America under President Trump

[Hal 9000]

4 hours ago, Boges said:

So when Mueller says, in his own actual spoken words, that he wasn't allowed to charge Trump with anything and that if he believed Trump didn't commit any crimes he'd have said so in the report (which he didn't) the Trump Echo chamber can just repeat "NO COLLUSION! NO OBSTRUCTION!" And that's fine? 

Jeez. 

I think Impeachment proceedings have to proceed, not because it may actually lead to removing him from office. It has to proceed so voters that don't believe every lie coming from 45's Twitter account can see for themselves what him and his team actually did. 

You have to understand what he didn't say too.  He could've said he had substantial evidence, but wasn't allowed to charge.  He didn't because he still has no evidence, still just accusations and at worst some he said, she said statements.  If they try to impeach, I'm good with that, it'll get struck down.  It's all just politics still.

 

[Boges]

10 minutes ago, Hal 9000 said:

You have to understand what he didn't say too.  He could've said he had substantial evidence, but wasn't allowed to charge.  He didn't because he still has no evidence, still just accusations and at worst some he said, she said statements.  If they try to impeach, I'm good with that, it'll get struck down.  It's all just politics still.

He said he wasn't allowed to charge. Why would he say that if he "could charge"? 

[BubberMiley]

What would make anyone think Mueller doesn't have evidence? He is forwarding his evidence of obstruction to Congress so they can decide whether to begin impeachment proceedings, in accordance with due process under the Constitution. It's all in the report.

[bush_cheney2004]

The U.S. House always has the power to draft articles of impeachment regardless of Mueller or anything else.   Then they have to get the votes for passage and then hope for the Senate to convict.

Blaming Mueller is just another political game by Speaker Pelosi, who knows she is on shaky ground.

So go ahead....impeach...DO IT !!

 

[Carlus Magnus]

Hey, let's see your evidence.  Bring it on bitches. 

Let's lay it all out to the American people.  Make public the evidence, and every last shred of documentation from the entire investigation, let's look at all of it.   

[Carlus Magnus]

There are a lot of security concerns that come out of the Mueller Report.  Things that need to be investigated ASAP.  Mueller said Misfud is a Russian Agent.  If that's true, we have very serious problems.

Quote

Mifsud has traveled many times to Russia and has contacts with Russian academics, his closest public ties are to Western governments, politicians, and institutions, including the CIA, FBI and British intelligence services. One of Mifsud’s jobs has been to train diplomats, police officers, and intelligence officers at schools in London and Rome, where he lived and worked over the last dozen years.

If Mifsud truly is a Russian agent – which is key to the collusion narrative – he could prove to be one of the most promiscuous spies in modern history. Western intelligence agencies and European politicians would have to spend the next few decades repairing the damage he did to global security by infiltrating key institutions and personnel. As of yet, however, there is no indication that any intelligence service has begun the embarrassing, but highly important, assessment of how it was penetrated and how it can re-fortify the vulnerabilities that Mifsud may have exposed. There has been no public effort to arrest him.

https://www.realclearinvestigations.com/articles/2018/05/26/the_maltese_phantom_of_russiagate_.html

 

[Hal 9000]

2 hours ago, BubberMiley said:

What would make anyone think Mueller doesn't have evidence? He is forwarding his evidence of obstruction to Congress so they can decide whether to begin impeachment proceedings, in accordance with due process under the Constitution. It's all in the report.

Because he didn't lay out evidence, what he gave is a list of "He said...he saids"...you know differing opinions of conversations, ".  That's not evidence, and certainly not proof.

[BubberMiley]

56 minutes ago, Hal 9000 said:

Because he didn't lay out evidence, what he gave is a list of "He said...he saids"...you know differing opinions of conversations, ".  That's not evidence, and certainly not proof.

You obviously aren't paying very close attention. It's hard to argue with someone who doesn't have a basic idea of the facts and refuses to learn them.

[bush_cheney2004]

1 minute ago, BubberMiley said:

You obviously aren't paying very close attention. It's hard to argue with someone who doesn't have a basic idea of the facts and refuses to learn them.

 

Then why hasn't Trump been impeached yet ?

What are the Democrats waiting for ?

Do it...so Trump can win again.

[Shady]

1 hour ago, Hal 9000 said:

Because he didn't lay out evidence, what he gave is a list of "He said...he saids"...you know differing opinions of conversations, ".  That's not evidence, and certainly not proof.

Exactly.  Otherwise he would’ve charged Trump with a crime.  But he didn’t.

[BubberMiley]

48 minutes ago, Shady said:

Exactly.  Otherwise he would’ve charged Trump with a crime.  But he didn’t.

