Deranged Rhino Posted July 21, 2017 Posted July 21, 2017 As soon as things come to light, the pardons will start and even the GOP congress will move to impeach.....and I will cash in on my bets that DT doesn't go full term.... You do realize Clinton was impeached, right? Impeachment does not = removal from office.
ALF Posted July 21, 2017 Posted July 21, 2017 Clinton Impeachment by House of Representatives Acquittal by the Senate https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Impeachment_of_Bill_Clinton
SlimShady'sSpaceForce Posted July 21, 2017 Posted July 21, 2017 (edited) You do realize Clinton was impeached, right? Impeachment does not = removal from office. true but a Clinton getting head and this horseshit being pulled by Frump are 2 different things. One can be punishable by prison Edited July 21, 2017 by ShadyBillsFan
Doc Brown Posted July 21, 2017 Posted July 21, 2017 true but a Clinton getting head and this horseshit being pulled by Frump are 2 different things. One is punishable by prison What exactly is Trump's crime?
SlimShady'sSpaceForce Posted July 21, 2017 Posted July 21, 2017 Working with the Russians directly or not to make an impact on the voters. If you or I did that we'd have been locked up on day 1. Russia if you are listening....... So, why is it Frump is asking about "Presidential Pardons"? You only need a Pardon if you are guilty. Impeding a Federal Investigation not once but twice
B-Man Posted July 21, 2017 Posted July 21, 2017 Working with the Russians directly or not to make an impact on the voters. If you or I did that we'd have been locked up on day 1. Russia if you are listening....... So, why is it Frump is asking about "Presidential Pardons"? You only need a Pardon if you are guilty. Impeding a Federal Investigation not once but twice apparently to Shady............Repetition = Truth.......... 9 months................and zero evidence of any "collusion" oh there is a mountain of supposition, crackpot theories, and amazing leaps to conclusions............but zero solid evidence. but by all means, keep posting it as fact.
K-9 Posted July 21, 2017 Posted July 21, 2017 What exactly is Trump's crime? The assumption is there is no crime committed by Trump or anyone else at this time; that's what investigations are for. The investigation is about others in his orbit who worked for or represented his campaign as well. Manafort, for example, was already under an FBI investigation concerning his financial activity and relationships with various players in Ukraine and Russia before Mueller was appointed. Nobody can be surprised that Mueller folded that investigation into his given Manafort's role in Trump's campaign. It's been known for weeks, ever since Mueller hired experts in foreign money laundering schemes, that was the direction the investigation had taken. You go where the evidence indicates and only the most blinded partisans would disagree with that.
Doc Brown Posted July 21, 2017 Posted July 21, 2017 The assumption is there is no crime committed by Trump or anyone else at this time; that's what investigations are for. The investigation is about others in his orbit who worked for or represented his campaign as well. Manafort, for example, was already under an FBI investigation concerning his financial activity and relationships with various players in Ukraine and Russia before Mueller was appointed. Nobody can be surprised that Mueller folded that investigation into his given Manafort's role in Trump's campaign. It's been known for weeks, ever since Mueller hired experts in foreign money laundering schemes, that was the direction the investigation had taken. You go where the evidence indicates and only the most blinded partisans would disagree with that. That's assuming Trump lets the investigation play out. As for SBF, he has not committed a crime.
K-9 Posted July 21, 2017 Posted July 21, 2017 That's assuming Trump lets the investigation play out. As for SBF, he has not committed a crime. Whether he "lets" it play out or not, Mueller's investigation to the point that it stops, remains. He needs to tread lightly though, as the preceding investigations undertaken by the FBI into Manafort and Flynn will continue regardless and he simply can't obstruct those. There is also the question of Don Jr's. potential legal jeopardy as well as Kushner's withholding of information on his security clearance applications on more than one occasion. Besides, the question of what a president can and cannot do regarding the termination of a special prosecutor has not been settled. That's why we will be embroiled in a Constitutional crisis if and when he decides to push that envelope. Interesting times.
Tiberius Posted July 21, 2017 Posted July 21, 2017 That's assuming Trump lets the investigation play out. As for SBF, he has not committed a crime. Well, how would it "play out" if he does not let it play out? The world will not stop and there are going to be future elections. If he is going to fire Mueller, issue pardons and everything then the election process would take over. If he does this before the 2018 elections we will have a hell of a mid term election season. Timing is all so important. I pointed out before Nixon resigned when the elections of 1974 were on the horizon. How do you think American voters will react to another Saturday Night Massacre AND blanket pardons being issued to people like Kushner who are still serving in the WH?
Tiberius Posted July 21, 2017 Posted July 21, 2017 Kind of interesting on the pardon issue: http://time.com/4868418/donald-trump-presidential-pardons-backfire/?xid=homepage Under the Fifth Amendment to the Constitution, Americans are protected against self-incrimination, but people who have been pardoned are no longer under any legal jeopardy, Harvard Law School Professor Laurence Tribe told TIME. "Anyone pardoned by Trump would lose most of the 5th Amendment’s protection against compelled testimony that might otherwise have incriminated the pardoned family member or associate, making it much easier for DOJ and Congress to require such individuals to give testimony that could prove highly incriminating to Trump himself," Tribe said in an email. Still, that could lead to another constitutional standoff, if the recipients of the Trump pardons refused to testify before Congress. Mark Osler, a University of St. Thomas Law School professor who has written about the president's pardon powers, said Congress might respond by holding them in contempt, leading to a second pardon.
