Mueller Report: Open Questions, Bad Decisions, Next Steps (Real Law Review) reviews
Now that we have (most) of the Mueller report. What now?
Check out Tab for a Cause: https://tab.gladly.io/legaleagle
Now that we’ve had a few days to digest the Mueller report, we have a better understanding of the decisions that were made. Not all of the investigation decisions may have been the right ones. And as many of the questions that the Mueller Report answered, it opened new questions. And the biggest question is “what next?”
What questions do you have?
Prior videos on the subject:
A Lawyer’s Analysis of the Mueller Report – https://youtu.be/f71Rasj_0JY
9 Things That Don’t Make Sense About the Barr Letter – https://youtu.be/t3qjH7pFq_0
——————————————————————————-
★ A Few of My Favorite Things★
(clicking the links really helps out the channel)
Custom Suits: https://legaleagle.link/indochino
Ties: https://fave.co/2ImLY9I
Tie Clips/Bars: https://amzn.to/2WIQ6EE
Pocket Squares: https://amzn.to/2UfsKtL
▶ Why Indochino Suits? (50% off Premium Suits + free shipping) [https://legaleagle.link/indochino]: Off-the-rack suits NEVER fit right. Indochino makes fully custom suits that fit perfectly using any material I want, with all of the options I want. And they cost 1/3rd of what normal suits costs. I’ve purchased them with my own money for years, so I’m thrilled they are now a sponsor.
▶ Why Ties from TheTieBar? (Free shipping on orders over $50) [https://fave.co/2ImLY9I]: Normal ties are too fat. Skinny ties are too skinny. So these days I only wear ties that are exactly 2.5” wide. They are fashionable without being hipster. You see them in all of my videos. TieBar ties are perfect, come in every color I want, and never cost more than $19.
▶ Why these Tie Clips? [https://amzn.to/2WIQ6EE]: It’s really hard to find affordable tie clips that are the right size (1.5”), look good, and are great quality. These tie bars are all three. Plus the 3-pack gives a variety of styles. They pair perfectly with 2.5” ties from TheTieBar (above).
▶ Why these Pocket Squares? [https://amzn.to/2UfsKtL]: I like my pocket squares perfectly, well, square. Like straight-out-of-Mad-Men square. The only way to do that is with a stiffer material that keeps its shape. I’ve exhaustively tried dozens of pocket squares, and these are by far the best. It’s how I get the perfectly flat pocket square you see in my videos.
——————————————————————————-
Welcome to Real Law Review by LegalEagle; a series where I try to tackle the most important legal issues of the day. If you have suggestion for the next topic leave your comment below.
And if you disagree, be sure to leave your comment in the form of an OBJECTION!
Remember to make your comments Stella-appropriate. Stella is the LegalBeagle and she wields the gavel of justice. DO NOT MESS WITH STELLA.
★More series on LegalEagle★
Real Lawyer Reacts: https://goo.gl/hw9vcE
Laws Broken: https://goo.gl/PJw3vK
Law 101: https://goo.gl/rrzFw3
Real Law Review: https://goo.gl/NHUoqc
All clips used for fair use commentary, criticism, and educational purposes. See Hosseinzadeh v. Klein, 276 F.Supp.3d 34 (S.D.N.Y. 2017); Equals Three, LLC v. Jukin Media, Inc., 139 F. Supp. 3d 1094 (C.D. Cal. 2015).
Typical legal disclaimer from a lawyer (occupational hazard): This is not legal advice, nor can I give you legal advice. Sorry! Everything here is for informational purposes only and not for the purpose of providing legal advice. You should contact your attorney to obtain advice with respect to any particular issue or problem. Nothing here should be construed to form an attorney client relationship. Also, some of the links in this post may be affiliate links, meaning, at no cost to you, I will earn a small commission if you click through and make a purchase. But if you click, it really helps me make more of these videos!
========================================================
★ Tweet me @legaleagleDJ https://twitter.com/legaleagleDJ
★ More vids on Facebook: ➜ https://www.facebook.com/legaleaglereacts
★ Stella’s Insta: https://www.instagram.com/stellathelegalbeagle
38 reviews for Mueller Report: Open Questions, Bad Decisions, Next Steps (Real Law Review) reviews
Add a review
Related Products
LegalEagle –
If learning about foreign interference and obstruction of justice gets you down, help give to charity: https://tab.gladly.io/legaleagle
Telma Garcia –
Estonses.todos.estis sin coruptos maldoso al paiz
Nancy Duermeier –
We waited so long for Mueller's report, I felt deflated when it came. Barr redacted so much and interfered to an insane degree, it seemed as though we couldn't touch Loser 45! It was such a disappointment!! We waited months for nothing!!!
Derschleifer –
Stop calling sb with a ue = ü in there name like sombody with a u
Ignition [FR] n2 –
0:55 – Chapter 1 – There are uncharted waters, in a legal sense . Did Mueller get it right ?
1:35 – Chapter 2 – What about the statute of limitations during a sitting president tenure in office ?
4:40 – Chapter 3 – Regarding evidence of obstruction of justice what is Mueller degree of certainty ?
