Former U.S. Attorney Tells Congress Trump Committed 'Multiple Crimes'
The Daily Beast By Barbara McQuade,The Daily Beast 1 hour 51 minutes ago


Rebecca Cook/Reuters

Statement as prepared for testimony before the House Judiciary Committee.

Chairman Nadler, Ranking Member Collins, and distinguished members of the Committee: Thank you for inviting me to speak with you today about lessons from the Mueller Report regarding obstruction of justice.

Overview of Testimony

The most significant finding in the Special Counsel's Report is that Russia interfered with our election in "sweeping and systematic fashion."

Through that lens, I will share 2 observations about the report -

What happened and why it matters.

First, the conduct described in the report constitutes multiple crimes of obstruction of justice, supported by evidence of guilt beyond a reasonable doubt.

If anyone other than a sitting president had committed this conduct, I am confident that he would be charged with crimes.

One thousand former federal prosecutors signed a letter agreeing that the president committed crimes.

Second, why it matters.

The obstruction described in the report created a risk to our national security because it was designed to prevent investigators from learning all of the facts about an attack on our country by a hostile foreign adversary.

Let me explain each of those observations.

Obstruction of Justice Occurred
First, what happened.

The special counsel's report describes ten episodes of potential obstruction of justice.

With regard to four of these episodes, the special counsel found "substantial evidence" for all elements of obstruction of justice.

First, the evidence shows a request to White House Counsel Don McGahn to remove Mr. Mueller as special counsel.

Second, a request to falsely deny public reports about that order and to create a false document to support the lie.

Third, efforts to persuade Attorney General Jeff Sessions to reverse his recusal decision, and to publicly announce that the Russia investigation would focus on future elections only.

Fourth, efforts to influence the testimony of Paul Manafort, another former campaign chairman.

Let me focus on one of those incidents.

The report describes President Donald Trump's persistent efforts to curtail the special counsel's investigation by directing Attorney General Sessions to reverse his recusal decision and to limit the investigation to future elections.

President Trump asked various intermediaries, including Corey Lewandowski, a private citizen, to convey his message to Mr. Sessions, but they ultimately didn't do it.

Mueller's Seething Message: This Isn't a Hoax, This Is a Crime

But for the acts of his associates, Mr. Trump would have limited the investigation to future elections, That would have prevented Mr. Mueller from learning the facts about Russian interference in the 2016 election.

Although Mr. Mueller's investigation did not establish the crime of conspiracy against the Trump campaign under federal statutes, proof of an underlying crime is not required to prove obstruction, because it is the interference with the search for the truth that the law prohibits.

And let's not forget that the investigation did establish sufficient evidence to charge 37 defendants with crimes, including Russian intelligence officials.

That's despite the fact that some people, including the president, refused to talk to Mr. Mueller, lied to him, used encrypted messaging apps.

We don't know what he would have been able to find if not for that kind of obstruction.

The report identified possible motives animating the president's conduct, all of which would legally support obstruction charges.

One motive was concerns that the investigation would raise doubts about the legitimacy of Trump's election.

Another motive was concern that the contacts with Russia, documented by Mr. Mueller, would be seen as criminal activity by the president, his campaign or his family. (P. 157)

In fact, President Trump was described as an unindicted co-conspirator in the indictment against Michael Cohen for campaign finance violations relating to payments to silence a woman from making allegations about Donald Trump.

Regardless of motive, the conduct described in the report was an attempt to interfere with Mr. Mueller's investigation, and it amounts to obstruction of justice under the criminal obstruction statute.

Second, why it matters.

Mr. Trump's attempt to limit the scope of the investigation to future elections, had it been successful, would have harmed our national security by shielding Russia's conduct in attacking the 2016 election from the investigation.

But for the conduct of other individuals, Mr. Trump would have thwarted Mr. Mueller's efforts to gain valuable intelligence.

By seeking to end or curtail the investigation, President Trump attempted to limit our country's understanding of how Russia attacked our election, which would also diminish our ability to detect and defend against future threats.

That is a threat to our national security.

Mr. Mueller concluded his public remarks by "reiterating the central allegation of our indictments - that there were multiple, systematic efforts to interfere in our election.

That allegation deserves the attention of every American."

I hope to answer your questions to give that allegation the attention that it deserves.


-------------------------
Dora Hates You

Who was that?

-------------------------
I :heart; Q

For those of you who can read I would recommend The Mueller Report.

In section 2 there are 10 counts of Obstruction of Justice involving Donald J Trump.
These counts are very well described and backed up with irrefutable, collaborated hard evidence. ( also known as facts )

Unfortunately, reading and facts are very difficult for the trump cultists.

