- Dec 18, 2013
- 136,651
- 27,995
- 2,180
are there any indictments against trump?
Navigation
Install the app
How to install the app on iOS
Follow along with the video below to see how to install our site as a web app on your home screen.
Note: This feature currently requires accessing the site using the built-in Safari browser.
More options
You are using an out of date browser. It may not display this or other websites correctly.
You should upgrade or use an alternative browser.
You should upgrade or use an alternative browser.
Why Is The GOP Senate So Afraid To Call Witnesses??
- Thread starter Biff_Poindexter
- Start date
Biff_Poindexter
Diamond Member
- Thread starter
- #1,302
The Senate trial starts next week....don't worry, the articles will not be sent over, so no one else will be testifying.It does hear testimony though, right? View evidence? Interview experts on the validity of said evidence? Whatever this preceding is..and I include the House in this as well...a fair and impartial weighing of all the evidence..is what it is NOT!The House needs to present a complete and valid case. They are the prosecutors. The Senate is the jury. A jury does not investigate.
Should the Senate decide to call witnesses, I have no particular problem with it, because the witnesses who will be called will be the witnesses disallowed by the House during the Shiff/Nadler nonsense.
It would be my advice to the Democrats to avoid this at all costs. Fortunately, they don't much listen to me.
Did you mean to type this comment last week??
4 is the magic number.
- Dec 18, 2013
- 136,651
- 27,995
- 2,180
without the articles then. are they there yet? LOLThe Senate trial starts next week....don't worry, the articles will not be sent over, so no one else will be testifying.It does hear testimony though, right? View evidence? Interview experts on the validity of said evidence? Whatever this preceding is..and I include the House in this as well...a fair and impartial weighing of all the evidence..is what it is NOT!The House needs to present a complete and valid case. They are the prosecutors. The Senate is the jury. A jury does not investigate.
Should the Senate decide to call witnesses, I have no particular problem with it, because the witnesses who will be called will be the witnesses disallowed by the House during the Shiff/Nadler nonsense.
It would be my advice to the Democrats to avoid this at all costs. Fortunately, they don't much listen to me.
Did you mean to type this comment last week??
Biff_Poindexter
Diamond Member
- Thread starter
- #1,305
No, sitting presidents cant be indicted...but they can be named as co-conspirators in other indictments tho…..like the kind when their long time lawyers get convicted...are there any indictments against trump?No, Obama didn't use the IRS to target political opponents...but don't just take my word, take the word of Trump's DOJ...By the way.....those documents and everything else is available now....guess what it still found??Please...have you ever heard of a document dump? It's when defendants provide thousands of documents to "prove" that they are cooperating with an investigation while they withhold documents that are harmful to them. Hillary Clinton provided lots of documents to the Benghazi investigators too but that doesn't mean she REALLY cooperated with the investigation! At the same time as she was promising to turn over everything related to Benghazi she was having tens of thousands of emails scrubbed from her secret servers to keep Congressional investigators from seeing them! What Holder did with Fast & Furious is no different...he provided 7,600 documents that didn't hurt the Obama Administration but when he was pressed for more he claimed Executive Privilege.
Fast & Furious was another manufactured scandal just like the IRS scandal, Benghazi, etc etc etc.....
Trump however, he is impeached......
Fast & Furious was a "manufactured" scandal? Did the Obama Administration not OK a gun running operation across the Mexican border? Did the Obama Administration not use the IRS against it's political opponents? Did the Obama Administration not run it's State Department through hidden servers to evade oversight by Congress? Those are all REAL things that happened!
The Trump "impeachment" is a political maneuver done by Democratic leaders because they're scared shitless he's going to win reelection!
DOJ denies GOP request to reopen case against former IRS official Lois Lerner
Were there any indictments handed out because of the fake ass IRS scandal?? Nope.....
The Trump admin racked up tons of indictments tho...
