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.
Yes, with the final defense being "He did it, but it's not impeachable". Of course, if they weren't terrified of trump, the GOP -- which generally despises him -- would have quickly convicted him.And then acquitted.
That’s actually not what they said.how can you prove a case when there is no crime? Barr said he plead guilty to something that was not a crime. Was that simple enough for you??It was why the DoJ would worry about whether they could prove a case they already had a guilty plea in.
That is some peak cultism right there. You are really embarrassing yourself.Absolutely, unless he says something inconvenient, then he's lying, or something.
Acquitted, also forever.Yes, with the final defense being "He did it, but it's not impeachable". Of course, if they weren't terrified of trump, the GOP -- which generally despises him -- would have quickly convicted him.And then acquitted.
Impeached. Forever.
Yep, just like clinton, totally acquitted. Never lied about what he was charged with. Because, acquitted.Acquitted, also forever.
Hardly. I'm laughing at those on all sides of the argument who take that approach, and you see them in this thread. Like something somebody said, "It's gospel truth!". Don't like it, "They're lying!", "They're corrupt!". Like I said, I laugh at how serious some of y'all are.That is some peak cultism right there. You are really embarrassing yourself.Absolutely, unless he says something inconvenient, then he's lying, or something.
Yes, to imply trump rarely lies is embarrassing cultism, and you are embarrassing yourself. I cant believe the grip that freak has on people's brainsHardly
Oh, no, Clinton did it. Heck, he lost his law license for a while and his handlers had to pay his fine for him, but it wasn't judged serious enough to kick him out of office over.Yep, just like clinton, totally acquitted. Never lied about what he was charged with. Because, acquitted.Acquitted, also forever.
Find me a politician that "rarely" lies. You don't get to Washington on the truth. I mean, Bubba made an art form out of it.Yes, to imply trump rarely lies is embarrassing cultism, and you are embarrassing yourself. I cant believe the grip that freak has on people's brainsHardly
Exactly like a Trump. He did it. But Republicans decided that using government resources to go after political opponents isn’t serious enough.Oh, no, Clinton did it. Heck, he lost his law license for a while and his handlers had to pay his fine for him, but it wasn't judged serious enough to kick him out of office over.Yep, just like clinton, totally acquitted. Never lied about what he was charged with. Because, acquitted.Acquitted, also forever.
Fake news.WASHINGTON (Reuters) - The notoriously independent-minded federal judge who once said he was disgusted by the conduct of Michael Flynn could block the administration’s bid to drop criminal charges against the former adviser to President Donald Trump, legal experts said.
The Department of Justice on Thursday told U.S. District Judge Emmet Sullivan in Washington it wants to drop the case against Flynn, Trump’s former national security adviser, following a pressure campaign by the Republican president and his political allies.
While judges typically sign off on such motions, Sullivan could refuse and instead demand answers from the DOJ about who requested the sudden about-face, said Seth Waxman, a former federal prosecutor now at the law firm Dickinson Wright.
“If Judge Sullivan wanted to he could conduct an inquiry and start asking a lot of questions,” said Waxman.
Skeptical judge could hold up Trump administration's bid to clear Flynn, legal experts say
The notoriously independent-minded federal judge who once said he was disgusted by the conduct of Michael Flynn could block the administration's bid to drop criminal charges against the former adviser to President Donald Trump, legal experts said.www.reuters.com
Presumably, Judge Sullivan is intimately familiar with these facts.
Flynn Redux: What Those FBI Documents Really Show
A lot of people seem to be expecting Michael Flynn's sudden vindication. They should take a deep breath.www.lawfareblog.com
"The president may well pardon Flynn, as he has long hinted. It’s possible—though for reasons we’ll explain, we think unlikely—that Judge Emmet G. Sullivan will allow Flynn to withdraw his plea. And it’s possible as well that Attorney General William Barr, who has already intervened in the case once before and has asked a U.S. attorney to review its handling, will intervene once again on Flynn’s behalf. (how prescient was that!!)
So far, however, nothing has emerged that remotely clears Flynn; nothing has emerged that would require Sullivan to allow him to withdraw his plea; and nothing has emerged that would justify the Justice Department’s backing off of the case—or prosecuting it aggressively if Flynn were somehow allowed out of the very generous deal Special Counsel Robert Mueller cut him."
...................................................................................................................................................
Facts which expose Barr's attempt to get another Trump crony off the hook for a crime he committed much more difficult to pull off than it is to convince Trumpleheads. Folks who are eager and willing to swallow all the horseshit the Trump admin can shovel their way.
Actually, the House failed to prove their case that he did. They accused him of it an awful lot, but didn't have the evidence to back it up. And yes, they were in just SUCH a hurry that they just couldn't wait to compel testimony and documentation (then sat on it for a month, but hey, who's counting?), but the end result is, they blew it.Exactly like a Trump. He did it. But Republicans decided that using government resources to go after political opponents isn’t serious enough.Oh, no, Clinton did it. Heck, he lost his law license for a while and his handlers had to pay his fine for him, but it wasn't judged serious enough to kick him out of office over.Yep, just like clinton, totally acquitted. Never lied about what he was charged with. Because, acquitted.Acquitted, also forever.
Nope. Acquitted. Sorry.Oh, no, Clinton did it.
Wrong. The final defense was that trump did it, but it was not impeachable. Clearly they proved their case enough to get republicans to admit he did it. Which was all the were tasked with doing.Actually, the House failed to prove their case that he did.
"sometimes people plead guilty to what is not a crime" - BarrThat’s actually not what they said.how can you prove a case when there is no crime? Barr said he plead guilty to something that was not a crime. Was that simple enough for you??It was why the DoJ would worry about whether they could prove a case they already had a guilty plea in.
The House did just fine. It wasn’t about what was proven. Republicans are on record saying that even if everything he was accused of was true, it’s still not impeachable.Actually, the House failed to prove their case that he did. They accused him of it an awful lot, but didn't have the evidence to back it up. And yes, they were in just SUCH a hurry that they just couldn't wait to compel testimony and documentation (then sat on it for a month, but hey, who's counting?), but the end result is, they blew it.Exactly like a Trump. He did it. But Republicans decided that using government resources to go after political opponents isn’t serious enough.Oh, no, Clinton did it. Heck, he lost his law license for a while and his handlers had to pay his fine for him, but it wasn't judged serious enough to kick him out of office over.Yep, just like clinton, totally acquitted. Never lied about what he was charged with. Because, acquitted.Acquitted, also forever.
thebulwark.com
It’s true. Sometimes people plead guilty to what is not a crime."sometimes people plead guilty to what is not a crime" - BarrThat’s actually not what they said.how can you prove a case when there is no crime? Barr said he plead guilty to something that was not a crime. Was that simple enough for you??It was why the DoJ would worry about whether they could prove a case they already had a guilty plea in.
Clearly they proved their case enough to get republicans to admit he did it. Which was all the were tasked with doing.
But that’s not what their motion to dismiss said.
What an idiotic comment. Nobody accused trump of the dastardly crime of "talking on the phone".it" is talking on the phone, hardly a crime.