If Donald J Trump was anyone else, except for being the President of the US, he would have been indicted and charged, pending trial or other legal action.

Being that he is currently the President of the US and that these obstruction charges are pending, the only remedy is impeachment.

The overwhelming and ponderance of the evidence leads to the question:
Why obstruct? Why doesn't Donald J Trump want the facts to be revealed and prosecuted?



-------------------------
So if you are a surfer I wish you the prosperity that allows you more time to pursue the salt water dream, and the true happiness that comes from warm water, clean waves and the companionship of your fellow surfers. If you are an internet troll just spewing bs then f off.

Four of the most disturbing highlights that have gotten too little attention.

1. Trump personally knew WikiLeaks was going to release illegally stolen, hacked information ahead of time - yet instead of notifying law enforcement, his campaign planned its press strategy around the release.

2. Trump personally directed members of his campaign to find the 30,000 missing (i.e. stolen & hacked by Russians) Clinton emails - they tried to do so, but were unsuccessful.

3. Trump's campaign manager, Paul Manafort, secretly shared polling data on "battleground states" with a known Russian operative at a time that Russians were engaging in a social media disinformation campaign targeting American voters.

4. Trump ordered his former campaign manager, Corey Lewandowski, to tell AG Sessions to constrain the scope of the Mueller investigation to just future election interference.




http://www.nytimes.com/2019/06...trump-impeachment.html

Lie. Mueller specifically said he could not say whether any of that constituted obstruction. Barr and Rosenstein could, however, and concluded that it wasn't. As do I and most people. It's over, dummies. Give it up.

-------------------------
I :heart; Q

I don't see anything wrong with any of that. Neither did Mueller.

-------------------------
I :heart; Q

Quite obviously, the tampon has not read the Mueller Report. Very similar to all of his kind. Rather than sorting out information that is factual for themselves, they / he chooses to parrot a party line.

Mueller said , in effect that if Donald J Trump was not President of the US, he would be charged with 10 counts of obstruction of justice. There is also a very good case for conspiracy, that Mueller outlines . Barr is setting himself up for several charges for himself. Apparently he does not want to be charged with contempt of Congress.


The factual evidence is clear. 171 contacts between the Trump campaign officials and direct representatives of the Russian government, helping to facilitate the circumvention of our election process. Trump and his lakeys including the tampon refuse to acknowledge the facts . They have put an ideology of hate, misogyny, injustice, elitism, exclusion, above the National interests. Trump uses his position to further his and his family's personnel interest at the expense of the
Republic.

Nixon when confronted chose an honorable exit and resigned. I sure hope Trump does not resign. Impeach and indict them all.

-------------------------
So if you are a surfer I wish you the prosperity that allows you more time to pursue the salt water dream, and the true happiness that comes from warm water, clean waves and the companionship of your fellow surfers. If you are an internet troll just spewing bs then f off.

Edited: 06/11/2019 at 03:00 PM by jdbman

Hell no I didn't read the report. I have far better things to do than to dedicate my life to a crazy conspiracy theory. Since you seemingly don't have that limitation and read the report, quote the language that says that Mueller would have indicted but for the Office of Legal counsel's opinion.

-------------------------
I :heart; Q

https://www.lawfareblog.com/ob...ueller-report-heat-map

-------------------------
"The truth is incontrovertible.
malice may attack it,
ignorance may deride it,
but in the end,
there it is." -Sir Winston Churchill

""Our investigation found multiple acts by the President that were capable of exerting undue influence over law enforcement investigations, including the Russian-interference and obstruction investigations," Mueller wrote. "The incidents were often carried out through one-on-one meetings in which the President sought to use his official power outside of usual channels. These actions ranged from efforts to remove the Special Counsel and to reverse the effect of the Attorney General's recusal; to the attempted use of official power to limit the scope of the investigation; to direct and indirect contacts with witnesses with the potential to influence their testimony."

Mueller, however, refrained from recommending prosecution, saying that there were "difficult [legal] issues that would need to be resolved," in order to reach a conclusion that the crime of obstruction of justice was committed by Trump.

Factoring into his decision not to weigh in on prosecution, Mueller wrote, was an opinion issued by the Office of Legal Counsel finding that "the indictment or criminal prosecution of a sitting President would impermissibly undermine the capacity of the executive branch to perform its constitutionally assigned functions" in violation of "the constitutional separation of powers."

"Because we determined not to make a traditional prosecutorial judgment, we did not draw ultimate conclusions about the President's conduct," Mueller wrote.

