Reply With Quote
instantly posting another deflection
Riposte, Chris?
Are you purely a social media magpie?
I see you've been lurking the last half hour, cat got your tongue?
I don't have an opinion about your opinion or I would have posted, and I wasn't "lurking". I leave the computer on from time to time you muppet.
How totally unsurprising. Magpie Chris defends the sullen dignity of not having his own take.
Great hearing on C span.org regarding the Schiff hearing on
COUNTER -INTELLIGENCE
regarding trump stealing the election with russia's help.
lol nunes
lol mcarthy
Clowns
Moonbats watching resistance porn on cspan.
Aren't you wishing for revenge on Black President for det spygate tho?Moonbats watching resistance porn on cspan.
Moonbats watching resistance porn on cspan.
when criminals engage in cover ups
concerned citizens stay informed
when criminals hide ALL evidence, deny every do ent request, employ a chunk of racist idiots to muddy the waters and those idiots blindly obey
that evidence needs citizens to demand that it be unearthed
this russia /trump treason must be exposed and it will be
Fbi lady under oath at hearing;
”the russians TASKED manafort with a request for internal campaign polling data- and manafort eagerly complied”
”the russians knew they could now continue the attack and when others in the trump campaign openly accepted their overtures- they knew they could ask for more and more”
nunes: “john kerry spoke to iranians!”
lolololol
Explain how Trump isn't guilty of multiple felonies. All three elements of felony obstruction are right there, multiple times.
FIRST FELONY
E. Efforts to fire Mueller
Obstructive act (p. 87): Former White House Counsel Don McGahn is a “credible witness” in providing evidence that Trump indeed attempted to fire Mueller. This “would qualify as an obstructive act” if the firing “would naturally obstruct the investigation and any grand jury proceedings that might flow from the inquiry.”
Nexus (p. 89): “Substantial evidence” indicates that, at this point, Trump was aware that “his conduct was under investigation by a federal prosecutor who could present any evidence of federal crimes to a grand jury.”
Intent (p. 89): “Substantial evidence indicates that the President’s attempts to remove the Special Counsel were linked to the Special Counsel’s oversight of investigations that involved the President’s conduct[.]”
SECOND FELONY
F. Efforts to curtail Mueller
Obstructive act (p. 97): Trump’s effort to force Sessions to confine the investigation to only investigating future election interference “would qualify as an obstructive act if it would naturally obstruct the investigation and any grand jury proceedings that might flow from the inquiry.” “Taken together, the President’s directives indicate that Sessions was being instructed to tell the Special Counsel to end the existing investigation into the President and his campaign[.]”
Nexus (p. 97): At the relevant point, “the existence of a grand jury investigation supervised by the Special Counsel was public knowledge.”
Intent (p. 97): “Substantial evidence” indicates that Trump’s efforts were “intended to prevent further investigative scrutiny of the President’s and his campaign’s conduct.”
THIRD FELONY
I. Order to McGahn to deny Trump’s order to fire Mueller
Obstructive act (p. 118): This effort “would qualify as an obstructive act if it had the natural tendency to constrain McGahn from testifying truthfully or to undermine his credibility as a potential witness[.]” There is “some evidence” that Trump genuinely believed press reports that he had ordered McGahn to fire Mueller were wrong. However, “[o]ther evidence cuts against that understanding of the president’s conduct”—and the special counsel lists a great deal more evidence on this latter point.
Nexus (p. 119): At this point “the Special Counsel’s use of a grand jury had been further confirmed by the return of several indictments.” Mueller’s office had indicated to Trump’s lawyers that it was investigating obstruction, and Trump knew that McGahn had already been interviewed by Mueller on the topic. “That evidence indicates the President’s awareness” that his efforts to fire Mueller were relevant to official proceedings. Trump “likely contemplated the ongoing investigation and any proceedings arising from it” in directing McGahn to create a false record of the earlier interaction.
Intent (p. 120): “Substantial evidence indicates that … the President acted for the purpose of influencing McGahn’s account in order to deflect or prevent further scrutiny” of Trump.
FOURTH FELONY
J. Conduct toward... Manafort
Obstructive act (p. 131): “The President’s actions toward witnesses … would qualify as obstructive if they had the natural tendency to prevent particular witnesses from testifying truthfully, or otherwise would have the probable effect of influencing, delaying, or preventing their testimony to law enforcement.” ...Regarding Manafort, “there is evidence that the President’s actions had the potential” to influence Manafort’s thinking on cooperation, and his public statements “had the potential to influence the trial jury.”
Nexus (p. 132): Trump’s actions toward [Manafort and others] “appear to have been connected to pending or anticipated official proceedings involving each individual.”
Are multiple counts of obstruction of justice impeachable?
i dno. maybe ask in larger font
The repe ion arouses my resistance... I was more amenable to RG's excerpts before he reposted them 100 times.
I know that's not strictly rational, but it does tally with human nature: people tend to resist rather than follow strenuous recommendations.
RG still has a ways to go to match the number of times he reposted his Trump is compromised by Russia wall of text.
Trump the traitor says if a foreign govt offers dirt again...
he STILL wont call the FBI— and will accept the dirt
fine
FBI should be opening up ANOTHER
counter- intelligence investigation
NEW statute of limitations begins today
trump is still susceptible to being compromised and publicly invited foreign actors to attack the usa
again
Post the worst thing Donald Trump has said about Vladimir Putin. or deflect.
I put out a testable, falsifiable hypothesis, and to my memory, it still has not been falsified. You have gamely tried to, but have failed in that regard.
You still get pissy because it bursts your delusional bubble.
It is there. Feel free to read the report Mr. Both Sides. I posted the four best obstruction charges, there are arguably about 4 others that could be made into tenable conventional prosecutions.
The picture the overall report paints of Trumpworld's intersections with the Russian efforts to help his campaign and harm Hillary's is every bit as damning, as much for the bumbling ineptness of Trumpworld as for their rather corrupt intent.
Are multiple counts of obstruction of justice impeachable?
A question, you have never answered. Why is that? seems like a slam dunk for anyone honest.
Criticizing the monotony of your posts is in no way both sidesism, in fact it's a hint that you're turning off posters otherwise inclined to agree, like me.
Criminals doing what criminals normally do
commit crimes
criminal traitor doing what criminal traitor frauds do
commit treasonous acts
(nods)
Forgive me man. I am only human, and can only take so much bull . This last couple of years ...oy.
you're just hyperbolic in nature
There are currently 1 users browsing this thread. (0 members and 1 guests)
Posting Permissions
