🔥 Popular | Latest

Crime, Presidential Election, and Justice: The Attorney General Obstruction of Justice. The report's second part addresses a number of actions by the President most of which have been the subject of public reporting - that the Special Counsel investigated as potentially raising obstruction-of-justice concerns. factual investigation" into these matters, the Special Counsel considered whether to evaluate the conduct under Department standards governing prosecution and declination decisions but ultimately determined not to make a traditional prosecutorial judgment. The Special Counsel therefore did not draw a conclusion - one way or the other - as to whether the examined conduct constituted obstruction. Instead, for each of the relevant actions investigated, the report sets out evidence on both sides of the question and leaves unresolved what the Special Counsel views as "difficult issues" of law and fact concerning whether the President's actions and intent could be viewed as obstruction. The Special Counsel states that "while this report does not conclude that the President committed a crime, it also does not exonerate him." After making a "thorough I prefer the real report. sOcia the and Atterney Worle-Produet // M 45 of Justice U.S. Department Harm to Ongoing Matter Proteeted Under Fed RCrim P 6fe) Attemey Werle Preduet // May-Eentain-Mate Prigo Harm to Ungoing M Was sancti atter urces n22orted on Prigozhin's tie otographs Report On The Investigation Into Russian Interference In The Harm to Ongoing Matter Harm m to Ongoing Matter 2016 Presidential Election Volume I of II Special Counsel Robert S. Mueller, III 28 C.F.R.600.8(c) I said, the real report. Submitted Parsuant ing Matter Washington, D.C Perfection. THE TRUMP LEAKS CRET MEMOS, EMA,LS. Exposc the IOP SE T C The *real* report

The *real* report

Save
College, Donald Trump, and Fbi: LARRY FLYNT AND HUSTLER MAGAZINE ANNOUNCE A CASH OFFER OF UP TO 10 MILLION FOR INFORMATION LEADING TO THE IMPEACHMENT AND REMOVAL FROM OFFICE OF DONALD J. TRUMP The attempt to impeach Donald Trump will strike many as tion, and obstruction of justice in the firing of FBI Dire Sour-grapes plot by Democrats to overturn a legitimate James Comey. lection. But there is a strong cas lection was egitinmate in many ways-and that after nine 2. Inciting violent civil strife with his racial dog-whi and unconscionable defense of the KKK and neo-Naa the Charlottesville riots. to be made that the last multuous months in office, Trump has proven he's dan- rously unfit to exercise the extreme power accrued by our w "unitary executive." 3. Compromising domestic and foreign policy massive conflicts-of-interest global business en 4. Telling hundreds of bald-faced lies, and com rance of world affairs. 5. Gross nepotism and appointment of un fter losing the popular vote, Trump was installed only by quirks of our antiquated Electoral College, enacted as ncession to lower-population slave states allowed to t slaves as three-fifths of a citizen, even though they sons to high office. nt vote-a real anacbronism today in a multicultural 6. Sabotaging the 195-nation Paris acc y still struggling for racial equity and tolerance. The planet from future climate cataclysm. If t ral College violates the "one man, one vote" principle, a misdemeanor, the term is meaningless But most worrisome is that, long be apocalypse strikes, Trump might trig Wyoming voters, for instance, at 3.6 times more alifornia voters. s also designed as a firewall against an unstable war. His foreign policy decisions hav gue. Alexander Hamilton hoped that electors would sober reflection,but thin-skinned advised tweets, often at odds with foreign policy con Yhreeimes as tn President "with talents for low intrique, and the in an eminent degreemeeting witha Full page Ad in The Washington Post.

Full page Ad in The Washington Post.

Save
Confidence, Crime, and Facts: in late December 2016. the e election. By early 2017 Fourth, if we had confidence after a thorough investigation of the facts that the President clearly did not commit obstruction of justice, we would so state. Based on the facts and the applicable legal standards, however, we are unable to reach that judgment. The evidence we obtained about the President's actions and intent presents difficult issues that prevent us from conclusively determining that no criminal conduct occurred. Accordingly, while this report does not conclude that the President committed a crime, it also does not exonerate him. JuSt ot to app imes. Th Branch, these investigat charges rough se. An ame. In rought, cator. zate "the Russian gover Jing any links or coording he Trump Campaign. For th conspir ticisms have been lodged a actice of naming unindicted co- social media campaign candidate Hilla intrusion operations eport milar erm. an see also Justice 30 COp. at 259 & n.38 (citation omitted) ween the Russian gove that the Russian govec cure that outcome cn ser on sel's work, he The Spee laining the prosecution avestigatory Gener Counsell reached. The Russian govermment interfered in the 2016 presidential election in sweeping and systematic fashion. Evidence of Russian government operations began to surface in mid-2016. In June, the Democratic National Committee and its cyber response team publicly announced that Russian hackers had compromised its computer network we safeguarding the integrity of the criminal jus red whether to evaluate the e investig s, but we cution and declinatio dars is through the organization W Acuments, a fore ilable ress were BChattannnga Times n a judgment tha tne Presiden BOB MUELLER BILL BARR Hide & Seek - DoJ Style

