- CRITTER TALK
- NEWS I FIND INTERESTING
In a statement Trump had the following to say:
“No obstruction; Essentially.”
In other words, “essentially speaking,” Trump, his administration, surrogates and supporters continue spreading this blatant lie. I am sure we all are supposed to be convinced with this new statement, that no obstruction occurred. However, in the First Part of my article, I provided no less than five circumstances which demonstrate potential areas of Trump obstructing justice.
Here are the remainder of instances where Mr. Trump potentially obstructed justice:
Sixth: Trump suppressed evidence on Donald Trump Junior’s meeting with other campaign staff and Russians. Said Mueller: “On several occasions, the President directed aides not to publicly disclose the emails setting up the June 9 meeting, suggesting that the emails would not leak and that the number of lawyers with access to them should be limited. Before the emails became public, the President edited a press statement for Trump Jr. by deleting a line that acknowledged that the meeting was with ‘an individual who [Trump Jr.] was told might have information helpful to the campaign’ and instead said only that the meeting was about adoptions of Russian children. When the press asked questions about the President’s involvement in Trump Jr.’s statement, the President’s personal lawyer repeatedly denied the President had played any role.” (The Mueller Report, Vol II).
Seventh: Trump attempts to get then United States Attorney General, Jeff Sessions to “unrecuse” while “getting control of Mueller.” Reported the Special Counsel: ““In early summer 2017, the President called Sessions at home and again asked him to reverse his recusal from the Russia investigation. Sessions did not reverse his recusal. In October 2017, the President met privately with Sessions in the Oval Office and asked him to ‘take [a] look’ at investigating Clinton. In December 2017, shortly after Flynn pleaded guilty pursuant to a cooperation agreement, the President met with Sessions in the Oval Office and suggested, according to notes taken by a senior advisor, that if Sessions unrecused and took back supervision of the Russia investigation, he would be a ‘hero’” (The Mueller Report, Vol II).
Eighth: Trump tried to according to sources on background stated and did the following: ““After Flynn withdrew from a joint defense agreement with the President and began cooperating with the government, the President’s personal counsel left a message for Flynn’s attorneys reminding them of the President’s warm feelings towards Flynn, which he said ‘still remains,’ and asking for a ‘heads up’ if Flynn knew ‘information that implicates the President’ … During Manafort’s prosecution and when the jury in his criminal trial was deliberating, the President praised Manafort in public, said that Manafort was being treated unfairly, and declined to rule out a pardon. After Manafort was convicted, the President called Manafort ‘a brave man’ for refusing to ‘break’ and said that ‘flipping almost ought to be outlawed” (The Mueller Report, Volume II).
Ninth: Trump made several attempts to intimidate Michael Cohen. According to sources willing to speak on condition of anonymity and confirmed but others the following events took place.
“The President’s conduct towards Michael Cohen, a former Trump Organization executive, changed from praise for Cohen when he falsely minimized the President’s involvement in the Trump Tower Moscow project, to castigation of Cohen when he became a cooperating witness …
“[A]fter Cohen began cooperating with the government in the summer of 2018, the President publicly criticized him, called him a ‘rat,’ and suggested that his family members had committed crimes” (The Mueller Report, Volume II).
If you are like the majority of citizens in this nation asking the reason why Trump was not charged with obstruction, I have the answers you seek. However, for space constraints, I want to keep that information for Part III. Please understand: I do not print anything regarding this without consulting my sources and of course, you will notice I provide only direct quotes from The Special Counsel’s Report. I apologize for being a bit delayed on this second Part, but be assured you are getting only Mueller’s words and not my interpretation or opinion of factual events.
Last week, nearly 800 former federal prosecutors wrote a letter indicating how Mr. Trump – in their legal opinion – did obstruct justice and would have been charged had he not been in the Office of President. Remember: As stated, a sitting President – according to the Justice Department cannot be indicted.
Watch Video of One Former Prosecutor Explain Why Trump can be charged:
In another few days, I will be describing how Mr. Mueller reached his charging or declination to charge decisions. I look forward to seeing each of you then.