Here’s what we know about: Obstruction of justice

Visits: 27

With the public release of special counsel Robert Mueller’s highly anticipated and redacted report on Thursday, pundits and politicians were parsing its findings on the question of “obstruction of justice.”

Obstruction of justice accounts for a federal crime in which someone “corruptly” attempts to “influence, obstruct or impede” the “due and proper administration of the law” in a pending proceeding, according to federal code. The president’s critics have pointed to his dismissal of former FBI Director James Comey – and subsequent explanations for that decision – as evidence that Trump obstructed justice.

In his letter to Congress describing the “principal conclusions” of Mueller’s report, Attorney General William Barr indicated that while Mueller did find at least some evidence suggesting Trump tried to obstruct the investigation, the evidence did not amount to a criminal offense.

Here’s what the report suggests about obstruction of justice.

Here’s the issue:

The 11 possible instances of Obstruction of Justice investigated

Here’s where you can find it in the report:

Volume 2, pages 3-6

Here’s the summary:

These are the 11 potential actions of obstruction of justice investigated by the special counsel’s office as described in the report. During his news conference Thursday morning before the report’ release, Barr mentioned 10 such instances. Each of these examples is extrapolated upon in both the executive summary and in the report.

Here’s what the report says:

1. The Campaign’s response to reports about Russian support for Trump

2. Conduct involving FBI Director Comey and Michael Flynn

3. The President’s reaction to the continuing Russia investigation

4. The President’s termination of Comey

5. The appointment of a Special Counsel and efforts to remove him

6. Efforts to curtail the Special Counsel’s investigation

7. Efforts to prevent public disclosure of evidence

8. Further efforts to have the Attorney General take control of the investigation

9. Efforts to have McGahn deny that the President had ordered him to have the Special Counsel removed

10. Conduct towards Flynn, Manafort, [REDACTED – HARM TO ONGOING MATTER]

11. Conduct involving Michael Cohen

Here’s the issue:

“The President’s Efforts to Prevent Disclosure of Emails about the June 9, 2016 Meeting between Russians and Senior Campaign Officials”

Here’s where you can find it in the report:

Vol. 2, pages 98 – 107

Here’s the summary:

This section is divided into four subsections: (1) The President Learns about the Existence of Emails Concerning June 9, 2016 Trump Tower Meeting, (2) President Directs Communications Staff Not to Publicly Disclose Information About the June 9 Meeting, (3) President Directs Trump Jr.’s Response to Press Inquiries About the June 9 Meeting, and (4) The Media Reports on the June 9, 2016 Meeting.

Mueller’s team cites at least three occasions between June 29, 2017 and July 9, 2017- when the President directed Hope Hicks and others not to publicly disclose information about the June 9, 2016 meeting between senior campaign officials and a Russian attorney. The OSC concludes that these efforts by the President were directed at the press, adding that these acts would amount to obstructive acts only if the President sought to withhold information or mislead congressional investigations or the SC. On May 17, 2017, the President’s campaign received a document request from SSCI that clearly covered the June 9 meeting.

In the analysis section, the Special Counsel specifically addresses the phrase attributed to Hope Hicks, “it will never get out”—in reference to the emails setting up the June 9 meeting. Hicks said she had no memory of making that comment and always believed the emails would eventually be leaked. The Special Counsel writes that the Hicks statement can be explained as reflecting a belief that the emails would not be made public if the President’s press strategy were followed, even if the emails were provided to Congress and the Special Counsel.

Here’s what the report says:

The report adds that “the only evidence we have of the President discussing the production of documents to Congress or the Special Counsel is the conversation on June 29, 2017, when Hicks recalled the President acknowledging that Kushner’s attorney should provide emails related to the June 9 meeting to whomever he needed to give them to. We do not have evidence of what the President discussed with his own lawyers at that time.” The Special Counsel also addresses “intent” writing about the President’s desire to “minimize public disclosures about those connections.” [campaign’s connections to Russia]. The report states the evidence does not establish the President intended to prevent the Special Counsel’s Office or Congress from obtaining the emails setting up the June 9 meeting or other information about that meeting.

Here’s the issue:

“The President Orders McGahn to Deny that the President Tried to Fire the Special Counsel”

Here’s where you can find it in the report:

Vol. 2, page 113

Here’s the summary:

SUMMARY: After news broke that Trump ordered McGahn to fire the Special Counsel, Trump pressured McGahn deny that he had been directed to do so, even suggesting to aides that he would fire him unless he complied. Mueller concludes that there is evidence to suggest Trump acted this way to impede his investigation.

Here’s what the report says:

The President then directed [staff secretary Rob] Porter to tell McGahn to create a record to make clear that the President never directed McGahn to fire the Special Counsel. Porter thought the matter should be handled by the White House communications office, but the President said he wanted McGahn to write a letter to the file “for our records” and wanted something beyond a press statement to demonstrate that the reporting was inaccurate. The President referred to McGahn as a “lying bastard” and said that he wanted a record from him. Porter recalled the President saying something to the effect of, “If he doesn’t write a letter, then maybe I’ll have to get rid of him.”

