• Friendly reminder: The politics section is a place where a lot of differing opinions are raised. You may not like what you read here but it is someone's opinion. As long as the debate is respectful you are free to debate freely. Also, the views and opinions expressed by forum members may not necessarily reflect those of GBAtemp. Messages that the staff consider offensive or inflammatory may be removed in line with existing forum terms and conditions.

Mueller personally told AG that he had mischaracterized the investigation's findings

  • Thread starter Xzi
  • Start date
  • Views 10,739
  • Replies 133
  • Likes 1

kevin corms

Well-Known Member
Member
Joined
Feb 21, 2015
Messages
1,014
Trophies
0
Age
40
XP
1,770
Country
Canada
There is no reason to think either one of the Clinton's is going to prison. On the other hand, the Mueller Report outlines numerous instances where Trump criminally obstructed justice, and that's ignoring the other issues of insurance fraud, bank fraud, campaign finance violations, etc.

no reason? are you kidding me? The Clintons did all that plus much more, god they have been caught laundering money through their foundation. Also, Clinton and Podesta are directly linked to Epstein. Im not asking you to like Trump, he can go to jail too for all I care, but please stop getting so tribal you are blind to what Clinton and the DNC have done. https://www.washingtonpost.com/worl...3470754bbb9_story.html?utm_term=.165539b614cd

and the washington post is a left leaning news source. Trump won because millions voted against Hillary, they would rather a bumbling moron than her.
 
Last edited by kevin corms,

Lacius

Well-Known Member
Member
Joined
May 11, 2008
Messages
18,099
Trophies
3
XP
18,338
Country
United States
they have been caught laundering money through their foundation.
  1. They have not.
  2. You're confusing the Clinton Foundation with the Trump Foundation. The Trump Foundation was actually involved with numerous illegal activities and was forced to shut down because of it. Donald Trump could still be charged.

Also, Clinton and Podesta are directly linked to Epstein.
  1. Trump is also directly linked to Epstein.
  2. Having been associated with Epstein isn't evidence of another person's guilt.

you are blind to what Clinton and the DNC have done.
There is nothing scandalous, nor criminal, about anyone hiring Fusion GPS to do opposition research on Trump. What's your point?

Trump won because millions voted against Hillary, they would rather a bumbling moron than her.
  1. Clinton received almost 3 million more votes than Trump.
  2. Trump won in part because of a broken Electoral College system that prioritized an arbitrary set of 78,000 votes over 3 million votes.
  3. Trump won in part because of Russian interference in the election.
There are lots of other reasons that led to Clinton losing the election (running a bad campaign, certain weaknesses she had as a political candidate, etc.), but the above three factors cannot be overstated.
 
Last edited by Lacius,
  • Like
Reactions: IncredulousP

kevin corms

Well-Known Member
Member
Joined
Feb 21, 2015
Messages
1,014
Trophies
0
Age
40
XP
1,770
Country
Canada
  1. They have not.
  2. You're confusing the Clinton Foundation with the Trump Foundation. The Trump Foundation was actually involved with numerous illegal activities and was forced to shut down because of it. Donald Trump could still be charged.

  1. Trump is also directly linked to Epstein.
  2. Having been associated with Epstein isn't evidence of another person's guilt.


There is nothing scandalous, nor criminal, about anyone hiring Fusion GPS to do opposition research on Trump. What's your point?


  1. Clinton received almost 3 million more votes than Trump.
  2. Trump won in part because of a broken Electoral College system that prioritized an arbitrary set of 78,000 votes over 3 million votes.
  3. Trump won in part because of Russian interference in the election.
There are lots of other reasons that led to Clinton losing the election (running a bad campaign, certain weaknesses she had as a political candidate, etc.), but the above three factors cannot be overstated.
So your just going to double down with blind tribalism, guess Im wasting my time if you are going to just ignore facts.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Deleted User

Lacius

Well-Known Member
Member
Joined
May 11, 2008
Messages
18,099
Trophies
3
XP
18,338
Country
United States
So your just going to double down with blind tribalism, guess Im wasting my time if you are going to just ignore facts.
I'm communicating the facts as I understand them. There is no "blind tribalism." For example, I fully acknowledged some of the shortcomings of the 2016 Clinton campaign.

