Mueller Report Imminent

[Orange_Vol1321]

Inferences:
If they thought there was insufficient evidence for a charge, then they would have said so. Like they did in Volume I. That means at least one charge meets the probable cause threshold. In layman’s terms, probable cause would be reasonably credible evidence that satisfies all elements of a crime. On the scale, probable cause is -.51.

I think you can perhaps infer and even higher degree of certainty, as I think a completed investigation raises the burden for bringing a charge. All prosecutors know they can indict you at probable cause, but a good prosecutor knows it’s irresponsible to indict someone if there is no hope of a conviction.

Opinions:
So what are the Instances of conduct that might rise to that level of probability?

Tier 1
1. Instructing McGahn to fire Mueller.
2. Attempts to get Sessions to limit the scope of the investigation.
3. Public statements that can be read as enticing Manafort not to cooperate.
4. Public statements to and about Flynn effectively doing the same.
5. Public statements towards Cohen.

Tier 2:
6. Asking Comey to let Flynn go.
7. Firing Comey

That said, as I’ve noted before, all of this occurred while Trump was president. Arguably, the law does not even apply to 1, 2, 6, or 7 because there is no clear statement of applicability to the President.

In terms of most likely to result in a criminal conviction, I would choose #3. I give 1 and 2 top billing because this is not a criminal court case and I thought they were the most worthy of impeachment.

If you think about it, the Mueller report is essentially a grand jury presentation. His Grand Jury is the House of Representatives.

Good write up. Now do the other side and how it got started.

 

[37L1]

Inferences:
If they thought there was insufficient evidence for a charge, then they would have said so. Like they did in Volume I. That means at least one charge meets the probable cause threshold. In layman’s terms, probable cause would be reasonably credible evidence that satisfies all elements of a crime. On the scale, probable cause is -.51.

I think you can perhaps infer and even higher degree of certainty, as I think a completed investigation raises the burden for bringing a charge. All prosecutors know they can indict you at probable cause, but a good prosecutor knows it’s irresponsible to indict someone if there is no hope of a conviction.

Opinions:
So what are the Instances of conduct that might rise to that level of probability?

Tier 1
1. Instructing McGahn to fire Mueller.
2. Attempts to get Sessions to limit the scope of the investigation.
3. Public statements that can be read as enticing Manafort not to cooperate.
4. Public statements to and about Flynn effectively doing the same.
5. Public statements towards Cohen.

Tier 2:
6. Asking Comey to let Flynn go.
7. Firing Comey

That said, as I’ve noted before, all of this occurred while Trump was president. Arguably, the law does not even apply to 1, 2, 6, or 7 because there is no clear statement of applicability to the President.

In terms of most likely to result in a criminal conviction, I would choose #3. I give 1 and 2 top billing because this is not a criminal court case and I thought they were the most worthy of impeachment.

If you think about it, the Mueller report is essentially a grand jury presentation. His Grand Jury is the House of Representatives.

Thank you for the reply and your insight.

Trump should learn to STFU and recognize boundaries. But Trump is gonna Trump.

My thoughts are that right now it's a stretch to impeach on any of these that you have listed, and I think Mueller and his team were of the same opinion regarding "crimes" but correctly decided that it was not their call. If the House proceeds with impeachment it will be viewed by most everyone through the lens of politics, which is "unfortunate."

Either way, Trump will play this for all it's worth, which is also "unfortunate."

 

[AM64]

Basically...........well that and Mueller saying if Trump was found innocent, they would have stated that. Mueller is just publically punting the ball to Congress

Funny, but I think the deal is that prosecutors decide either to prosecute if there's a chance of winning or don't prosecute. To the best of my knowledge deciding innocence has never been in their charter ... simply prosecute or don't.

 

[IPleadInsanity]

Collusion failed, so you had to move to obstruction, then that fails you have to move to attempted obstruction. You all are so desperate.

He obstructed the false charges made with no probable cause. The deep state is pulling out all the stops to avoid investigation, this made be obstruction under their own definition. All of the rocks need to be uncovered. Their impeachment talk is just that, they know the American people would never allow it. They would most likely get kicked out of office but Trump will be in the picture a while longer.

 

[VolStrom]

Thank you for the reply and your insight.

Trump should learn to STFU and recognize boundaries. But Trump is gonna Trump.

My thoughts are that right now it's a stretch to impeach on any of these that you have listed, and I think Mueller and his team were of the same opinion regarding "crimes" but correctly decided that it was not their call. If the House proceeds with impeachment it will be viewed by most everyone through the lens of politics, which is "unfortunate."