Mueller emphasized, however, that his analysis of the evidence did not clear the president of obstruction. Said Mueller: "f 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, we are unable to reach that judgment.""

....
lawfareblog

Mueller left open the door for congressional consideration of Trump's conduct. "With respect to whether the President can be found to have obstructed justice by exercising his powers under Article II of the Constitution, we concluded that Congress has authority to prohibit a President's corrupt use of his authority in order to protect the integrity of the administration of justice," Mueller wrote.

fact check


-------------------------
"The truth is incontrovertible.
malice may attack it,
ignorance may deride it,
but in the end,
there it is." -Sir Winston Churchill

Not even close to what jdb claimed. Why I let myself get dragged into your fantasies is beyond me. I don't like people lying, I guess.

-------------------------
I :heart; Q

Can't be bothered by facts? The defendant says he's innocent. Good enough for me!

-------------------------
"I remember South Africa in the late 70's, sleeping on the beach at J-bay, smoking ganja with the blacks. On weekends we'd go to the pub in East London to drink beer and fight with the Afrikaners. They liked to fight, I liked to fight. It was a good time"

If you guys are all convinced that the Steele dossier is true then why aren't you demanding that Steele testify? Is anyone even asking for it?

Seriously, compare the examples Democrats are claiming are clear evidence that Trump committed obstruction of justice to Clinton doing everything in her power to destroy any sign of 30,000 subpoenaed emails. No interest obstruction there.

Bill Clinton has a secret meeting on the tarmac in Phoenix with Loretta Lynch to discuss the golf they didn't play and the grandchildren Lynch doesn't have while Bill's wife is under investigation by Lynch and Obama's DOJ. No interest in obstruction here either.

Compare Trump knowing when Wikileaks might drop real emails written by dumbass Democrats that embarrassed dumbass Democrats to Hillary Clinton paying a law firm, who paid Fusion GPS, who paid Christopher Steele, who paid Russian sources for unverified gossip, then taking bullshit dossier to a FISA court, committing warrant fraud so they can spy on political opponents and then using the bullshit dossier to spark a two-year, $35M waste of time and money.

Hillary Clinton clearly obstructed justice and colluded with Russians to influence the 2016 election. PLEASE impeach him. Democrats won't do it because they know they will fail. Hell, Bill Clinton clearly obstructed justice multiple times, perjured himself multiple times, had to pay over $850,000 in settlements to Paula Jones for sexual assault, and was disbarred. None of the Democrats gave a shit, yet they want everyone to throw Trump overboard for this? Good luck.



-------------------------
"The government who robs Peter to pay Paul can always depend on the support of Paul," - George Bernard Shaw

“End of quote. Repeat the line.” - wise words from Joe Biden

“Your boos mean nothing, I’ve seen what makes you cheer” ~ Rick Sanchez

The FBI investigation conclusively determined that her server administrator took it upon himself to delete and scrub the server, without any direction from Hillary or her staff, after Hillary and her attorney provided work related emails to Congress. The FBI was able to recover and review all of the emails, and determined that no work related emails were intentionally deleted by Hillary or her attorneys. Therefore, she complied and cooperated, and even testified for hours.

Indeed, seriously compare that to this...




Trump continues to obstruct by blocking subpoenaed information, refusing to testify, and having his AG investigate the investigators while spreading "deep state" conspiracy theories.

I'm amazed that any lawyer would take a witness's conclusion instead examining how he arrived at that conclusion. And by amazed, I mean disappointed.

-------------------------

"One of the reasons why propaganda tries to get you to hate government is because it's the one existing institution in which people can participate to some extent and constrain tyrannical unaccountable power." Noam Chomsky.

I cite the Mueller Report . I obtained and read it. It is clear. WG has quoted what Mueller has said in Congressional testimony. Consistent and factual.

If the tampon had any friends an intervention of sorts would be in order. His credibility as a human left the planet long ago.

The facts are:

The Russian government succeeded in interfering in the 2016 Presidential Election.
There has been nothing done in retribution.
There has been nothing done to prevent future incursions.
Donald J Trump and his associates had 171 contacts with members of the Russian government or persons directed by the Russian government.
Nothing of this sort goes on in Russia with out the direction of Putin.

Donald J
Trump directly obstructed the Mueller investigation a minimum of 10 documented times.

Mueller said that if Donald J Trump was not President that he would be indicted. Mueller said that because of DOJ policy that it was not his job or jurisdiction to indict Donald J Trump.

That leaves it to Congress:

The remaining questions are:

Why did Donald J Trump attempt to circumvent the Mueller investigation a minimum of 10 times?

