I saw this this morning, right after the roll call for the vote.

 

Rep Matt Gaetz is under investigation by the Florida Bar Association

 

For What?

 

'Intimidation' against Cohen;

Gaetz wrote: “Do your wife & father-in-law know about your girlfriends? Maybe tonight would be a good time for that chat. I wonder if she’ll remain faithful when you’re in prison. She’s about to learn a lot...”

Maybe Gaetz knows something that not many do know.

 

They keep doubling down, hoping they win something before their markers are called.

 

Fox's Napolitano slams Barr memo: 'It was dumb and insulting'

https://thehill.com/homenews/admini...lams-barr-memo-as-dumb-and-foolish-attempt-to

 

They're going on "what", Nancy? (0:52)

 

I see the leftists brought out the big guns to voice an objection against the GOP for bringing contempt hearing against the criminal/activist/racist former AG Holder.

 

Trump Reportedly Wanted Don McGahn to Deny He Obstructed Justice –– And McGahn Declined, Twice

https://www.mediaite.com/donald-tru...obstructed-justice-and-mcgahn-declined-twice/

 

More leftist lies,or....someone is in violation of Attorney Client privilege.

 

Are people still arguing about this shit. It is over. It doesn't matter if you like the results, it is through with.
Accept it or just keep pissing and moaning.

 

If despicables really want to see the report why haven't any of them (as of yesterday) looked at the report provided to select members of the committee in the :safe" room?

Cause as has been said before, they aren't after the truth, they're after Trump.

 

I think that they got Mueller mixed up with Miller and are holding out for the free beer.

 

Trump continues to obstruct justice in plain sight so mentally ill he thinks he can just lie his way out of the Mueller report. But since Trump cannot grasp the consequences of his own actions he doesn't realize that by trying to call Don McGahn a liar he is forcing congress to investigate that and McGahn to defend himself.

Trump: I Wanted to Fire Don McGahn More Than Mueller

https://www.thedailybeast.com/trump-i-wanted-to-fire-don-mcgahn-more-than-mueller

 

More sour grapes.

 

First, a traditional prosecution or declination decision entails a binary determination to initiate or decline a prosecution, but we determined not to make a traditional prosecutorial judgment. The Office of Legal Counsel (OLC) has issued an opinion finding that "the indictment or criminal prosecution of a sitting President would impermissibly undermine the capacity of the executive branch to perform its constitutionally assigned functions" in violation of "the constitutional separation of powers."1 Given the role of the Special Counsel as an attorney in the Department of Justice and the framework of the Special Counsel regulations, see 28 U.S.C. § 515; 28 C.F.R. § 600.7(a), this Office accepted OLC' s legal conclusion for the purpose of exercising prosecutorialjurisdiction. And apart from OLC's constitutional view, we recognized that a federal criminal accusation against a sitting President would place burdens on the President's capacity to govern and potentially preempt constitutional processes for addressing presidential misconduct.2 Second, while the OLC opinion concludes that a sitting President may not be prosecuted, it recognizes that a criminal investigation during the President's term is permissible.3 The OLC opinion also recognizes that a President does not have immunity after he leaves office.4 And if individuals other than the President committed an obstruction offense, they may be prosecuted a this time. Given those considerations, the facts known to us, and the strong public interest in safeguarding the integrity of the criminal justice system, we conducted a thorough factual investigation in order to preserve the evidence when memories were fresh and documentary materials were available

https://www.justsecurity.org/wp-con...-04.18.2019-Word-Searchable.-Reduced-Size.pdf

 

CONCLUSION

Because we determined not to make a traditional prosecutorial judgment, we did not draw ultimate conclusions about the President's conduct. The evidence we obtained about the President's actions and intent presents difficult issues that would need to be resolved if we were making a traditional prosecutorial judgment. At the same time, if we had confidence after a thorough investigation of the facts that the President clearly did not commit obstruction of justice, we would so state. Based on the facts and the applicable legal standards, we are unable to reach that judgment. Accordingly, while this report does not conclude that the President committed a crime, it also does not exonerate him. 8

https://www.justsecurity.org/wp-con...-04.18.2019-Word-Searchable.-Reduced-Size.pdf

 

More investigation,....love it.

 

The Campaign's response to reports about Russian support for Trump. During the 2016 presidential campaign, questions arose about the Russian government's apparent support for candidate Trump. After WikiLeaks released politically damaging Democratic Party emails that were reported to have been hacked by Russia, Trump publicly expressed skepticism that Russia was responsible for the hacks at the same time that he and other Campaign officials privately sought information about any further planned WikiLeaks releases. Trump also denied having any business in or connections to Russia, even though as late as June 2016 the Trump Organization had been pursuing a licensing deal for a skyscraper to be built in Russia called Trump Tower Moscow. After the election, the President expressed concerns to advisors that reports of Russia's election interference might lead the public to question the legitimacy of his election.

https://www.justsecurity.org/wp-con...-04.18.2019-Word-Searchable.-Reduced-Size.pdf

 

Two days after directing McGahn to have the Special Counsel removed, the President made another attempt to affect the course of the Russia investigation. On June 19, 2017, the President met one-on-one in the Oval Office with his former campaign manager Corey Lewandowski, a trusted advisor outside the government, and dictated a message for Lewandowski to deliver to Sessions. The message said that Sessions should publicly announce that, notwithstanding his recusal from the Russia investigation, the investigation was "very unfair" to the President, the President had done nothing wrong, and Sessions planned to meet with the Special Counsel and " let [him] move forward with investigating election meddling for future elections." Lewandowski said he understood what the President wanted Sessions to do.

One month later, in another private meeting with Lewandowski on July 19, 2017, the President asked about the status of his message for Sessions to limit the Special Counsel investigation to future election interference. Lewandowski told the President that the message would be delivered soon. Hours after that meeting, the President publicly criticized Sessions in an interview with the New York Times, and then issued a series of tweets making it clear that Sessions's job was in jeopardy. Lewandowski did not want to deliver the President's message personally, so he asked senior White House official Rick Dearborn to deliver it to Sessions. Dearborn was uncomfortable with the task and did not follow through. Efforts to prevent public disclosure of evidence.

https://www.justsecurity.org/wp-con...-04.18.2019-Word-Searchable.-Reduced-Size.pdf