OftenWrong

It satisfies the public that there is this thing called real justice. Strictly punitive measures are ok.

For my friend @Omni

There's no question it was not a crime. Comey knows full well what he's allowed to say, and gave a clear answer. You are free to believe in unicorns if you wish.

And which liberals are constantly sniffing

Legal minds do not support the notion that asking a question is a crime. Or for that matter, firing someone.

So-called "Breaking news".

Yes and Unicorns could have very well been real. Anything's possible, in the fantasy world of a disturbed liberal mind.

Sometimes the question of punishment does not hinge only on the specific crime itself, but whether it shocks the conscience of the public. This is what terrorism tries to do. Hate crimes seem worse to me because they are premeditated acts against anonymous persons as opposed to acts of passion or for personal gain. The kind of person capable of doing this is a highly sociopathic criminal. Hate crimes also encourage others of similar mentality to do likewise, both individuals and in groups.

No crime was committed in asking.

Asking question is called "Obstruction of justice"? Nonsense.

Yes, because I miss those long late-night chats with Charles, into the wee hours of the morning.

I guess that gives you reason for hope then. Hang in there, it'll be alright.

I can't find any evidence that asking the question is illegal. Do you have evidence?

"Best hockey player in the world" - Bwahaha

To get him on record as saying "No, you are not under investigation".

Thursday, May 11, 2017 James Clapper, the former Director of National Intelligence, told a Senate Judiciary subcommittee on Monday that he still has not seen any evidence of any kind of collusion between the Trump campaign and Russian foreign nationals. Sen. Lindsey Graham, R-N.C., asked if Clapper's prior statement was correct, when he said on NBC that there was "no evidence' of collusion between the Trump campaign and Russian officials. When asked if that is still accurate, Clapper said Monday, "it is." http://www.washingtonexaminer.com/james-clapper-still-no-evidence-of-any-russian-collusion-with-trump-campaign/article/2622452 It makes no difference what I think the reason was. It is pure speculation. But I doubt it was because Donald Trump was afraid of something coming out of it. By now they should have found something. Either there is evidence, or there is not. People like Van Jones et al are all speculating and doing so for very specific reasons. I don't react to propaganda. Fact is, the people close to the investigation have nothing, as James Clapper makes clear. What I think however is that liberals are looking more and more foolish every day. If they believe that what they are doing with this hysterical smear campaign we are seeing is going to be effective, IE convince the public that Trump is a train wreck in every way, they are likely in for a big surprise. They underestimate the capability of the public to perceive when they are being taken for a ride. If they don't change the message and start coming up with criticisms that are substantial, it will backfire in their faces, much like during the election.

It seems they've had enough time to determine if any collusion occurred. Up till now they have found nothing.

That is true, and therefore not likely the reason he was fired.

Your uniqueness is definitely showing!

I thought you would like that. There might have been other means to dismantle slavery in the US without going to war, though they would have taken longer.

Actually Trump's fascination with Jackson goes back before this. President Donald J. Trump’s admiration for Andrew Jackson is well known. He hung his portrait in the Oval Office, and last spring criticized the Treasury Department’s decision to take Jackson off the front of the $20 bill. And on Wednesday (Mar 15 2017), Jackson’s 250th birthday, Mr. Trump visited the Hermitage, Jackson’s home in Nashville, where he laid a wreath at his tomb and paid tribute to Old Hickory’s populism. A History of Presidents, Mostly Democrats, Paying Homage to Jackson

The solution is to allow slavery to continue.

After reading some of that link, especially the part where Andrew Jackson mentions civil war, I suggest that Donald Trump knows more about him than the average dumbo.

Man, I am no expert on US history. Years ago I read a few pages of some book on the civil war. Big book, I did not finish it. But one thing I recall, threats of secession were being made by various states in the years leading up to the war. The war did not happen just suddenly, it was the final step after years of unresolved conflict. I suppose Donald Trump felt that the right person could have resolved those conflicts before a civil war broke out. Here's a link about Jackson and secession. http://www.civilwarcauses.org/jackson.htm Andrew Jackson is the only President, other than Lincoln, to have to deal with a serious threat of secession (as well as nullification), so his reaction, nearly 30 years prior to the Civil War is illuminating. We present here two documents: - A private letter written by Jackson to Rev. A.J. Crawford - President Jackson's Proclamation on Nullification. Sounds interesting. A quick read reveals Jackson's concern about the threat of civil war. I have had a laborious task here; but nullification is dead, and its actors and courtiers will only be remembered by the people to be execrated for their wicked designs to sever and destroy the only good government on the globe, and that prosperity and happiness we enjoy over every other portion of the world. Haman's gallows ought to be the fate of all such ambitious men, who would involve the country in civil war, and all the evils in its train, that they might reign and ride on its whirlwinds, and direct the storm.