Doc Brown Posted July 21, 2017 Posted July 21, 2017 (edited) Well, how would it "play out" if he does not let it play out? The world will not stop and there are going to be future elections. If he is going to fire Mueller, issue pardons and everything then the election process would take over. If he does this before the 2018 elections we will have a hell of a mid term election season. Timing is all so important. I pointed out before Nixon resigned when the elections of 1974 were on the horizon. How do you think American voters will react to another Saturday Night Massacre AND blanket pardons being issued to people like Kushner who are still serving in the WH? It would obviously hurt the Republican Party and the Democrats would pry win the midterms despite themselves. That's just a guess though because the Democratic Party is in such shambles right now that a recent Washington Post/ABC poll said only 35% of the country thinks the Democrats stand for "something" and 54% said the party stands for nothing except being "against Trump." Those are horrible numbers. A lot will also depend on whether the Republicans get health care and tax cuts through. Edited July 21, 2017 by Doc Brown
SlimShady'sSpaceForce Posted July 21, 2017 Posted July 21, 2017 Donny can't pardon himself. How he didn't know that is astounding
B-Man Posted July 22, 2017 Posted July 22, 2017 (edited) UNDER THIS DEFINITION OF PRESIDENTIAL OBSTRUCTION OF JUSTICE, I’m pretty sure that Barack Obama is indictable........... Glenn Reynolds: https://pjmedia.com/instapundit/270646/ Edited July 22, 2017 by B-Man
snafu Posted July 22, 2017 Posted July 22, 2017 Whether he "lets" it play out or not, Mueller's investigation to the point that it stops, remains. He needs to tread lightly though, as the preceding investigations undertaken by the FBI into Manafort and Flynn will continue regardless and he simply can't obstruct those. There is also the question of Don Jr's. potential legal jeopardy as well as Kushner's withholding of information on his security clearance applications on more than one occasion. Besides, the question of what a president can and cannot do regarding the termination of a special prosecutor has not been settled. That's why we will be embroiled in a Constitutional crisis if and when he decides to push that envelope. Interesting times. I think (not sure) that since Mueller was appointed by DOJ his removal by Trump wouldn't raise a Constitutional issue. It would raise a lot of eyebrows. If Mueller were a Congressionally appointed investigator, it would raise both.
K-9 Posted July 22, 2017 Posted July 22, 2017 I think (not sure) that since Mueller was appointed by DOJ his removal by Trump wouldn't raise a Constitutional issue. It would raise a lot of eyebrows. If Mueller were a Congressionally appointed investigator, it would raise both. I appreciate the point here and you very well may be right in terms of the eyebrows raised, but Trump cannot fire Mueller directly; it has to be done by the person who appointed him; in this case, Rosenstein (because Sessions is recused) who has adamantly said he refuses to do that. So Trump would have to fire Sessions and appoint an Attorney General who would be willing to follow his orders to remove Mueller. This would be a politically stupid thing to do as evidenced by Bob Corker's comments in the linked article here. https://www.bloomberg.com/news/articles/2017-07-20/trump-move-to-fire-mueller-likely-would-trigger-purge-at-justice
snafu Posted July 22, 2017 Posted July 22, 2017 I appreciate the point here and you very well may be right in terms of the eyebrows raised, but Trump cannot fire Mueller directly; it has to be done by the person who appointed him; in this case, Rosenstein (because Sessions is recused) who has adamantly said he refuses to do that. So Trump would have to fire Sessions and appoint an Attorney General who would be willing to follow his orders to remove Mueller. This would be a politically stupid thing to do as evidenced by Bob Corker's comments in the linked article here. https://www.bloomberg.com/news/articles/2017-07-20/trump-move-to-fire-mueller-likely-would-trigger-purge-at-justice Yeah, maybe "raise eyebrows" was a bit of an understatement. But, hey, it wouldn't be unconstitutional so I say go for it (inserts beer drinking emoji here).
Tiberius Posted July 22, 2017 Posted July 22, 2017 It would obviously hurt the Republican Party and the Democrats would pry win the midterms despite themselves. That's just a guess though because the Democratic Party is in such shambles right now that a recent Washington Post/ABC poll said only 35% of the country thinks the Democrats stand for "something" and 54% said the party stands for nothing except being "against Trump." Those are horrible numbers. A lot will also depend on whether the Republicans get health care and tax cuts through. In mid-term elections when the opposition party controls everything, just being against the powers that be can be enough. Resorting Constitutional checks is a serious and important issue http://cookpolitical.com/story/10414 When minority parties have succeeded in midterm elections, it has been because voters were not happy with the people and party in power and decided to go with the alternative. This is the way American politics works. It might well be all that House Democrats need next year.
boyst Posted July 22, 2017 Posted July 22, 2017 true but a Clinton getting head and this horseshit being pulled by Frump are 2 different things. One can be punishable by prison clinton lying under oath is not being mentioned. that is actually a crime. but, clintons can get away with murder (literally). I appreciate the point here and you very well may be right in terms of the eyebrows raised, but Trump cannot fire Mueller directly; it has to be done by the person who appointed him; in this case, Rosenstein (because Sessions is recused) who has adamantly said he refuses to do that. So Trump would have to fire Sessions and appoint an Attorney General who would be willing to follow his orders to remove Mueller. This would be a politically stupid thing to do as evidenced by Bob Corker's comments in the linked article here. https://www.bloomberg.com/news/articles/2017-07-20/trump-move-to-fire-mueller-likely-would-trigger-purge-at-justice trump can fire him. if there is more smoke and bull **** to this investigation i think trump should. mueller is a joke.
PastaJoe Posted July 22, 2017 Posted July 22, 2017 Let he who has never forgotten 77 assets worth $100 million & some meetings with Russian spies cast the first stone!
Recommended Posts