Welcome to DU!
The truly grassroots left-of-center political community where regular people, not algorithms, drive the discussions and set the standards.
Join the community:
Create a free account
Support DU (and get rid of ads!):
Become a Star Member
Latest Breaking News
General Discussion
The DU Lounge
All Forums
Issue Forums
Culture Forums
Alliance Forums
Region Forums
Support Forums
Help & Search
General Discussion
Related: Editorials & Other Articles, Issue Forums, Alliance Forums, Region ForumsExcellent (unrolled) Twitter thread about damning details in the Mueller report;
https://threadreaderapp.com/thread/1118895263790370817.html
InfoView thread info, including edit history
TrashPut this thread in your Trash Can (My DU » Trash Can)
BookmarkAdd this thread to your Bookmarks (My DU » Bookmarks)
6 replies, 1140 views
ShareGet links to this post and/or share on social media
AlertAlert this post for a rule violation
PowersThere are no powers you can use on this post
EditCannot edit other people's posts
ReplyReply to this post
EditCannot edit other people's posts
Rec (19)
ReplyReply to this post
6 replies
= new reply since forum marked as read
Highlight:
NoneDon't highlight anything
5 newestHighlight 5 most recent replies
Excellent (unrolled) Twitter thread about damning details in the Mueller report; (Original Post)
tblue37
Apr 2019
OP
Leghorn21
(13,526 posts)1. It's Daniel Dale!!
Many thanks, blue!!
triron
(22,013 posts)2. Reading through this it looks like to me Mueller did some whitewashing himself.
I am unable to understand his conclusion about conspiracy and cooperation.
Anyone else feel likewise?
mercuryblues
(14,537 posts)3. Wow
..if we had confidence...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."
This is the 1st time I am seeing the preceding sentence. Which gives the quote Barr has been pushing the exact opposite meaning.
Based on the facts and the applicable legal standards, we are unable to reach that judgment.
triron
(22,013 posts)4. Again this looks like whitewash coming from Mueller.
Wishy washy.
mercuryblues
(14,537 posts)5. It is wishy-washy
if we had confidence...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."
I am reading those 2 sentences as using legal standards
"I could not find evidence that trump did not commit obstruction of justice." IOW: I could find evidence that trump did commit obstruction. Mueller's team chose to write it up using double negatives.
Maraya1969
(22,494 posts)6. Witness Tampering.
Mueller: After Flynn withdrew from his defense agreement with Trump, Trump's lawyer left Flynn's lawyer a voicemail demanding a "heads up" if Flynn was giving Mueller any info that "implicates the president," and asking Flynn to "remember" that Trump had warm feelings for him.
And I bet Manafort is kicking his ass for believing this shit from #45
Mueller: Manafort told Gates that Trump's personal lawyer told him that "we'll be taken care of," though the lawyer didn't specifically use the word pardon, and that it'd therefore be stupid to plead guilty.
And this:
Mueller: There doesn't need to be an underlying crime for there to be obstruction of justice. "The injury to the integrity of the justice system is the same regardless of whether a person committed an underlying wrong."