He and Barr believe they aren't allowed to do that under the Constitution. Congress must first impeach. If you had any idea of what you're talking about, you'd know that. It's kind of funny that you still don't, even after it's been explained to you several times. It's almost like you wish that weren't true so that you could have a leg to stand on.

Edited May 31, 2019 by BubberMiley

[BubberMiley]

1 hour ago, bush_cheney2004 said:

 

Then why hasn't Trump been impeached yet ?

What are the Democrats waiting for ?

Do it...so Trump can win again.

You think I'm the Democrats?

[bush_cheney2004]

1 minute ago, BubberMiley said:

You think I'm the Democrats?

 

Of course not, but you sure as hell want to impeach Trump.

[BubberMiley]

Oh, you secretly do too. You're just trying to save face until they do.

[Hal 9000]

1 hour ago, BubberMiley said:

Oh, you secretly do too. You're just trying to save face until they do.

Don't you think that if they had any evidence against Trump, any evidence at all, they'd all be shouting it from every news tower.  After 2 years and countless investigators, they have nothing, and instead of just saying that, Mueller says we cant charge a sitting president.  

Here's the plan;  Start Impeachment proceeding regardless of evidence, when Trump testifies and says something different than Cohen, McGahn...whoever, lay charges of perjury.

[bush_cheney2004]

For those keeping score in Canada:

Quote

NEWT GINGRICH: I always tell people if you go back and look at Ken Starr's report, I went back and pulled it up because I had that exact question, it was a long time ago. Ken Starr issued a report that had 11 counts on which [Clinton] was guilty. Five of them are obstruction. This count, guilty, this count guilty.

If Mueller had issued a report that said Donald Trump was guilty on 11 counts, there would be an impeachment effort. it would probably fail because the Senate would not vote to [convict]. Just as the House impeached but the Senate refused to convict with Clinton, which might have been the correct constitutional solution.

But in Clinton's case, he was guilty enough that he lost his license to practice law in Arkansas, he had to pay a fine, he was clearly guilty. In Trump's case, Mueller came back and said there is nothing there you can take him to court on. There's a pretty big gap here.

https://www.realclearpolitics.com/video/2019/05/26/newt_gingrich_the_difference_between_trump_and_clintons_impeachment_is_starr_report_said_clinton_was_guilty.html
 

 

[BubberMiley]

But Newt doesn't note the difference is that Mueller believes he lacks the jurisdiction to prosecute.

[bush_cheney2004]

2 minutes ago, BubberMiley said:

But Newt doesn't note the difference is that Mueller believes he lacks the jurisdiction to prosecute.

 

Didn't seem to bother Ken Starr...maybe because there was video evidence of Clinton lying under oath.

If only Trump would cooperate and provide videos of collusion and obstruction !

[BubberMiley]

Ken Starr didn't have a puppet of the president running the DOJ; Mueller didn't have a president with the balls to testify under oath. 

[bush_cheney2004]

Bill Clinton had to testify because of a separate sexual harassment lawsuit...and he lied under oath....Trump didn't.

Mueller did his job and now the Democrats don't have nearly as much impeachment meat on the bone.

 

[BubberMiley]

You shouldn't allow yourself to be so easily misled. Here's an article by Ken Starr himself explaining how it is DOJ policy to not indict a sitting president.

https://www.theatlantic.com/ideas/archive/2019/03/ken-starr-muellers-report-shouldnt-go-congress/585577/

[bush_cheney2004]

1 minute ago, BubberMiley said:

You shouldn't allow yourself to be so easily misled. Here's an article by Ken Starr himself explaining how it is DOJ policy to not indict a sitting president.

https://www.theatlantic.com/ideas/archive/2019/03/ken-starr-muellers-report-shouldnt-go-congress/585577/

 

Irrelevant....Bill Clinton was not indicted by Ken Starr...Starr only provided the grounds (evidence) for 11 possible counts for impeachment.

Mueller did not provide this level of evidence against Trump, because he didn't find it.

 

 

[BubberMiley]

At least you desperately hope he didn't. You haven't a clue.

[Hal 9000]

12 hours ago, BubberMiley said:

But Newt doesn't note the difference is that Mueller believes he lacks the jurisdiction to prosecute.

You have completely put away the thought that there is no evidence of guilt and are now buying into the "can't prosecute" narrative.  Wow, you're pretty malleable, but I guess that's what Mueller and the Dems expect. 

[BubberMiley]

8 minutes ago, Hal 9000 said:

You have completely put away the thought that there is no evidence of guilt and are now buying into the "can't prosecute" narrative.  Wow, you're pretty malleable, but I guess that's what Mueller and the Dems expect. 

Are you saying Bill Barr is lying? Do you even know who Bill Barr is?