Follow along with the video below to see how to install our site as a web app on your home screen.
Note: This feature may not be available in some browsers.
A close associate of Trump (Stone) lying to federal authorities, impeding an investigation, when he had information relating to the Trump campaign's communications with Wikileaks about their document dumps, at Trump's direction, is nothing?Answer, he didn't find anything.
Lol, Don Jr met a Russian lawyer and left. Anyway getting dirt on your political opponent is nothing new. How about the fbi holding on to Hunter's laptop and telling social media sites to suppress people talking about it? Biden should be in jail for that.Donnie J illegally conspiring to obtain dirt on Hillary from the Russian government is nothing?
Manafort giving internal polling data from the campaign to a Russian intel operative, polling data that ended up in the Kremlin, is nothing?
These things would have sent Trumpworld in to apoplectic hysteria if Dems did them.
You mean a lawyer asking the same questions different ways till you can catch them lying? Hopefully all those guys will get the same next year when Republicans go after them.A close associate of Trump (Stone) lying to federal authorities, impeding an investigation, when he had information relating to the Trump campaign's communications with Wikileaks about their document dumps, at Trump's direction, is nothing?
I guess it is if Dear Leader is involved.
Read what Mueller had to say about it. The reason Donnie was not charged with the crime he committed was ignorance of the law. That and the difficulty in accessing a value on the dirt Donnie was seeking when he took the meeting. The intention to commit a crime being a chargeable offense just as it would be to conspire to rob a bank.Lol, Don Jr met a Russian lawyer and left.
On the facts here, the government would unlikely be able to prove beyond a reasonable doubt that the June 9 meeting participants had general knowledge that their conduct was unlawful. The investigation has not developed evidence that the participants in the meeting were familiar with the foreign-contribution ban or the application of federal law to the relevant factual context. The government does not have strong evidence of surreptitious behavior or efforts at concealment at the time of the June 9 meeting.
But he couldn't, so he is innocent , just like Hunter?Read what Mueller had to say about it. The reason Donnie was not charged with the crime he committed was ignorance of the law. That and the difficulty in accessing a value on the dirt Donnie was seeking when he took the meeting. The intention to commit a crime being a chargeable offense just as it would be to conspire to rob a bank.
Mueller considered bringing charges related to the meeting.
When Kushner, Manafort, and Trump Jr. showed up at the meeting in Trump Tower, they anticipated receiving damaging information on Hillary Clinton. That alone was enough for the special counsel to consider bringing charges. Ultimately, Mueller’s office determined “the government would not be likely to obtain and sustain a conviction.”
Trump once said, “Then, I have an Article II, where I have to the right to do whatever I want as president.” It would appear no one in his admin or inner circle dared to inform him of his colossal misunderstanding of Article II powers. But he's finding out now.
But this thread isn't about the sordid MaL affair. It's about whether we all can agree the absolute power to pardon people possessed by the POTUS needs to be reformed?
One of the features of Trump's presidency was the extent to which he exposed weaknesses in the laws, rules, and protocols governing a prez's behavior. Weaknesses that existed because no one ever contemplated that a prez would so extensively exploit them. This article explores some of the areas in need of reform and suggests remedies to address them.
Repairing the Rule of Law: An Agenda for Post-Trump Reform
What should be done in a post-Trump world to restore the rule of law?www.lawfareblog.com
One of them being.............-Pardon reform. There can be little doubt of two things. First, as currently constructed, the president’s pardon power is nearly absolute. Second, President Trump’s use of the pardon power has transgressed the Founders’ expectations. Indeed, the idea that a president might pardon his own criminal confederates (as is arguably the case with Roger Stone) is exactly why George Mason opposed the pardon power altogether. At some point, Congress might give serious consideration to a constitutional amendment that, for example, makes pardons illegal for individuals personally known to the president and makes the misuse of the power judicially reviewable.
As the author points out, Stone is the most glaring example of an abuse because he possessed information that related to Trump's exposure in the Mueller investigation. After making it clear to Stone his silence would be rewarded Stone was in fact pardoned. I can think of no other example of a previous prez so manifestly abusing his authority.
The question at hand being, can we agree no POTUS should be allowed to pardon someone who could act as a hostile witness to the prez in a civil or criminal case or in an impeachment trial?
I think Trump could be done for obstruction of justice... It is pretty clear that this power Trump used was to protect himself in a case. It shouldn't be on the government to make a strong case, with such power it should be almost Trump that has the burden of proof considering he pardoned a person who could have testified against him.I think it's fair to say many prez's have tried to exceed their authority. Lincoln surely did. Trump did it in record fashion. I take your response as being in favor of reform.
I think Trump could be done for obstruction of justice... It is pretty clear that this power Trump used was to protect himself in a case. It shouldn't be on the government to make a strong case, with such power it should be almost Trump that has the burden of proof considering he pardoned a person who could have testified against him.
First, Rodger Stone should be brought into testify under oath, he doesn't enjoy the ability of pleading the fifth and he can be prosecuted for perjury or contempt of court. Televise it too...