Hide & Seek - DoJ Style

Save
Confidence, Crime, and Facts: in late December 2016, the| e election. By early 2017 Fourth, if we had confidence after a thorough investigation of the facts that the President clearly did not commit obstruction of justice, we would so state. Based on the facts and the applicable Icgal standards, however, we are unable to reach that judgment. The evidence we obtained about the President's actions and intent presents difficult issues that prevent us from conclusively determining that no criminal conduct occurred. Accordingly, while this report does not conclude that the President committed a crime, it also does not exonerate him. JUst ot to app mes. Th e Branch, these investigate charges hrough a se. An ame. In rought cator5 ate "the Russian gover ing any links or coordin he Trump Campaign. For t conspir ticisms have been lodged ag ractice of naming unindicted co- social media campaign t| candidate Hilla r-intrusion operations eport, milar erm, ; see also Justice 30 Op. at 259 & n.38 (citation omitted). tween the Russian gove that the Russian gover cure that outcome an ent Scrv on sel's work, he he Spe laining the prosecution nvestigatory The Russian government interfered in the 2016 presidential election in sweeping and systematic fashion. Evidence of Russian government operations began to surface in mid-2016. In June, the Democratic National Committee and its cyber response team publicly announced that Russian hackers had compromised its computer network we Genera Counsel reached. we investig but red whether to evaluate the cution and declinatio through the organization W Ancuments, a fore ilable icel safeguarding the integrity of the criminal jus Free PressMnet dars is vere ahattanooga Times na judgment tha une Presiden BOB MUELLER BILL BARR The Report

