 |
|
is it in Trump's constitutional perogative to fire Mueller
Posted on: July 28, 2019 at 11:00:06 CT
blake1771 MU
Posts:
14461
Member For:
20.03 yrs
Level:
User
M.O.B. Votes:
0
and or Mueller's entire team? Was it Trump's constitutional prerogative to fire Comey?
the answer, to both, is yes.
was probable cause established to prove that Trump possessed a corrupt intent for thinking/talking about firing Mueller? Or for actually firing Comey?
Was the investigation ever hindered in any manner by Trump's words or Comey's firing? Nope, not according to Mueller.
The answer is no, but I'll give you the benefit of the doubt and say ehhh a "reasonable" person might think that. Well then let's go to the next step of federal prosecution guidelines which dictate that unless it's believed that prosecutors can prove their case beyond a reasonable doubt they shouldn't pursue it. So moving on from probable cause, can they prove that he obstructed beyond a reasonable doubt?
not a snowball's chance in hell.
so you basically want Trump charged for a conspiracy to ATTEMPT to obstruct something he had the full legal authority to do and for things that had ZERO effect on the actual investigation despite the fact, there was no underlying crime and despite the fact, you can't prove any corrupt intent.
if you want to impeach him go for it. knock yourselves out trying. but for God's sake give up the idiotic obstruction angle.
ESPECIALLy when you compare it to what team HRC did in her email investigation the idea that Trump should be charged is even more ludicrous.
the answer, to both, is yes.
was probable cause established to prove that Trump possessed a corrupt intent for thinking/talking about firing Mueller? Or for actually firing Comey?
Was the investigation ever hindered in any manner by Trump's words or Comey's firing? Nope, not according to Mueller.
The answer is no, but I'll give you the benefit of the doubt and say ehhh a "reasonable" person might think that. Well then let's go to the next step of federal prosecution guidelines which dictate that unless it's believed that prosecutors can prove their case beyond a reasonable doubt they shouldn't pursue it. So moving on from probable cause, can they prove that he obstructed beyond a reasonable doubt?
not a snowball's chance in hell.
so you basically want Trump charged for a conspiracy to ATTEMPT to obstruct something he had the full legal authority to do and for things that had ZERO effect on the actual investigation despite the fact, there was no underlying crime and despite the fact, you can't prove any corrupt intent.
if you want to impeach him go for it. knock yourselves out trying. but for God's sake give up the idiotic obstruction angle.
ESPECIALLy when you compare it to what team HRC did in her email investigation the idea that Trump should be charged is even more ludicrous.
Please explain why this message is being reported.
MESSAGE THREAD
is it in Trump's constitutional perogative to fire Mueller - blake1771 KC - 7/28 11:00:06
-