Cohen Plea Deal Makes Trump 'Unindicted Co-Conspirator,' Watergate Prosecutor Says
Can you tell me if so much as Obama's gardener been indicted with anything?? let alone his personal lawyer...
Keep failing tho...
- Dec 18, 2013
- 136,651
- 27,995
- 2,180
none were, so I'm still waiting.No, sitting presidents cant be indicted...but they can be named as co-conspirators in other indictments tho…..like the kind when their long time lawyers get convicted...are there any indictments against trump?No, Obama didn't use the IRS to target political opponents...but don't just take my word, take the word of Trump's DOJ...By the way.....those documents and everything else is available now....guess what it still found??Please...have you ever heard of a document dump? It's when defendants provide thousands of documents to "prove" that they are cooperating with an investigation while they withhold documents that are harmful to them. Hillary Clinton provided lots of documents to the Benghazi investigators too but that doesn't mean she REALLY cooperated with the investigation! At the same time as she was promising to turn over everything related to Benghazi she was having tens of thousands of emails scrubbed from her secret servers to keep Congressional investigators from seeing them! What Holder did with Fast & Furious is no different...he provided 7,600 documents that didn't hurt the Obama Administration but when he was pressed for more he claimed Executive Privilege.
Fast & Furious was another manufactured scandal just like the IRS scandal, Benghazi, etc etc etc.....
Trump however, he is impeached......
Fast & Furious was a "manufactured" scandal? Did the Obama Administration not OK a gun running operation across the Mexican border? Did the Obama Administration not use the IRS against it's political opponents? Did the Obama Administration not run it's State Department through hidden servers to evade oversight by Congress? Those are all REAL things that happened!
The Trump "impeachment" is a political maneuver done by Democratic leaders because they're scared shitless he's going to win reelection!
DOJ denies GOP request to reopen case against former IRS official Lois Lerner
Were there any indictments handed out because of the fake ass IRS scandal?? Nope.....
The Trump admin racked up tons of indictments tho...
Cohen Plea Deal Makes Trump 'Unindicted Co-Conspirator,' Watergate Prosecutor Says
Can you tell me if so much as Obama's gardener been indicted with anything?? let alone his personal lawyer...
Keep failing tho...
- Dec 18, 2013
- 136,651
- 27,995
- 2,180
for what?4 is the magic number.
HOGWASH!!!In the case of Nixon...there was an actual crime...followed by an actual cover up of the crime! The Supreme Court ruled that Nixon couldn't hold back any material related to those criminal acts! That is totally different from what is taking place now, Care! You liberals want to subpoena Trump Administration Staff members in the hopes of finding a crime to impeach Trump on when you haven't produced any evidence whatsoever that a crime has taken place!
here are just some of the alleged crimes, for the second reposting
Laws broken, abuses of power
Campaign finance laws on foreign gvt help.
Bribery/extortion, govt corruption.... soliciting help from Velensky, to make an announcement on CNN that the Ukraine was opening an investigation in to the Biden's, in order for the Ukraine to get their congressionally passed military aid, and a coveted white house meeting.... quid pro quo.
The Congressional Budget and Impoundment Control Act of 1974 - holding back the military aid passed by congress was illegal
Hiding the IG urgent designated whistleblower complaint from congress was illegal.
Refusing to turn over any subpoena documents, breaks the law
Refusing to allow admin witnesses to testify, on this made up "absolute immunity claim" is illegal.
(Both, obstruction of congress.)
Harassing the whistleblower, illegal
Sending Giuliani and thugs, to the Ukraine is also problematic
All above need witnesses and evidence
----------------------
no one is looking for more crimes, there are enough alleged crimes already
they want to bring first hand witnesses forward who are directly involved with the president's actions in these specific Trump Articles of Impeachment... no one is fishing for other crimes
Trump's whining claims, and Republican regurgitation of them, is that there have been no first hand witnesses, it's all conjecture, a 'heard or was told' thing,
but that don't fly!
