With the advancement of European colonization in North America, the Native Americans were often conquered and displaced. The first Europeans to arrive in the contiguous United States were Spanish conquistadors such as Juan Ponce de León, who made his first visit to Florida in 1513. Even earlier, Christopher Columbus landed in Puerto Rico on his 1493 voyage. The Spanish set up the first settlements in Florida and New Mexico such as Saint Augustine and Santa Fe. The French established their own as well along the Mississippi River. Successful English settlement on the eastern coast of North America began with the Virginia Colony in 1607 at Jamestown and with the Pilgrims' Plymouth Colony in 1620. Many settlers were dissenting Christian groups who came seeking religious freedom. The continent's first elected legislative assembly, Virginia's House of Burgesses, was created in 1619. The Mayflower Compact, signed by the Pilgrims before disembarking, and the Fundamental Orders of Connecticut, established precedents for the pattern of representative self-government and constitutionalism that would develop throughout the American colonies.
The second volume of the report investigated the topic of obstruction of justice, describing ten episodes where Trump may have obstructed justice as president and one episode before he was elected, and analyzing each in terms of the criteria needed to constitute criminal obstruction. The investigation found both public and private actions "by the President that were capable of exerting undue influence over law enforcement investigations, including the Russian-interference and obstruction investigations". However, Trump mostly failed to influence it because his subordinates or associates refused to carry out his instructions. The Mueller team refrained from charging Trump with obstruction because investigators abided by a DOJ Office of Legal Counsel (OLC) opinion that a sitting president cannot stand trial, and they feared that charges would affect Trump's governing and possibly preempt a potential impeachment. In addition, investigators felt it would be unfair to accuse Trump of a crime without charges and without a trial in which he could clear his name. Since they had decided "not to make a traditional prosecutorial judgment" on whether to "initiate or decline a prosecution," the special counsel's office "did not draw ultimate conclusions about the President's conduct." The report "does not conclude that the president committed a crime", but specifically did not exonerate Trump on obstruction of justice, because investigators were not confident that Trump was innocent after examining his intent and actions. The report concluded that Congress has the authority to take further action against Trump on the question of obstruction of justice, stating that no one is above the law.
More InfoThe second volume of the report investigated the topic of obstruction of justice, describing ten episodes where Trump may have obstructed justice as president and one episode before he was elected, and analyzing each in terms of the criteria needed to constitute criminal obstruction. The investigation found both public and private actions "by the President that were capable of exerting undue influence over law enforcement investigations, including the Russian-interference and obstruction investigations". However, Trump mostly failed to influence it because his subordinates or associates refused to carry out his instructions. The Mueller team refrained from charging Trump with obstruction because investigators abided by a DOJ Office of Legal Counsel (OLC) opinion that a sitting president cannot stand trial, and they feared that charges would affect Trump's governing and possibly preempt a potential impeachment. In addition, investigators felt it would be unfair to accuse Trump of a crime without charges and without a trial in which he could clear his name. Since they had decided "not to make a traditional prosecutorial judgment" on whether to "initiate or decline a prosecution," the special counsel's office "did not draw ultimate conclusions about the President's conduct." The report "does not conclude that the president committed a crime", but specifically did not exonerate Trump on obstruction of justice, because investigators were not confident that Trump was innocent after examining his intent and actions. The report concluded that Congress has the authority to take further action against Trump on the question of obstruction of justice, stating that no one is above the law.
More InfoOn May 29, 2019, Mueller announced that he was retiring as special counsel and that the office would be shut down, and he spoke publicly about the report for the first time. Saying "[t]he report is my testimony," he indicated he would have nothing to say that wasn't already in the report. On the subject of obstruction of justice, he said he had been prohibited by Justice Department policy from charging the president with a crime and that any potential wrongdoing by a president must be addressed by a "process other than the criminal justice system". This suggested that the investigation could now be picked up by Congress. He stressed that the central conclusion of his investigation was "that there were multiple, systematic efforts to interfere in our election. That allegation deserves the attention of every American." He also stated: "If we had had confidence that the President clearly did not commit a crime, we would have said so. We did not, however, make a determination as to whether the president did commit a crime".
More InfoThe Washington Post noted on January 9, 2018, that the source Simpson had referred to may not necessarily have been an informant willingly or directly, or during the campaign, but rather may have become an informant as a result of later becoming implicated in wrongdoing. Natasha Bertrand, then with Business Insider, reported on January 3, 2018, that a source told her Simpson had been referring to George Papadopoulos, who had first been interviewed by the FBI seven days after Trump's inauguration and whose cooperation with the FBI—to "provide information regarding any and all matters as to which the Government deems relevant"—began with his arrest on July 27, 2017, and was not publicly known until his indictment in October 2017. The New York Times reported on May 18, 2018, that the FBI sent an informant to meet with George Papadopoulos in late-summer 2016, and to meet repeatedly with Carter Page over ensuing months, after the FBI had acquired evidence that the two men had suspicious contacts with Russians. The Washington Post reported the same day that the informant first approached Page at a symposium in Britain in July 2016, and in September 2016 invited Papadopoulos to London to work on a research paper. Late that summer, the informant also met with Trump campaign co-chairman Sam Clovis in Northern Virginia. The informant was identified as an American academic who teaches in Britain, but both The Times and The Post declined to publish his name. NBC News identified him as Stefan Halper.
More InfoThe New York Times reported on April 3, that some members of the special counsel had told associates that they believe Barr's letter did not adequately portray their findings, which they considered to be more troubling for Trump than reported. The next day, The Washington Post reported that members of Mueller's team, who spoke anonymously, reported that the evidence gathered on obstruction of justice was "much more acute than Barr suggested." These members of Mueller's team revealed that they believed that the evidence showed Trump obstructed justice, but that the entire team could not draw a conclusion because they were split over the evidence and law. The Washington Post report did not explain why they believed their findings to be more serious than Barr's conclusions and it is unknown how many members of the special counsel hold these opinions.
More InfoWe don't show ads. Help us keep it that way.