Posted on 12/04/2017 3:51:30 AM PST by saywhatagain
For all practical purposes, the collusion probe is over. While the “counterintelligence” cover will continue to be exploited so that no jurisdictional limits are placed on Special Counsel Robert Mueller, this is now an obstruction investigation
(Excerpt) Read more at nationalreview.com ...
The president can’t obstruct justice.
why?
who gets to decide whether to prosecute or even investigate someone ? the prosecutor right? maybe the detective in charge? the police chief ect, right?
who is ALL of those peoples boss? you got it, the president.
Plus, all the investigators have assured Trump MANY times ... HE is not under investigation.
“Comey stole government documents and gave them to someone who was not authorized to see them. That is a crime,” Jarrett says.
“Comey stole government documents and gave them to someone who was not authorized to see them. That is a crime,” Jarrett says.
“Obama and Clinton are the overlords of obstruction of justice.”.....
Did we just figure that out? In particular, the Clinton’s (with odumbo’s help) have been the “MASTERS” of obstruction for years and have been given a free pass for as long. Are we disgusted enough yet to call for a reckoning? Guess not!
Comey was obstructing justice. It would have been obstructing justice not to fire him.
Mueller and the FBI are the REAL obstructionists . The FBI has gone rogue and needs to be fully investigated this time by an honest independent council ,, not another a donating member of the RAT party .
I am seeing a real showdown between the two branches. Facts are on the executive side. Entertainment and sound bites are on the judicial side. The legislative side is taking bets on the victor.
Trump and his people understand that this is the real danger that lies ahead. That is why they are going after the FBI so hard to try to discredit them.
Flockov, defeatist troll.
Just a few items that immediately come to mind:
1. If the whole "collusion" angle was a farce from the beginning (and by "farce" I mean that there was no illegality involved even if every allegation about Trump's team having some kind of interactions with the Russians was true), then there should have been no need for Sessions to recuse himself at all. As the U.S. Attorney General, Sessions would have known better than anyone that Flynn's dealings with the Russians during the transition were perfectly legal.
2. With this in mind, Sessions' recusal had to involve something more than just the "Russian collusion" idiocy. As the case stands now (assuming McCarthy is correct in his "obstruction" point), the biggest role Sessions has played to date has been his involvement in the firing of James Comey.
3. Go back over Items #1 and #2 and think about this in the context of the sequence of these events. This can only mean that Sessions knew all the way back in early February that Comey was going to be fired ... even though it was another three months before Comey's termination unfolded.
4. Now go back and look at Items #1 through #3 and view them in the context of the events surrounding Comey's firing. For an administration that was supposedly leaking to the media like a sieve, and where rumors of terminations of almost every senior administration official have been posted all over the media on a weekly basis, there wasn't even a single hint of a possibility that Comey might be fired before he was cut loose. Heck -- he learned of his own termination by watching it on CNN!
I look at all of these things and I come to the conclusion that the Trump administration had Comey in its crosshairs as a target -- not only for termination, but as the subject of a potential criminal investigation -- for months leading up to his firing.
It’s pathetic how many people here on FR will rightly point out that the mainstream media is nothing more than “fake news,” but then will immediately latch onto a mainstream media report that casts Trump in a dark light as if it were the gospel truth.
Yes, the deep strategy: campaign for Trump, get him elected, then give up a senate seat to become AG so that he could take him down - and er, be replaced as AG by the next guy to come along.
THAT makes a lot of sense to me. I can see Sessions doing that fer sure. [/s/]
That's a valid point, but someone acting as a Federal prosecutor can only deal with legal bearing. Nobody on Mueller's team can publish a legal analysis based on "conduct and integrity."
Not going to happen.
As to your other excellent points, it's actually a pretty simple battle plan: legal vs political.
Trump has the law - and the entire legal apparatus - on his side. The uniparty's play is to move the controversy into the political spectrum; obviously a much slower, more ambiguous approach.
Guess who is going to win? For one, the deep state must first win in 2018, then proceed to impeachment. Trump, on the other hand, has all the cards. He can collapse the entire facade at any point & time of his choosing.
Flynn, whether a purposeful sacrifice or not, set the standard so low - lying about what is in fact legally permissible - that every single swamp creature is guilty. I, for one, don't worry at all about what is coming down the pike. I think we're going to see the roll out pretty soon.
There's no way Congress would have passed Trump's tax bills - or helped him in any way, shape or form, if they thought the outcome would be in their favor. It was never going to be easy taking the country back - but it will and is going to occur simply because we finally elected someone in who was determined to win.
When it comes to Congress, I am pretty sure Mueller nor his investgation team "publishes" any "legal analysis." Counsel simply turns over documentation to the House Judiciary Committee.
From that point, the committee reviews the material and determines if there is sufficient evidence to "impeach" the president. Conduct and integrity is determined along with any criminal act.
My point . . . Impeachment does not necessarily have to meet any judicial or criminal threshold or requirements.
Many say, and I wholly agree, the President has not committed any "criminal" act or as President, has the prerogative to execute in the manner he chooses.
I was old enough to follow the Nixon impeachment. Many, many people then as they do today with Trump, believed that President Nixon did not commit any act that would have been found criminally illegal. IT DID NOT MATTER. Same as today.
Charges against Nixon were 1. Obstruction of justice, 2. abuse of power and 3 contempt of congress. None of which Nixon would have been found guilty in a court of law.
In this case, Mueller's responsibilities lie entirely within the U.S. Department of Justice. He was appointed as a special counsel because the U.S. Attorney General and Deputy AG were dealing with a potential conflict of interest that would have tainted their appearances of objectivity. Mueller reports only to the person who appointed him -- which in this case is Deputy AG Rod Rosenstein.
There isn't anything this so-called "deep state" could do after 2018 that they couldn't do today.
That seems clear insofar as it goes. So Why is CNN beating the drum for obstruction, obstruction and more obstruction by trump today?
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.