If I made any mistakes, feel free to point out what I got wrong.
 

kevin corms

Well-Known Member
Member
Joined
Feb 21, 2015
Messages
1,014
Trophies
0
Age
40
XP
1,770
Country
Canada
I'm communicating the facts as I understand them. There is no "blind tribalism." For example, I fully acknowledged some of the shortcomings of the 2016 Clinton campaign.
no you didnt fully acknowledge anything, you are just like the people who cant see how the gop does any wrong. You picked a side and you think they are the good guys, just admit it. Also, pro tip... dont use google since they are biased themselves, duckduckgo is a good alternative. Its sad that google has so much control over information.
 
Last edited by kevin corms,

Lacius

Well-Known Member
Member
Joined
May 11, 2008
Messages
18,099
Trophies
3
XP
18,338
Country
United States
For example, I fully acknowledged some of the shortcomings of the 2016 Clinton campaign.
no you didnt fully acknowledge anything
There are lots of other reasons that led to Clinton losing the election (running a bad campaign, certain weaknesses she had as a political candidate, etc.), but the above three factors cannot be overstated.
We are dealing with objective facts here, and there's a record. If you're going to make things up, you're going to look ridiculous.

you are just like the people who cant see how the gop does any wrong.
I can be very critical of certain Democratic politicians and the Democratic Party in general. Don't misrepresent my positions.

You picked a side and you think they are the good guys, just admit it.
I have a political ideology that aligns most closely with the Democratic Party, but that has nothing to do with the facts of what we're discussing. You were wrong about some of the things you said, and I showed you how. My political ideology is irrelevant. I also don't view politics as "good guys" and "bad guys." If a Democratic politician says or does something foolish, I'm one of the first people to criticize him or her.

Also, pro tip... dont use google since they are biased themselves, duckduckgo is a good alternative. Its sad that google has so much control over information.
  1. Regarding our conversation, I didn't have to use a search engine.
  2. You don't know which search engine I use.
  3. Google is not biased, not that it's relevant to the conversation, and I'm unlikely to get dragged into a conversation about Google.
 
Last edited by Lacius,
  • Like
Reactions: IncredulousP

kevin corms

Well-Known Member
Member
Joined
Feb 21, 2015
Messages
1,014
Trophies
0
Age
40
XP
1,770
Country
Canada
We are dealing with objective facts here, and there's a record. If you're going to make things up, you're going to look ridiculous.


I can be very critical of certain Democratic politicians and the Democratic Party in general. Don't misrepresent my positions.


I have a political ideology that aligns most closely with the Democratic Party, but that has nothing to do with the facts of what we're discussing. You were wrong about some of the things you said, and I showed you how. My political ideology is irrelevant. I also don't view politics as "good guys" and "bad guys." If a Democratic politician says or does something foolish, I'm one of the first people to criticize him or her.


  1. Regarding our conversation, I didn't have to use a search engine.
  2. You don't know which search engine I use.
  3. Google is not biased, not that it's relevant to the conversation, and I'm unlikely to get dragged into a conversation about Google.


Well Im wasting my time here, no matter what I say or what I link you wont change your mind. You're tribal and you dont even think you are. The media can do that to people. Just like in Russia, the people love Putin.
 

Lacius

Well-Known Member
Member
Joined
May 11, 2008
Messages
18,099
Trophies
3
XP
18,338
Country
United States
Well Im wasting my time here, no matter what I say or what I link you wont change your mind. You're tribal and you dont even think you are. The media can do that to people. Just like in Russia, the people love Putin.
If you're just going to shout "tribalism" instead of actually posting a substantive response to the facts I've laid out, then you shouldn't expect to change anybody's mind about anything.
 