The Report

Save
Being Alone, America, and Click: Jason Fuller, Contributor Working to bring about the best in America, both on-line and off. Impeachment Is No Longer Enough; Donald Trump Must Face Justice Impeachment and removal from office are only the first steps; for treason and-if convicted in a court of law-executed. 06/11/2017 10:39 pm ET for America to be redeemed, Donald Trump must be prosecuted Donald Trump has been President of the United States for just shy of six months now. I think that most of us among the electorate knew that his presidency would be a relative disaster, but I am not sure how many among us expected the catastrophe our nation now faces. friendly-neighborhood-patriarch: hominishostilis: abstractandedgyname: siryouarebeingmocked: mississpithy: bogleech: notyourmoderate: angrybell: thinksquad: http://archive.is/5VvI5 Huffpo, everybody. Can someone tell me what high crime or misdemeanor Trump has committed that merits this? Or is the HuffPo just publishing outright fantasies? God dammit, I’m now in the position of defending Huffington. I didn’t want to be here. Okay, @angrybell … actually, @ literally everyone who reblogged this uncritically as a tacit endorsement and agreement. Such as @the-critical-feminist that I reblog this from.My first question has to be: are you serious? Don’t read that with a tone, don’t read that as an attack. That’s my first question: Are you asking a serious question about what high crimes or misdemeanors Trump has perpetrated? Are you asking a sincere question or is this the sort of rhetoric that doesn’t translate well into text? And, if you are actually asking this question, are ou going to hear the answer or are you going to immediately start concocting your counter-argument because you just know in your heart that anyone who disagrees with you must be wrong, so you start formulating a plan to prove them wrong before you actually hear what they have to say?Next: did you read the article that was posted in the link you responded to? Because the author of that article does a reasonable job of explaining their thought process behind the headline. Or did you lash out before you read the article? Okay, presuming that you did read the article in good faith, evaluate its points, perform the follow-up research to understand context, and still disagree with the central tenets and simply believe that the author’s reasoning does not hold up for whatever reasons you have chosen not to state, and you believe their source information is falsified for whatever reason you have chosen not to state, I will move on. After I have given you and yours every conceivable benefit of the doubt and every charitable assumption. Because if the article itself doesn’t convince you, there’s the fact that Donald Trump has broken literally every federal law against corruption and conflict of interest. Not one or two, not most, not all but a few. Literally every single law we have against corruption, from the Constitution to the informal guidelines circulated as a memo from the White House ethics scholars. He’s broken literally every one of those rules. He’s openly traded favors for money and favors for months now. Hell, that Chinese influence-peddler that paid him off for sixteen million dollars should have been enough to get him convicted of treason. Sharing code-word level classified information with a government on the opposite side of an ongoing military conflict isn’t *necessarily* treason, unless the information was part of a share program with an allied nation and wasn’t his to distribute. That’s aiding a foreign aggressor at the expense of a military ally, and that’s treason. Giving aid and comfort to enemies of the nation. Obstruction of justice is pretty clear-cut, that’s an impeachment, except that the justice in question is also a matter of national security, so that’s treason. Again. Defaming the former president? Misdemeanor, impeachable. The way he drags his heels nominating posts in Justice and State could be prosecuted as dereliction of duty. If he has tapes of Comey, he’s on the hook for contempt, if he doesn’t then he’s on the hook for witness tampering. Hell, deleting the covfefe tweet is destroying federal records, which is a misdemeanor, and impeachable. The man doesn’t go a week without bringing on an impeachable offense. Strictly speaking, every time he goes to Mar-A-Lago he’s committing grand larceny by fraud, because he’s taking millions of dollars of American funds for his own benefit, after promising not to do that. There are dozens, hundreds maybe, of impeachable offenses already in this 140 days, “high crimes and misdemeanors”. Actual counts of treason, punishable by death by hanging, is probably only five or six counts. Only five or six counts of high treason by our sitting president. His job does not put him above reproach. His job is to *be* above reproach. And he’s failing that job. Trump’s supporters probably believe he’s done nothing impeachable or treasonous because they spent eight years claiming on no grounds whatsoever that Obama was impeachable and treasonous, just because they didn’t like him. They now probably convince themselves that these facts about Trump are as fake as their Obama theories and they’ve ruined the gravity of these terms for themselves. “ His job does not put him above reproach. His job is to *be* above reproach. And he’s failing that job. “ I like how Bogleech doesn’t know many Trump supporters are former Obama supporters. https://www.nytimes.com/2018/05/04/us/obama-trump-swing-voters.html