Why does the Administration and Donald J Trump not protect the United States against further foreign ( Russian ) intervention in our elections.?
Why are there not severe sanctions against the Russian government.?
( Some have said its an attack, why no retaliatory military action.)

Why hasn't the mother fucking son of a bitch been impeached?




-------------------------
So if you are a surfer I wish you the prosperity that allows you more time to pursue the salt water dream, and the true happiness that comes from warm water, clean waves and the companionship of your fellow surfers. If you are an internet troll just spewing bs then f off.

(Applause)

Where? Quote the report. Very simple request.

-------------------------
I :heart; Q

Here, look at this. I mean seriously Trumpablo, have you gone retarded?

"Our investigation found multiple acts by the President that were capable of exerting undue influence over law enforcement investigations, including the Russian-interference and obstruction investigations," Mueller wrote. "The incidents were often carried out through one-on-one meetings in which the President sought to use his official power outside of usual channels. These actions ranged from efforts to remove the Special Counsel and to reverse the effect of the Attorney General's recusal; to the attempted use of official power to limit the scope of the investigation; to direct and indirect contacts with witnesses with the potential to influence their testimony." Mueller, however, refrained from recommending prosecution, saying that there were "difficult [legal] issues that would need to be resolved,"

-------------------------
I was right.

That is not a pure quote from the report and does not say that he did or didn't so something because of the Office of Legal Counsel's opinion. Mueller told Barr that wasn't the basis of his opinion.

-------------------------
I :heart; Q

It was the basis of his opinion. Verbatim from the Mueller Report in Introduction to Volume II:
"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 judgment. The Office of Legal Counsel (OLC) has issued an opinion finding that "the indictment or criminal prosecution of a sitting President would impermissibly undermine the capacity of the executive branch to perform its constitutionally assigned functions" in violation of the constitutional separation of powers." Given the role of the Special Counsel as an attorney in the Department of Justice and the framework of the Special Counsel regulations, see 28 U.S.C. § 515; 28 C.F.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."

Conclusion: Tpap is not a lawyer

Edited: 06/11/2019 at 02:50 PM by HAPDigital

Thank you, Hap. All I was asking for. But, it doesn't say what jdb said it does. That said, it certainly seems that is what he wanted people to believe he was saying. It is a trick you see from half-ass lawyers who don't have a good case. Barr asked him directly about this and Mueller said he did not refrain from acting because of that opinion. So, it is settled.

-------------------------
I :heart; Q

tampon


No, not until 10 counts of obstruction, high crimes and misdemeanors are adjudicated in a House impeachment hearing.

That's a start.

-------------------------
So if you are a surfer I wish you the prosperity that allows you more time to pursue the salt water dream, and the true happiness that comes from warm water, clean waves and the companionship of your fellow surfers. If you are an internet troll just spewing bs then f off.

This is called fabrication.

Yep, it's what he does. Lie and spin.

Mueller said he wouldn't charge a sitting president and that it was up to congress, which is what is partially happening right now. I say partially because there is nothing Trump can do that will cause Republicans to side with Democrats.

-------------------------
I was right.

Not fabrication. Barr said he had witnesses to the conversation and Mueller hasn't disputed the it. Lies are all you guys have. People will see through them.

-------------------------
I :heart; Q

"Two years ago, the Acting Attorney General asked me to serve as Special Counsel, and he created the Special Counsel's Office. The appointment order directed the office to investigate Russian interference in the 2016 presidential election. This included investigating any links or coordination between the Russian government and individuals associated with the Trump campaign.
I have not spoken publicly during our investigation. I am speaking today because our investigation is complete. The Attorney General has made the report on our investigation largely public. And we are formally closing the Special Counsel's Office. As well, I am resigning from the Department of Justice and returning to private life.
I'll make a few remarks about the results of our work. But beyond these few remarks, it is important that the office's written work speak for itself.
Let me begin where the appointment order begins: and that is interference in the 2016 presidential election.
As alleged by the grand jury in an indictment, Russian intelligence officers who were part of the Russian military launched a concerted attack on our political system. The indictment alleges that they used sophisticated cyber techniques to hack into computers and networks used by the Clinton campaign. They stole private information, and then released that information through fake online identities and through the organization WikiLeaks. The releases were designed and timed to interfere with our election and to damage a presidential candidate.
And at the same time, as the grand jury alleged in a separate indictment, a private Russian entity engaged in a social media operation where Russian citizens posed as Americans in order to interfere in the election. These indictments contain allegations.
And we are not commenting on the guilt or innocence of any specific defendant. Every defendant is presumed innocent unless and until proven guilty in court.

