row_33 Posted June 4, 2019 Posted June 4, 2019 4 minutes ago, Buffalo_Gal said: I think that 90% figure is kinda low myself. some remember the process for Clinton and some looked up what the process is for knowledge sake
Tiberius Posted June 4, 2019 Author Posted June 4, 2019 House is calling a bunch of witnesses to educate the American public on the lawlessness of the Great Obstructor
row_33 Posted June 4, 2019 Posted June 4, 2019 Politics as usual It’s just that the losers are so much more butthurt than normal and it is so frickin hilarious 1
RochesterRob Posted June 4, 2019 Posted June 4, 2019 9 minutes ago, Tiberius said: House is calling a bunch of witnesses to educate the American public on the lawlessness of the Great Obstructor Nonsense. The Democrats are just trying to use an episode from the past to fire up their base to in turn put pressure on DC politicians. Anybody that cares one way or the other about impeachment is already up on the topic. 1
row_33 Posted June 4, 2019 Posted June 4, 2019 1 minute ago, RochesterRob said: Nonsense. The Democrats are just trying to use an episode from the past to fire up their base to in turn put pressure on DC politicians. Anybody that cares one way or the other about impeachment is already up on the topic. A smart Dem is digging a bomb shelter to hopefully jump in and survive 2020
Tiberius Posted June 4, 2019 Author Posted June 4, 2019 Just now, RochesterRob said: Nonsense. The Democrats are just trying to use an episode from the past to fire up their base to in turn put pressure on DC politicians. Anybody that cares one way or the other about impeachment is already up on the topic. No, many Americans don't know that Trump tried to cover up by trying to fire Mueller, ordered McGhan to lie about it and pressured a witness to remain silent. He's suppose to faithfully enforce the laws, not undermine them.
Deranged Rhino Posted June 4, 2019 Posted June 4, 2019 31 minutes ago, Tiberius said: No, many Americans don't know that Trump tried to cover up by trying to fire Mueller, But those same Americans know Trump did not fire Mueller... so you're proposing those same uninformed Americans will go along with the notion that thinking about something constitutes a crime. That's about as fundamentally un-American as it gets. 32 minutes ago, Tiberius said: ordered McGhan to lie about it Even McGhan denies Trump committed obstruction. Tough case to make when again, Mueller was never fired, never impeded, and given two plus years to investigate and ultimately find there was no collusion/conspiracy as long promised there would be. 33 minutes ago, Tiberius said: and pressured a witness to remain silent. Do you mean Flynn? You mean this? Yeah -- that's not pressuring someone to remain silent. It might be if you go by the edited version of the report, the one Weissman and the media hoped would be the only version you'd ever see. But it's not at all pressuring Flynn to be silent when you see the full context. In fact, this kind of gamesmanship makes the Mueller team look bad to uninformed Americans, not better. None of those are going to move the needle, Tibs. If anything, each one has more of a chance of blowing back up in the conspirators' faces than it does convincing people Trump should be impeached. 1
Tiberius Posted June 4, 2019 Author Posted June 4, 2019 42 minutes ago, Deranged Rhino said: But those same Americans know Trump did not fire Mueller... so you're proposing those same uninformed Americans will go along with the notion that thinking about something constitutes a crime. That's about as fundamentally un-American as it gets. No, he tried to but his subordinate refused to carry out the order. Still it is an attempt to obstruct. If you try robbing a bank but don't get any money because you got spooked half way through robbery, you are still a bank robber. 44 minutes ago, Deranged Rhino said: Even McGhan denies Trump committed obstruction. Tough case to make when again, Mueller was never fired, never impeded, and given two plus years to investigate and ultimately find there was no collusion/conspiracy as long promised there would be. Oh McHhan said so? That's not his call. The President told him to lie about...obstruction! Why? To obstruct justice.