6:50 – Chapter 4 – How did Barr come to a "No Obstruction" determination ?
7:55 – Chapter 5 – Who's behind all of the redactions ?
9:50 – Chapter 6 – Why didn't mueller interview the president ?
13:20 – Chapter 7 – What are the next steps ?
16:05 – End roll ads
Mireille Lebeau –
My point of view is that the Muller report has made Trump look innocent and the real victim of a witch hunt orchestrated by the media.
Some times what a report says and what is the perception of the public are two very different things.
Philip Hall –
Can’t wait to see a video on the Durham report when it comes out.
Karin Dennis –
So now that Trump is leaving office, can they prosecute? Do we know if there’s a statute of limitations and what it is?
DARTH HULKA-BURGER –
Mueller Investigation = A Big Waste of Time. Why? 1) Because we all knew that the Senate wasn't going to Impeach. 2) Mueller was as evasive as TrumpCo…it was lmost like Mueller approached every question like HE was the Defendant, like he was invoking the 5th. Everytime.
Mueller had a chance to make a difference & get a lot of these unanswered questions about abuse of power settled. He could've also 'done the right thing' by taking a stand & calling out what EVERY perso on the Planet knew was bad behavior by Trump.
Instead…Mueller just acted like a bureaucrat who wants to knock off at 5 O'Clock. He punted…He let down his Country – BIG TIME.
Jason Souvannarath –
I know this is old. but….
Objection! Bill barr is lying through his teeth. His cadence, his mannerisms, though I cannot see them, and his overall tone and hesitation give it away. I doubt very highly that he asked Robert Muler in person about the OLC memo, much less multiple times. If so, wouldn't once be enough? Bill Barr is fishing for the answers that his boss, trump, wants. That OLC memo was just a suggestion about Nixon. It doesn't, nor should it, apply to anybody else.
Andrew B. –
Barr misled Congress by stating he didn't know what Mueller thought about his letter though it came out later that Mueller had made his opinions clear and lied to the American people over whether tear gas was used on the protestors at Lafayette Park. At this point if Barr told me his shit stank, I'd need a second opinion.
Dawn Nightinger –
Mueller was right for the wrong reasons. It's not that it couldn't happen, it's that it wouldn't happen.
Alfred Gomez –
Wasn’t mueller that bumbling and senile old man that can’t answer questions because they are beyond his intelligence ( oh I mean purview) lol
Lord Ba’al –
Mmm yes. Next steps… That'd be… 'Nothing'.
Artymowski –
https://youtu.be/SHeCSjcTC64
floyd burney –
……This guy is the Lionel Hutz (Simpson's) of LA Lawyers. A 17-minute video & 12 minutes of it is torcher of the English language.
Jessie Joy –
Just because trump couldn’t be indicted did not mean that mueller couldn’t have come to a conclusion. In fact he didn’t even mention this with the conspiracy charge, he did come to a conclusion. Investigations are NEVER done to exonerate, they are done to deem guilt or not guilty (because not guilty = innocence in USA). So muellers “conclusion “ on obstruction was a joke…..oh and there were 0 next steps little eagles lol.
Darko Vignjevic –
Objection! Mullers decission not to interview a person who is considered a pathological liar and would deliberately do anything to save his skin is quite sound.
Ron Kidd –
I have listened to several of your commentaries and I can see you are a closet liberal. [most attorneys are]. Being a constitutional conservative, I really find it hard to believe you are impartial. The law IS the law, however, the way it is explained can lead some people astray. Place yourself in Judge Kavanaugh's shoes and tell me you wouldn't be a bit P.O.'d and telling the audience to give more credence to Ford's statements. It's not testimony when it can't be verified, otherwise, any accusation I make truthful or not can destroy someone's life. There are four attorneys in my family, all but one are left wing liberals. It's hard to have a discussion with them.
Clint Lavender –
Seems like a fair thing to ask is what laws did Mueller say were broken? If none ID'ed then Obstruction falls apart… Obstruction needs a crime.
Also-
Senator Collins asked "At any time during the investigation, was your investigation curtailed or stopped … or hindered?”
“No.”- Mueller
Seems like that should be mentioned if this was unbiased commentary.
Prolly shows LegalEagles Bias.. It would have been nice to see LegalEagle comment on the new legal conclusion "Not exonerated"
regierbuddy204 –
I think S.O.L is 7 years in canada instead of 5 can anyone confirm that tho? I am not 100%
MrJohndoakes –
15:05 When impeachment was mentioned. Eight months later, Trump was impeached by the House.
Thomas Atkinson –
How about you tell your audience about the fact that every major donor made to the law firm you are associated with (Barnes & Thornburg LLP), are democrat government politicians and lobbyists?
Slightly bias, bigbird??
Sorry "big bird" but you can't expect people to take you seriously on a political issue such as this when you are clearly bias. A judge with your level of bias on this matter would recuse himself immediately.
zachirie66 –
so thats it. cannot indite a sitting prez so trump is above the law?
Ian –
Wait, wouldn't his reelection be fruits of the crime? How would the statute of limitations apply, when the reason he can't be charged is because he's benefitting from that crime? Is this broken?