  • Like
Reactions: IncredulousP

SG854

Hail Mary
Member
Joined
Feb 17, 2017
Messages
5,215
Trophies
1
Location
N/A
XP
8,104
Country
Congo, Republic of the
@Chary Mueller made himself look like an old man who has no idea what’s going on. And guess what, the Democrats after the Mueller thing announced more investigations. They don’t want to let this go. Everybody is sick of it. No one cares about this dumb investigation anymore. Ratings were low for this.



@Taleweaver

Saying his investigation wasn't successfully impeded isn't the same thing as saying criminal obstruction of justice didn't occur. He also said during his testimony that unsuccessful obstruction of justice is still obstruction of justice.

Trump criminally obstructed justice. Mueller could have evidence of it (he did), and he still couldn't say Trump obstructed justice because of the OLC opinion that a sitting president cannot be indicted. Mueller also said that he would have said so if he could exonerate Trump, but he couldn't do that. Finally, Mueller said that the president could be indicted after leaving office.


Mueller said it wasn't within the scope of his investigation, so he didn't do it, and unfortunately, Mueller is correct. That means it's the job of another investigation (e.g. Congress) to look into Trump's finances.

The "big smoking gun" wasn't that he tried to stop Mueller from looking into his Trump's finances. The "smoking gun" was the acts of obstruction of justice explained in the Mueller Report.


It's a big report, and he's not the only author. He also seemed to know the report pretty well, aside from specific page numbers.


Regarding the scope of the Mueller investigation, there was no evidence of "collusion" between Russia and the Trump campaign. However, the scope of this specific investigation was relatively narrow and doesn't extend to counterintelligence investigation(s) that apparently might still be going on.


  1. Assuming what he said was factually untrue, there's a difference between a "lie" and being wrong.
  2. There's a difference between legal jargon and colloquial uses. I didn't see a contradiction.


Regardless of whether or not you think Mueller had the power to exonerate anybody, it was Mueller's intention to do so if he could. The problem for Trump and the Republicans is that Mueller not exonerating the President has nothing to do with his alleged lack of power to do so. It was because the evidence didn't exonerate him, which is damning in the context of the aforementioned OLC opinion.
How did he not contradict himself when he answered questions opposite of what the report says about colloquial and legal use. He even says he chooses his words carefully. So either he lied when they questioned him or he lied in his report.

Him having multiple people working on the report is no excuse for him not knowing what’s in his own report. It’s called the Mueller report. He is the head guy in charge of this. If the rest of world read the report what the hell was he doing all these months after the report was released. He did not have a good idea of what’s in his own report. Since he’s the face of this investigation it looks bad for him.





Our legal justice system does not run on exoneration. It’s not guilty until proven innocent, it’s innocent until proven guilty. Only God has the power to Exonerate. It’s not whether I think he has the power to exonerate, no one does. That’s not how our legal system runs. Because then every single case then will say not exonerated, for me, for you, for other people. It’s like me saying, “you raped someone, but no evidence has been found to establish that. But you are not exonerated though.” That’s ridiculous in an innocent until proven guilty system.


Mueller was caught lying about exoneration. No one has that power, not Mueller, not the attorney General, no one, period. Exoneration is not a legal thing. It’s no where in legal books. It was just pure propaganda to say that to trick people. And it was a successful propaganda because people latched on to those words.



And Turner did a good job making Muller look like an idiot pointing out the exoneration part, because it’s not hard to make someone look like an idiot when they are lying.


Turner even pointed out that exoneration isn’t a legal term yet Mueller put it in the report going to the Attorney General. Why would he put it in there if Barr knows he can’t exonerate him, and Mueller knows he himself can’t exonerate him. But that’s the whole story in the U.S., he wasn’t exonerated. No one watches him get humiliated when they caught him lying.


And people started questioning his mental health, saying he might have dementia because of how badly he answered. But there’s excellent videos from Body Language Ghost pointing out he does not show signs of dementia. When he first walks in he’s completely normal shaking people’s hand not confused or lost. When he reads from a paper he reads it just fine without stumbling. So that throws dementia out the window.

She also has other videos pointing here and here that his body language shows he’s lying. From the tension building up in him, to lip movement, body posture, and how he reacts when he’s being questioned. He’s flat out lying and doesn’t have dementia.



