Mueller claims Trump is not criminal target in his investigation, report says

Aww.

Well, there goes all those impeachment wet dreams.

To spell out the obvious ...if Trump isn't considered now, nor at any point in the past, to be a target of a criminal investigation then that means...

MULLED HAS NOT FOUND EVEN THE SLIGHTEST AMOUNT OF PROOF OR EVEN SPECULATIVE EVIDENCE TO EVEN SUGGEST COLLUSION JUST AS TRUMP HAS SAID OVER AND OVER AND OVER AND OVER AND OVER!!!

Also, it appears (keyword appears) that Mueller has just indicated that his investigation is coming to a close.

Aww, wouldn't it just be a shame if the Dems rolled into 2018 having just been branded the tin foil hat conspiracy theorists by their champion Mueller?

I'm not saying that's whats happening ...but it surely does appear to be going that way.

What Trump has to do now is refuse, flat out refuse, to meet with Mueller just on the off chance this is some corrupt scheme which, knowing the scum that Mueller has on his team, it very well could be.

But intentional leak or not, it appears Mueller has gone on the record as saying Trump isn't a target and thus Trump can and should decline and interview.

That would force Mueller to show his cards in which we'd either see a bluff or definite proof that the investigation can justifiably be ended.

 

Trump will incriminate himself and his lawyers know that. Trump has lied under oath in the past and cannot help but do it again.

Mueller doesn't consider President Trump a criminal target

Mueller plays chess, Trump and his supporters play tic-tac-toe. Mueller did tell Trump's lawyers that Trump remains the subject of an investigation. Mueller is not going to say Trump is a criminal target, that would mean that Mueller has already concluded Trump is guilty. Mueller is a great poker player -- he never shows the strength of his hand.

A criminal target is a person about to be indicted. You can't indict a sitting President. All of this is a play on words and only the ignorant will take news headlines and run with them.

 

That's better.

That BOLDED (LARGE FONT) BS is as ANNOYING as Hell.

You might want to lay off that.

Just a friendly suggestion.

Your basic "point" (assuming that there is one buried in the RW Trolling) is based on MISINFORMATION.

You don't have to commit a crime to be impeached.

You can be impeached without committing a per se "crime".

The Possibility of whether (or not) Trump Can (or Will) be Impeached has absolutely nothing to do with whether Mueller finds a "crime" or not.

As long as a simple majority of The House votes to impeach, it doesn't matter whether (or not) a statutory "crime" has actually been committed.

^Anybody who has taken a 5th Grade Government Class is aware of that.

Your thread is an Epic Fail.

Better Luck next time.

Next.

 

Trump HAS NOT been cleared of anything.

Trump is not a target at this time but is under investigation. If he had been cleared he wouldn't be under investigation. He could become a target. We won't know until Mueller clears or indicts trump. And it may well come down to a Constitutional showdown as to whether trump will testify.

Since trump wants to be his own lawyer, I'm sure nothing can go wrong.

 

Peppermintwist those words as much as you want, Trump isn't now nor has he been a target.

I realize the point isn't registering yet but basically if hasn't been a target this entire time then that means the almost 2 years of leftoid conspiracy theories have been based on total bullshit, which is what we've been trying to tell you guys all along.

 

An interview and testimony could be two different things.

When Hillary Clinton was being "investigated" (farce) for her email crimes she wasn't put under oath and thus there was never any record.

That made it all too easy for Comey (who was in on it) to follow orders and clear her knowing there wouldn't be a trail of evidence regarding questions asked or not asked and answered or not answered.

Muller will undoubtedly want Trump under oath, but why exactly should Trump do that considering hes just been declared to be a target either now or in the past.

There should be no testimony under oath, but if Mueller wants an interview to wrap it up that could be fine.

 

The FBI doesn't put you under oath, they merely inform you that lying to them is a crime. You know what that makes the rest of your post?

 

The lack of a record was and is the point.

So I guess that makes the rest of my post something that went over your head.

 

Note the line above that OP found so important that he put it in bold, color and underlined "he does not consider Trump to be a criminal target in his investigation of Russian actions during the 2016 campaign".
All along it's not that Trump personally colluded was the problem but that someone did. Now the question of the investigation probably is did Trump know and is he obstructing justice. That was not mentioned by Mueller.

 

Mueller is the consummate professional investigator and prosecutor, he think four steps ahead and acts accordingly. Any criminal charges against Trump will activate a years long battle of Presidential pardon in SCOTUS which no one wants thus charges will be left to states where the Pardon is irrelevant. Mueller will release his report and send pertinent data to Congress as well as the state AG's he already has contact with, this will do far more than trying to charge the President with Federal crimes.

 

"Collusion" in the tin-foil hat way this Russian nonsense is considered, isn't even a crime.

Therefore there would be zero obligation for Trump to volunteer anything that he might have known, which he doesn't since this entire thing is a fabrication.

What is he supposed to do?

Run to the FBI every time any one of the thousands of people that worked on his campaign had a meeting with somebody from another country?

What the **** sense does that make?

This is why Mueller has been trying to manufacture crimes, because the basis of this sham investigation wasn't ever criminal.