Because Trump has prevented first hand witnesses from even showing up, some stupid, and recently rejected by the courts, illegal thing he is calling Absolute Immunity, not even executive privilege...
So, now is the time to call the first hand witnesses and subpoenaed documentary evidence, that Trump has been holding back, that he's claimed, the other side needs....
THIS IS A COVER-UP, above and beyond Nixon's cover up!.... is what is going on here... wish so much, that you could see it or admit you see it, but you are OK with it....?
Last edited:
- Dec 18, 2013
- 136,651
- 27,995
- 2,180
hahahaahahahahahahaha, no crime in the articles of the supposed impeachment thingy. what is it? you got nothing jack.HOGWASH!!!In the case of Nixon...there was an actual crime...followed by an actual cover up of the crime! The Supreme Court ruled that Nixon couldn't hold back any material related to those criminal acts! That is totally different from what is taking place now, Care! You liberals want to subpoena Trump Administration Staff members in the hopes of finding a crime to impeach Trump on when you haven't produced any evidence whatsoever that a crime has taken place!
here are just some of the alleged crimes, for the second reposting
Laws broken, abuses of power
Campaign finance laws on foreign gvt help.
Bribery/extortion, govt corruption.... soliciting help from Velensky, to make an announcement on CNN that the Ukraine was opening an investigation in to the Biden's, in order for the Ukraine to get their congressionally passed military aid, and a coveted white house meeting.... quid pro quo.
The Congressional Budget and Impoundment Control Act of 1974 - holding back the military aid passed by congress was illegal
Hiding the IG urgent designated whistleblower complaint from congress was illegal.
Refusing to turn over any subpoena documents, breaks the law
Refusing to allow admin witnesses to testify, on this made up "absolute immunity claim" is illegal.
Both, obstruction of congress.
Harassing the whistleblower, illegal
Sending Giuliani and thugs, to the Ukraine is also problematic
All above need witnesses and evidence
----------------------
no one is looking for more crimes, there are enough alleged crimes already
they want to bring first hand witnesses forward who are directly involved with the president's actions in these specific Trump Articles of Impeachment... no one is fishing for other crimes
Trump's whining claims, and Republican regurgitation of them, is that there have been no first hand witnesses, it's all conjecture, a 'heard or was told' thing,
but that don't fly!
Because Trump has prevented first hand witnesses from even showing up, some stupid, and recently rejected by the courts, illegal thing he is calling Absolute Immunity, not even executive privilege...
So, now is the time to call the first hand witnesses and subpoenaed documentary evidence, that Trump has been holding back, that he's claimed, the other side needs....
THIS IS A COVER-UP, above and beyond Nixon's cover up!.... is what is going on here... wish so much, that you could see it or admit you see it, but you are OK with it....?
Me..I'm offended by the procedure...I've been against removal..from the start...but this shyte is so egregious....that it does make one wonder....what is REALLY behind the curtain?well the three prosecutors present the articles and answer the jury's questions. What else is needed? the house ran the investigation and are supposed to question all witnesses ahead of the trial. what is it you believe they missed? Obviously you believe they didn't do their jobs otherwise why would you need more witnesses?It does hear testimony though, right? View evidence? Interview experts on the validity of said evidence? Whatever this preceding is..and I include the House in this as well...a fair and impartial weighing of all the evidence..is what it is NOT!The House needs to present a complete and valid case. They are the prosecutors. The Senate is the jury. A jury does not investigate.
