So Mueller was not satisfied with the way Barr summarized his report

[TheOriginalHappyGoat]

LOL

Mueller: "I did A because of B."
COH: "I don't see any evidence B had anything to do with A."

 

[meridian]

I honestly believe doing that would help Trump at this point.

I agree.

 

[Circlejoe]

I agree.

It all depends. If the House investigation brings out enough damaging information, we might see a move to impeach. The timing might be the issue. If the info about Trump’s tax returns in addition to Mueller and McGann testimonies are as damaging as expected, it might be a race between impeachment and voting his butt out of office.

 

[TheOriginalHappyGoat]

It all depends. If the House investigation brings out enough damaging information, we might see a move to impeach. The timing might be the issue. If the info about Trump’s tax returns in addition to Mueller and McGann testimonies are as damaging as expected, it might be a race between impeachment and voting his butt out of office.

Unless something comes out that makes it clear Trump is an imminent threat to the Republic, it's better (for both the Dems and the country) to just vote his butt out of office.

 

[Circlejoe]

Unless something comes out that makes it clear Trump is an imminent threat to the Republic, it's better (for both the Dems and the country) to just vote his butt out of office.

I agree, but the wild card will be the Republicans in Congress. If the dam breaks and the information, especially the financial info, is so damaging that they have to throw Trump under the bus, the Republicans decide it’s “everyone for themselves” look out.

 

[CO. Hoosier]

I'll say it's questionable, since that's not one of the elements.

Some form of a nexus between the obstructive act and an official proceeding is indeed an element. You didn't read the Mueller report, did you. The SC extensively commented about this and even briefed the particular issue as it responded to Barr's previous comments.

 

[CO. Hoosier]

Mueller: "I did A because of B."
COH: "I don't see any evidence B had anything to do with A."

Says the guy who doesn't understand the elements of the crime.

SC wrote exhaustively about obstruction. SC argued in detail about particular conduct, facts, and the law. SC adopted an expansive view of the nexus requirement (with extensive legal briefing in several places). This was obviously in direct response to Barr's previous memo reaching a different conclusion about nexus with a proceeding. This expansive view formed the basis for SC's stated inability to reach a conclusion. This should all be undisputed. SC's inconclusiveness rests on this arguably erroneous view of the nexus requirement. The DOJ no indictment rule played absolutely no role in that point.