toonkee

I do not believe you. I've been to Costa Rica. I'm pretty sure there are no rules about driving there.

https://www.lawfareblog.com/what-mueller-found-russia-and-obstruction-first-analysis The report identifies and analyzes 10 episodes of concern in the obstruction investigation: conduct involving then-FBI Director Comey and Michael Flynn; the president’s reaction to the continuing Russia investigation; the president’s termination of Comey; the appointment of a special counsel and efforts to remove him; efforts to curtail the special counsel’s investigation; efforts to prevent public disclosure of evidence; further efforts to have the attorney general take control of the investigation; efforts to have White House Counsel Don McGahn deny that the president had ordered him to have the special counsel removed; conduct toward Flynn, Manafort, and a redacted individual (likely Roger Stone); and conduct involving Michael Cohen. Each episode includes a detailed set of factual findings and then analyzes how the evidence maps onto the criminal charge of obstruction, which requires (1) an obstructive act; (2) a nexus with an official proceeding; and (3) a corrupt intent. We have summarized all of the episodes and Mueller’s analysis of them under the obstruction statutes here. For present purposes, the critical point is that in six of these episodes, the special counsel’s office suggests that all of the elements of obstruction are satisfied: Trump’s conduct regarding the investigation into Michael Flynn, his firing of Comey, his efforts to remove Mueller and then to curtail Mueller’s investigation, his campaign to have Sessions take back control over the investigation and an order he gave to White House Counsel Don McGahn to both lie to the press about Trump’s past attempt to fire Mueller and create a false record “for our files.” In the cases of Comey’s firing, Trump’s effort to fire Mueller and then push McGahn to lie about it, and Trump’s effort to curtail the scope of the investigation, Mueller describes “substantial” evidence that Trump intended to obstruct justice. Only in one instance—concerning Trump’s effort to prevent the release of emails regarding the Trump Tower meeting—does the special counsel seem to feel that none of the three elements of the obstruction offense were met. It is not entirely clear how Mueller would apply his overarching factual considerations, discussed above, to the specific cases, but he does seem to be saying that the evidence of obstruction in a number of these incidents is strong.

here's a decent article on the subject. Short version is you're mostly correct. http://theconversation.com/anti-vaccination-beliefs-dont-follow-the-usual-political-polarization-81001

I think if we let him take Rheinland he'll settle down a bit and we'll avoid any real nastiness.

wyoming has an airport?

Also, they nominated Donald Trump to be president. I gave up trying to shame Republicans. It doesn't work.

Maybe this is more accurate? "the majority of alabama republicans would rather have a republican sexual predator than probably any democrat" Any way you slice it, still not a good look.

Oh. aight. he is the big word here, isn't it.

I thought it said the whole sitting president stuff was not considered with regards to an obstruction charge.

nobody reads the articles, bro. headlines and tweets is all we got time for. Then we make a judgement on that one sentence based on what we already feel way down in our tum tums.

What's not being accepted? The report says no "collusion" and that he did not criminally obstruct. I think the people you are trying to zing around here accept those facts.

Hey! stop calling them Nazis! They are neo-nazis and it's not fair to lump them together!

bump

The toonkee summary: "yeah, he did some sketchy obstruction stuff, but this is the president of these united states we talkin' 'bout, and that creates a legal mess so...peace out"

This one apparently was at least a little. They considered it.