Are you beginning to understand the giant scam we've been forced to endure these past years when we should have been focused on making our lives better?

Is it starting to become apparent just how hard the Democrats work at keeping us all as low as they can in order to sell us a "fix" that never comes in exchange for votes?

 

No, it simply didn't rise to the level of being comment worthy. Your little conspiracy smear lacked any foundation. When is the last time that you heard the testimony given in an FBI interview being recorded? They don't operate that way,it's only in the last two years that interviews with those already in custody have been recorded. After the interview the agents fill out a report with a summary of the salient points and that report has been made public. And do try and remember that she was under oath for 11 hrs in front of a Republican led committee.

 

What part of not a target now nor at any point in the past escapes you?

If hes not a target, and never was, then that means there was never anything that even remotely suggested that Trump did wrong.

And considering that "collusion" in the tin-foil hat way this Russian nonsense is considered isn't even a crime ...what exactly do you think is going to happen?

Face it.

You were sold on a giant lie.

 

Did you seriously just ask that question?

Federal agents conducting officially arranged interviews are required to record them.

And ...you'll love this ...it was Obama's buddy Eric "I don't charge my people with crimes" Holder that put the rule in place along with a bunch of others relative to this matter.

The specific reason for this rule was because the traditional practice of taking paper notes wasn't measuring up anymore, ya know ...because of the obvious potential for abuse.

And yet, despite this rule, the FBI interview with Hillary was not recorded but rather notes "were taken".

Yea, are you beginning to understand the massive level of abuse that went on?

True, because the answer she gave to 90%+ of the questions was "I cannot recall".

Maybe Trump should do the interview with Mueller and respond with "I cannot recall" to every single question just for the ****ing lulz of watching lefty media implode trying to attack it.

 

The Lefties need some tissues, it's been 1 big wet dream.

 

It is apparent that you for some strange reason could not grasp the details of my commentary. Likely this would be due to shock after reading the bill from your own receipt after noting the broken merchandize inside the box you ordered. By the way....collusion has never been a chargeable crime but the elements that it consists of are.

 

I think this article explains (sort of) the 3 levels of an investigation, target, subject, witness

SNIP
Toobin said “targets” are often charged and “witnesses” are generally people needed for information.

“In between the two, there is something called the “subject.” That is someone who is under investigation but who may or may not be charged. Trump is a subject, and I don’t think that is particularly good news for him. It’s a big deal to be under criminal investigation by the FBI, particularly if you’re president of the United States.”

ENDSNIP

https://www.huffingtonpost.com/entr...mp-robert-mueller_us_5ac431aae4b0ac473edb285b

I think it's a good strategy to give Trump a false sense of security before his interview, not that any perceived state of mind will prevent epic lying.. It's still a huge mistake for Trump to be interviewed by Mueller without massive preconditions...

 

Really?

So all the posts about being Putin’s puppet(some even by the person who liked your post, never happened. All the editorial pieces, all the news pieces....

Yeah no. It’s been Trump colluded with Russia. All along.

 

He might not be the target but he is the subject of the investigation (learn the difference). Also this doesn't cover obstruction of justice, money laundering, income tax evasion and perjury (if he ever talks to Mueller). You golden shower pervert isn't out of the woods yet.

 

Not so.

What does today’s news that Trump is a “subject” of Mueller’s investigation but not a “target” mean? (Short answer: Not as much as it seems at first glance.)

1/ Today the @washingtonpost reported that Mueller told Trump’s attorneys that he is a “subject” but not a “target” of his investigation. Washington Post:

2/ You are a “subject” of a federal investigation when your conduct is part of the government’s investigation. So if the government is investigating what you did, you are a “subject.” It’s what people commonly refer to as being “under investigation.”

3/ A “target” of an investigation is someone for whom the prosecutor has substantial evidence linking him or her to a crime and is a “putative defendant.” In other words, is someone the prosecutor intends to charge.

4/ As a practical matter, federal prosecutors typically don’t decide until late in an investigation whether they will charge a person who is under investigation. Usually prosecutors don’t make that judgement until they’ve interviewed witnesses and reviewed the relevant documents.

5/ For that reason, defense attorneys typically complain that a “non-target letter” isn’t worth the paper it’s printed on. As a practical matter, if your client is a “subject,” a statement that the prosecutor doesn’t intend to indict you at this time doesn’t mean much.

6/ The prosecutor can just continue to collect evidence and make the decision to indict at a later time. That’s why any good federal criminal defense attorney knows that what really matters most is whether your client is a subject.

7/ So all today’s news tells us is that Mueller hasn’t decided to indict Trump at this time. But if Trump’s lawyers know what they’re doing, they’ll tell him that he’s still under great risk. /end

 

Impeachment for political differences and partisanship is an abuse of power.

 

Did this snippet of a filing happen to mention whether Trump is the target of an obstruction of justice investigation?

 

Mueller didn't say Trump is the subject, learn the difference.

 

[Dupe]

 

Even if they find some obstruction of justice, it will not be enough to remove him from office. The precedent has already been set with that particular matter.