“Porter told McGahn that he had to write a letter to dispute that he was ever ordered to terminate the Special Counsel. McGahn shrugged off the request, explaining that the media reports were true. McGahn told Porter that the President had been insistent on firing the Special Counsel and that McGahn had planned to resign rather than carry out the order, although he had not personally told the President he intended to quit.804 Porter told McGahn that the President suggested that McGahn would be fired if he did not write the letter. McGahn dismissed the threat, saying that the optics would be terrible if the President followed through with firing him on that basis. McGahn said he would not write the letter the President had requested.”

But the President’s efforts to have McGahn write a letter “for our records” approximately ten days after the stories had come out- well past the typical time to issue a correction for a news story-indicates the President was not focused solely on a press strategy, but instead likely contemplated the ongoing investigation and any proceedings arising from it…Substantial evidence indicates that in repeatedly urging McGahn to dispute that he was ordered to have the Special Counsel terminated, the President acted for the purpose of influencing McGahn’s account in order to deflect or prevent further scrutiny of the President’s conduct towards the investigation.

Here’s the issue:

The President’s conduct involving Michael Cohen

Here’s where you can find it in the report:

Page 134

Here’s the summary:

The Mueller report states that while working on his statements to Congress, President Donald Trump‘s then-personal attorney Michael Cohen had “extensive” discussions with the president’s personal counsel. The report also states Trump passed messages of support to Cohen and Cohen discussed pardons with the president’s legal team. Cohen believed if he cooperated he would get a pardon, according to the report.

Here’s what the report says:

“While working on the congressional statement, Cohen had extensive discussions with the President’s personal counsel, who, according to Cohen, said that Cohen should not contradict the President and should keep the statement short and ‘tight.’

“Cohen also discussed pardons with the President’s personal counsel and believed that if he stayed on message, he would get a pardon or the President would do ‘something else’ to make the investigation end.”

Here’s the issue:

The President’s Further Efforts to Have the AG Jeff Sessions Take Over the Investigation

Here’s where you can find it in the report:

Vol. 2, pages 111-112

Here’s the summary:

Mueller appears to conclude that President Trump’s actions with regard to Jeff Sessions could constitute as obstruction

Here’s what the report says:

“On multiple occasions in 2017, the President spoke with Sessions about reversing his recusal so that he could take over the Russia investigation and begin an investigation of Hillary Clinton…There is evidence that at least one purpose of the President’s conduct toward Sessions was to have Sessions assume control over the Russia investigation and supervise it in a way that could restrict its scope…A reasonable inference from those statements and the President’s action is that an unrecused Attorney General would play a protective role and could shield the President from the ongoing Russia investigation.”

Here’s the issue:

Obstruction

Here’s where you can find it in the report:

Vol.2, pages 90-93

Here’s the summary:

2nd time Trump tried to affect Special Counsel investigation — Trump dictated message to former campaign manager Corey Lewanandowski to give to AG Sessions to limit the scope of the SC investigation to election interference only.

Here’s what the report says:

Two days after Trump directed Don McGhan to remove Special Counsel, Trump on June 19, 2017 “met one-one-one w/ Corey Lewandowski in the Oval Office” to dictate a message to Sessions that would have limited the scope of the investigation to ELECTION INTERFERENCE ONLY

Trump “met one-one-one w/ Corey Lewandowski in the Oval Office and dictated a message to be delivered to attorney general Sessions that would have had the effect of limiting the Russia investigation to election interference only.”

President dictated this note for Lewandowski to deliver to Sessions: “The president directed that Sessions should give a speech publicly announcing: ‘I know that I recused myself from certain things having to do with specific areas. But our POTUS… Is being treated very unfairly. He shouldn’t have a special prosecutor/Counsel b/c he hasn’t done anything wrong I was on the campaign w/ him for nine months, there were no Russians involved with him. I know it for a fact b/c I was there. He didn’t do anything wrong except he ran the greatest campaign in an American history.’”

The dictated message went on to state that Sessions would meet with the Special Counsel to limit his jurisdiction to future election interference:

DICTATION OF PRESIDENT TRUMP PER THE REPORT VIA LEWANDOWSKI : “Now a group of people want to subvert the Constitution of the United States. I am going to meet with the Special Prosecutor to explain this is very unfair and let the Special Prosecutor move forward with investigating election meddling for future elections so that nothing can happen in future elections.”

“Lewandowski wanted to pass the message to Sessions in person rather than over the phone. He did not want to meet at the department of justice because he did not want to public log of his visit and did not want Sessions to have an advantage over him by meeting about Lewandowski described as Sessions turf.”

BUT — Lewandowski left DC w/o being able to meet Sessions. He later decided Rick Dearborn should deliver message. The message “raised an eyebrow” w/ Dearborn & he didn’t deliver the message, though he told Lewandowski he did.

Lewandowski met again in Oval alone w/ POTUS. POTUS asked if message had been delivered to Trump. Lewandowki said it would be delivered “soon.” THEN: “Lewandowski recalled the president told him that if Sessions did not meet with him, he should tell Sessions he was fired.”

ABC News’ John Santucci, Lucien Bruggeman and Pete Madden contributed to this report.

Read More Go To Source