Trump Impeachments Were Unfair, Unprecedented, and Unconstitutional

[AntonToo]

You gave an opinion that proves nothing.

Copy and paste the text from the Mueller report where Mueller clearly makes the determination Trump acted with "the intent to obtain an improper advantage for himself or someone else, in a manner inconsistent with official duty and the rights of others"

G'head. I'll wait.

You have no idea what you are talking about.

Mueller laid out clearly why DOJ policy did not allow him to bring charges and make deregatory determinations.

 

[Independentthinker]

He is wrong. It was not unfair and not unconstitutional. The only reason that it is unprecedented is because Trump's level of corruption in the White House was unprecedented.

He's not wrong. It was a railroad job and even as partisan as Nadler is, he noticed Trump was getting railroaded and not given due process, the very same thing going on right now with the Jan 6th committee, which is a full blown Union Station.

 

[Catsnmeters]

hahah he didn’t say there was obstruction in other of those quotes

He answered the n the affirmative to this question.

And your investigation actually found, quote, "multiple acts by the president that were capable of exerting undue influence over law enforcement investigations, including the Russian interference and obstruction investigations." Is that correct?

Mueller: Correct."

That is obstruction.

i didn’t say indict…i asked why they didn’t impeach

And I have said several times, I don't know. I have speculated that the reason is the same as Trump's for not going after Hillary.

it looks great for trump cause they investigated and didn’t impeach…..therein the house exonerated trump of those accusations.

They did impeach. Twice. Learn how impeachment works and get back to me.

 

[Catsnmeters]

WAS THAT IN THE BOOK?

What book? I tend to read fantasy with some American history sprinkled in.

 

[M14 Shooter]

You have no idea what you are talking about.

Clearly I do, and just as clearly, you cannot meet the challenge put to you.

Copy and paste the text from the Mueller report where Mueller clearly makes the determination Trump acted with "the intent to obtain an improper advantage for himself or someone else, in a manner inconsistent with official duty and the rights of others"

Well?

Mueller laid out clearly why DOJ policy did not allow him to bring charges and make deregatory determinations.

This is a lie.
Mueller could, and did, make the determination that Trump committed obstructive acts.
Mueller could, and did, make the determination that those acts had a nexus with e federal investigation.
Why did Mueller --not-- make the determination that Trump committed those acts w/ corrupt intent?

 

[Catsnmeters]

A charge of obstruction requires three things:
- An obstructive act
- A nexus between that act and an investigation
- Corrupt intent.
Guess which two Mueller proved, and which one he could not.

Link please.

 

[Lesh]

Clearly I do, and just as clearly, you cannot meet the challenge put to you.

Copy and paste the text from the Mueller report where Mueller clearly makes the determination Trump acted with "the intent to obtain an improper advantage for himself or someone else, in a manner inconsistent with official duty and the rights of others"

Well?


This is a lie.
Mueller could, and did, make the determination that Trump committed obstructive acts.
Mueller could, and did, make the determination that those acts had a nexus with e federal investigation.
Why did Mueller --not-- make the determination that Trump committed those acts w/ corrupt intent?

Mueller:

“Our investigation found multiple acts by the President that were capable of exerting undue influence over law enforcement investigations, including the Russian-interference and obstruction investigations,” Mueller wrote. “The incidents were often carried out through one-on-one meetings in which the President sought to use his official power outside of usual channels. These actions ranged from efforts to remove the Special Counsel and to reverse the effect of the Attorney General’s recusal; to the attempted use of official power to limit the scope of the investigation; to direct and indirect contacts with witnesses with the potential to influence their testimony.”

 

[AntonToo]

Clearly I do, and just as clearly, you cannot meet the challenge put to you.

You are asking for a determination from Mueller in the report...that Mueller told you he was not allowed to give.

Thats your proposed standard of proof.

I'm clearly wasting my time dealing with a total idiot.

 

[struth]

He answered the n the affirmative to this question.

And your investigation actually found, quote, "multiple acts by the president that were capable of exerting undue influence over law enforcement investigations, including the Russian interference and obstruction investigations." Is that correct?

Mueller: Correct."

That is obstruction.




And I have said several times, I don't know. I have speculated that the reason is the same as Trump's for not going after Hillary.


They did impeach. Twice. Learn how impeachment works and get back to me.

