Why the President Did NOT Commit Obstruction(in spite of what some ppl are madly spinning) *edited for additional info*

I was going to write an article on why Pres Trump could not be charged with obstruction of justice.I happened to come across an article explaining why he could be charged with obstruction. I decided to use this article as a starting point.It was very well written.It’s just wrong in what it asserts.

I posit there was no obstruction or Mueller would have indicted Trump with obstruction. The investigation was never meant to indict Trump; they knew they had nothing. It was meant to lead to his impeachment.

Here’s all the evidence of obstruction of justice in the Mueller report, in case you forgot

Keep in mind the article was written BEFORE Mueller testified in Congress.

Note that in the “Mueller” Report(i use the term loosely anymore)the investigation turned the decision over to William Barr. Why would they do that? Simple: a prosecutor does not exonerate a subject. They can’t. Not their role. They either indict or not indict. If they don’t indict the subject with a crime then it’s over. The subject is considered not guilty.The role to determine whether there is a case of obstruction against Trump falls under  the purview of  the attorney general in the Justice Dept. Mueller actually did what he was permitted to do.Trust me,he knew that. He knew that the collusion story was bunk too. Weissmann knew from the beginning, meaning Mueller had to know himself.
When it comes to the so called Mueller report(it’s not;it’s likely the Weissmann report)you don’t begin with Part II,the investigation of obstruction.
You have to begin with Part I. Part I should lay out the crime.You spell out what the subject of the investigation is being investigated for.Problem 1: as we know Pres Trump was informed that he was NOT the target of an investigation.Problem 2: Trump is not charged with a crime. It’s been alleged or speculated he might have ‘colluded’ with the Russians. He didn’t. The report even concluded he didn’t.Problem 3.Collusion is not a crime nor is speaking to  Russians;not even Putin.
man

Sometimes quoted as, “show me the man and i’ll show you the crime”.

Rod Rosenstein gave Mueller what are referred to as  the Scope memos. These memos simply authorized what Mueller and his team may and may not have investigated, that is the scope of the investigation.Problem 5: Mueller should have been  conducting a criminal investigation but he couldn’t. Paragraph 1 is supposed to be the crime.(You don’t get to Paragraph 2 unless you go through Paragraph 1). There was none. Instead Rosenstein sent him off on a counterintelligence-not a criminal investigation. It was an investigation in search of a crime.The House committee had to jump to Part II in the Mueller hearing.You can’t get to impeachment with Part I(Collusion).  You can barely get to impeachment in Part II(Obstruction). Part II was their best bet.

When former special counsel Robert Mueller testifies on July 24 before the House Judiciary Committee, he will be answering questions about whether the US president obstructed justice by thwarting Mueller’s investigation of Russian interference in the 2016 presidential election.

If Mueller were really investigating possible interference of the Russians in the 2016 election then it would make sense to look at both campaigns,not just Trump’s.

Pres Obama didn’t seem too concerned about the 2016 election(of course at this point he was sure Hillary was going to win).

Problem 6 & 7 I: Jeff Sessions did not need to recuse himself.Rosenstein should have never had the power to appoint a special counsel. In fact,one was not necessary. Most of the issues could have been handled by the DOJ.

I digress though;let’s deal with the situation as it turned out.

Trump publicly expressed skepticism that Russia was responsible for the WikiLeaks release of hacked Democratic National Committee documents during the 2016 presidential campaign

We all expressed skepticism. The DNC computers were never examined by the FBI and the FBI report on the ‘hack’ has that qualifier. It was outsourced to Crowdstrike. A strange move if you were really concerned about hacking. The FBI would be the agency of choice for that type of crime. To this day the FBI has not examined them.

Trump  privately sought information about future[wikileaks] releases.Yeah,if true,and?

Not necessary anyway. The information from wikileaks was already in the public domain.As a side here,always wondered why the Mueller team didn’t question Assange himself.

    • He also denied having any business in Russia, despite pursuing a licensing deal for a skyscraper called Trump Tower Moscow up to June 2016.

He denied having any business in Russia because he didn’t have any businesses in Russia.* The deal never went through.Besides doing business in Russia is not a crime.Furthermore,this was before he was elected President and seems to have been before he even became a candidate.

  • After the election, he privately expressed concern that Russia’s interference could cause the public to question his presidency’s legitimacy.

No kidding.

Trump had the authority as CEO of the executive branch to fire Sessions,Comey and yes,even “Bob” Mueller. Did he want to let Mueller go? Of course he did.Tell me,why wouldn’t he? Look at the group of people that Weissmann assembled against him. All Clinton supporters.Not one Republican. They didn’t even try to make it look fair,unbiased and objective.

  • The president instructed White House counsel Don McGahn to stop Sessions from recusing himself.

  • He was angry that Sessions disobeyed, telling advisors his attorney general should “protect” him.

