4 ms·

[self-censored]

spaceheretostay 8y ago
"Obstruction of justice" has nothing to do with the report being finished. Those are completely unrelated things. > I'm just pointing out how far the goalpost has moved. You're the one moving goalposts here. Obstruction of justice is illegal even in an attempt to actively obstruct, which Trump and others did, repeatedly, and which was written about clearly in the redacted Mueller report.
- dang 8y ago
  Since you've been using HN primarily for political battle, and we warned you that we'd ban you if you didn't stop, I've banned this account. https://news.ycombinator.com/newsguidelines.html https://news.ycombinator.com/newsguidelines.html
lukenels 8y ago
The crime is the attempt to obstruct justice. Having succeeded in doing so is not a requirement.
daveFNbuck 8y ago
He finished the report, but he wasn't able to draw a conclusion on whether Trump colluded with Russia.
- polithrowaway 8y ago
  "The investigation did not identify evidence that any U.S. persons knowingly or intentionally coordinated with the IRA’s interference operation"
  - daveFNbuck 8y ago
    Lack of evidence is not a conclusion. It's what you'd expect if there were successful obstruction of justice. Even Barr's summary quoted that the report "does not conclude that the President committed a crime, it also does not exonerate him."
    - polithrowaway 8y ago
      In America, you need to prove beyond a reasonable doubt to convict someone of a crime. It's innocent until PROVEN guilty with EVIDENCE. How do you fully exonerate someone of a claim that isn't true. You're asking them to prove a negative.
daveFNbuck 8y ago
> EDIT: to repliers, the person I replied to said "we weren't able to determine whether that happened" that's why I asked how he obstructed a report that was finished. I'm not debating whether or not Trump obstructed justice. He obstructed the investigation leading up to the report. No one is saying he obstructed the report after its release. > EDIT: to daveFNbuck, in America, you're innocent until proven guilty. If someone can't conclude you committed the crime beyond reasonable doubt, you're innocent. That's why we've made obstruction of justice a separate crime regardless of whether you can be found guilty of anything else. Obstruction is a separate offense that you can be found guilty of.

[self-censored]

"Obstruction of justice" has nothing to do with the report being finished. Those are completely unrelated things. > I'm just pointing out how far the goalpost has moved. You're the one moving goalposts here. Obstruction of justice is illegal even in an attempt to actively obstruct, which Trump and others did, repeatedly, and which was written about clearly in the redacted Mueller report.

dang 8y ago
Since you've been using HN primarily for political battle, and we warned you that we'd ban you if you didn't stop, I've banned this account. https://news.ycombinator.com/newsguidelines.html https://news.ycombinator.com/newsguidelines.html

lukenels 8y ago

The crime is the attempt to obstruct justice. Having succeeded in doing so is not a requirement.

daveFNbuck 8y ago

He finished the report, but he wasn't able to draw a conclusion on whether Trump colluded with Russia.

polithrowaway 8y ago
"The investigation did not identify evidence that any U.S. persons knowingly or intentionally coordinated with the IRA’s interference operation"
- daveFNbuck 8y ago
  Lack of evidence is not a conclusion. It's what you'd expect if there were successful obstruction of justice. Even Barr's summary quoted that the report "does not conclude that the President committed a crime, it also does not exonerate him."
  - polithrowaway 8y ago
    In America, you need to prove beyond a reasonable doubt to convict someone of a crime. It's innocent until PROVEN guilty with EVIDENCE. How do you fully exonerate someone of a claim that isn't true. You're asking them to prove a negative.

daveFNbuck 8y ago

> EDIT: to repliers, the person I replied to said "we weren't able to determine whether that happened" that's why I asked how he obstructed a report that was finished. I'm not debating whether or not Trump obstructed justice. He obstructed the investigation leading up to the report. No one is saying he obstructed the report after its release. > EDIT: to daveFNbuck, in America, you're innocent until proven guilty. If someone can't conclude you committed the crime beyond reasonable doubt, you're innocent. That's why we've made obstruction of justice a separate crime regardless of whether you can be found guilty of anything else. Obstruction is a separate offense that you can be found guilty of.