TimoleanJ –
objection: That tie is too fly. It causes video artifacts at 3:29 (watch his hands).
Snowshowslow –
"I'm not sure that this justice department deserves the benefit of the doubt"… As a lawyer, that has to hurt.
Kyle Schaff –
The House has proposed a bill that would set the date of any crime the president could have committed to be the day s/he leaves office—statute of limitations can’t start up while in office.
https://govtrackinsider.com/no-president-is-above-the-law-act-would-end-a-presidents-ability-to-run-out-the-clock-on-a-819fb1cfbcf1
Kyle Schaff –
Hold on, I get this whole thing about there being no criminal cases being brought forward while the individual is in the office of the presidency, but then that someone could be in office for two terms and then potential crimes s/he may have done go past the statute of limitations is crazy to me. Personally, I’m not certain I’d ever want a statute of limitations placed on anything the president does while acting in that position. If we found out something like Carter bribing Democrats with meth, kittens, personal blowjobs, and one personal get-out-of-jail-free murder pardon card for support on his healthcare plan, I’d hope that we could still seek justice—even 40 years after the fact. I feel like there must be a difference when it’s the most public of public officials during their most public time in their life and most everything is kept on one record or another.
I wish the Framers were a bit less ambiguous with this kind of stuff. Like, that they had another document that acted as an extension to clarify specific applications and rules for the federal government. Like, for what’s going on today, I wish the Framers wrote about what classifies an impeachable offense more specifically than two examples, and then set up a specific process in which offenses could be added to that kind of a list (and help us handle anything that may seem a bit ad hoc, since a lot of this stuff comes up unprecedented). I really like the sentiment of writing very general rules, and we can adapt and evolve them as we go, I just wish they gave us methodologies that left no room for interpretation in terms of how the federal government should regulate itself.
EDIT: Found that the House has proposed a bill that would make it so that the start of the statute of limitations clock doesn’t begin until after the president is replaced.
https://govtrackinsider.com/no-president-is-above-the-law-act-would-end-a-presidents-ability-to-run-out-the-clock-on-a-819fb1cfbcf1
Luke C. –
When are you going to get to the 302's that the foia from buzzfeed/CNN got? Thank you for this channel.
emily exe –
Quick question, do you think Stella will ever be put on John Oliver's canine Supreme Court? I think this should be a serious conversation.
Alan Rosen –
Mueller was given bad instructions to run his investigation. He ran it as a criminal investigation and made judgments toward guilt, neither of which should have been done. An impeachment trial is neither a criminal nor civil trial. It falls under the auspices of "administrative adjudication" where the worst that can happen is loss of your job. This is similar to what any civil servant would be subject to for misbehavior while under protection of a union. The rules of evidence, scope of witness statements, and degree of proof are very different. It is presided over by someone who is not a trial judge. Wrong conclusions in the report!! US Constitution Article 1, Section 3, last paragraph strongly infers an impeachment must precede a criminal indictment. This would be the basis of the Justice Dept policy.
That80sGuy1972 –
Redacted info is easy to make into a lie.
Let me demonstrate.
Suppose I have a factual document that is rock solid that says this:
Mr. Smith is innocent of the crime if applied directly. He orchestrated the crime and that crime is of rape and murder of Jane Doe out of sheer revenge. He has no reason to be considered innocent in any way as Doug Doe did the deed but Mr. Smith has the motive.
Mr. Smith is innocent of the crime XX XXXXXXX XXXXXXXX. XX XXXXXXXXXXXX XXX XXXXX XXX XXX XXXXX XX of rape and murder of Jane Doe XXX XX XXXXX XXXXXXX. He has XX reason to be considered innocent XX XXX XXX as Doug Doe did the deed XXX XXX XXXXX XXX XXX XXXXXX.
Redacting is not that obvious but the motive is exactly the same.
That80sGuy1972 –
Redacted info is easy to make into a lie.
Let me demonstrate.
Suppose I have a factual document that is rock solid that says this:
Mr. Smith is innocent of the crime if applied directly. He orchestrated the crime and that crime is of rape and murder of Jane Doe out of sheer revenge. He has no reason to be considered innocent in any way as Doug Doe did the deed but Mr. Smith has the motive.
Mr. Smith is innocent of the crime XX XXXXXXX XXXXXXXX. XX XXXXXXXXXXXX XXX XXXXX XXX XXX XXXXX XX of rape and murder of Jane Doe XXX XX XXXXX XXXXXXX. He has XX reason to be considered innocent XX XXX XXX as Doug Doe did the deed XXX XXX XXXXX XXX XXX XXXXXX.
Redacting is not that obvious but the motive is exactly the same.
Ajc 7575 –
Everyone in my class was using tab for a cause so some people sent the link around, I downloaded it because the school uses some tech and we were opening a lot of tabs. Our teachers banned it.
Why would you ban a way to give money to charity?
Thomas Bateman –
Wouldn't you be able to get an extension for the statute of limitations because of the time where he isn't allowed to be brought up on charges?
Rick Baker –
You should cover whether Comey committed perjury.
Colin Campbell –
Mueller never had a say in the report he never wrote it