The problem with the whole obstruction thing is it is very much about intent.
An example:
If you ARE guilty of what they were accusing Trump of, and then you fire Comey, you can be accused of abstruction of justice because your “motive” was to keep him from revealing the truth.
However, if you are completely innocent, and you fire Comey, your motive was not to keep from getting caught. So it’s not obstruction.
And, frankly, the way this is playing out, the left is attempting to turn anything trump did into obstruction, which is virtually impossible since no crime was committed. That is, there was no motivation to obstruct justice. The motivation was to end an investigation into a crime that didn’t happen. Further, he only attempted to do that. And since it wasn’t obstruction, it wasn’t even attempted obstruction.
It’s a huge nothingburger. The only fuel the left and MSM can glean from this report is that Trump seemed to tell people to not testify to things. And since there was no crime to hide, is motives were not to obstruct justice.
Because he didn’t know.
And he was obviously nervous enough about his own conduct - not knowing whether it would be against the law or not, or held against him or not, or spun to be something it wasn’t.
I think at one point he came very close to dismissing Mueller and it was a good thing that he didn’t because that would have made it look worse.
Because, even if you are innocent, people who are trying to take you down may come up with some plausible seeming “evidence”. Being innocent is no guarantee that you will not be convicted.
Simply, Trump did not know Mueller was going to clear him (mostly) so he may have wanted to end an investigation he knew could go anywhere and could “indict a ham sandwich”. I don’t blame him for at least discussing all possibilities.
Rush is musing now that, with an army of Clinton lawyers on the team, how did they agree to *not* hold anything against Trump that was actionable? He believes some (including Mueller) probably would not agree to an official indictment with their signatures that wasn’t proven and the end result was a compromise to get the final report completed.
Don’t even bother taking the bait.
The Rats are just trying to create a buzz about nothing.
The collusion illusion was a hoax and so is this.
There’s no point in even discussing it - you’re just getting sucked into their trap.
I believe you can still be guilty of obstruction if you actively impede an investigation, regardless of its outcome.
That said, that the investigation resulted in no originating crimes being declared leaves the question of the validity and legality of the investigation in the first place. What was the probable cause? Isn’t this a “poisoned tree”? Why shouldn’t all of the indictments & convictions be thrown out? Lives were destroyed.
Mueller knew from the outset that there was no “Trump-Russia” activities, there was no evidence - so what about all the raids? Roger Stone was raided just weeks ago.
It all makes no sense UNLESS...the goal was ALWAYS to get PDJT on some form of “obstruction”. The investigation was just the vehicle to setup the right situation. Look at what they did, raiding his LAWYER - it was all to bait PDJT into some action that could be specifically pointed to. Their problem is that he didn’t do anything of significance that rises to the level of obstruction - this is what is driving them nuts. This is why the media is trying really hard to distort the “evidence” to reach the bar needed to claim impeachment justification, even to the point of just talking like it’s a no-brainer it does.
If they found some real crimes that would have just been a bonus, they probably thought they would find something - but if not the fallback was always obstruction.
...outside that, that the Mueller team was made up of purely Democrats, it might also have been to cover up the crimes of Hillary and Obama.
OBSTRUCTION OF INJUSTICE!
How would he know what Mueller was doing?
Volume 2 is proof Muller was hunting for a pony he could ride, and not investigating.
Making it easy for an “investigator” who has clearly already made his mind up ... is just stupid. Especially after the hounding of Hatfill in the anthrax case. It’s not obstruction to demand the investigators play by the rules.
And another question, if Trump has the power to fire Mueller, or to direct his investigation to be shut down, if Trump has the power to direct an investigation to be started or stopped, OR to even conduct it personally... If he has the power to negate any prosecution Muller did with pardon power...then exactly how the hell can he “obstruct” him?
It’s retarded. You cannot prosecute a president for obstructing one of his minor bureaus or Cabinet level departments.
If a President acts in a corrupt manner there is one and only one remedy. Congress can impeach him.
In America’s corrupt, politicized Federal justice system, we all know a prosecutor can indict a ham-sandwich.
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 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.
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.
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.
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.