Don’t play these word games with yourself obscuring the reality of this situation to bullshit yourself, desperately trying to salvage anything you can from this investigation. If after you watched the video with Turner and still use the exoneration argument then you are an idiot, plain and simple.



--------------------- MERGED ---------------------------

i feel like you might be underestimating the moral bankruptcy of the political right in your country, as much as you overestimate your peoples ability to vote in their own best interests.

--------------------- MERGED ---------------------------




did you just copy and paste all of this nonsense straight from trumps twitter?
No I didn’t copy it from Trumps Twitter no one has the power to exonerate in the U.S., it’s an innocent until proven guilty system.
 
Last edited by SG854,

Josshy0125

Banned!
Banned
Joined
Jun 16, 2019
Messages
370
Trophies
0
Age
37
XP
753
Country
United Kingdom
In his own link Xzi gave us it says in 2 different paragraphs that Mueller found Barrs summary to be accurate. He just wanted better context provided that is all. I pointed this out in another thread but I guess he’s ignoring that.


I’m waiting for them to get nothing out of Mueller then afterwards learn he and Barr have been good friends for years and accuse him of teaming up with Barr. I already heard them accuse Mueller of being a Republican and a Puppet of Russia so i’m not too far off.


The whole Barr hearing was just bad. They are trying to get him on this summary debacle. Complaining that his summary hiding something, but we have access to the 448 page Mueller Report now, so how can Barr mislead us if we can read the report ourselves and read Mueller’s words is beyond me. And would be stupid if Barr did hide something because of the eventual release of the Report which Mueller assisted in redacting.



It’s just more games which i’m already tired of at this point.
The mental gymnastics and blatant sheeping here is nuts. If you dont have an IQ of under 10, you would know that orange guy AND barr are liars and are NOT the good guys here.
 

Lacius

Well-Known Member
Member
Joined
May 11, 2008
Messages
18,099
Trophies
3
XP
18,338
Country
United States
it’s an innocent until proven guilty system.
Trump has been demonstrated to be guilty. The reason he hasn't been charged is because of the OLC opinion that a sitting president cannot be charged with a crime while president.

Everything else in your post only serves as a distraction from this fact.
 

Josshy0125

Banned!
Banned
Joined
Jun 16, 2019
Messages
370
Trophies
0
Age
37
XP
753
Country
United Kingdom
Trump has been demonstrated to be guilty. The reason he hasn't been charged is because of the OLC opinion that a sitting president cannot be charged with a crime while president.

Everything else in your post only serves as a distraction from this fact.
Dont bother. They wont understand fact or logic if it hit them right in their face. Its mental gymnastics from a blind-follower, probably because he likes guns or some shit. Theyre using irrelevant sidenotes to try and argue their point and are failing miserably. Theyre clearly a blind Trump supporter...
 

Taleweaver

Storywriter
Member
Joined
Dec 23, 2009
Messages
8,685
Trophies
2
Age
43
Location
Belgium
XP
8,066
Country
Belgium
How did he not contradict himself when he answered questions opposite of what the report says about colloquial and legal use. He even says he chooses his words carefully. So either he lied when they questioned him or he lied in his report.

Him having multiple people working on the report is no excuse for him not knowing what’s in his own report. It’s called the Mueller report. He is the head guy in charge of this. If the rest of world read the report what the hell was he doing all these months after the report was released. He did not have a good idea of what’s in his own report. Since he’s the face of this investigation it looks bad for him.
There's a third possibility : neither happened and that conclusion is spoonfed to you by reporters having their own agenda. This isn't new... Is just that the quality of these journalists are getting dumber.