https://www.vox.com/policy-and-politics/2018/10/16/17980820/trump-obama-2016-race-racism-class-economy-2018-midterm https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Obama-Trump_voters It’s not even a secret. But why am I not surprised bogleech - that intellectual titan - failed to do basic research? And last time I checked, no nation required their politicans to be perfect. Which is what NYM is asking for with that quote; perfection. That’s what ‘above reproach’ means. An impossible standard, considering people “reproach” Trump for feeding fish wrong, for his skin color, for any and every little thing, even if they have to twist reality into a pretzel to do it. In fact, I’ve seen people take pictures of kids in cages from 2014, and blame Trump for it. So this: Are you asking a serious question about what high crimes or misdemeanors Trump has perpetrated? Is a question of this: Can someone tell me what high crime or misdemeanor Trump has committed that merits this? Seems you missed the part that says “merits this”. Next: did you read the article that was posted in the link you responded to? Because the author of that article does a reasonable job of explaining their thought process behind the headline. Or did you lash out before you read the article? (The underlined is in the subtitle, not the headline.) Okay, presuming that you did read the article in good faith, evaluate its points, perform the follow-up research to understand context, and still disagree with the central tenets… Context? Central tenets? Do you not know how highlighting works? You don’t need to know the context, or any other point, when you’re indicating a specific, explicit, and isolated quality. The subtitle called for Trump’s execution, we’re 5 paragraphs in and you haven’t even acknowledged that part yet. Or at all, I’m guessing, because I’m not reading further. You keep talking around it. You accuse others, preemptively, of not hearing the answer and pre-”concocting” a response, and yet you’re waffling on about shit around the one, sole, isolated thing that was indicated in the first place. This isn’t about ignoring context, this is about criticising one thing. Which is a thing people are allowed to do, by the way, just because people criticise one thing, doesn’t mean they’re criticising everything about the everyone involved, and everything said before, adjacent to, and after that one thing, and therefore are required to include all of those things in their consideration and assessment of this one thing. The specific criticism of the indicated quality is the advocation of Trump’s execution. That’s it. No context is needed to understand that this is what was said, especially since that which was said, which is being criticised, is explicit. No amount of, “So, click-bait subtitle that you don’t see until you’ve already clicked on the article link out of the way, here’s what I actually meant when I said I wanted this person tried and executed,” could excuse the use of that language, let alone actually believing in it. It’s like… it’s like if someone makes a typo, someone else is like, “Oh, seems you made a typo,” you’d jump in like, “But what about they’re perfectly reasonable spelling everywhere else? Hm? Forced to ignore contextual perfect spelling I see. They’re lack of typos everywhere else explains this typo, and vindicates it”. You and what’s his face, James, fuckin ReasonAndEmpathy or whatever now, y’all keep saying “but what of the context?” when the criterion of criticism is isolated, atomic, specific, and/or explicit. No amount of context invalidates the very specific, singular words explicitly spoken. “Sure he called for Trump to be executed, but he explains himself.” Fucking and? When did the death sentence become ok? When did that happen? Moderates are ok with the death sentence now? Aight, weird. Man this fucking post aged like fine wine, take a SIP Delicious This was quite a ride
Save
Family, Fire, and Future: MUELLER REPORT SUMMARY There are 3 elements that define Obstruction of Justice Obstructive Act Corrupt IntentNexus To An Official Proceeding Knew that there was an active investigation or court case when obstruction occurred Anything that blocks, makes difficult, or Knew they were acting improperly, or with an hinders an investigation improper motive What Did President Trump Do? Asked Comey to "see your way to letting this go" for Flynn Asked McGahn to stop Sessions from recusing himself Fired Comey Tried to fire Mueller Tried to get the Investigation to only focus on future elections Lied to the press about the Trump Tower Meeting Tried to have Jeff Sessions take over Mueller Investigation Ordered McGahn to deny Trump's attempt to fire Mueller Attempted to influence Michael Flynrn Attempted to influence Paul Manafort Attempted to influence the jury for Manafort's trial Attempted to influence REDACTED (likely Roger Stone) Attempted to influence Michael Cohen's testimony Publicly attacked Michael Cohen, and family after cooperation OBSTRUCT INTENT NEXUS YES Unclear YES YES YES NO YES YES Unclear YES YES YES YES YES YES YES NO YES YES Unclear YES Unclear YES YES YES YES YES NO YES YES YES YES YES YES YES YES N/A N/A YES YES Unclear YES The DOJ will not indict a sitting President until she/he has been impeached. Based on a spreadsheet by Quinta Jurecic @qjurecic 4/19/19 Design by @YammerJaw Quinta Jurecic at Lawfare wrote a breakdown of the evidence for each act of obstruction - captured beautifully in this chart

Quinta Jurecic at Lawfare wrote a breakdown of the evidence for each act of obstruction - captured beautifully in this chart

Save
Jail, Justice, and Today: HER ST HE Today made me think of Nixons' AG John Mitchell, here going to jail for perjury, conspiracy and obstruction of justice.

Today made me think of Nixons' AG John Mitchell, here going to jail for perjury, conspiracy and obstruction of justice.

Save
America, Bad, and Bitch: Posted by u/sublimeinslime MAGA 1 day ago 4.6k ATTY GENERAL WILLIAM BARR BRIEFS THE NATION PRIOR TO RELEASING THE MUELLER REPORT - LIVE 2.4k Comments Give Award Share Save HideReport SORT BY NEW (SUGGESTED) Single comment thread. View all comments ▼ Show parent comments points 23 hours ago This is why I am so confused. Did the report truly vindicate Trump or not? Reply Give Award Share Report Save USMC 33 points 23 hours ago It truly vindicated him, but repeatedly handed the dems clearly biased talking points to further their political agenda. Reply Give Award Share Report Save 2 points 19 hours ago That is simply not true. CTRL+ F the report for exonerate The evidence we obtained about the President's actions and intent presents difficult issues that would need to be resolved if we were making a traditional prosecutorial judgement. At the same time, if we had confidence after a thorough investigation of the facts that the President clearly did not commit obstruction of justice, we would so state Based on the facts and applicable legal standards, we are unable to reach that judgement. Accordingly, while this report does not conclude the president committed a crime, it also does not exonerate him." Reply Share Save Edit USMC 3 points 19 hours ago exonerate /vindicate, chump Just so we are clear, I hope the piss video is true and comes out so I can laugh in your face at yet another thing that isn't illegal, isn't impeachable, and truly represents how I feel about your global socialist plans. If I could, I would straight up pay whores to piss all over your bed, and laugh in your pathetic evil face about it. Reply Give Award Share Report Save 2 points 19 hours ago edited 18 hours ago holy shit did you just say that hahahahahahhaha my pathetic evil face with global socialist plans? wut? You owe it to yourself to go see a shrink, my friend. If you happened to have access to a website called google, then you'd see that, yes, verbs,and are defined using the same words. I'm still down to get pissed on though if that's your kinda thing Reply Share Save Edit USMC 1 point 11 hours ago Exactly how pissed are you that Trump is both totally vindicated and totally exonerated? Answer in terms of how many "e"s are in your Reeeees! Reply Give Award Share Report Save points 11 hours ago It blatantly says he is not, so I truely don't understand how you can take a point blank statement and still press forth. Do you have anything citable or any logic that you can present in a humane manner to even suggest he is? Reply Share Save Edit USMC 1 point 11 hours ago Yes, the fact that it says they investigated dozens and dozens of "incidents" over 2.5 years with unlimited resources and fueled by hatred, and found NOTHING. Literally NOTHING. That is the definition of exoneration in our legal system. The public presentation of that fact is his vindication. He could have been exonerated and denied his vindication, but now that we get to see it, Trump achieved both. Mueller doesn't like it, and you don't like it, but that is the REALITY and the mental illness that you are infected with, that makes you think you can persecute someone endlessly is the antithesis of what the United States of America was founded upon, and will forever stand against. You are an unamerican piece of evil globalist socialist shit, and you will always lose because of it. No poliical talking point that Mueller attempts to feed you will ever change the fact that he was investigated WRONGLY, after having the most powerful nations full intelligence capabiliies laid upon him, and you have won NOTHING. There is NOTHING on Trump. You no longer have the opportunity or power to defeat him through lies, and you will never defeat him through actions. For your sake, you better hope you're as clean as he is, because it's your turn now, bitch. Reply Give Award Share Report Save Show parent comments O points 11 hours ago edited 10 hours ago The report speaks for itself so I won't even address that further. If you can't connect the dots between him directing his subordinates to obstruct justice, having numerous Russian friends with benefits, his camps involvement in bribery, his pervasive lying, and eagerness to slander and mistreat about anyone in his own self-interest and not our great nation's; then you either are A) not a critical thinker, B) grossly unethical, or C) a sad try hard (as evident by your name calling and threat to...investigate me??) I'm guessing all the above PS: go fuck yourself. You spew the negative hate that you pretend to condemn and are sickening imitation of a human being Reply Share Save Edit USMC 1 point 10 hours ago The report does speak for itself: No Collusion. No Obstruction. Total Exoneration. Not even a Special Prosecutor with all resources and every attempt to throw things in a false light could frame him. He's just THAT clean. You're connecting dots that don't exist due to your mental illness. It's not a threat to you, but a PROMISE to those evil ideologies you worship. I only hate EVIL and if that horrifies you as much as you claim, that should be your wake up cal. Reply Give Award Share Report Save 0 points 10 hours ago Get help Reply Share Save Edit USMC 2 points-10 hours ago Says the guy having a breakdown because your masters programmed you with "Orange Man Bad" and promised impeachments for years, and produced nothing for you. And as predicted, your side just dives straight into the sea of mental illness, rejecting the TRUTH that your evil masters lied and failed because of the lies, so you have to construct the mental coping mechanism to keep your mind from shattering. Now it's all "OMG Mueller was IN ON IT ALL ALONG" while still hanging on his every word, trying to scrape out SOMETHING that will prevent the world of lies that you constructed from crashing around you. And you can't win jack shit. From 2016 to the end of your pathetic evil life, you will lose. At everything Reply Give Award Share Report Save Is Receiving Idiotic Threats from /the_donald Considered Cheating?
Save
cnn.com, Donald Trump, and Justice: CNN: Donald Trump committed of Obstruction of Justice by allowing Rod Rosenstein to resign.

CNN: Donald Trump committed of Obstruction of Justice by allowing Rod Rosenstein to resign.

Save
Justice, Idiocracy, and President: In Idiocracy (2006), President Camacho intervenes in Secretary Not Sure's execution. This is a foreshadowing of President Trump's attempted obstruction of justice.

