375 former prosecutors believe Trump obstructed justice and should be charged as a felon

[Anonymous]

Mueller did not recommend prosecution. Period.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:It is grounds for impeachment, plain and simple.

The real question is, why do Barr and Giuliani disagree with 400+ former federal prosecutors?

Yeah no.

The Mueller report exonerated Trump and his campaign.

Try using your brain for a change.

+1 And try looking up the definition of exonerate.
https://www.merriam-webster.com/news-trend-watch/barr-report-also-does-not-exonerate-trump-20190324

Why are people looking up exonerate?
Exonerate was our top lookup on March 24th, 2019, following the word’s appearance in a letter written by William Barr, US Attorney General, summarizing the findings of the report recently concluded by Special Counsel Robert Mueller.

The Special Counsel states that “while this report does not conclude that the President committed a crime, it also does not exonerate him.”
— William P. Barr, letter to Lindsey Graham, Dianne Feinstein, Doug Collins, and Jerrold Nadler, 24 Mar. 2019

+1

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:So when Trump is no longer President, he can be charged with obstruction for crimes he committed while President?

IDK but after he dies maybe democrats can dig up his corpse and put it on trial.

#resist

LOL. I know. It's ridiculous

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:So when Trump is no longer President, he can be charged with obstruction for crimes he committed while President?

IDK but after he dies maybe democrats can dig up his corpse and put it on trial.

#resist

LOL. I know. It's ridiculous

Nope, if you read the OP, you would learn that the only reason Trump wasn't charged now is because he's President. Being President isn't a lifetime immunity pass for all your misdeeds.

[Anonymous]

How many people would sign on to a petition suggesting that these former (Democratic) prosecutors get a life?

Funny how they note that they served under administrations of both parties, as if the politics of a line attorney at the DOJ are somehow implicated by anything like that.

[Anonymous]

The individuals who have signed the letter (400+) represent both parties - Republicans and Democrats - as well as independents. You can see the full list of names by going to the link the OP posted.

This is NOT a partisan endeavor by any means.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:The individuals who have signed the letter (400+) represent both parties - Republicans and Democrats - as well as independents. You can see the full list of names by going to the link the OP posted.

This is NOT a partisan endeavor by any means.

+1 It's a simple matter of Law and Order. Something the GOP used to support until it was no longer to their advantage.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:It is grounds for impeachment, plain and simple.

The real question is, why do Barr and Giuliani disagree with 400+ former federal prosecutors?

Yeah no.

The Mueller report exonerated Trump and his campaign.

You should try to believe it instead of believing the lies you are told.

Haha. That should say “You should try to READ it”.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:It is grounds for impeachment, plain and simple.

The real question is, why do Barr and Giuliani disagree with 400+ former federal prosecutors?

Yeah no.

The Mueller report exonerated Trump and his campaign.

You should try to believe it instead of believing the lies you are told.

Haha. That should say “You should try to READ it”.

And if the PP read it they would see they were incorrect that Mueller exonerated Trump.

The Special Counsel states that “while this report does not conclude that the President committed a crime, it also does not exonerate him.”
— William P. Barr, letter to Lindsey Graham, Dianne Feinstein, Doug Collins, and Jerrold Nadler, 24 Mar. 2019

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:Mueller did not recommend prosecution. Period.

He couldn’t.
https://biotech.law.lsu.edu/blaw/olc/sitting_president.htm

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:So when Trump is no longer President, he can be charged with obstruction for crimes he committed while President?

IDK but after he dies maybe democrats can dig up his corpse and put it on trial.

#resist

LOL. I know. It's ridiculous

Nope, if you read the OP, you would learn that the only reason Trump wasn't charged now is because he's President. Being President isn't a lifetime immunity pass for all your misdeeds.

Not true. Rosenstein and Barr met with Mueller on March 5. Mueller told them he was not going to indict the president for obstruction of justice. And that decision had nothing to do with the OLC memo. Barr wrote this point specifically in his principal conclusion letter. Barr and Rosenstein's decision to not charge the president also has nothing to do with the OLC memo.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:So when Trump is no longer President, he can be charged with obstruction for crimes he committed while President?

IDK but after he dies maybe democrats can dig up his corpse and put it on trial.