  • Trump urged Sessions to “un-recuse” himself

So,so and so. None of these things are a crime. In fact why on earth would the President just sit there and say wow,that’s fantastic? To this day I’m not sure why Sessions did recuse himself. Was he weak,was he a plant,did someone from DOJ pressure him?

The President had a right to defend himself especially when something as egregious as this witch hunt [he knew] was set up to target him. it was obvious from the beginning that the whole purpose of the investigation was to cripple the Trump administration at first and then lead to his impeachment later.

Trump was an innocent man trying to defend himself under impossible circumstances.

I’m not going to delve into this much further because there was no crime that justified appointing Mueller.Everything from that point out is basically a process crime.

Mueller (or Weissmann)did everything possible to try to push Trump into shutting down the investigation (ie the incarceration of  Paul Manafort,the spectacle at the Stone residence)so they could claim obstruction.They also did everything possible to drag out the investigation until the mid terms.

They figured with a cloud over the White House they stood a good chance of getting a Democrat House and Senate elected. The House went Democrat. Trump was able to hold off any gains in the Senate-in fact the Republicans gained 2 seats.

They needed the House and Senate both to impeach the President. The House can still bring articles of impeachment against the President-their problem is that it’s DOA in the Senate.NOT GOING TO HAPPEN.

  • He called FBI chief Comey again, requesting that he “lift the cloud” by stating that the president wasn’t being investigated personally.

Absolutely true,but not exactly accurate in the way it’s trying to imply that there’s either something nefarious or illegal about the request. Comey HAD told Pres Trump he was not a target of the investigation. All Pres Trump was asking Comey, was that he go public with the information. Another words,state publicly what he had been saying privately all along.

A MUST see. Dan Bongino’s talk on Spygate.

We could surmise that Mueller was head of the team in name only. He most likely delegated the investigation over to Weissmann. It’s doubtful he even wrote the report with his name on it.Maybe Mueller saw his role in a different light than we did.I’m not saying that’s wrong;just saying we made a wrong assumption based on what we thought we knew.

It’s also possible that Bob’s sudden onset of senility was a charade. A dirty cop would know how to pull this off. Remember the Mueller hearing over the IRS scandal? You would swear you were watching the same hearing.

We may never know but it hardly matters-either way he was a terrible witness.

I’m going to stop right there because we’ve learned a few things since Mueller testified.  Here’s  my short take on the hearing. It’s a previous entry.YOU can decide whether he was senile or crooked.

https://americafirst.blog/2019/07/26/mueller-senile-or-crooked/

We’ve since learned that Josef Misfud was defintely Western intel,not Russian. The meeting with Papadopolous was most likely a set up.

It’s important to keep in mind that in any investigation you question who makes the initial contact. It actually matters.In every case with the Trump team it was the agents who contacted the Trump personnel; not the other way around. It screams set up.

Recall that Misfud kind of dropped off the planet. He vanished and turned up later in Italy. I even came across comments that suggested he might be dead. Never bought that. There would have been information somewhere. An obit for instance.

Manafort’s charges had nothing to do with Russia.

Carter Page walked. They used him to get the initial FISA warrant.

George Papadopolous served 14 days.

Comey actually bragged on live tv that he deliberately took advantage of the transition period of the Trump White House to send in agents and question Flynn. We’ve also learned  there was a spy sent into the White House when Trump began his first term.

townhall.com/tipsheet/mattvespa/2018/05/21/waitthe-suspected-fbi-spy-reportedly-tried-to-infiltrate-trump-administration-af-n2482957

The  Flynn case could be tossed out by Judge Sullivan. Flynn recently hired attorney Sidney Powell.I’ll leave it to the reader to look up  articles on the Flynn case to see where that stands now.Here’s an article that SUGGESTS Flynn’s guilty plea could be thrown out.

https://www.americanthinker.com/blog/2018/12/is_the_flynn_guilty_plea_going_to_be_thrown_out.html

Jim Jordan questions “Bob” Mueller. At the end he tells us where the investigation is now heading.

I’ve posted this You Tube in several entries. Jordan always does a top rate job of questioning in any hearing.It’s worth watching several times. Jordan never beats around the bush.

This analysis of the hearing by Attorney DiGenova & his wife Victoria Toensing is also worth watching.They know all the players very well. It gives their analysis a unique take.

* How about that speaking fee former President Bill Clinton collected from Russia? How about that flexibility Obama said he would have with Putin after his[Obama] election? How about that sale of U.S. Uranium to Russia approved by Hillary’s State Dept and then President Obama?

 

Author:

Catholic.conservative. Pro life.Period.

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out /  Change )

Google photo

You are commenting using your Google account. Log Out /  Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )

Connecting to %s

This site uses Akismet to reduce spam. Learn how your comment data is processed.

%d bloggers like this: