So... about that Mueller investigation

M, you have nothing to apologize for … not one bit.

 

Um. You dont have to be charged at the conclusion of the investigation to be charged as a result of the investigation. These people had multiple charges brought against them during the investigation as a direct result of the investigation.

 

It is a case of Republican blinders.

 

You must by now understand that Mueller only had authority to charge people in a very specific area, or he could refer to another office of the DOJ. All his charges had to be approved by Rosenstein or Barr, or the charges had to be presented for congressional consent.

 

Oi, so much wrong with that

First off give me the US federal legal definition if collusion Hint: Thats a trick question.

Your words: Mueller said he and hus buddies did collude.

So he would go to the federal attorney general, or one of the state attorney generals with "he and his buddies did collude"?

Sort of obstructing the inquiry kind of isnt the same thing as the actual definition if obstruction of justice. Cant actually be charged with that if you have never been interviewed and there is no actual record beyond third party heresay of what he said

 

Ok, do this list again, tell me what they all got charged with, which convictions stuck, and which jurisdictions wherevthe charges brought.

Pinedo got charged with identify theft, fook has that got to do with this, the sentenc8ng you listed there is inaccurate, and tell us all where he got charged

 

Course I know, thats why Im playing with them.

Especially things like lying to the FBI, charges and convictions have nothing to do with Mueller and co

 

I don't understand the limits of Mueller's authority. I do know he sent the Cohen case to the Southern New York people. There is that secret bank case which is owned by a government of another nation. Barr pulled Mueller off that case before he was done. Mueller prevailed in the supreme court and Barr still pulled him off the job. It did fall within Mueller's authority. That case will not remain secret much longer.

 

As I've said many times, there is no federal crime of collusion, which is why Mueller didn't find it. There's a federal crime of conspiracy, but that requires a showing of specific elements including wilful intent, which is why he didn't recommend charging that. Yet there is evidence of collusion in the report--not criminal to be sure, since there is no such thing. Congress is not constrained by the U.S. Statutes in finding impeachable offenses.

Before you hang out your attorney's shingle, you might brush up a little more on U.S. law. Sworn testimony about what a person heard from the source is admissible evidence. It wasn't hearsay, because it wasn't a third party reporting something somebody told him. If Trump said it directly to them or they were present at the time and they relayed it to Mueller or a grand jury, it isn't hearsay. Mueller didn't pursue the charge of obstruction, because it was Justice Department policy not to charge a sitting President. The failure to subpoena Trump was based on deference to the executive office and realization that that would mean a prolonged legal battle. Actually, attempt is a crime, and there is plenty of evidence that Trump attempted to obstruct but was restrained by his subordinates. Mueller provided an open invitation to Congress to pursue that. Interesting that the Mueller report documents massive Russian interference in our election and a culture of shocking deceit and attempted coverups in the White House, but because there are no criminal charges brought, it shows nothing--case closed. Are you okay with that kind of a presidency. I suppose you might be, since you're not a U.S citizen and don't have to live with the consequences.

 

Fairly useless evidence by itself though

 

From a prosecutorial standpoint, yes. But Trump's poll numbers have already fallen a little, and much will depend on what the House majority does with it, what else they come up with, and what the prosecutors come up with in New York..

 

When people have a difficult time absorbing clear information there might be a serious medical reason involved.

 

Gallop poll for Presidents job approval rating:
and comparisons with previous presidents


Presidential Approval Ratings -- Donald Trump

I dont see anything particularly alarming for Trump, 45% at the moment, slightly lower than Obamas average, but higher than Reagan and Carter

 

Well, the poll numbers have been remarkably consistent--much more so than for Reagan and Carter--since he took office, ranging from 35-45% with a mode of 42%, never a majority, with sizeable majorities of disapproval. He was elected by a minority of voters and has been consistently a minority president, governing for his base instead of the American people. An average doesn't capture that pattern. It's also interesting that the poll report you cite ends on April 9. I mentioned that the poll numbers dropped after the redacted Mueller report was released, from 40 to 37%--a new low for 2019.
Poll: Mueller Report Sinks Trump’s Approval Rating To New 2019 Low – Rolling Stone
Trump approval drops to 2019 low after Mueller report's release: poll
Trump approval drops 3 points to 2019 low after release of Mueller report: Reuters/Ipsos poll - Reuters
We'll see how long that holds, and whether his minority of Troglydites and Russian trolls can carry him over the finish line once more.

 

Mueller report exposes all the president’s liars