Either way, Trump will play this for all it's worth, which is also "unfortunate."

Just a question, had a special council never existed, what would be the crime? This to me is like a catch 22, we're investigating you, but we didn't find anything. We didn't find anything but you were pissed that we were investigating and you wanted to fire a prosecutor that would have been replaced with another prosecutor, but we'll impeach you for that. Where is the crime because I fail to see it?

 

[AM64]

Attempted obstruction of justice is a crime. It's in there multiple times.

1736. Inchoate Obstruction Of Justice Offenses

So just out of curiosity, what would you call basing and justifying an investigation on a piece of political propaganda cooked up by DNC supporters and supported by Russian operatives? Looks a lot like collusion with the Russians using a go between, and I wouldn't find much difference between the terms "perversion" or intentional "obstruction" of justice. Either one would be an attempt to interfere with the legal course of activity - whether impeding an investigation or falsely accusing and impeding the freedom of an individual who would otherwise never have been investigated.

 

[BigOrangeD]

 

[AM64]

But they are the body which decides guilt in this case. If they decide he is guilty, they have a duty to impeach. Correct?

The minute they take action against Trump whether in a court or in an impeachment process, they have to deal with how the investigation began. Nobody in his/her right mind on the Dim side wants to have to face that issue. The Dims should be focused on any means possible to keep that from happening ... even Schiff for brains doesn't want the beginnings of the whole Mueller debacle released. Illegal warrants just don't turn out well for the prosecution.

 

[AM64]

It's a crime. Did you read that DOJ link I posted or did you conveniently skip it? The law calls it "endeavor", which is to be interpreted even more broadly than "attempt". You can ignore it if you want, but it doesn't make you right.

I think you'll find false accusations and falsely acquiring warrants are criminal acts, too.

Pushing an illegally started investigation and using hearsay as evidence is not a cross to die on.

 

[37L1]

The minute they take action against Trump whether in a court or in an impeachment process, they have to deal with how the investigation began. Nobody in his/her right mind on the Dim side wants to have to face that issue. The Dims should be focused on any means possible to keep that from happening ... even Schiff for brains doesn't want the beginnings of the whole Mueller debacle released. Illegal warrants just don't turn out well for the prosecution.

We can do "The Innuendo"
We can dance and sing
When it's said and done we haven't told you a thing
We all know that crap is king
Give us dirty laundry!

 

[Hunerwadel]

The minute they take action against Trump whether in a court or in an impeachment process, they have to deal with how the investigation began. Nobody in his/her right mind on the Dim side wants to have to face that issue. The Dims should be focused on any means possible to keep that from happening ... even Schiff for brains doesn't want the beginnings of the whole Mueller debacle released. Illegal warrants just don't turn out well for the prosecution.

I really don't think they have to deal with that at all. If the President had just kept his mouth shut and let Mueller do his job like most everyone (right and left) on this board recommended the events of today would have never happened. It would have ended with there was Russian interference but no conspiracy (collusion).

 

[luthervol]

At 11:00 today I was at a memorial service for a longtime friend. 48 years old, 3 kids, 2 the same ages as mine. I coached his son on my son's teams for years, beginning in kindergarten. His oldest daughter is the same age and went through school with my youngest daughter.

Had no idea what Mueller said until around 2:00.

My take:
There is plenty there that warrants impeachment and Barr intentionally mislead the public. (Which is obviously just confirmation of what I already believed.)

 

[tvolsfan]

At 11:00 today I was at a memorial service for a longtime friend. 48 years old, 3 kids, 2 the same ages as mine. I coached his son on my son's teams for years, beginning in kindergarten. His oldest daughter is the same age and went through school with my youngest daughter.

Had no idea what Mueller said until around 2:00.

My take:
There is plenty there that warrants impeachment and Barr intentionally mislead the public. (Which is obviously just confirmation of what I already believed.)

It blows my mind that so many are willing to look the other way on a president hiring a stooge AG to lie about an investigation into him.

 

[RockyTop85]

Just a question, had a special council never existed, what would be the crime? This to me is like a catch 22, we're investigating you, but we didn't find anything. We didn't find anything but you were pissed that we were investigating and you wanted to fire a prosecutor that would have been replaced with another prosecutor, but we'll impeach you for that. Where is the crime because I fail to see it?

Which statute considers that to be an element of the crime?

 

[37L1]

It blows my mind that so many are willing to look the other way on a president hiring a stooge AG to lie about an investigation into him.

AG's lie?

 

[volfanjustin]

At 11:00 today I was at a memorial service for a longtime friend. 48 years old, 3 kids, 2 the same ages as mine. I coached his son on my son's teams for years, beginning in kindergarten. His oldest daughter is the same age and went through school with my youngest daughter.

