64% think attempting and failing to obstruct justice is as bad as obstructing justice

[CrusaderFrank]

This latest survey (post the redacted Mueller report,) is a bit of "bad news" for Trump.....not only in his attempts to obstruct justice, but ALSO of his incompetence in such attempts.

As a reminder to the simple math challenged, Trump sycophants, 64% is almost 2 out of 3 voters.

Bad news for Trump: 64% of Americans think attempting and failing to obstruct justice is as bad as obstructing justice

Starkey tells me that Trump will be impeached...any day now

 

[Pogo]

This latest survey (post the redacted Mueller report,) is a bit of "bad news" for Trump.....not only in his attempts to obstruct justice, but ALSO of his incompetence in such attempts.

As a reminder to the simple math challenged, Trump sycophants, 64% is almost 2 out of 3 voters.

Bad news for Trump: 64% of Americans think attempting and failing to obstruct justice is as bad as obstructing justice

Actually, in legal terms it is, 100%.

Here's a helpful primer I happened across yesterday: I like this guy. He's a video law class.

​

He's slick, but he's also slimy, just as Mueller is. By suggesting the President may be guilty of obstruction but falsely claiming he can't indict him, despite the fact there is no case law to support that claim, and by suggesting the Democrat controlled House is where the President can get a fair hearing, Mueller makes a mockery of his own claim to "fairness".

Those were as he points out, Mueller's own ground rules from the outset. That means he can find evidence but (thinks he) cannot indict.

Now, the question of whether that's true (that a sitting POTUS can't be indicted) isn't at all settled. There's no known reason that can't happen. So it's a self-limitation.

There was no limitation at all. Mueller could have said he found adequate grounds to indict the President, if such evidence existed, but didn't because he wasn't sure he had the power to.

That's what the video and I just said. Are you a parrot?

As to fairness, you would have to be retarded to believe Trump could get a fair hearing in the Democrat controlled House as Mueller suggested.

Except he didn't.

Not sure what your point is here and I don't think you are either.

 

[basquebromance]

Trump “would never admit publicly to being wrong, no matter what steps he had to take to maintain his position; and that nothing made him angrier than to be confronted with evidence that he made a mistake.” Nat Hentoff, 1989

 

[basquebromance]

"The endorsement of Giuliani by Trump yielded dividends that went far beyond the dollars he raised and attracted headlines in every tabloid." In 1993, Wayne Barrett explored the tangled ties between Rudy Giuliani and Donald Trump

 

[Pogo]

Well it seem the poll has been shown for what it is and is another slanted poll the left want to use for their argument against Trump and Russia.

As I pointed out the article is from a German owned company and as another poster pointed out the polling data could be slanted.

Now with that I know Nat will defend the data and website while screaming about the possible Obstruction and Russia influence over our 2016 election..

I haven't looked at the poll but who owns the company is patently irrelevant.

And the way to determine if the poll was biased is to examine its methodology. That conclusion doesn't come from "Fingerboy posted it on a message board".

 

[Bruce_T_Laney]

Now as for Nat thread I am questioning why Nat is using a foreign owned site to support his opinion against Trump but then complains about Russia and Wikileaks?

Let's let other "judge" your level of your moronic logic........

I cite a foreign owned (a German-owned.....and to my best recollection, Germany is a staunch ally of the U.S.) publication that surveyed AMERICANS............and the idiot Brucey finds that somewhat "disloyal".......

The Brucey idiot then finds a parallel with his orange hero utilizing the influence of Russian oligarch's (yes, Russia is not exactly an ally) and utilizes the electronic stealing by Wikileaks operated by a pedophile who is wanted in Sweden AND the U.S.

So........my friends......review Brucey's "logic" and by all means praise his intelligentsia..........LOL

Here is your problem Nat and Julian Assange and Wikileaks information has never been discredited, so it seen you are losing this argument and melting into personal insults as usual.

The fact is you are using a website owned by a foreign company that can be influenced and you have no idea if the CEO of the company is influenced by someone like Putin or even China but you ran with the article because it support your opinion and hate for Trump.

Also Nat I am willing to bet Trump supporters can argue I hate Trump more than you but unlike you I am not someone that live dialy to bash the man with any site that support my view.

So prove that Wikileaks information was false because as of now you can not use Julian Assange criminal acts as reason, well why did people in the DNC and CNN lose their jobs?

 

[toomuchtime_]

This latest survey (post the redacted Mueller report,) is a bit of "bad news" for Trump.....not only in his attempts to obstruct justice, but ALSO of his incompetence in such attempts.

