| | | What has shocked you the most about the Trump administration response to the Mueller report?
Ed Seith, Discussing the minutiae of American politics with open mind for decades
QUESTION: What has shocked you the most about the Trump administration response to the Mueller report?
ANSWER: That so many people actually believed that response. That so many people hear him say “no collusion” and “total exoneration” and they believe that over actual supported details outlined in the report itself, like:
“The evidence we obtained about the president’s actions and intent presents difficult issues that would need to be resolved if we were making a traditional prosecutorial judgment. At the same time, if 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. Accordingly, while this report does not conclude that the president committed a crime, it also does not exonerate him.”
"Our investigation found multiple acts by the President that were capable of exerting undue influence over law enforcement investigations, including the Russian-interference and and obstruction investigations. These incidents were often carried out through one-on-one meetings where 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 generals recusal; to the attempted use of official power to limit the scope of the investigation; to direct and indirect contacts with with witnesses with the potential to influence their testimony. … The President’s efforts to influence the investigation were mostly unsuccessful, but that is largely because the persons who surrounded the President declined to carry out orders or accede to his requests."
"The investigation established that the Russian government perceived it would benefit from a Trump presidency and worked to secure that outcome, and that the campaign expected it would benefit electorally from information stolen and released through Russian efforts..."
"The conclusion that Congress may apply the obstruction laws to the President's corrupt exercise of the powers of office accords with our constitutional system of checks and balances and the principle that no person is above the law."
The last of which is VERY obviously a call for Congress to impeach him for the crimes outlined above.
This amounts to colllusion to me:
"The investigation established that the Russian government perceived it would benefit from a Trump presidency and worked to secure that outcome, and that the campaign expected it would benefit electorally from information stolen and released through Russian efforts..."
As for impeachment on obstruction grounds (not the only crime he's committed), note the last paragraph:
"The conclusion that Congress may apply the obstruction laws to the President's corrupt exercise of the powers of office accords with our constitutional system of checks and balances and the principle that no person is above the law." |
|
