On June 7, 2016 Trump announced his intention to give "a major speech" "probably Monday of next week"-which would have been June 13-about "all of the things that have taken place with the Clintons." See, e.g., Phillip Bump, What we know about the Trump Tower meeting, Washington Post (Aug. 7, 2018). Following the June 9 meeting, Trump changed the subject of his planned speech to national security. B
Page 51 The week after Corney's briefing, the White House Counsel's Office was in contact with SSCI Chairman Senator Richard Burr about the Russia investigations and appears to have received information about the status of the FBI investigation.309
i'd be real curious to hear from Mueller his thoughts on closing up the special counsels office when we know they were still figuring out big questions very very recently
The word "congressman" is only mentioned once. Oh, here's the media report: https://www.cnn.com/2018/05/23/politics/rohrabacher-assange-interview/index.html
The follow up question to any statement she makes for the rest of her life should be - was that also founded on nothing?
In the summer of 2017, the President learned that media outlets were asking questions about the June 9, 2016 meeting at Trump Tower between senior campaign officials, including Donald Trump Jr., and a Russian lawyer who was said to be offering damaging information about Hillary Clinton as "part of Russia and its government's support for Mr. Trump." On several occasions, the President directed aides not to publicly disclose the emails setting up the June 9 meeting, suggesting that the emails would not leak and that the number of lawyers with access to them should be limited. Before the emails became public, the President edited a press statement for Trump Jr. by deleting a line that acknowledged that the meeting was with "an individual who [Trump Jr.] was told might have information helpful to the campaign" and instead said only that the meeting was about adoptions of Russian children. When the press asked questions about the President's involvement in Trump Jr.' s statement, the President's personal lawyer repeatedly denied the President had played any role.
wouldn't go that far but I also wouldn't be stunned if Mueller felt a time crunch due to the political climate around the investigation and an even more staunch partisan coming in to the DOJ
"NO charges can be brought against a President" - These are Mueller's words. Again, Barr lied. The report was written with the premise that this would go to congress for impeachment hearings. - per Ari Melber
We did not make a traditional prosecution decision about these facts, but the evidence we obtained supports several general statements about the President's conduct. In particular, the actions we investigated can be divided into two phases, reflecting a possible shift in the President's motives. The first phase covered the period from the President's first interactions with Corney through the President's firing of Corney. During that time, the President had been repeatedly told he was not personally under investigation. Soon after the firing of Corney and the appointment of the Special Counsel, however, the President became aware that his own conduct was being investigated in an obstruction-of-justice inquiry. At that point, the President engaged in a second phase of conduct, involving public attacks on the investigation, non-public efforts to control it, and efforts in both public and private to encourage witnesses not to cooperate with the investigation. Judgments about the nature of the President's motives during each phase would be informed by the totality of the evidence.
if Dems don't begin impeachment proceedings its like example number 93451349513450 that our country isn't really working properly