Anyhow..looks like we gunna have some sort of a trial..Pelosi is presenting the articles.
https://www.usnews.com/news/politic...nesday-to-send-impeachment-articles-to-senate
- Dec 18, 2013
- 136,651
- 27,995
- 2,180
the house will not approve it.Me..I'm offended by the procedure...I've been against removal..from the start...but this shyte is so egregious....that it does make one wonder....what is REALLY behind the curtain?well the three prosecutors present the articles and answer the jury's questions. What else is needed? the house ran the investigation and are supposed to question all witnesses ahead of the trial. what is it you believe they missed? Obviously you believe they didn't do their jobs otherwise why would you need more witnesses?It does hear testimony though, right? View evidence? Interview experts on the validity of said evidence? Whatever this preceding is..and I include the House in this as well...a fair and impartial weighing of all the evidence..is what it is NOT!The House needs to present a complete and valid case. They are the prosecutors. The Senate is the jury. A jury does not investigate.
Anyhow..looks like we gunna have some sort of a trial..Pelosi is presenting the articles.
Billy_Kinetta
Paladin of the Lost Hour
- Mar 4, 2013
- 52,766
- 22,197
- 2,320
HOGWASH!!!In the case of Nixon...there was an actual crime...followed by an actual cover up of the crime! The Supreme Court ruled that Nixon couldn't hold back any material related to those criminal acts! That is totally different from what is taking place now, Care! You liberals want to subpoena Trump Administration Staff members in the hopes of finding a crime to impeach Trump on when you haven't produced any evidence whatsoever that a crime has taken place!
here are just some of the alleged crimes, for the second reposting
Laws broken, abuses of power
Campaign finance laws on foreign gvt help.
Bribery/extortion, govt corruption.... soliciting help from Velensky, to make an announcement on CNN that the Ukraine was opening an investigation in to the Biden's, in order for the Ukraine to get their congressionally passed military aid, and a coveted white house meeting.... quid pro quo.
The Congressional Budget and Impoundment Control Act of 1974 - holding back the military aid passed by congress was illegal
Hiding the IG urgent designated whistleblower complaint from congress was illegal.
Refusing to turn over any subpoena documents, breaks the law
Refusing to allow admin witnesses to testify, on this made up "absolute immunity claim" is illegal.
Both, obstruction of congress.
Harassing the whistleblower, illegal
Sending Giuliani and thugs, to the Ukraine is also problematic
All above need witnesses and evidence
----------------------
no one is looking for more crimes, there are enough alleged crimes already
they want to bring first hand witnesses forward who are directly involved with the president's actions in these specific Trump Articles of Impeachment... no one is fishing for other crimes
Trump's whining claims, and Republican regurgitation of them, is that there have been no first hand witnesses, it's all conjecture, a 'heard or was told' thing,
but that don't fly!
Because Trump has prevented first hand witnesses from even showing up, some stupid, and recently rejected by the courts, illegal thing he is calling Absolute Immunity, not even executive privilege...
So, now is the time to call the first hand witnesses and subpoenaed documentary evidence, that Trump has been holding back, that he's claimed, the other side needs....
THIS IS A COVER-UP, above and beyond Nixon's cover up!.... is what is going on here... wish so much, that you could see it or admit you see it, but you are OK with it....?
nope!Holder and the Obama Administration only claimed Executive Privilege when it became apparent that people in the Obama Administration knew about Fast & Furious long before they had claimed. THAT was when Holder refused to answer any more questions.
the republican lead investigations ended up proving NEITHER Obama or Holder knew about Fast and Furious, until afterwards.
AND a court SUIT, MADE HOLDER turn over all the executive privileged document he previously held back....
Republicans in Congress GOT everything! Another precedent imo, of the Court's ruling, we the people, through Congress.. our only representation in our govt and with their Congressional oversight power, have a RIGHT TO KNOW what's going on in the govt we pay for, over and above, executive privilege!
WillowTree
Diamond Member
- Sep 15, 2008
- 84,532
- 16,091
- 2,180
Horse shit!HOGWASH!!!In the case of Nixon...there was an actual crime...followed by an actual cover up of the crime! The Supreme Court ruled that Nixon couldn't hold back any material related to those criminal acts! That is totally different from what is taking place now, Care! You liberals want to subpoena Trump Administration Staff members in the hopes of finding a crime to impeach Trump on when you haven't produced any evidence whatsoever that a crime has taken place!
here are just some of the alleged crimes, for the second reposting
Laws broken, abuses of power
Campaign finance laws on foreign gvt help.
