Just review the evidence in the report. He didn't. It's a report. Not an evidentiary file. Not a conclusion.
He subverts and misleads the public, in his preemptive press conference, revealing his bias. Without reviewing the evidence, he has failed to bring confidence in his abilities as the top law enforcement officer of the land. Originally Posted by eccieuser9500
You keep saying it but don't give any specifics.
Nice Grubering. Originally Posted by gnadfly
Article 1, Section 3, Clauses 6 and 7Indictment
The Senate shall have the sole Power to try all Impeachments. When sitting for that Purpose, they shall be on Oath or Affirmation. When the President of the United States is tried the Chief Justice shall preside; And no Person shall be convicted without the Concurrence of two thirds of the Members present.
Judgement in Cases of Impreachment shall not extend further than to removal from Office, and disqualification to hold and enjoy any Office of honor, Trust or Profit under the United States: but the Party convicted shall nevertheless be liable and subject to Indictment, Trial, Judgement and Punishment, according to Law.
Article 1, Section 3, Clauses 6 and 7Indictment Originally Posted by eccieuser9500
The Senate shall have the sole Power to try all Impeachments. When sitting for that Purpose, they shall be on Oath or Affirmation. When the President of the United States is tried the Chief Justice shall preside; And no Person shall be convicted without the Concurrence of two thirds of the Members present.
Judgement in Cases of Impreachment shall not extend further than to removal from Office, and disqualification to hold and enjoy any Office of honor, Trust or Profit under the United States: but the Party convicted shall nevertheless be liable and subject to Indictment, Trial, Judgement and Punishment, according to Law.
https://static.c-span.org/files/pres...er_+Report.pdf Originally Posted by eccieuser9500I wonder how many of former federal prosecutors will have signed the letter to the DOJ by the end of the week, 700 have concluded that if trump wasn’t president he would have been charged with Obstruction.
I wonder how many of former federal prosecutors will have signed the letter to the DOJ by the end of the week, 700 have concluded that if trump wasn’t president he would have been charged with Obstruction. Originally Posted by Jaxson66All of those jackasses are Odumbo, hildebeest and Soros confederates; so, their opinion doesn't mean shit: they can't pass the Barr!
I wonder how many of former federal prosecutors will have signed the letter to the DOJ by the end of the week, 700 have concluded that if trump wasn’t president he would have been charged with Obstruction. Originally Posted by Jaxson66i have bad news. the only prosecutor who's opinion matters didn't recommend charges. Bobby Swan Mueller, 3rd of his name.
i have bad news. the only prosecutor who's opinion matters didn't recommend charges. Bobby Swan Mueller, 3rd of his name.And that’s your personal opinion, I seriously doubt 100% of the DOJ rank and file agrees with Barr’s summary. Files have a habit of leaking in the current administration. Maybe you missed the news about ten years of trump’s taxes being sent to the NYT....stand by for a tweet storm.
BAHHAAAAA had to work some GOT in there
#MoveOn2020!!! Originally Posted by The_Waco_Kid
And that’s your personal opinion, I seriously doubt 100% of the DOJ rank and file agrees with Barr’s summary. Files have a habit of leaking in the current administration. Maybe you missed the news about ten years of trump’s taxes being sent to the NYT....stand by for a tweet storm.More poor trolling. Reminiscent of a Sistine Chapel post.
I would post links but I can’t seem to get my iPad to cooperate with the platform. I’ll have it figured out soon Originally Posted by Jaxson66
And that’s your personal opinion, I seriously doubt 100% of the DOJ rank and file agrees with Barr’s summary. Files have a habit of leaking in the current administration. Maybe you missed the news about ten years of trump’s taxes being sent to the NYT....stand by for a tweet storm.the rank and file has no say at all. they are worker bees. is it my personal opinion that Mueller did not recommend any charges? that was his call and he made it. actually he politicized his "decline to indict" part of his mandate which violates his mandate. but that's another matter yeah?
I would post links but I can’t seem to get my iPad to cooperate with the platform. I’ll have it figured out soon Originally Posted by Jaxson66
the rank and file has no say at all. they are worker bees. is it my personal opinion that Mueller did not recommend any charges? that was his call and he made it. actually he politicized his "decline to indict" part of his mandate which violates his mandate. but that's another matter yeah?I would say Trumps net worth fluctuates depending on what real estate appraisals are. Much like people that are heavily invested in the market.
i don't give a rat's ass about Trump's taxes. he's been audited forever. and this time there is no reason to accuse him of lying yeah? so let's give the Donald a TRUE on that eh?
there isn't going to be any evidence in his returns that the IRS hasn't already seen or found, no smoking gun that once again shows some Russian money laundering. like Jackie said before, the only bad thing for Trump is it likely shows he's simply not as rich as he claims. Originally Posted by The_Waco_Kid
the rank and file has no say at all. they are worker bees. is it my personal opinion that Mueller did not recommend any charges? that was his call and he made it. actually he politicized his "decline to indict" part of his mandate which violates his mandate. but that's another matter yeah?I don’t know if a vote of no confidence can be taken in the DOJ but I’d bet against him. Mueller states in the report that the Russians interfered in 2016 with sweeping and systematic attacks against democracy. In volume two there are separate incidents of trump’s behavior regarding Comey, Sessions and Mcgahn that is what me and 700 former prosecutors consider obstruction.
i don't give a rat's ass about Trump's taxes. he's been audited forever. and this time there is no reason to accuse him of lying yeah? so let's give the Donald a TRUE on that eh?
there isn't going to be any evidence in his returns that the IRS hasn't already seen or found, no smoking gun that once again shows some Russian money laundering. like Jackie said before, the only bad thing for Trump is it likely shows he's simply not as rich as he claims. Originally Posted by The_Waco_Kid
I don’t know if a vote of no confidence can be taken in the DOJ but I’d bet against him. Mueller states in the report that the Russians interfered in 2016 with sweeping and systematic attacks against democracy. In volume two there are separate incidents of trump’s behavior regarding Comey, Sessions and Mcgahn that is what me and 700 former prosecutors consider obstruction.Would you wanted to be treated by the justice system as you propose. If you had a good attorney, I doubt it.
I don’t think it’s asking to much to see the underlying evidence of those ten incidents. Private notes were taken by Mcgahn, Comey, and McDonald that should be questioned. I doubt a court will side with trump because Ty Cobb, trump’s lawyer at the time sent memos to everyone to cooperate with the SC.
Mnuchin is obstructing Justice by denying Congress trump’s tax returns but they will be leaked by a patriot before the courts have time to read the complaints.
I’m no Edgar Casey but I’d bet on that too. Originally Posted by Jaxson66
