What is the difference between Trump saying he'd accept foreign information

domer76 said:
Nope, sure isn’t, stupid fuck. When she decides to pull the trigger, they’ll all fall into line.

The problem is with McConnell and the Senate cowards. Party above country
Click to expand...

But if the Mullet report is all that...ten instances of obstruction and further blather, what is she waiting on?

Pelosi talks impeachment for purely political purposes—it’s posturing. It’s red meat for people like yourself. She has no intentions of allowing the vote. For the simple reason they don’t have anything. When Mullet failed to produce on collusion it was Game Over, politically; and impeachment is a political process.

And *ambitious* prosecutor might try and get an obstruction conviction, in a court trial, from an investigation that produced no crime. But it’s political suicide to try that in a Senate trial. To further complicate things *the investigation, itself, is under investigation*!!!

Not by congressional nitwits but by a motivated AG and his appointed prosecutor. Trump calls her Nervous Nancy for a reason: she’s between a rock and a hard place.
 
AssHatZombie said:
nobody is looking for a campaign violation, dipshit, its bigger than that. ok little dougie?
Click to expand...

Trump just solicited it on ABC last night.

Yeah, it is bigger than that. It’s the solicitation in order to affect an election. That’s what junior did and what Orangetweet tried to cover up.

Obstruction.
 
Darth Omar said:
But if the Mullet report is all that...ten instances of obstruction and further blather, what is she waiting on?

Pelosi talks impeachment for purely political purposes—it’s posturing. It’s red meat for people like yourself. She has no intentions of allowing the vote. For the simple reason they don’t have anything. When Mullet failed to produce on collusion it was Game Over, politically; and impeachment is a political process.

And *ambitious* prosecutor might try and get an obstruction conviction, in a court trial, from an investigation that produced no crime. But it’s political suicide to try that in a Senate trial. To further complicate things *the investigation, itself, is under investigation*!!!

Not by congressional nitwits but by a motivated AG and his appointed prosecutor. Trump calls her Nervous Nancy for a reason: she’s between a rock and a hard place.
Click to expand...

I just told you, idiot.

Your comprehension skills suck.

Here’s what prosecutors think. 1000 of them.

“Each of us believes that the conduct of President Trump described in Special Counsel Robert Mueller’s report would, in the case of any other person not covered by the Office of Legal Counsel policy against indicting a sitting President, result in multiple felony charges for obstruction of justice.”

https://medium.com/@dojalumni/statem...s-8ab7691c2aa1

Moron :rofl2:
 
domer76 said:
I just told you, idiot.

Your comprehension skills suck.

Here’s what prosecutors think. 1000 of them.

“Each of us believes that the conduct of President Trump described in Special Counsel Robert Mueller’s report would, in the case of any other person not covered by the Office of Legal Counsel policy against indicting a sitting President, result in multiple felony charges for obstruction of justice.”

https://medium.com/@dojalumni/statem...s-8ab7691c2aa1

Moron :rofl2:
Click to expand...

swiftboat prosecutors for biden!
 
domer76 said:
I just told you, idiot.

Your comprehension skills suck.

Here’s what prosecutors think. 1000 of them.

“Each of us believes that the conduct of President Trump described in Special Counsel Robert Mueller’s report would, in the case of any other person not covered by the Office of Legal Counsel policy against indicting a sitting President, result in multiple felony charges for obstruction of justice.”

https://medium.com/@dojalumni/statem...s-8ab7691c2aa1

Moron :rofl2:
Click to expand...

Don’t be so gullible lol.

Clicking on the button that says ‘yes, I would indict’ is one thing, but preparing for a trial is a totally different animal. Just because someone gets indicted, it doesn’t end there, you know that, right?

Also, you predictably ignored the fact the investigation that you, AOC and the gang are so hot to charge Trump with obstructing *is itself, under investigation by a federal prosecutor!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

Put yourself in Nervous Nancy’s shoes for a minute. If there is even a one in five chance indictments come out of Barr’s ‘investigation of the investigation’ that kind of puts a damper on things. Doesn’t it??

Talk about a fricking cluster F****. Imagine Democrats being in the midst of a Senate trial where they are trying to impeach Trump for ‘obstructing’ an investigation that is tainted by corruption.

If..if..Pelosi allows an impeachment vote, it will only come after Barr’s report. Take it to the bank.
 
Darth Omar said:
Don’t be so gullible lol.

Clicking on the button that says ‘yes, I would indict’ is one thing, but preparing for a trial is a totally different animal. Just because someone gets indicted, it doesn’t end there, you know that, right?

Also, you predictably ignored the fact the investigation that you, AOC and the gang are so hot to charge Trump with obstructing *is itself, under investigation by a federal prosecutor!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

Put yourself in Nervous Nancy’s shoes for a minute. If there is even a one in five chance indictments come out of Barr’s ‘investigation of the investigation’ that kind of puts a damper on things. Doesn’t it??

Talk about a fricking cluster F****. Imagine Democrats being in the midst of a Senate trial where they are trying to impeach Trump for ‘obstructing’ an investigation that is tainted by corruption.

If..if..Pelosi allows an impeachment vote, it will only come after Barr’s report. Take it to the bank.
Click to expand...

They put their names on it, dumbfuck. And, unlike the Trump administration, were vetted.

What you can take to the bank, moron, is that the Senate cowards will not find him guilty until the House gathers sufficient evidence to even convince them. Yet, Trump continues to obstruct that process.

Don't hold your breath on the investigation of the investigators. When will the first indictments come down?

Moron :rofl2:
 
Last edited:
domer76 said:
They put their names on it, dumbfuck. And, unlike the Trump administration, were vetted.