Bribery/extortion, govt corruption.... soliciting help from Velensky, to make an announcement on CNN that the Ukraine was opening an investigation in to the Biden's, in order for the Ukraine to get their congressionally passed military aid, and a coveted white house meeting.... quid pro quo.
The Congressional Budget and Impoundment Control Act of 1974 - holding back the military aid passed by congress was illegal
Hiding the IG urgent designated whistleblower complaint from congress was illegal.
Refusing to turn over any subpoena documents, breaks the law
Refusing to allow admin witnesses to testify, on this made up "absolute immunity claim" is illegal.
Both, obstruction of congress.
Harassing the whistleblower, illegal
Sending Giuliani and thugs, to the Ukraine is also problematic
All above need witnesses and evidence
----------------------
no one is looking for more crimes, there are enough alleged crimes already
they want to bring first hand witnesses forward who are directly involved with the president's actions in these specific Trump Articles of Impeachment... no one is fishing for other crimes
Trump's whining claims, and Republican regurgitation of them, is that there have been no first hand witnesses, it's all conjecture, a 'heard or was told' thing,
but that don't fly!
Because Trump has prevented first hand witnesses from even showing up, some stupid, and recently rejected by the courts, illegal thing he is calling Absolute Immunity, not even executive privilege...
So, now is the time to call the first hand witnesses and subpoenaed documentary evidence, that Trump has been holding back, that he's claimed, the other side needs....
THIS IS A COVER-UP, above and beyond Nixon's cover up!.... is what is going on here... wish so much, that you could see it or admit you see it, but you are OK with it....?
LOL! Just sayin'...you have a lousy track record as a prophet!the house will not approve it.Me..I'm offended by the procedure...I've been against removal..from the start...but this shyte is so egregious....that it does make one wonder....what is REALLY behind the curtain?well the three prosecutors present the articles and answer the jury's questions. What else is needed? the house ran the investigation and are supposed to question all witnesses ahead of the trial. what is it you believe they missed? Obviously you believe they didn't do their jobs otherwise why would you need more witnesses?It does hear testimony though, right? View evidence? Interview experts on the validity of said evidence? Whatever this preceding is..and I include the House in this as well...a fair and impartial weighing of all the evidence..is what it is NOT!The House needs to present a complete and valid case. They are the prosecutors. The Senate is the jury. A jury does not investigate.
Anyhow..looks like we gunna have some sort of a trial..Pelosi is presenting the articles.
Yes, they will--they really have no choice--history is rushing to a conclusion....leading to big ***yawn***
- Dec 18, 2013
- 136,651
- 27,995
- 2,180
and that's the truth.Horse shit!HOGWASH!!!In the case of Nixon...there was an actual crime...followed by an actual cover up of the crime! The Supreme Court ruled that Nixon couldn't hold back any material related to those criminal acts! That is totally different from what is taking place now, Care! You liberals want to subpoena Trump Administration Staff members in the hopes of finding a crime to impeach Trump on when you haven't produced any evidence whatsoever that a crime has taken place!
here are just some of the alleged crimes, for the second reposting
Laws broken, abuses of power
Campaign finance laws on foreign gvt help.
Bribery/extortion, govt corruption.... soliciting help from Velensky, to make an announcement on CNN that the Ukraine was opening an investigation in to the Biden's, in order for the Ukraine to get their congressionally passed military aid, and a coveted white house meeting.... quid pro quo.
The Congressional Budget and Impoundment Control Act of 1974 - holding back the military aid passed by congress was illegal
Hiding the IG urgent designated whistleblower complaint from congress was illegal.