One example :
Numerous Trump tweets: total exoneration by Mueller. Wheee!
Mueller: if that were the case, we would have mentioned it.
Republican: I have a whole slew of legal books here. Exoneration is not a legal term, is it?
Mueller: I'll pass on that one
Me: wait... So Republicans providing proof that Trump is full of shit is somehow an argument AGAINST the investigation? :wacko:
 
D

Deleted User

Guest
Guys your just being hateful now!
Instead of bringing up evidence to support your beliefs, your just saying,"Wow this guys an idiot pffft there so stupid, they dont get lOgiC and faCtS!!"
Is it possible that politics have filled you guys with hatred for your fellow man?? Please, just love eachother and move on! Were not a threat to you, or anybody for that matter. Instead of asking us what we believe you say "This guy's a Trump puppet and he hates the truth" and when we object it's just "NO UR LYING! u do not noe de wae!" and nothing get's done. nothing is proven. The only thing that happens is that you and me start hating eachother. It's not a battle.
 

Taleweaver

Storywriter
Member
Joined
Dec 23, 2009
Messages
8,685
Trophies
2
Age
43
Location
Belgium
XP
8,066
Country
Belgium
Guys your just being hateful now!
Instead of bringing up evidence to support your beliefs, your just saying,"Wow this guys an idiot pffft there so stupid, they dont get lOgiC and faCtS!!"
Is it possible that politics have filled you guys with hatred for your fellow man?? Please, just love eachother and move on! Were not a threat to you, or anybody for that matter. Instead of asking us what we believe you say "This guy's a Trump puppet and he hates the truth" and when we object it's just "NO UR LYING! u do not noe de wae!" and nothing get's done. nothing is proven. The only thing that happens is that you and me start hating eachother. It's not a battle.
*sigh*

What do you expect, really? Trump is living on controversy. At the start of his presidency, he said he'd be there for all Americans. He also said that he had the greatest show up of people on the inauguration day ever. The journalists who were there scratched their head and said (okay: wrote) "erm...no. that part isn't true". Rather than admit being wrong* he started a personal war against the press. And America split into two groups: those who believe the news, and those who believe Donald Trump. Of course Donald Trump believes fox news, so it's not like only the conspiracy theorists believe him, but it is true that since then, democrats and republicans have done nothing but drift further away from each other.

You're still relatively new on gbatemp, but believe me: there have been discussions. We've brought up evidence, and for the most part we've not stepped into personal territory. then again, it gets pretty tiresome after a while. Things went back and fo..erm...were being deflected all the time.

A: hey! Michael Flynn conspired with Russians. Wasn't he a major player in Trump's team?
B: that's not true! It was all pretty legal, and besides: it's not like that means Trump has done anything.
A: okay...Flynn is found guilty. Oh, and Donald's son was on that meeting as well.
B: that doesn't mean anything. There's no need to investigate.
A: erm...yes, there is? There are traces of interference and collusion everywhere. On a daily basis from Trump's own twitter account, no less!
B: that investigation is a witch hunt that is a waste of tax dollars!
A: sorry: not true. That "witch hunt" got convictions and fines to the point where it far more than payed for itself. here are some parts of the testimony of Michael Cohen.
B: that guy's a rat! He shouldn't tell anything to the general public.
A: ...and here he is, holding a cheque that proves Trump had conflicting Russian interests while running for president.
B: I want to have a source. Where's your source?
A: be patient. it's all in this report...that Barr needs to release...somewhere this decade.
B: that report exonerates the president because he says so!
A: despite the delays and censoring, it turns out that there was massive tampering with the election and a lot of obstruction of justice. That's not even CLOSE to exoneration.
B: then why does the investigator say so?
A: here's the investigator himself saying that he DIDN'T say that.
B: *sigh* are you STILL going on with this? No, I didn't read the report. I want someone to read it for me.
A: here's plenty of press that...
B: not those guys. They hate Trump because Trump calls them fake.
A: okay, here's the main investigator, alive and well. Happy?
B: I don't like how he looks on television!



So in case it's not clear: I disagree. This is a freaking battle. The denial of there being a battle is just part of it. In truth, you probably know damn well there's plenty of proof and witnesses and it's not exactly hidden information either. Just get him impeached and properly trialed for it already.





