Posted in Static News

Prosecutors can bring charge of obstruction after president leaves office, Mueller says

   August 4, 2021  50 Comments on Prosecutors can bring charge of obstruction after president leaves office, Mueller says

5 key takeaways from Robert Mueller’s testimony before Congress: https://abcn.ws/2Y5Xmj0

Rep. Ken Buck, R-Colo., pressed Robert Mueller on the ethics of charging the president after he leaves office.

#ABCNews #News #Mueller #Testimony #Hearing #MuellerReport #Politics

source

Author: avnblogfeed

ANGELHOUSE © 2009 - 2022 | HOSTING BY PHILLYFINEST369 SERVER STATS| & THE IDIOTS ROBOT AND CONTROL INC. |(RSS FEED MODULE)| ALL YOUTUBE VIDEOS IS A REGISTERED TRADEMARK OF GOOGLE INC. THE YOUTUBE CHANNELS AND BLOG FEEDS IS MANAGED BY THERE RIGHTFUL OWNERS (AVNBLOGFEED.COM)
Website Twitter

50 thoughts on “Prosecutors can bring charge of obstruction after president leaves office, Mueller says”

  1. So when Mueller was asked and I'm paraphrasing "did the president hinder, impede, or prevent your investigation" Mueller replied very clearly "no" so if those things didnt happen how was justice obstructed? Stop. The American people are tired of it.

  2. Funny with this question he answered so readily. Instead of his default “I can’t get into that.” Seems anytime a question is asked that credits the President he “can’t get into it” or it isn’t in his purview. Yet any question asked which discredits the president he freely answers. Hmm?

  4. Weren't paying attention? Trump was NOT exonerated, Trump DID commit obstruction of justice, Trump and Republicans were helped in the Presidential election and Hillary hurt by the Russians, Trump IS the choice of the Russians because he is dividing the morally weak, insecure, ignorant, and intolerant in our country along racial, ethnic, and religious fault lines accomplishing what Russia has been unable to do for 70 years, weaken America. And Trump and Senate Republicans have no plans, in fact resist, a real wall against an actual continuing national threat, foreign interference in our elections, especially interference that benefits them, AKA as despicable, dishonorable national treachery.

  5. Fake news! Snippet taken out of context. At the very least, search for a better copy of this interchange; during the first 4 minutes, Mueller is raked over the coals. This last few seconds of video shows an ambiguous exchange that requires further clarification before any conclusion can be made. Seriously, go listen to the 5 minute version of this interchange.

  6. Mueller was a disaster – a stumbling, bumbling, and drooling idiot was the optic drilled into the minds of Americans. The DEMS just pissed away 2020………Thank Schiff and the fat ass Nadler folks….

  7. Unfortunate that Buck didn't clarify the question more. He began asking about the belief that Trump committed a criminal obstruction, but then switched to the question of if he can be prosecuted for obstruction after he left office. To this Mueller agreed, but now it remains unclear to which parts of the question he has agreed. My guess, knowing how cautious Mueller is about speculation, is that he was only answering the last part of it. Although, clearly, Trump has committed obstruction of justice, he's leaving that for Congress to decide.

    What a sh*t show. 🙁 I would like to see a constitutional amendment to remove this ambiguity so that future impeachment decisions can be made upon solid legal and non-political grounds. If we want to survive as a nation (and not fall into civil war or autocracy) then we need to take MANY actions to assure this never happens again. And I think we need to reverse Regan's deregulation that allowed a "news" broadcast to say any damn thing they want, regardless of the clear, unambiguous, objectives and observable facts of the situation — no more opinion shows calling themselves news, either "liberal" or "conservative"!

  8. Buck stepped in it! Just clarified that DJT committed obstruction and will most likely be charged when he leaves office. It may have been better for Republicans to keep up the illusion that there wasn't enough evidence. Probably my favorite part of the proceedings, a Rep pointing out the president is a criminal. Too good!