#resist

LOL. I know. It's ridiculous

Nope, if you read the OP, you would learn that the only reason Trump wasn't charged now is because he's President. Being President isn't a lifetime immunity pass for all your misdeeds.

Not true. Rosenstein and Barr met with Mueller on March 5. Mueller told them he was not going to indict the president for obstruction of justice. And that decision had nothing to do with the OLC memo. Barr wrote this point specifically in his principal conclusion letter. Barr and Rosenstein's decision to not charge the president also has nothing to do with the OLC memo.

400 prosecutors signed a letter stating otherwise.

We are former federal prosecutors. We served under both Republican and Democratic administrations at different levels of the federal system: as line attorneys, supervisors, special prosecutors, United States Attorneys, and senior officials at the Department of Justice. The offices in which we served were small, medium, and large; urban, suburban, and rural; and located in all parts of our country.

Each of us believes that the conduct of President Trump described in Special Counsel Robert Mueller’s report would, in the case of any other person not covered by the Office of Legal Counsel policy against indicting a sitting President, result in multiple felony charges for obstruction of justice.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:So when Trump is no longer President, he can be charged with obstruction for crimes he committed while President?

IDK but after he dies maybe democrats can dig up his corpse and put it on trial.

#resist

LOL. I know. It's ridiculous

Nope, if you read the OP, you would learn that the only reason Trump wasn't charged now is because he's President. Being President isn't a lifetime immunity pass for all your misdeeds.

Not true. Rosenstein and Barr met with Mueller on March 5. Mueller told them he was not going to indict the president for obstruction of justice. And that decision had nothing to do with the OLC memo. Barr wrote this point specifically in his principal conclusion letter. Barr and Rosenstein's decision to not charge the president also has nothing to do with the OLC memo.

400 prosecutors signed a letter stating otherwise.

We are former federal prosecutors. We served under both Republican and Democratic administrations at different levels of the federal system: as line attorneys, supervisors, special prosecutors, United States Attorneys, and senior officials at the Department of Justice. The offices in which we served were small, medium, and large; urban, suburban, and rural; and located in all parts of our country.

Each of us believes that the conduct of President Trump described in Special Counsel Robert Mueller’s report would, in the case of any other person not covered by the Office of Legal Counsel policy against indicting a sitting President, result in multiple felony charges for obstruction of justice.

400 prosecutors are not Mueller. He chose not to indict. He said it wasn't due to OLC policy.
This is really a moot issue.
If the House wants to impeach, have at it. It won't end well. For Democrats.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:So when Trump is no longer President, he can be charged with obstruction for crimes he committed while President?

IDK but after he dies maybe democrats can dig up his corpse and put it on trial.

#resist

LOL. I know. It's ridiculous

Nope, if you read the OP, you would learn that the only reason Trump wasn't charged now is because he's President. Being President isn't a lifetime immunity pass for all your misdeeds.

Not true. Rosenstein and Barr met with Mueller on March 5. Mueller told them he was not going to indict the president for obstruction of justice. And that decision had nothing to do with the OLC memo. Barr wrote this point specifically in his principal conclusion letter. Barr and Rosenstein's decision to not charge the president also has nothing to do with the OLC memo.

400 prosecutors signed a letter stating otherwise.

We are former federal prosecutors. We served under both Republican and Democratic administrations at different levels of the federal system: as line attorneys, supervisors, special prosecutors, United States Attorneys, and senior officials at the Department of Justice. The offices in which we served were small, medium, and large; urban, suburban, and rural; and located in all parts of our country.

Each of us believes that the conduct of President Trump described in Special Counsel Robert Mueller’s report would, in the case of any other person not covered by the Office of Legal Counsel policy against indicting a sitting President, result in multiple felony charges for obstruction of justice.

400 prosecutors are not Mueller. He chose not to indict. He said it wasn't due to OLC policy.
This is really a moot issue.
If the House wants to impeach, have at it. It won't end well. For Democrats.

No, Barr said it wasn't due to OLC policy, not Mueller. You're making assumptions, and 400 prosecutors disagree with you, despite your empty threats on the perils of impeachment.

[Anonymous]

It's high time Mueller gets in front of Congress to tell his side of the story. Period.