Nadler formally launches impeachment inquiry of Donald J Trump

[TSA]

Mueller said his mandate didn’t include determining whether POTUS committed crimes.

DOJ regs prevented him from doing so. He gathered information.

[Chris]

Trump trolling

[Winehole23]

So winehole is on the impeachment bandwagon with boutons?

Up to Congress.

What would the GOP do, roles reversed?

For the record, I still think impeachment is a bad idea, pragmatically speaking, but I’m also sympathetic to the argument from principle. If you let one guy slide, what happens when the shoe is on the other foot?

[spurraider21]

Strange that you can reach that conclusion when Mueller couldn’t.

actually, he did

Second, many obstruction cases involve the attempted or actual cover-up of an underlyingcrime.

The obstruction-of-justice statute most readily applicable to our investigation is 18 U.S.C.§ 1512( c )(2). Section 1512(c) provides:

(c) Whoever corruptly-

(1) alters, destroys, mutilates, or conceals a record, do ent, or other object, orattempts to do so, with the intent to impair the object's integrity or availability foruse in an official proceeding; or

(2) otherwise obstructs, influences, or impedes any official proceeding, or attemptsto do so,

finally, while after evaluating the evidence on the collusion/conspiracy charges, mueller had no qualms simply stated that they lack evidence to support culpability. but for whatever reason, was unable to come to the same conclusion on obstruction, after he laid out a bunch of trumps efforts to obstruct. and again as you know, he lacked the legal authority to actually accuse him of committing a crime

[Winehole23]

Normative erosion is a thing. Ins utions depend on norms more so than the law.

[spurraider21]

And Mueller in no uncertain terms said his investigation wasn't obstructed. Game, set, match.

have you read Vol 2 of the mueller report?

[Chris]

I prefer fence sniping like 21.

We know.

[CosmicCowboy]

actually, he did





finally, while after evaluating the evidence on the collusion/conspiracy charges, mueller had no qualms simply stated that they lack evidence to support culpability. but for whatever reason, was unable to come to the same conclusion on obstruction, after he laid out a bunch of trumps efforts to obstruct. and again as you know, he lacked the legal authority to actually accuse him of committing a crime

What was the ATTEMPT? Be specific.

[Winehole23]

Up to Congress.

What would the GOP do, roles reversed?

For the record, I still think impeachment is a bad idea, pragmatically speaking, but I’m also sympathetic to the argument from principle. If you let one guy slide, what happens when the shoe is on the other foot?

Corruption at the highest level of power can’t be allowed to stand. Otherwise, you invite it.

[Winehole23]

What was the ATTEMT? Be specific.

I was specific.

Trump asked Sessions to fire investigators. Then he asked his lawyer to falsify the record about his attempt.

To his credit, Don McGahn refused to.

[Winehole23]

Why?

Because Don McGahn sized that up as a crime.

[spurraider21]

What was the ATTEMPT? Be specific.

https://www.lawfareblog.com/obstruct...eport-heat-map

[Winehole23]

We know.

White flag, non-germane.

[spurraider21]

another variant

[TSA]

actually, he did





finally, while after evaluating the evidence on the collusion/conspiracy charges, mueller had no qualms simply stated that they lack evidence to support culpability. but for whatever reason, was unable to come to the same conclusion on obstruction, after he laid out a bunch of trumps efforts to obstruct. and again as you know, he lacked the legal authority to actually accuse him of committing a crime

(c) Whoever corruptly-

When did Mueller reach that conclusion in the report?

[Winehole23]

Forced hilarity is another white flag.

[CosmicCowboy]

As you know I am no trump lover but talking about it isn't the same as doing it. But...go ahead and impeach him.

[Winehole23]

As you know I am no trump lover but talking about it isn't the same as doing it. But...go ahead and impeach him.

You’ll vote for him again.

[CosmicCowboy]

I didn't vote for him last time.

[spurraider21]

True.

DJT failed in his attempt to do so.

Merely attempting to do so is a crime. Obstruction of justice.

Strange that you can reach that conclusion when Mueller couldn’t.

to be fair, it was unclear which conclusion you were referring to, line 2 or line 3 of wine's post. i addressed line 3 pretty thoroughly, that even attempting obstruction is a crime (even if there is no underlying crime, and even if it was only an attempt to obstruct, regardless of outcome)

as to line 2, i addressed that as well, though not as thoroughly. mueller was not allowed to come to a conclusion on that matter, if that conclusion implicated the president. that he laid out several acts that could be considered attempts to obstruct, only to then say "well i cant rule it out but i'm not allowed to say that he's guilty"... it's about as heavy handed as he could possibly be

[CosmicCowboy]

I think trump is a narcissistic yankee asshole.

[Winehole23]

I didn't vote for him last time.

Your reflexive defense of DJT threw me off.

Who will you vote for this time?

[CosmicCowboy]

Your reflexive defense of DJT threw me off.

Who will you vote for this time?

If its warren/trump I will leave that blank again.

[Winehole23]

If its warren/trump I will leave that blank again.

why do you defend DJT if you hate him?

[AaronY]

Skip to 1:00

0% lmao literally the full blutarsky