel and Quinta Jurecic argue at Lawfare that there isn't.

On May 2, Speaker of the House Nancy Pelosi made an accusation: Attorney General William Barr, she said, had lied to Congress. And the speaker emphasized: “That’s a crime.”

Pelosi’s comments referred not to Barr’s testimony the previous day before the Senate Committee on the Judiciary but, rather, to his comments during a previous appearance in front of the House appropriations committee on April 9, after Barr released his letter characterizing Special Counsel Robert Mueller’s conclusions but before the release of Mueller’s report itself. Pelosi’s accusation is serious, and it adds fuel to the fire stoked by congressional Democrats demanding that Barr step down.

There’s just one problem: The legal standard for perjury is a high one, and it’s highly unlikely that the attorney general’s comments clear that bar. . . . ​

https://www.lawfareblog.com/there-perjury-case-against-barr

 

McGahn isn’t (and never was) the personal attorney for the President. He was WH counsel and there is a difference. Now, Trump can make an argument of executive privilege on anyone that spoke on certain sensitive topics but I think that was waived by Flood when Trump didn’t object during the investigation.... as a side note, the President needs better attorney representation... his counsel has put him in a tough spot.

 

Perjury is very difficult to prove. Kavanaugh came closer than Barr. With Barr the issue is what repercussions should there be for willingly lying and deceiving the American people.

 

Nobody knows what Mueller's exact complaint was so how could Barr? Mueller just gave some vague nonsense, so Barr called him up and Mueller still gave vague nonsense.

Mueller is a political hack.

 

I think everyone, including Barr, knew what Mueller's complaint was, and most people understood why that complaint was legitimate.

 

which was........

here's his letter

https://www.washingtonpost.com/cont...696-845a-1b45ad32fff1/?utm_term=.e588a69aae84

please tell me what he thought Barr left out of his summary of the conclusions.

Do you ever wonder why Mueller's team wrote this letter instead of just calling Barr?

 

Anyone that practices law knows why Mueller wrote a letter instead of relying on a conversation with Bill Barr.

 

Its easier to leak a letter. That's why.

 

Probably true.

Had to get the truth out. Couldn't let a traitor like Barr control the narrative.

 

Not everyone. Some don’t know as they don’t care to follow any of this or anything political for that matters. Some of these folks don’t consume any media or at least this type of media. Some may have seen some media and bought into the narrative of Barr and Trump.

For those that at least are somewhat aware and believe Trump is already a crook but don't care, I know it’s hard to believe, but people could change their mind.

And probably most important, the people that knows Trump is crooked and don't care that he is one... still can quite easily care if he's a criminal. Did he actually omitted obstruction of justice? Pretty clear to me, but probably not clear to half of American that is hearing two different sides, one of which is from the President and his AG that has completely misled and lied to the American people. Due to Barr disgraceful actions, the DEM does have another card to play - they can extend Congressional investigations indefinitely, or at least till the election or Barr is gone. But to me, go ahead and gather what they need, but it's already enough to start impeachment proceeding and they should do so.

 

Your character assassination is laughable. I think you might be the only person to ever associate 'vague' and 'nonsense' with Robert Mueller.
He wrote the letter because he absolutely knew Barr purposely mischaracterized the report for Fox News consumption and to allow the Trumpanistas to shout "no Collusion" and input that idea into the public consciousness before the legally complex, nuanced report became public knowledge. It was a simplified misrepresentation offered for their low information base.