In Idiocracy (2006), President Camacho intervenes in Secretary Not Sure's execution. This is a foreshadowing of President Trump's attempted ...

Save
Being Alone, Fbi, and Supreme: The Mueller Report correctly concludes that there are no Supreme Court decisions or even Department of Justice positions that directly resolve the issue of whether "the president's exercises of his constitutional authority to terminate an FBI director and to close investigations" can constitutionally constitute an obstruction of justice. The report also acknowledges the principle that "general statutes must be read as not applying to the president if they do not expressly apply where application would arguably limit the president's constitutional role." And it correctly concludes that "the obstruction statutes do not disqualify the president from acting in a case simply because he has a personal interest in it or because his own conduct may be at issue." As the Department of Justice has made clear, "a claim of conflict of interest standing alone cannot deprive the president of the ability to fulfill his constitutional function." Those three principles should end the matter. In the absence of a contrary precedent, the general obstruction of justice statute should not be deemed applicable to the commission of an act by a president authorized by the constitution, even if it was self-serving. This conclusion applies not only to the firing of Comey, but to all actions taken by President Trump to pursuant constitutional authority under Article II. Alan Dershowitz giving a unbiased and informed destruction of the Obstruction of Justice nonsense and showing how biased Mueller was.

Alan Dershowitz giving a unbiased and informed destruction of the Obstruction of Justice nonsense and showing how biased Mueller was.

Save
Facts, Fbi, and Period: U.S. Department of Justice INTRODUCTION TO VOLUME II This report is submitted to the Attorney General pursuant to 28 C.F.R. S 600.8(c), which states that, "[alt the conclusion of the Special Counsel's work, he.shall provide the Attorney General a confidential report explaining the prosecution or declination decisions [the Special Counsel] reached." Beginning in 2017, the President of the United States took a variety of actions towards the ongoing FBI investigation into Russia's interference in the 2016 presidential election and related matters that raised questions about whether he had obstructed justice. The Order appointing the Special Counsel gave this Office jurisdiction to investigate matters that arose directly from the FBI's Russia investigation, including whether the President had obstructed justice in connection with Russia-related investigations. The Special Counsel's jurisdiction also covered potentially obstructive acts related to the Special Counsel's investigation itself. This Volume of our report summarizes our obstruction-of-justice investigation of the President. We first describe the considerations that guided our obstruction-of-justice investigation, n overview of this Volume: First, a traditional prosecution or declination decision entails a binary determination to initiate or decline a prosecution, but we determined not to make a traditional prosecutorial udgment. The Office of Legal Counsel (OLC) has issued an opinion finding that "the indictment inal prosecution of a sitting President would impermissibly undermine the capacity of the itutionally assigned functions" in violation of "the executive constitutional separation of powers." Given the Toe Department of Justice and the framework of the Special Counsel regulations, see 28 U.S.C. 515; 28 CF.R. § 600.7(a), this Office accepted OLC's legal conclusion for the purpose of exercising prosecutorial jurisdiction. And apart from OLC's constitutional view, we recognized that a federal criminal accusation against a sitting President would place burdens on the President's capacity to govern and potentially preempt constitutional processes for addressing presidential misconduct.2 Second, while the OLC opinion concludes that a sitting President may not be prosecuted, it recognizes that a criminal investigation during the President's term is permissible. The OLC opinion also recognizes that a President does not have immunity after he leaves office. And if individuals other than the President committed an obstruction offense, they may be prosecuted at this time. Given those considerations, the facts known to us, and the strong public interest in A Sitting President's Amenability to Indictment and Criminal Prosecution, 24 Op. O.L.C. 222, See U.S. CONST. Art. I 2, cl. 5; S3, el. 6; of OLC Op. at 257-258 (discussing relationship OLC Op. at 257 n.36 (A grand jury could continue to gather evidence throughout the period of 222, 260 (2000) (OLC Op.) between impeachment and criminal prosecution of a sitting President). immunit OLC Op. at 255 ("Recognizing an immunity from prosecution for a sitting President would not preclude such prosecution once the President's term is over or he is otherwise removed from office by resignation or impeachment"). Mueller had no reason to say he didn’t exonerate trump it says right on the first page of the second half they “determined not to make a traditional prosecutorial judgment” this shit is nothing but a hit job on Trumps Presidency
Save