The indictments allege, and the other activities in our report describe, efforts to interfere in our political system. They needed to be investigated and understood.
That is among the reasons why the Department of Justice established our office. That is also a reason we investigated efforts to obstruct the investigation.
The matters we investigated were of paramount importance. It was critical for us to obtain full and accurate information from every person we questioned.


When a subject of an investigation obstructs that investigation or lies to investigators, it strikes at the core of the government's effort to find the truth and hold wrongdoers accountable.
Let me say a word about the report.
The report has two parts addressing the two main issues we were asked to investigate. The first volume of the report details numerous efforts emanating from Russia to influence the election. This volume includes a discussion of the Trump campaign's response to this activity, as well as our conclusion that there was insufficient evidence to charge a broader conspiracy.
And in the second volume, the report describes the results and analysis of our obstruction of justice investigation involving the President.
The order appointing me Special Counsel authorized us to investigate actions that could obstruct the investigation. We conducted that investigation and we kept the office of the Acting Attorney General apprised of the progress of our work.
As set forth in our report, after that investigation, if we had confidence that the President clearly did not commit a crime, we would have said that. We did not, however, make a determination as to whether the President did commit a crime.

The introduction to volume two of our report explains that decision. It explains that under long-standing Department policy, a President cannot be charged with a federal crime while he is in office. That is unconstitutional.
Even if the charge is kept under seal and hidden from public view, that too is prohibited. The Special Counsel's Office is part of the Department of Justice and, by regulation, it was bound by that Department policy.
Charging the President with a crime was therefore not an option we could consider.
The Department's written opinion explaining the policy against charging a President makes several important points that further informed our handling of the obstruction investigation. Those points are summarized in our report.
And I will describe two of them:
. First, the opinion explicitly permits the investigation of a sitting President because it is important to preserve evidence while memories are fresh and documents are available. Among other things, that evidence could be used if there were co-conspirators who could now be charged.
. And second, the opinion says that the Constitution requires a process other than the criminal justice system to formally accuse a sitting President of wrongdoing.
And beyond Department policy, we were guided by principles of fairness. It would be unfair to potentially accuse somebody of a crime when there can be no court resolution of an actual charge.
So that was the Justice Department policy and those were the principles under which we operated. From them we concluded that we would not reach a determination - one way or the other - about whether the President committed a crime. That is the office's final position and we will not comment on any other conclusions or hypotheticals about the President.
We conducted an independent criminal investigation and reported the results to the Attorney General - as required by Department regulations. The Attorney General then concluded that it was appropriate to provide our report to Congress and the American people.
At one point in time I requested that certain portions of the report be released. The Attorney General preferred to make the entire report public all at once. We appreciate that the Attorney General made the report largely public. I do not question the Attorney General's good faith in that decision.
I hope and expect this to be the only time that I will speak about this matter. I am making that decision myself - no one has told me whether I can or should testify or speak further about this matter. There has been discussion about an appearance before Congress.
Any testimony from this office would not go beyond our report. It contains our findings and analysis, and the reasons for the decisions we made. We chose those words carefully, and the work speaks for itself.
The report is my testimony. I would not provide information beyond that which is already public in any appearance before Congress. In addition, access to our underlying work product is being decided in a process that does not involve our office. So beyond what I have said here today and what is contained in our written work, I do not believe it is appropriate for me to speak further about the investigation or to comment on the actions of the Justice Department or Congress.
It is for that reason that I will not take questions here today.
Before I step away, I want to thank the attorneys, the FBI agents, the analysts, and the professional staff who helped us conduct this investigation in a fair and independent manner."




-------------------------
So if you are a surfer I wish you the prosperity that allows you more time to pursue the salt water dream, and the true happiness that comes from warm water, clean waves and the companionship of your fellow surfers. If you are an internet troll just spewing bs then f off.

Hey tampon

Call me a liar again.

-------------------------
So if you are a surfer I wish you the prosperity that allows you more time to pursue the salt water dream, and the true happiness that comes from warm water, clean waves and the companionship of your fellow surfers. If you are an internet troll just spewing bs then f off.

People today see what they want to see. It's team sports. If I like the Seminoles I don't care if they got free shoes or stole some crabs. Hurricanes or Gators don't care if players are criminals either, as long as they win.

We could stop the music and all change positions 180 degrees and pick right up with the fight. Anything your side can get away with is just fine.

-------------------------
"Are you a Communist?"
"No I am an anti-fascist."
"For a long time?"
"Since I have understood fascism."

-Protagonist Robert Jordan, "For Whom the Bell Tolls" (Hemmingway)