As a reminder to the simple math challenged, Trump sycophants, 64% is almost 2 out of 3 voters.

Bad news for Trump: 64% of Americans think attempting and failing to obstruct justice is as bad as obstructing justice

Actually, in legal terms it is, 100%.

Here's a helpful primer I happened across yesterday: I like this guy. He's a video law class.

​

He's slick, but he's also slimy, just as Mueller is. By suggesting the President may be guilty of obstruction but falsely claiming he can't indict him, despite the fact there is no case law to support that claim, and by suggesting the Democrat controlled House is where the President can get a fair hearing, Mueller makes a mockery of his own claim to "fairness".

Those were as he points out, Mueller's own ground rules from the outset. That means he can find evidence but (thinks he) cannot indict.

Now, the question of whether that's true (that a sitting POTUS can't be indicted) isn't at all settled. There's no known reason that can't happen. So it's a self-limitation.

There was no limitation at all. Mueller could have said he found adequate grounds to indict the President, if such evidence existed, but didn't because he wasn't sure he had the power to.

That's what the video and I just said. Are you a parrot?

As to fairness, you would have to be retarded to believe Trump could get a fair hearing in the Democrat controlled House as Mueller suggested.

Except he didn't.

Not sure what your point is here and I don't think you are either.

We both know what my pointis, that Mueller took a parting shot at Trump by not conceding he hadn't found sufficient evidence of obstruction and by saying it was now up to Congress, the Democrat controlled House, to decide if obstruction took place. Clearly, Mueller is a sleaze, and the law student who made the video is clearly another sleaze, and if you are not too stupid to see that, you are a third sleaze.

 

[toomuchtime_]

Well it seem the poll has been shown for what it is and is another slanted poll the left want to use for their argument against Trump and Russia.

As I pointed out the article is from a German owned company and as another poster pointed out the polling data could be slanted.

Now with that I know Nat will defend the data and website while screaming about the possible Obstruction and Russia influence over our 2016 election..

I haven't looked at the poll but who owns the company is patently irrelevant.

And the way to determine if the poll was biased is to examine its methodology. That conclusion doesn't come from "Fingerboy posted it on a message board".

The poll is meaningless since it asked about attempts to obstruct justice that never took place.

 

[Papageorgio]

This latest survey (post the redacted Mueller report,) is a bit of "bad news" for Trump.....not only in his attempts to obstruct justice, but ALSO of his incompetence in such attempts.

As a reminder to the simple math challenged, Trump sycophants, 64% is almost 2 out of 3 voters.

Bad news for Trump: 64% of Americans think attempting and failing to obstruct justice is as bad as obstructing justice

Pelosi and company need to impeach Trump. Not sure why they are ignoring their own principles in this matter.

 

[nat4900]

No prosecutor in the Country would charge someone with 'attempted theft'

The never-ending jon of educating Trump cultists who gather their legal knowledge from the back of a cereal box......Here:

An attempt to commit a crime occurs if a criminal has an intent to commit the crime and takes a substantial step toward completing the crime, but for reasons not intended by the criminal, the final resulting crime does not occur. Attempt to commit a particular crime is a crime....

Criminal Law - Cases and Materials, 7th ed. 2012, Wolters Kluwer Law & Business; John Kaplan (law professor), Robert Weisberg, Guyora Binder, ISBN 978-1-4548-0698-1

 

[ThisIsMe]

I agree that if trump issued orders to obstruct, it is bad. The fact that the only reason obstruction didnt take place is because of the insubordination of those working for him, is no excuse.

However, it's hard to speak out on it because the left will not speak out against their own when wrongdoing has occurred.

Had Hillary won, you can bet there would have been no further investigation of her clear and apparent obstruction (destroying evidence, wiping servers etc.)

It's the one thing that is noticable between the two sides. The right will criticize their own, you'll hardly ever find anyone on the left who will do the same.

 

[Leo123]

Interesting finding in Mueller's report that sane voters are mulling over (the Trump cultists are beyond sanity)

The [Mueller] report did say "the investigation established that the Russian government perceived it would benefit from a Trump presidency and worked to secure that outcome" and the Trump campaign "expected it would benefit electorally from information stolen and released through Russian efforts."

Ya but, even if that were true still no collusion....How sad for you...

 

[Bruce_T_Laney]

No prosecutor in the Country would charge someone with 'attempted theft'

The never-ending jon of educating Trump cultists who gather their legal knowledge from the back of a cereal box......Here:

An attempt to commit a crime occurs if a criminal has an intent to commit the crime and takes a substantial step toward completing the crime, but for reasons not intended by the criminal, the final resulting crime does not occur. Attempt to commit a particular crime is a crime....

