Deranged Rhino Posted August 12, 2019 Author Posted August 12, 2019 39 minutes ago, ShadyBillsFan said: "Was there sufficient evidence to convict President Trump or anyone else with obstruction of justice?" Buck asked. "We did not make that calculation," Mueller said, citing the OLC opinion. Buck later asked, "Could you charge a president with a crime after he left office?" "Yes," Mueller replied. This isn't the right thread for Russia stuff, but Shady, with all due respect (and I mean that sincerely, I like your posts), there's a very easy way to tell whether or not there was collusion or conspiracy (aside from the report stating there was not -- which it does multiple times): Collusion/Conspiracy requires more than one person to pull off. Meaning more than one person would be charged with said crime. Right? But only POTUS was protected by the OLC Opinion -- not the rest of the conspirators. So, if there was conspiracy/collusion, how come not a single person was charged with it after 2+ years? (Answer: because it didn't happen. It was a lie from the start) 2
Buffalo_Gal Posted August 12, 2019 Posted August 12, 2019 6 minutes ago, Koko78 said: During? Yes. After? No. Impeachment by the House and removal after conviction by the Senate is the sole remedy for a sitting President who is engaging in wrongdoing. Once they're out of office, then they can be prosecuted. https://avalon.law.yale.edu/18th_century/fed65.asp You are saying a President could not be convicted of a crime after s/he left office? I think what you responding to is a President can be removed from office via impeachment, but that is a political process, not a criminal process. If, after leaving office (or while in office) a President commits a criminal offense (say, murder, rape, car-jacking (yeah, yeah, but I couldn't come up with another one)) s/he could be arrested, tried, and convicted of a crime. There is nothing that stands in the way of that (unless as an attorney you know of a secret law I do not?).
Koko78 Posted August 12, 2019 Posted August 12, 2019 8 minutes ago, Buffalo_Gal said: You are saying a President could not be convicted of a crime after s/he left office? I think what you responding to is a President can be removed from office via impeachment, but that is a political process, not a criminal process. I am not saying that at all. 11 minutes ago, Buffalo_Gal said: If, after leaving office (or while in office) a President commits a criminal offense (say, murder, rape, car-jacking (yeah, yeah, but I couldn't come up with another one)) s/he could be arrested, tried, and convicted of a crime. There is nothing that stands in the way of that (unless as an attorney you know of a secret law I do not?). After they are out of office, the former president can be prosecuted for whatever crimes they may have committed within the statute of limitations (though an argument could probably be made that the statute of limitations should be tolled while the president is in office.) As sitting president, they must be impeached and removed from office first - that is the sole Constitutional remedy for a sitting president's wrongdoing while in office. It makes zero practical or logical sense to have DOJ officials who serve at the pleasure of the sitting president to prosecute the sitting president - thus the impeachment remedy.
Deranged Rhino Posted August 12, 2019 Author Posted August 12, 2019 Here comes Hollywood... Clooney first up in the barrel: https://www.thesun.co.uk/news/9701672/george-clooney-jeffrey-epstein-sex-act-ghislaine-maxwell/ (Clooney and Maxwell the charge -- not Clooney and Esptein's slaves)
Koko78 Posted August 12, 2019 Posted August 12, 2019 5 minutes ago, Deranged Rhino said: Here comes Hollywood... Clooney first up in the barrel: https://www.thesun.co.uk/news/9701672/george-clooney-jeffrey-epstein-sex-act-ghislaine-maxwell/ Eh, if the best they got against Clooney is a BJ in a bathroom from an adult woman, I'm not terribly worried for him. 1
Deranged Rhino Posted August 12, 2019 Author Posted August 12, 2019 More Daily Mail/Maxwell coverage: https://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-7347091/RICHARD-PENDLEBURY-Robert-Maxwells-daughter-spill-*****-Jeffrey-Epsteins-secrets.html 1
B-Man Posted August 12, 2019 Posted August 12, 2019 CHUTZPAH, THY NAME IS NEW YORK TIMES: Times: Epstein Suicide Conspiracy Theories Show How Our Information System is Poisoned. This is the same New York Times that, just for example, completely misreported the Trayvon Martin case (going so far as to deem George Zimmerman a “white Hispanic” to further its narrative, a phrase the Times never otherwise used) and was the leader of the lynch mob over phony rape allegations against the Duke lacrosse team. Just last week oped columnist Michelle Goldberg reiterated the myth that Trump called neo-Nazis “very fine people.” But it’s the rest of the “information system” that’s poisoned. Physician, heal thyself. The Mysterious, Outrageous Death of Jeffrey Epstein by Judith Miller Original Article 2
Gary M Posted August 12, 2019 Posted August 12, 2019 11 hours ago, Doc said: Where is it? Are they keeping it safely hidden? I think JE choked on it.
Chef Jim Posted August 12, 2019 Posted August 12, 2019 1 hour ago, Tiberius said: Are you SoCalDeek? It’s awesome how when you’re called out on your BS you deflect. Sooooo where’s the verifiable evidence that points to the truth?