What you can take to the bank, moron, is that the Senate cowards will not find him guilty until the House gathers sufficient evidence to even convince them. Yet, Trump continues to obstruct that process.

Don't hold your breath on the investigation of the investigators. When will the first indictments come down?

Moron :rofl2:
Click to expand...

I don’t know, you don’t know and most importantly Pelosi doesn’t know.

This isn’t debate board stuff with Pelosi. She can’t afford to be wrong like you since nobody gives a crap if your wrong. Not like you haven’t been wrong before lol. But if Pelosi gambles on Barr not finding a single person to indict—and loses, her whole party loses, bigly.

There was a reason House Democrats went postal over the ‘spy’ word and why they’d love to get rid of Barr. Because Barr has them stymied on impeachment.

They have to wait on the Barr tab.
 
Darth Omar said:
I don’t know, you don’t know and most importantly Pelosi doesn’t know.

This isn’t debate board stuff with Pelosi. She can’t afford to be wrong like you since nobody gives a crap if your wrong. Not like you haven’t been wrong before lol. But if Pelosi gambles on Barr not finding a single person to indict—and loses, her whole party loses, bigly.

There was a reason House Democrats went postal over the ‘spy’ word and why they’d love to get rid of Barr. Because Barr has them stymied on impeachment.

They have to wait on the Barr tab.
Click to expand...
They also have to wait on Bulldog Durham.

"US Attorney John Durham was tapped to determine if the government’s methods of collecting intelligence involving the 2016 Trump campaign were “lawful and appropriate,” the Associated Press reported, citing a source."

https://nypost.com/2019/05/13/william-barr-appoints-us-attorney-to-examine-origins-of-russia-probe/
 
Earl said:
They also have to wait on Bulldog Durham.

"US Attorney John Durham was tapped to determine if the government’s methods of collecting intelligence involving the 2016 Trump campaign were “lawful and appropriate,” the Associated Press reported, citing a source."

https://nypost.com/2019/05/13/william-barr-appoints-us-attorney-to-examine-origins-of-russia-probe/
Click to expand...

Yup.

I say Barr for the sake of brevity, comrade Earl. Durham will hand out the indictments *under* Barr. Durham is essentially an appointed SC. Which is exactly why Nancy and a lot of other people are nervous.

Also, Barr is such a nifty name lol. Barr tab, belly up to the Barr and etc.
 
Darth Omar said:
I don’t know, you don’t know and most importantly Pelosi doesn’t know.

This isn’t debate board stuff with Pelosi. She can’t afford to be wrong like you since nobody gives a crap if your wrong. Not like you haven’t been wrong before lol. But if Pelosi gambles on Barr not finding a single person to indict—and loses, her whole party loses, bigly.

There was a reason House Democrats went postal over the ‘spy’ word and why they’d love to get rid of Barr. Because Barr has them stymied on impeachment.

They have to wait on the Barr tab.
Click to expand...
da comrade..Trump finally got himself a real AG
 
Interesting take on the difference between direct involvement by a foreign government with "dirt" on an opponent, and the Fusion GPS Steele dossier:

"The main difference is the role of a foreign government.

"Working hand-in-hand with a foreign power for information intended to influence an election is different than hiring a private firm that then hired somebody who had been a former intelligence agent," said Karen Greenberg, director of the Center on National Security at Fordham Law.

"Everybody does opposition research," she added. "The issue here is the foreign government."

"That distinction is critical, experts told us, because a foreign government that interferes in American politics is likely to have a stake in what happens on Election Day."

https://www.politifact.com/punditfa...ndits-defended-trumps-abc-interview-and-why-/
 
Darth Omar said:
Well, he gives that appearance at least lol.

Even if it’s all a big bluff [which I suspect is NOT the case] it threw a wet blanket on Democrats Impeachment hopes.
Click to expand...
he's pissed.make no mistake. He's an institutionalist ,and he values the natural order.
not the IC leadership's abuse of power for it's own machinations
 
ThatOwlWoman said:
Interesting take on the difference between direct involvement by a foreign government with "dirt" on an opponent, and the Fusion GPS Steele dossier:

"The main difference is the role of a foreign government.

"Working hand-in-hand with a foreign power for information intended to influence an election is different than hiring a private firm that then hired somebody who had been a former intelligence agent," said Karen Greenberg, director of the Center on National Security at Fordham Law.

"Everybody does opposition research," she added. "The issue here is the foreign government."

"That distinction is critical, experts told us, because a foreign government that interferes in American politics is likely to have a stake in what happens on Election Day."

https://www.politifact.com/punditfa...ndits-defended-trumps-abc-interview-and-why-/
Click to expand...
that would be true except Steel used his contacts - da Russians _for the dossier.
It makes no difference how many times Clinton's money changed hands to get to steele
 
dukkha said:
that would be true except Steel used his contacts - da Russians _for the dossier.
It makes no difference how many times Clinton's money changed hands to get to steele
Click to expand...

So you agree that the Toadstool seeking dirt on opponents from foreign govts. is a bad thing? You were pleased that McCain turned the dossier over to the FBI?
 
Darth Omar said:
I don’t know, you don’t know and most importantly Pelosi doesn’t know.

This isn’t debate board stuff with Pelosi. She can’t afford to be wrong like you since nobody gives a crap if your wrong. Not like you haven’t been wrong before lol. But if Pelosi gambles on Barr not finding a single person to indict—and loses, her whole party loses, bigly.

There was a reason House Democrats went postal over the ‘spy’ word and why they’d love to get rid of Barr. Because Barr has them stymied on impeachment.

They have to wait on the Barr tab.
Click to expand...

Stymied? Obstructed is the appropriate word.

He’s a lying Trump toady. You guys sure are drawn to liars.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top