Criminal Law - Cases and Materials, 7th ed. 2012, Wolters Kluwer Law & Business; John Kaplan (law professor), Robert Weisberg, Guyora Binder, ISBN 978-1-4548-0698-1

So what is stopping Pelosi?

Why is she failing you Nat?

 

[CrusaderFrank]

Now as for Nat thread I am questioning why Nat is using a foreign owned site to support his opinion against Trump but then complains about Russia and Wikileaks?

Let's let other "judge" your level of your moronic logic........

I cite a foreign owned (a German-owned.....and to my best recollection, Germany is a staunch ally of the U.S.) publication that surveyed AMERICANS............and the idiot Brucey finds that somewhat "disloyal".......

The Brucey idiot then finds a parallel with his orange hero utilizing the influence of Russian oligarch's (yes, Russia is not exactly an ally) and utilizes the electronic stealing by Wikileaks operated by a pedophile who is wanted in Sweden AND the U.S.

So........my friends......review Brucey's "logic" and by all means praise his intelligentsia..........LOL

Here is your problem Nat and Julian Assange and Wikileaks information has never been discredited, so it seen you are losing this argument and melting into personal insults as usual.

The fact is you are using a website owned by a foreign company that can be influenced and you have no idea if the CEO of the company is influenced by someone like Putin or even China but you ran with the article because it support your opinion and hate for Trump.

Also Nat I am willing to bet Trump supporters can argue I hate Trump more than you but unlike you I am not someone that live dialy to bash the man with any site that support my view.

So prove that Wikileaks information was false because as of now you can not and to use Julian Assange criminal acts as reason, well why did people in the DNC and CNN lose their jobs?

I an almost feel sorry for them

 

[nat4900]

until they leave the store with the merchandise, they have committed no crime.

.....even if the stolen item is dropped while running toward the exit door???????................................

(Try it, Willi, Manafort may be getting lonely..........LOL)

 

[Pogo]

I agree that if trump issued orders to obstruct, it is bad. The fact that the only reason obstruction didnt take place is because of the insubordination of those working for him, is no excuse.

However, it's hard to speak out on it because the left will not speak out against their own when wrongdoing has occurred.

Had Hillary won, you can bet there would have been no further investigation of her clear and apparent obstruction (destroying evidence, wiping servers etc.)

It's the one thing that is noticable between the two sides. The right will criticize their own, you'll hardly ever find anyone on the left who will do the same.

That must be why we have ZERO Rumpbots who will break down and admit the obvious, that he's repeatedly lying about where his father was born.

SMH Nun so blind, pray for us.

 

[Bruce_T_Laney]

until they leave the store with the merchandise, they have committed no crime.

.....even if the stolen item is dropped while running toward the exit door???????................................

(Try it, Willi, Manafort may be getting lonely..........LOL)

If I am walking toward the door and drop the item in a basket before I left the store then no crime.

If I stuffed it into my pants and then try to leave, yes a crime.

You see Trump as a criminal no matter what and Pelosi will never impeach him...

 

[JimH52]

Not only did he attempt to obstruct....HE DID. All the evidence proving conspiracy with Wikileaks and Russia was destroyed...trump is happy he got away with it....

 

[Pogo]

Well it seem the poll has been shown for what it is and is another slanted poll the left want to use for their argument against Trump and Russia.

As I pointed out the article is from a German owned company and as another poster pointed out the polling data could be slanted.

Now with that I know Nat will defend the data and website while screaming about the possible Obstruction and Russia influence over our 2016 election..

I haven't looked at the poll but who owns the company is patently irrelevant.

And the way to determine if the poll was biased is to examine its methodology. That conclusion doesn't come from "Fingerboy posted it on a message board".

The poll is meaningless since it asked about attempts to obstruct justice that never took place.

Whether something took place in the real world or not has zero to do with whether the attempt is deemed to be as bad as the action.

Or didn't you think of that?

 

[JimH52]

This latest survey (post the redacted Mueller report,) is a bit of "bad news" for Trump.....not only in his attempts to obstruct justice, but ALSO of his incompetence in such attempts.

As a reminder to the simple math challenged, Trump sycophants, 64% is almost 2 out of 3 voters.

Bad news for Trump: 64% of Americans think attempting and failing to obstruct justice is as bad as obstructing justice

Hillary by a landslide.

Putin's president....