Silicon Investor (SI) -- The First Internet Community

STOCKTALK

We've detected that you're using an ad content blocking browser plug-in or feature. Ads provide a critical source of revenue to the continued operation of Silicon Investor. We ask that you disable ad blocking while on Silicon Investor in the best interests of our community. If you are not using an ad blocker but are still receiving this message, make sure your browser's tracking protection is set to the 'standard' level.

Politics : Formerly About Advanced Micro Devices -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?

To: Tenchusatsu who wrote (1137811)	5/30/2019 7:29:30 PM
From: d[-_-]b	Respond to of 1573814

Clarity is a wonderful thing

To: Tenchusatsu who wrote (1137811)	5/30/2019 7:33:50 PM
From: Wharf Rat	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 1573814

"hung around for almost two years trying to provoke a process crime" One of those process crimes led to Mueller being appointed in the first place. Obstruction of Justice in the Mueller Report: A Heat Map - Lawfare D. Firing of James Comey Obstructive act (p. 74): “Firing Comey would qualify as an obstructive act if it had the natural and probable effect of interfering with or impeding the investigation.” Trump’s handling of the Comey firing and his actions in the subsequent days “had the potential to affect a successor director’s conduct of the investigation,” though removing Comey “would not necessarily … prevent or impede the FBI from continuing its investigation.” Nexus (p. 75): By the time of the Comey firing, Trump was aware of both the FBI investigation into Russian election interference and the investigation into Flynn. Intent (p. 75): “Substantial evidence” indicates that Trump fired Comey because of “Comey’s unwillingness to publicly state that the President was not personally under investigation.” Mueller notes that “[s]ome evidence indicates that the President believed that the erroneous perception he was under investigation harmed his ability to manage domestic and foreign affairs”—but “[o]ther evidence … indicates that the President wanted to protect himself from an investigation into his campaign.” “The initial reliance on a pretextual justification [for Comey’s firing] could support an inference that the President had concerns about providing the real reason for the firing, although the evidence does not resolve whether those concerns were personal, personal, or both.” lawfareblog.com