Refusing to turn over any subpoena documents, breaks the law
Refusing to allow admin witnesses to testify, on this made up "absolute immunity claim" is illegal.
Both, obstruction of congress.
Harassing the whistleblower, illegal
Sending Giuliani and thugs, to the Ukraine is also problematic
All above need witnesses and evidence
----------------------
no one is looking for more crimes, there are enough alleged crimes already
they want to bring first hand witnesses forward who are directly involved with the president's actions in these specific Trump Articles of Impeachment... no one is fishing for other crimes
Trump's whining claims, and Republican regurgitation of them, is that there have been no first hand witnesses, it's all conjecture, a 'heard or was told' thing,
but that don't fly!
Because Trump has prevented first hand witnesses from even showing up, some stupid, and recently rejected by the courts, illegal thing he is calling Absolute Immunity, not even executive privilege...
So, now is the time to call the first hand witnesses and subpoenaed documentary evidence, that Trump has been holding back, that he's claimed, the other side needs....
THIS IS A COVER-UP, above and beyond Nixon's cover up!.... is what is going on here... wish so much, that you could see it or admit you see it, but you are OK with it....?
- Dec 18, 2013
- 136,651
- 27,995
- 2,180
no they won't. there is no upside to.LOL! Just sayin'...you have a lousy track record as a prophet!the house will not approve it.Me..I'm offended by the procedure...I've been against removal..from the start...but this shyte is so egregious....that it does make one wonder....what is REALLY behind the curtain?well the three prosecutors present the articles and answer the jury's questions. What else is needed? the house ran the investigation and are supposed to question all witnesses ahead of the trial. what is it you believe they missed? Obviously you believe they didn't do their jobs otherwise why would you need more witnesses?It does hear testimony though, right? View evidence? Interview experts on the validity of said evidence? Whatever this preceding is..and I include the House in this as well...a fair and impartial weighing of all the evidence..is what it is NOT!The House needs to present a complete and valid case. They are the prosecutors. The Senate is the jury. A jury does not investigate.
Anyhow..looks like we gunna have some sort of a trial..Pelosi is presenting the articles.
Yes, they will--they really have no choice--history is rushing to a conclusion....leading to big ***yawn***
WillowTree
Diamond Member
- Sep 15, 2008
- 84,532
- 16,091
- 2,180
Why did Obama claim executive privilege and seal the fast and furious documents?When did Obama prevent any of his cabinet members from testifying in an impeachment trial??Remember the part about Obama not being impeached and Obama not preventing his cabinet from testifying??Please...have you ever heard of a document dump? It's when defendants provide thousands of documents to "prove" that they are cooperating with an investigation while they withhold documents that are harmful to them. Hillary Clinton provided lots of documents to the Benghazi investigators too but that doesn't mean she REALLY cooperated with the investigation! At the same time as she was promising to turn over everything related to Benghazi she was having tens of thousands of emails scrubbed from her secret servers to keep Congressional investigators from seeing them! What Holder did with Fast & Furious is no different...he provided 7,600 documents that didn't hurt the Obama Administration but when he was pressed for more he claimed Executive Privilege.
And isn't Trump far more superior and honest than the Obama admin?? Why do you defend everything he does by saying "but but but Obama did it" -- and still getting that part wrong
Why do you get offended when I point out that the things you accuse Trump of without proof...Obama actually DID! I'm amused at the Left's blatant hypocrisy!
I'll keep waiting while you continue to fail...
there were not Criminal Statutes allegedly broken listed because the House did not have special prosecutors investigating, like COX, JAWORSKY, STARR in other impeachment cases... a DOJ prosecutor can state, after investigation, alleged criminal offenses and with a criminal statute associated.hahahaahahahahahahaha, no crime in the articles of the supposed impeachment thingy. what is it? you got nothing jack.HOGWASH!!!In the case of Nixon...there was an actual crime...followed by an actual cover up of the crime! The Supreme Court ruled that Nixon couldn't hold back any material related to those criminal acts! That is totally different from what is taking place now, Care! You liberals want to subpoena Trump Administration Staff members in the hopes of finding a crime to impeach Trump on when you haven't produced any evidence whatsoever that a crime has taken place!
here are just some of the alleged crimes, for the second reposting
Laws broken, abuses of power
Campaign finance laws on foreign gvt help.