Had no idea what Mueller said until around 2:00.

My take:
There is plenty there that warrants impeachment and Barr intentionally mislead the public. (Which is obviously just confirmation of what I already believed.)

Huge surprise this was your take. Call Pelosi/Nadler,Schiff and Amash and let's get it going, I'm ready for the hearings to begin.

 

[UT_VOLS13]

At 11:00 today I was at a memorial service for a longtime friend. 48 years old, 3 kids, 2 the same ages as mine. I coached his son on my son's teams for years, beginning in kindergarten. His oldest daughter is the same age and went through school with my youngest daughter.

Had no idea what Mueller said until around 2:00.

My take:
There is plenty there that warrants impeachment and Barr intentionally mislead the public. (Which is obviously just confirmation of what I already believed.)

LOL

 

[37L1]

At 11:00 today I was at a memorial service for a longtime friend. 48 years old, 3 kids, 2 the same ages as mine. I coached his son on my son's teams for years, beginning in kindergarten. His oldest daughter is the same age and went through school with my youngest daughter.

Had no idea what Mueller said until around 2:00.

My take:
There is plenty there that warrants impeachment and Barr intentionally mislead the public. (Which is obviously just confirmation of what I already believed.)

"Plenty"? Even Mueller shied away from that one but he shied away from a lot and now wants to be a hermit.

 

[AM64]

I really don't think they have to deal with that at all. If the President had just kept his mouth shut and let Mueller do his job like most everyone (right and left) on this board recommended the events of today would have never happened. It would have ended with there was Russian interference but no conspiracy (collusion).

They would certainly have had to deal with it in a trial; and if you think the Republicans would sit idly and not bring it up during the impeachment proceedings, then I have some prime oceanfront property in Kansas specially priced for you. The only way that goes away is if the Dims have the good sense to walk away, but I have a feeling that even if they do it won't work. Trump wants his pound of Dim flesh.

 

[VolStrom]

At 11:00 today I was at a memorial service for a longtime friend. 48 years old, 3 kids, 2 the same ages as mine. I coached his son on my son's teams for years, beginning in kindergarten. His oldest daughter is the same age and went through school with my youngest daughter.

Had no idea what Mueller said until around 2:00.

My take:
There is plenty there that warrants impeachment and Barr intentionally mislead the public. (Which is obviously just confirmation of what I already believed.)

Sorry for your loss Luther.

 

[37L1]

At 11:00 today I was at a memorial service for a longtime friend. 48 years old, 3 kids, 2 the same ages as mine. I coached his son on my son's teams for years, beginning in kindergarten. His oldest daughter is the same age and went through school with my youngest daughter.

Had no idea what Mueller said until around 2:00.

My take:
There is plenty there that warrants impeachment and Barr intentionally mislead the public. (Which is obviously just confirmation of what I already believed.)

luther,

Sorry for the loss of your friend.

 

[NorthDallas40]

At 11:00 today I was at a memorial service for a longtime friend. 48 years old, 3 kids, 2 the same ages as mine. I coached his son on my son's teams for years, beginning in kindergarten. His oldest daughter is the same age and went through school with my youngest daughter.

Had no idea what Mueller said until around 2:00.

My take:
There is plenty there that warrants impeachment and Barr intentionally mislead the public. (Which is obviously just confirmation of what I already believed.)

Sorry to hear that about your buddy Luther. That’s way too young to leave this earth.

 

[Coug]

You are just as clueless and brainwashed as he is

You can disagree with the answer if you want but it doesn't change it's validity.

 

[lawgator1]

Funny, but I think the deal is that prosecutors decide either to prosecute if there's a chance of winning or don't prosecute. To the best of my knowledge deciding innocence has never been in their charter ... simply prosecute or don't.

Then you don't understand much about them, and you certainly do not understand the role of special counsel.

I think you do, actually. And I think you know that your above post is utter nonsense.

But it helps your simple-minded MAGA brethren to see "Golly gee, if Mueller did not charge him then there must not be anything to this. I shall not read the report. I shall not learn facts. I shall not independently or critically think about what happened. Trump says case closed, so must be true."

 

[MOOOOONEY]

It's funny that y'all are dismissing attempted obstruction because articles haven't been/won't be filed, but dwelling on Hillary's crimes is totally valid, even tho she's not going down either.

If Congress believes he is guilty and has the proof then they need to impeach. It’s that simple nothing more nothing less. It’s their job correct?

I have strong feelz that congress knows he is not guilty and are still playing their constituents like fools.