  10. Since there was zero collusion…that officially concludes review..thats what he was hired to find. Continuing the investigation/intrusion, was first, ILLEGAL..as there was NO Evidence to search, question, investigate or report…Without a 1st crime..there cant be ANY subsequent crimes..the info gathered would be tainted to fit a speculation/theory..verses..having FACT from COLLUSION that a idea or THEORY could be discovered. With an ILLEGAL ongoing, any action by any person could be considered a crime…but again…only if the first crime were in fact were facts, established, and again..they werent.!!! I think that goes over most peoples head!!! so..you can talk about robbing a bank….and a bank "somewhere" gets robbed…so you are blamed and cops, media, everyone says you did it…even tho it happened in another state…so..after years of them not proving, and info shows you were nowhere near the scene…they charge you with assaulting the bank teller instead….cuz facts proved you didnt rob bank….its done…their investigation and theory are flawed…ALL EVIDENCE THAT SEEMED TO CONNECT YOU TO THE NOW ALLEGED ASSAULT…..IS FLAWED>>NOT ADMISSABLE!!! (EASIER???)

  11. No thank you nobody wants to fucking listen to your ABC bullshit fucking fake news you guys are nothing but bullshit just to make the American people go a different direction you nothing but fucking fraud ABC and NBC are both fucking fake news

  17. Mueller has already issued a clarification on this. This was a hypothetical question. Mueller clarified that he and his team did not conclude that the president was guilty or worth charging. I bet ABC will not run anything on his clarification though.

  20. Post more than just this 30 seconds. Hypotheticals don’t prove anything. Ask “would you charge this president after he leaves office”. Not a generalized hypothetical question about the law. I watched the whole hearing. I am no more convinced than I was yesterday. The Dems has scripted, fast yes or no questions while Mueller seemed confused by the Republican’s questions. He did not seem to know much about what was in his report. It seems to me that the majority of investigative work and drawn conclusions were provided by his staff of “never Trump” biased Democrats. Another huge waste of time. Nothing will happen because of this testimony aside from both sides running cut up clips to try and show evidence for their arguments. Definitely not enough to sway people to the left. Probably just the opposite in my opinion.

  21. I knew this comment was ginna go viral by the left but it's completely out of context. There making it seem like they have enough evidence that they can charge trump as soon as he's out of office but all the muller is saying is that a president in general could be charged once he's left office. Not that they have enough to charge him. That's two major differences and a prime example of how easily the media can spread lies

  26. I love how butthurt libtards are about all the "This will be the day we get him!" only for him not to be touched lmao
    This was the guy you put your faith in, no answers just "I can't speak on it, cause it would make the people that believed in me look even more stupid an willfully ignorant than they already do"
    He won't even give basic answers, you morons will be the reason Trump gets elected again, an this time you won't be able to scream collusion for an excuse 😂

  29. there is no obstruction when the whole thing was a coup HOW GODDAMN STUPID,IT WAS A COUP AND IT DOESNT MATTER THE PRESIDENT HAS THE LEGAL RIGHT TO EXONERATE HIMSELF SO THE CORRUPT LEFT AND THE DISGRACE THEY PULLED CAN ALL FUCK OFF

  33. Raise your hand if you think that is a good idea? HAHA How stupid. They will all be out of office by then. This will destroy the house majority for the democrats and the presidency is not even in question. ABC is not even relevant any more. Add in AOC, Ilhan Omar, Rashida Tlaib, and the other incompetent, and the democrat party is Hemorrhaging votes. Hispanic support for the president is skyrocketing, Independents and Millennials are working and prospering they ware not going to throw that away with a democrat vote. I cannot see a democrat victory anywhere.

  38. Of course they can, but the question is should they. Believe it or not you have to have an actual crime to prosecute; of course these people are law makers and know that, but they are pathetic children determined to get a "gotcha" moment for the cameras no matter how disingenuous it is to the America people. GROW UP!

  44. Bring charges after the President is out of office. LOL.
    In the mean time. It is all about
    Trump 2020

    Get Over Yourself Dems You Lost

  48. He didn't answer whether there were actually grounds for a charge … only IF he COULD be charged. ABC is slicing and dicing this whole thing. They should just post the entire hearing for the people with attention spans longer than 30 seconds.

  49. One of the amazing things is that Trump has told America a bold-faced lie that he was exonerated by Mueller's report and his cult-followers have accepted it as the utter truth. Even after seeing Mueller repeatedly state Trump has not been exonerated, they will shamelessly hold onto this lie. Not only do they not care their President is a compulsive liar, they emulate his behavior.

Comments are closed.