Deranged Rhino Posted August 12, 2019 Author Posted August 12, 2019 Thread on Barr's comments -- happening this morning: 2 2
Deranged Rhino Posted August 12, 2019 Author Posted August 12, 2019 ********************* Just a reminder: no one is more concerned about Epstein than the British Royal Family... Cannot leave them out of the discussions of who might benefit from Epstein going away... 1
SlimShady'sSpaceForce Posted August 12, 2019 Posted August 12, 2019 42 minutes ago, Deranged Rhino said: This isn't the right thread for Russia stuff, but Shady, with all due respect (and I mean that sincerely, I like your posts), there's a very easy way to tell whether or not there was collusion or conspiracy (aside from the report stating there was not -- which it does multiple times): Collusion/Conspiracy requires more than one person to pull off. Meaning more than one person would be charged with said crime. Right? But only POTUS was protected by the OLC Opinion -- not the rest of the conspirators. So, if there was conspiracy/collusion, how come not a single person was charged with it after 2+ years? (Answer: because it didn't happen. It was a lie from the start) Of course it was. The cover up is what caused a lot of the aftermath IMO. I've held a security clearance and believe me - People are required to report ALL meeting with foreign persons / dignitaries. 1 hour ago, GG said: How about addressing the main points? I have. Trumps team fracked up. They covered it up with lies. the media on both sides made more of it than they should.
Deranged Rhino Posted August 12, 2019 Author Posted August 12, 2019 4 minutes ago, ShadyBillsFan said: I've held a security clearance and believe me - People are required to report ALL meeting with foreign persons / dignitaries. The only shady (heh) meeting was Trump Tower -- which was entirely orchestrated by the FBI, State Department and Clinton campaign to entrap Don Jr. 1
Deranged Rhino Posted August 12, 2019 Author Posted August 12, 2019 Thread on what is likely to happen next: 1 1
SlimShady'sSpaceForce Posted August 12, 2019 Posted August 12, 2019 3 minutes ago, Deranged Rhino said: The only shady (heh) meeting was Trump Tower -- which was entirely orchestrated by the FBI, State Department and Clinton campaign to entrap Don Jr. I like your takes too but on this its not worth arguing much further. I'll just post these as to what I was alluding to. Trump admits son met Russian for information on opponent - BBC News https://www.bbc.com/news/world-us-canada-45079377 Aug 6, 2018 - US President Donald Trump has admitted his son met a Russian lawyer in ... Donald Trump Jr's meeting with Kremlin-linked lawyer Natalia ... Trump (Again) Admits His Son Met With Russian Lawyer To Get Dirt ... https://www.npr.org/.../trump-admits-his-son-met-with-russian-lawyer-to-get-dirt-on-clin... Aug 6, 2018 - Was President Trump admitting to collusion between his campaign and Russia? Was back to Epstein
Tiberius Posted August 12, 2019 Posted August 12, 2019 3 minutes ago, Deranged Rhino said: The only shady (heh) meeting was Trump Tower -- which was entirely orchestrated by the FBI, State Department and Clinton campaign to entrap Don Jr. The meetings over a Trump Tower in Moscow that Trump lied about were not Shady? The very secret meetings between Trump and Putin with no one else there and notes destroyed afterwards, were not shady? The meeting to draft lies about the Trump Tower meeting were not shady? The meeting where Trump made everyone else but Comey leave and asked for his loyalty were not shady? Manafort's meeting with Kremlin connected oligarchs where he gave them campaign info, not Shady?
Deranged Rhino Posted August 12, 2019 Author Posted August 12, 2019 1 minute ago, ShadyBillsFan said: I like your takes too but on this its not worth arguing much further. I'll just post these as to what I was alluding to. Trump admits son met Russian for information on opponent - BBC News https://www.bbc.com/news/world-us-canada-45079377 Aug 6, 2018 - US President Donald Trump has admitted his son met a Russian lawyer in ... Donald Trump Jr's meeting with Kremlin-linked lawyer Natalia ... Trump (Again) Admits His Son Met With Russian Lawyer To Get Dirt ... https://www.npr.org/.../trump-admits-his-son-met-with-russian-lawyer-to-get-dirt-on-clin... Aug 6, 2018 - Was President Trump admitting to collusion between his campaign and Russia? Was back to Epstein That same Russian lawyer had meetings immediately before and after Trump tower with... Glenn Simpson. Despite the fact she does not speak English (allegedly) and Simpson doesn't speak Russian. Natalia was also a Fusion GPS client on the Prevezon matter who was banned from traveling into the US. In order to make the Trump Tower meeting it required an emergency VISA from the State Department to be approved -- and it was. Rob Goldstone who set up the meeting is connected to Richard Dearlove of MI6, who was actively involved in helping run CI's at that time on behalf of Brennan and Comey. And to top it off, the only other person in the meeting was the translator... who was Hillary's personal translator while she was SecState. To recap: Everyone in that meeting not named Trump or Kushner was doing so on behalf of Clinton's campaign and the US State Department. That's entrapment, Shady. And it's backed with mountains of evidence. Despite this, nothing illegal took place at the meeting, even the FBI and every committee who has investigated it concurs on that front. The Trump Tower meeting is proof of the plan to "get Trump", not of Trump/Russia collusion. 2 1
Tiberius Posted August 12, 2019 Posted August 12, 2019 30 minutes ago, Chef Jim said: It’s awesome how when you’re called out on your BS you deflect. Sooooo where’s the verifiable evidence that points to the truth? Is that a yes, then? You have two accounts? 5 minutes ago, Deranged Rhino said: The Trump Tower meeting is proof of the plan to "get Trump", not of Trump/Russia collusion. When? The election happened yet this info did not come out till well after. Your timeline does not work.
Chef Jim Posted August 12, 2019 Posted August 12, 2019 13 minutes ago, Tiberius said: The meetings over a Trump Tower in Moscow that Trump lied about were not Shady? The very secret meetings between Trump and Putin with no one else there and notes destroyed afterwards, were not shady? The meeting to draft lies about the Trump Tower meeting were not shady? The meeting where Trump made everyone else but Comey leave and asked for his loyalty were not shady? Manafort's meeting with Kremlin connected oligarchs where he gave them campaign info, not Shady? So all ya got is Shady? Yeah that’s some damn good truth! I hope you never have and never will sit on a jury.
Recommended Posts