*something many leaders have trouble with, but absolutely not to the degree that simple facts are ignored
 
D

Deleted User

Guest
*sigh*

What do you expect, really? Trump is living on controversy. At the start of his presidency, he said he'd be there for all Americans. He also said that he had the greatest show up of people on the inauguration day ever. The journalists who were there scratched their head and said (okay: wrote) "erm...no. that part isn't true". Rather than admit being wrong* he started a personal war against the press. And America split into two groups: those who believe the news, and those who believe Donald Trump. Of course Donald Trump believes fox news, so it's not like only the conspiracy theorists believe him, but it is true that since then, democrats and republicans have done nothing but drift further away from each other.

You're still relatively new on gbatemp, but believe me: there have been discussions. We've brought up evidence, and for the most part we've not stepped into personal territory. then again, it gets pretty tiresome after a while. Things went back and fo..erm...were being deflected all the time.

A: hey! Michael Flynn conspired with Russians. Wasn't he a major player in Trump's team?
B: that's not true! It was all pretty legal, and besides: it's not like that means Trump has done anything.
A: okay...Flynn is found guilty. Oh, and Donald's son was on that meeting as well.
B: that doesn't mean anything. There's no need to investigate.
A: erm...yes, there is? There are traces of interference and collusion everywhere. On a daily basis from Trump's own twitter account, no less!
B: that investigation is a witch hunt that is a waste of tax dollars!
A: sorry: not true. That "witch hunt" got convictions and fines to the point where it far more than payed for itself. here are some parts of the testimony of Michael Cohen.
B: that guy's a rat! He shouldn't tell anything to the general public.
A: ...and here he is, holding a cheque that proves Trump had conflicting Russian interests while running for president.
B: I want to have a source. Where's your source?
A: be patient. it's all in this report...that Barr needs to release...somewhere this decade.
B: that report exonerates the president because he says so!
A: despite the delays and censoring, it turns out that there was massive tampering with the election and a lot of obstruction of justice. That's not even CLOSE to exoneration.
B: then why does the investigator say so?
A: here's the investigator himself saying that he DIDN'T say that.
B: *sigh* are you STILL going on with this? No, I didn't read the report. I want someone to read it for me.
A: here's plenty of press that...
B: not those guys. They hate Trump because Trump calls them fake.
A: okay, here's the main investigator, alive and well. Happy?
B: I don't like how he looks on television!



So in case it's not clear: I disagree. This is a freaking battle. The denial of there being a battle is just part of it. In truth, you probably know damn well there's plenty of proof and witnesses and it's not exactly hidden information either. Just get him impeached and properly trialed for it already.





*something many leaders have trouble with, but absolutely not to the degree that simple facts are ignored
Alright then, I can respect that, and thank you for being respectful, we can disagree all we want and be friends at the end of the day. But, I guess your right, it is a battle. It's a battle between good and evil, and of course both sides think their good. However, I'd like to ask you about this right here.

https://www.businessinsider.com/these-6-corporations-control-90-of-the-media-in-america-2012-6
https://www.factcheck.org/2017/01/the-facts-on-crowd-size/https://www.factcheck.org/2017/01/the-facts-
on-crowd-size/

https://www.cnn.com/interactive/2017/01/politics/trump-inauguration-gigapixel
https://www.washingtontimes.com/news/2017/apr/25/christopher-steele-admits-dossier-charge-unverifie/
https://www.washingtonpost.com/news...prohibited-by-u-s-law/?utm_term=.cade6870fa47
https://www.washingtonpost.com/news...-immigrants-and-crime/?utm_term=.214591d389c0
Sending money to a place that is pro terrorist is morally wrong, legal or not.
Also, that's a far cry from alL meXiCAns arE bAd!!! (sorry guys, I love doing that too much :D)

I know you get tired of politics, I sure as hell do but would anyone mind linking me to a page where there is proof of the President being guilty of a crime? I'd like to know, thank you.

http://thebullelephant.com/why-do-some-people-hate-donald-trump/

## EDIT: NO WAIT I FOUND IT ALREADY! Oh, I was soooo stupid for ever being a conservative. I'll renounce my ways, soo sorry for even getting involved. Here's the link, if anyone want's to use it in a debate.