Deranged Rhino Posted June 4, 2019 Posted June 4, 2019 Just now, Tiberius said: No, he tried to but his subordinate refused to carry out the order. Still it is an attempt to obstruct. If you try robbing a bank but don't get any money because you got spooked half way through robbery, you are still a bank robber. Not if you never enter the bank. Talking about robbing a bank is not a crime. Thinking about robbing a bank is not a crime. Planning a bank robbery is not a crime... Unless a bank is actually robbed. If talking about robbing banks is a crime, if planning a bank robbery is a crime, then me and hundreds of writers are guilty for fictional writings on the subject. 1 1
Tiberius Posted June 4, 2019 Author Posted June 4, 2019 45 minutes ago, Deranged Rhino said: Do you mean Flynn? You mean this? No Manafort, who has refused to tell the whole story on Trump and Russia even when he promised he would, but we found out he just wanted to know what Mueller wanted to know, then lied in the answers, probably running back to Trump telling him what they asked. And this is wrong, if not an abuse of power: I believe that if people stoped using or subscribing to @ATT, they would be forced to make big changes at @CNN, which is dying in the ratings anyway. It is so unfair with such bad, Fake News! Why wouldn’t they act. When the World watches @CNN, it gets a false picture of USA. Sad! — Donald J. Trump (@realDonaldTrump) June 3, 2019
3rdnlng Posted June 4, 2019 Posted June 4, 2019 43 minutes ago, Tiberius said: No Manafort, who has refused to tell the whole story on Trump and Russia even when he promised he would, but we found out he just wanted to know what Mueller wanted to know, then lied in the answers, probably running back to Trump telling him what they asked. And this is wrong, if not an abuse of power: I believe that if people stoped using or subscribing to @ATT, they would be forced to make big changes at @CNN, which is dying in the ratings anyway. It is so unfair with such bad, Fake News! Why wouldn’t they act. When the World watches @CNN, it gets a false picture of USA. Sad! — Donald J. Trump (@realDonaldTrump) June 3, 2019 What did he do, sneak out of solitary confinement and then sneak back in?
Tiberius Posted June 4, 2019 Author Posted June 4, 2019 49 minutes ago, 3rdnlng said: What did he do, sneak out of solitary confinement and then sneak back in? Everyone speaks through lawyers _____ So Trump sought economic punishments of AT&T using the governments anti-trust laws? Congress is demanding documentation on this but the cover up has extended to this also
Nanker Posted June 4, 2019 Posted June 4, 2019 No Russian collusion! No crime by Team Trump. Lots of crimes by Team DNC/FBI/CIA/FusionGPS/Christopher Steele and others... LOTS of crimes! INVESTIGATE! 2
reddogblitz Posted June 4, 2019 Posted June 4, 2019 (edited) 2 hours ago, Tiberius said: No, he tried to but his subordinate refused to carry out the order. Still it is an attempt to obstruct. If you try robbing a bank but don't get any money because you got spooked half way through robbery, you are still a bank robber. If I tell my subordinate to run down to the Quikee-Mart and steal me a pack of cigarettes and she doesn't do it, have I committed a crime? Edited June 4, 2019 by reddogblitz 1
Foxx Posted June 4, 2019 Posted June 4, 2019 (edited) 1 hour ago, Tiberius said: ... So Trump sought economic punishments of AT&T using the governments anti-trust laws? Congress is demanding documentation on this but the cover up has extended to this also Tibs, you need to back away from the ledge. everywhere you are looking you see #orangemanbad. Edited June 4, 2019 by Foxx 1
Tiberius Posted June 4, 2019 Author Posted June 4, 2019 1 hour ago, reddogblitz said: If I tell my subordinate to run down to the Quikee-Mart and steal me a pack of cigarettes and she doesn't do it, have I committed a crime? No, but if you told the employee to hide evidence of a crime, it would be
Chef Jim Posted June 4, 2019 Posted June 4, 2019 1 hour ago, Tiberius said: No, but if you told the employee to hide evidence of a crime, it would be Are you ever correct on anything??
3rdnlng Posted June 4, 2019 Posted June 4, 2019 53 minutes ago, Chef Jim said: Are you ever correct on anything?? You just created the perfect conundrum.
DC Tom Posted June 4, 2019 Posted June 4, 2019 57 minutes ago, Chef Jim said: Are you ever correct on anything?? He once saod "I'm hungry." He was still wrong, but oh, so close.
Recommended Posts