Posted on 04/22/2019 9:31:20 AM PDT by Mr. K
A special counsel cannot charge a President with a single crime. And he can be hired or fired by a president.
he is a limited DOJ employee and is in no way superior to the Presidency.
The absolutely only remedy for a corrupt or criminal president is impeachment. But no, a special prosecutor cannot charge him, and is indeed the direct subordinate of the president. DOJ and special prosecutors are not independent in any way.
Why would Mueller not have concluded his investigation in December 2017 after ascertaining the Steele dossier could not be corroborated? Because the goal was always to entrap POTUS in an obstruction or perjury charge. Two things eventually shut Rosenstein/Mueller/Weissman down: Trump’s refusal to submit to an in person interview and the appointment of Bill Barr.
He knew he did not collude, but he believed that he was being framed. The longer the investigation when on, the more he believed that Mueller and his team of Clinton donors were a part of the frame.
If Trump did anything to "obstruct" the investigation, it was the appointment of William Barr as Attorney General. I believe that it was Barr who put a stop to the Mueller investigation after Congressional Democrats called for Barr to recuse himself.
-PJ
He didn’t and he wouldn’t.
Howver, get ready for Impeach,Impeach,Impeach,Impeach,Impeach,Impeach,from the Dems and media. Trump needs his DOJ to investigate the process and frankly start holding people from Obama on down accountable.
The whole thing with this obstruction thing is that it’s made up by the very same people that made up the Russia thing.
They lie. About everything. All the time.
How is that so hard to understand?
A presidential term is incredibly short, and there are many things a president hopes to accomplish. And even if he knows that the investigation is going to prove him right, the process is deeply distracting, and gives political opponents extra energy to resist him.
You could say the Mueller investigation was an Obstruction of the Presidency itself, since it impeded Trump from performing his job to the fullest.
He knew there was no collusion over a year ago. He did this to obstruct Trump and help the Dems with impeachment if they were suicidal enough to move forward with it.
Because Mueller was dragging his feet and generally being an ass about it.
He can easily be replaced without ending the investigation, but any move against Mueller the man would be falsely labeled, by the press, as stopping the investigation. Institutional baggage prohibits efficiency and accuracy.
The first question is whether a crime was committed by Trump’s campaign, and if so “What did Trump know and when did he know it?” But only if so - andMueller’s reportBarr’s report of Mueller’s findings says No. Full Stop.The second question is why anyone should care what Trump supposedly said. What did his Administration do?
And ultimately, “Was there a Mueller ‘Investigation,’ or merely a Mueller attempted coup by character assassination? There is nothing wrong with obstructing a coup.
I’m differentiating between obstructing in an investigation into a President’s activities and *charging* the President. That is for Congress - but I can’t see a POTUS being able to just obstruct an investigation on POTUS by a SC. That is something I’d expect Congress to act upon.
If Trump was indeed not interfering, then he would not know what Mueller was doing.
We have seen almost nothing but Rule of Lawfare and Rule of Skullduggery since Barack Obama first became president. It metastasized when Donald Trump announced for the office.
Not actually committing obstruction is no protection from the process crimes Mueller sought to manufacture, for Trump, as he successfully did for others.
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.