Bribery/extortion, govt corruption.... soliciting help from Velensky, to make an announcement on CNN that the Ukraine was opening an investigation in to the Biden's, in order for the Ukraine to get their congressionally passed military aid, and a coveted white house meeting.... quid pro quo.
The Congressional Budget and Impoundment Control Act of 1974 - holding back the military aid passed by congress was illegal
Hiding the IG urgent designated whistleblower complaint from congress was illegal.
Refusing to turn over any subpoena documents, breaks the law
Refusing to allow admin witnesses to testify, on this made up "absolute immunity claim" is illegal.
Both, obstruction of congress.
Harassing the whistleblower, illegal
Sending Giuliani and thugs, to the Ukraine is also problematic
All above need witnesses and evidence
----------------------
no one is looking for more crimes, there are enough alleged crimes already
they want to bring first hand witnesses forward who are directly involved with the president's actions in these specific Trump Articles of Impeachment... no one is fishing for other crimes
Trump's whining claims, and Republican regurgitation of them, is that there have been no first hand witnesses, it's all conjecture, a 'heard or was told' thing,
but that don't fly!
Because Trump has prevented first hand witnesses from even showing up, some stupid, and recently rejected by the courts, illegal thing he is calling Absolute Immunity, not even executive privilege...
So, now is the time to call the first hand witnesses and subpoenaed documentary evidence, that Trump has been holding back, that he's claimed, the other side needs....
THIS IS A COVER-UP, above and beyond Nixon's cover up!.... is what is going on here... wish so much, that you could see it or admit you see it, but you are OK with it....?
Congress critters can't. IF a president is impeached from office, after he leaves, prosecutors will open their own investigations and press charges if need be, in the case of not having Special Prosecutors ahead of time, is my understanding of it....
- Dec 18, 2013
- 136,651
- 27,995
- 2,180
shhhhhhhhhhh you'll educate the fool.Why did Obama claim executive privilege and seal the fast and furious documents?When did Obama prevent any of his cabinet members from testifying in an impeachment trial??Remember the part about Obama not being impeached and Obama not preventing his cabinet from testifying??Please...have you ever heard of a document dump? It's when defendants provide thousands of documents to "prove" that they are cooperating with an investigation while they withhold documents that are harmful to them. Hillary Clinton provided lots of documents to the Benghazi investigators too but that doesn't mean she REALLY cooperated with the investigation! At the same time as she was promising to turn over everything related to Benghazi she was having tens of thousands of emails scrubbed from her secret servers to keep Congressional investigators from seeing them! What Holder did with Fast & Furious is no different...he provided 7,600 documents that didn't hurt the Obama Administration but when he was pressed for more he claimed Executive Privilege.
And isn't Trump far more superior and honest than the Obama admin?? Why do you defend everything he does by saying "but but but Obama did it" -- and still getting that part wrong
Why do you get offended when I point out that the things you accuse Trump of without proof...Obama actually DID! I'm amused at the Left's blatant hypocrisy!
I'll keep waiting while you continue to fail...
Similar threads
- Replies
- 121
- Views
- 1K
- Locked
- Replies
- 13
- Views
- 154
- Replies
- 84
- Views
- 678
- Replies
- 77
- Views
- 741
Latest Discussions
- Replies
- 787
- Views
- 5K
- Replies
- 20
- Views
- 79
- Replies
- 5
- Views
- 58
Forum List
-
-
-
-
-
Political Satire 8077
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
ObamaCare 781
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
Member Usernotes 471
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-