1) haha no it’s not…it asked if he could of had influence…of course he could he’s the president…but he didn’t as he said in the quote i provided
2) haha they wouldn’t of had the investigation if that was the case
3) which highlights your answer to number 2 is bs. They didn’t impeach over “obstruction” they were force to use”parody” over a call and the. rushed to try after jan 6

 

[struth]

Trump admitted in a public interview that DOJ recomendation to fire Comey for being too rough on Clinton is not why he fired him (DUH)

"when I decided to just do it, I said to myself, I said: ‘You know, this Russia thing with Trump and Russia is a made up story - Trump

Donald Trump admits 'this Russia thing' part of reasoning for firing Comey

President admits the allegations of collusion between his advisers and Russian officials played into sacking of FBI director

www.theguardian.com

and it was a made up story we know that now.

 

[struth]

Mueller specifically explained that DOJ policy prevented him from being able to bring charges against a sitting president or make deregotary judgements.

You are asking for something Mueller himself said he can't do.

it does, but that doesn’t mean he couldn’t recommend a charge or that he could be impeached

 

[struth]

Mueller specifically explained that DOJ policy prevented him from being able to bring charges against a sitting president or make deregotary judgements.

You are asking for something Mueller himself said he can't do.

sorry he said the pollcy prevents indicting a sitting president…not recommedation…nothing prevented making a judgement.. We know because he never said one presented a judgment, and also because Starr did

Moreover, Congress could still impeach, and they didn’t on this issue

 

[AntonToo]

sorry he said the pollcy prevents indicting a sitting president…not recommedation…nothing prevented making a judgement.. We know because he never said one presented a judgment

Wrong, wrong again. DOJ policy is to not make deregatory public judgements about someone if indictment is not made.

On paper Comey was fired for insubordination to AG and making deregatory public statements about Clinton without bringing charges.

 

[struth]

Wrong, wrong again. DOJ policy is to not make deregatory public judgements about someone if indictment is not made.

On paper Comey was fired for insubordination to AG and making deregatory public statements about Clinton without bringing charges.

DOJ can and has recommended indictments...see Ken Starr. That's not deregatory, that was the role of the Special Prosecutor in a case where impeachment must happen before indictment.

They elected not to, and punted to the House. The House found nothing to impeach on after more investigation.

Moreover, the DOJ did conclude there was no obstuction....actually I should say the OLC memo was released: DocumentCloud


Yes, we know Comey should of been fired for not bringing charges, with that said we do know he was "only following orders" from above. He said nothing deregatory about her, he just laid out the facts of what she had done. His mistake was making the conclusion, instead of handing it off the prosecutors to make that call. Rod Rosenstein's letter recommending Comey be fired

 

[AntonToo]

DOJ can and has recommended indictments...see Ken Starr.

WRONG, Ken Starr was an independent council. He was not bound by DOJ policies the way special investigator Mueller was.

 

[AntonToo]

Yes, we know Comey should of been fired for not bringing charges, with that said we do know he was "only following orders" from above. He said nothing deregatory about her, he just laid out the facts of what she had done.

Thats a stupid fantasy in your head, nothing more.


Directly from Rosenstein's recomendation for firing of Comey, which was attached to his firing letter:

The director was wrong to usurp the Attorney General's authority on July 5, 2016, and announce his conclusion that the case should be closed without prosecution.

Compounding the error, the Director ignored another longstanding principle: we do not hold press conferences to release derogatory information about the subject of a declined criminal investigation.

Rod Rosenstein's letter recommending Comey be fired

This is the letter in full by the deputy attorney general, recommending Comey be sacked.

www.bbc.com

 

[Smokin' OP]

Republicans..................turning themselves into word pretzels, trying to defend their dear leader.

 

[M14 Shooter]

Link please.

https://www.justice.gov/storage/report_volume2.pdf

 

[M14 Shooter]

Mueller:
“Our investigation found multiple acts by the President that were capable of exerting undue influence over law enforcement investigations, including the Russian-interference and obstruction investigations,” Mueller wrote. “The incidents were often carried out through one-on-one meetings in which the President sought to use his official power outside of usual channels. These actions ranged from efforts to remove the Special Counsel and to reverse the effect of the Attorney General’s recusal; to the attempted use of official power to limit the scope of the investigation; to direct and indirect contacts with witnesses with the potential to influence their testimony.”

Copy/past the text where Muller made the determination that Trump acted with corrupt intent.
W/o corrupt intent, there can be no obstruction of justice.

 

[M14 Shooter]

You are asking for a determination from Mueller in the report...that Mueller told you he was not allowed to give.

Yourr statement is a lie.
Mueller could, and did, make the determination that Trump committed obstructive acts.
Mueller could, and did, make the determination that those acts had a nexus with e federal investigation.
Mueller could - but did not - make the determination that Trump committed those acts w/ corrupt intent.
Why?

I'm clearly wasting my time dealing with a total idiot.

Says he who knows he cannot deliver.