No they didn't. Conspiracy to collude was proven; U.S. has new intel that Manafort pal gave Trump campaign data to RussiaBull the fbi even said it was not true.
Repeat lies everyone has debunked. Are you mentally sick?Answer, he didn't find anything.
No we won't, because we told the truth. And so far, no one from Trump's cultist camp has changed that reality.The Witch Hunt run by The Democrat Party at The State and Federal Levels costing taxpayers Billions of dollars over the past 6 years discounts everything any of you DemNazi scumbags have to say. Every last word out of your mouth is nothing but propaganda. and lies
You'll go to Hell for that.
Tell me this. What collusion did Mueller find? With unlimited resources and money?
www.nbcnews.com
I guess it is if Dear Leader is involved.
Trump is "dangling pardons" to the insurrectionists right now. Offering full pardons and apologies to them if he's re-elected. Nobody is doing anything about it.
I think Trump could be done for obstruction of justice...
Is it my imagination, or are the rubes becoming more and more feral and bitter? I swear, it's accelerating. Is it the increasing risk of legal action their mullah if facing that has them so agitated?No we won't, because we told the truth. And so far, no one from Trump's cultist camp has changed that reality.
The top 1% own you, not just the wealth. Thanks to Reagan and Citizens United, they ruined the middle class.The top 1% own about 90% of everything. This is why Biden and the dems always say they are going after the people making over $400,000/yr. That never works. As Sinema proved recently, the wealthy ALWAYS buy their "tax loopholes" from the pols they own. When Trump was in, the GOP cut taxes for the wealthy, trotting out the old GOP dogma that "GDP growth would hit 5%". It NEVER works.
Lately the uber-wealthy hi-tech oligarchs, like Zuckerberg, are spending their money on politics, buying elections. So the "wealth divide" isn't only between Rs & Ds. There are also "value divides", such as between "traditional values" and "woke values", or lack thereof, like for abortion. Its not only about money. There are many issues that divide us. Race, wealth, religion, political philosophy, region, education, etc. When the middle gets too pushy, like when unions make outrageous demands, the wealthy move factories overseas. In CA today, burger flippers are demanding $25/hr, so they are pricing themselves to the unemployment line.
View attachment 694007
He did it to himelf.We can all agree Orange Man Bad
It's not your imagination. They can smell the rule of law working by way of the chronic lying they get caught up in, and it's not in their favor. They understand their own individual exposure here, and they need to make a choice, what side they are on. Are they for the Constitution, the institutions that prop it up, the rule of law, American patriotism, etc., or do they walk away from it? They know, by walking away from it, they'll be on the wrong side of history if they do. They'll be looked upon as traitors, and they know that's what they'll be.Is it my imagination, or are the rubes becoming more and more feral and bitter? I swear, it's accelerating. Is it the increasing risk of legal action their mullah if facing that has them so agitated?
Are you seeing this, too?
What about Manafort and the polling data?Lol, Don Jr met a Russian lawyer and left. Anyway getting dirt on your political opponent is nothing new. How about the fbi holding on to Hunter's laptop and telling social media sites to suppress people talking about it? Biden should be in jail for that.
Muellers job was never to convict, but to expose the crimes. He did that. Barr hijacked the pertinent parts of his own reading of the Mueller report, whereby wiping it under the rug. When that was exposed, as of late, we now find that Trump was/is guilty as sin by way of obstruction and conspiracy.But he couldn't, so he is innocent , just like Hunter?
Trump once said, “Then, I have an Article II, where I have to the right to do whatever I want as president.” It would appear no one in his admin or inner circle dared to inform him of his colossal misunderstanding of Article II powers. But he's finding out now.
But this thread isn't about the sordid MaL affair. It's about whether we all can agree the absolute power to pardon people possessed by the POTUS needs to be reformed?
One of the features of Trump's presidency was the extent to which he exposed weaknesses in the laws, rules, and protocols governing a prez's behavior. Weaknesses that existed because no one ever contemplated that a prez would so extensively exploit them. This article explores some of the areas in need of reform and suggests remedies to address them.
Repairing the Rule of Law: An Agenda for Post-Trump Reform
What should be done in a post-Trump world to restore the rule of law?
One of them being.............-Pardon reform. There can be little doubt of two things. First, as currently constructed, the president’s pardon power is nearly absolute. Second, President Trump’s use of the pardon power has transgressed the Founders’ expectations. Indeed, the idea that a president might pardon his own criminal confederates (as is arguably the case with Roger Stone) is exactly why George Mason opposed the pardon power altogether. At some point, Congress might give serious consideration to a constitutional amendment that, for example, makes pardons illegal for individuals personally known to the president and makes the misuse of the power judicially reviewable.
As the author points out, Stone is the most glaring example of an abuse because he possessed information that related to Trump's exposure in the Mueller investigation. After making it clear to Stone his silence would be rewarded Stone was in fact pardoned. I can think of no other example of a previous prez so manifestly abusing his authority.
The question at hand being, can we agree no POTUS should be allowed to pardon someone who could act as a hostile witness to the prez in a civil or criminal case or in an impeachment trial?
