So what exactly isn't acceptable to Republicans? It's Important to know your limits.

Mueller started in May. Not exactly 2 years . More like 1. And is the concept that an investigator is not releasing what he has found tough for you? Perhaps you should email Mueller and have his send his findings directly to you. Truth is no leaks . Nobody knows what Mueller has found. Except you. Somehow you know he has found nothing,.

So if no one knows what Mueller has found; this thread is based on a lot of lies and speculation right?

I love it how lying leftists tell us we don't know if he is NOT guilty, while claiming it is a matter of days until he is brought to justice. Moron.
 
The American conservatives of this board would allow Donald Trump to shit in their mouths...and defend his right to do it.

Wrong; but you leftist liars let Obama shit in yours and tell everyone how good it tasted.

He tells us what would NOT bother them, namely that he could shoot someone to death on Fifth Avenue.

It was a figure of speech; which whiny little snowflakes love to take literally because they love to lie and bullshit.

Nothing will do the job for the Kool Aid addicts.

Irony.
 
giphy.gif

Not an idiot TD. You were unanimously voted biggest moron at JPP.
Give yourself some credit.

a moron is then the highest level of intelligence for someone who is mentally retarded, thus considered as being mildly mentally retarded. Specifically, those who have an IQ between 0 and 25 are idiots; IQs between 26 and 50 are considered imbeciles; and those who have an IQ between 51 and 70 are considered morons.
 
In other words, no you'll still be the same loud mouthed nigger you've always been.

and this is who the republicans here come to the defense of

just keep stabbing that republican party to death huh


you are like dinosaurs sinking in a tar pit


you keep baying and squealing that there is no tar and that you are not dinosaurs while your mouths are filling with tar and you continue to sink


gulp the tar


keep on stabbing

its all you can see to do at this point
 
I don't think that is a settled question. Legal scholars disagree. People did not think a president could be sued in a civil case until the courts ruled he could in the Paula Jones case. If they had settled that case when it arose it would not have come up during his presidency and he would not have committed perjury.

Of course it would not be "settled" as such a case has never occurred. I am just giving the more common answer.
 
In the last few days Trump has been saying his people won't "flip", over and over.
Not exactly consistent with someone who claims he did nothing wrong, is it.

Yet, there are no indictments and no criminal charges. Why is that, if as you want to infer, he is guilty as hell?

So you lying leftists have given up the collusion angle for good now? :rofl2:
 
and this is who the republicans here come to the defense of

just keep stabbing that republican party to death huh


you are like dinosaurs sinking in a tar pit


you keep baying and squealing that there is no tar and that you are not dinosaurs while your mouths are filling with tar and you continue to sink


gulp the tar


keep on stabbing

its all you can see to do at this point

I call it like it is. If you don't want to see the truth, that's your problem.
 
What are the five counts?

Well there are at least five instances of Trump attempting to thwart or block the investigations into his administration.
I'm so glad you asked.
Trying to protect Flynn by cajoling Comey into dropping the investigation into his lies and misdealings. On Feb. 14, Trump directed several other officials to leave the Oval Office so he could speak privately with Comey. He then told Comey to “let this go,” referring to the investigation of Michael Flynn, who had resigned the previous day as Trump’s national security adviser.
During a dinner at the White House on Jan. 27, 2017, Trump asked for a pledge of “loyalty” from James Comey, then the F.B.I. director, who was overseeing the investigation of the Trump campaign.
In March and April, Trump told Comey in phone calls that he wanted Comey to lift the ”cloud” of the investigation.
The firing of Comey himself, which Trump admitted, several times, that that action was taken to end the FBI investigation into his administration.
He ordered top White House lawyers to stop Attorney General Jeff Sessions from recusing himself from the Russia investigation. Trump had expected his top law enforcement official to protect him from the investigation. The fact that Trump attempted to influence the way the Justice Department operates adds more evidence showing the president was attempting to obstruct justice.
In March 2017, Trump asked the director of national intelligence, Dan Coats, and the director of the National Security Agency, Mike Rogers, to deny publicly the existence of any evidence of collusion between the Trump campaign and Russia. The conversation was recorded in a memo.
Trump was involved in an effort to cover up the motive for his son Donald Trump Jr.'s arranged meeting with a Kremlin-connected Russian lawyer during the campaign. The president helped draft a misleading statement about the June 2016 meeting at Trump Tower, which was attended by Trump Jr. and other campaign team members.
On May 17, shortly after hearing that the Justice Department had appointed Mueller to take over the Russia investigation, Trump berated Jeff Sessions, the attorney general. The appointment had caused the administration again to lose control over the investigation, and Trump accused Sessions of “disloyalty.”
In June, Trump explored several options to retake control. At one point, he ordered the firing of Mueller, before the White House counsel resisted.
On July 26, in a tweet, Trump called for the firing of Andrew McCabe, the F.B.I.’s deputy director, a potential corroborating witness for Comey’s conversations with Trump. The tweet was part of Trump’s efforts, discussed with White House aides, to discredit F.B.I. officials.
Trump repeatedly made untruthful statements about American intelligence agencies’ conclusions regarding Russia’s role in the 2016 election.
Whether Mueller decides to charge them seperately or lump them all under one umbrella as conspiracy to obstruct justice is up to him as the prosecutor.
I tend to think that he will list them separately as was done in Nixon's case of obstruction.
A list has more impact and demonstrates at the outset a "pattern of intent to obstruct justice".
 
Back
Top