http://tinyurl.com/2g9mqh
 

IncredulousP

GBAtemp's Resident Bastard
Member
Joined
Aug 21, 2012
Messages
679
Trophies
2
Location
Penguin Village
XP
2,994
Country
United States
It's a battle between good and evil
No it isn't. It's a battle between logic and spin.

proof of the President being guilty of a crime?
Really dude? Do you just plug your ears and close your eyes when something you don't like shows up? If you did a brief search you can find tons of evidence that he committed crime. The freaking Republican Special Counsel investigator said, himself, on live television, and in 448 pages of a report, that Trump can be convicted for his actions. Nobody cares that you're conservative, just don't be a blind following fool. At some point you just gotta accept the facts, dude.
 
D

Deleted User

Guest
No it isn't. It's a battle between logic and spin.


Really dude? Do you just plug your ears and close your eyes when something you don't like shows up? If you did a brief search you can find tons of evidence that he committed crime. The freaking Republican Special Counsel investigator said, himself, on live television, and in 448 pages of a report, that Trump can be convicted for his actions. Nobody cares that you're conservative, just don't be a blind following fool. At some point you just gotta accept the facts, dude.

To be 100% clear, I'm not a blind following tool. I always try to make sure, if it's important to me that I know absolutely talking about. I don't just absolutely love Trump. I don't love some of the things he's said, and he's been a part of Hollywood for all his life. I wouldn't care if it was a woman president leading us, or a black guy, or an asian. I would want them to really care for my Country, to keep it neutral politically so that all people who are being persecuted can at least live here and not have government penalties, whether or not their gay, Islamic or Hindu or Jew or Christian or what have you. However, the government shouldn't pick sides like were doing because now it's legal to discriminate against Christians on behalf of the LGBT community. The government is spending waaay too much money, on what??? 120 trillion will never go away, and I'm sure it's not.

Also, Trump hasn't been nice to the Russians, now that he's in office. They've aligned with Iran and Turkey and Syria, and they've threatened us cause we've been fighting with Iran. It's a precarious situation.

And no, I don't plug my eyes and ears, or get out a pot and a spoon and whistle to try to drown out a Fourth of July speech either. If I don't like it, I investigate. I don't take Rush Limbaughs word for it, I don't take Shaun Hannity's word for it, I look for it myself. I don't take Trump's word for it either.

Would you mind reviewing some of the links that I've set forth? I made sure they weren't linking to right wing sources.



The democrats only ask Mueller yes and no questions about what's in his report. I would like to point out that Barr cannot legally release the unredacted report.

https://www.cnn.com/2019/04/18/politics/full-mueller-report-pdf/index.html

--------------------- MERGED ---------------------------

Also, please don't tell me this is okay.
https://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/ar...uit-social-media-receiving-death-threats.html
 
Last edited by ,

Hanafuda

Well-Known Member
Member
Joined
Nov 21, 2005
Messages
4,452
Trophies
2
XP
6,873
Country
United States
Perjury isn't an issue wrt: President Trump, but of course after Mueller declared no collusion it has been all about the 'obstruction of justice' angle. With Rep. Jerry Nadler leading the charge in the House Judiciary Committee.

But Jerry Nadler said perjury and obstruction of justice are not impeachable offenses.

Mr. Nadler said he was not convinced that Mr. Clinton committed perjury or obstructed justice, but that even if the President did, the offenses would not be impeachable.

''An impeachable offense is an abuse of Presidential power designed to or with the effect of undermining the structure or function of government, or undermining constitutional liberties,'' he told several hundred people at the recent town hall meeting at the Fashion Institute of Technology.

https://www.nytimes.com/1999/02/01/...lifts-his-profile-house.html?mtrref=undefined


But that was when it was about Bill Clinton. It's about Donald Trump now, so this is different or something.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Deleted User

Site & Scene News

Popular threads in this forum

General chit-chat
Help Users
  • No one is chatting at the moment.
    SylverReZ @ SylverReZ: @salazarcosplay, Morning