Obstruction of Justice Thread and Poll

[radical right]

On December 29 ... General Flynn and Russian Ambassador Sergey Kislyak spoke several times.

quite honestly I don't fking care. I don't live within the looking glass as you all do. so I see everything normal.

NSA says Flynn talked to Kislyak about the Trump administration undoing the sanctions Obama just put onto Russia.

The next day, Putin announces he will not retaliate against the sanctions.

 

[jc456]

Trump-Snowflakes, does it bother you that after a month of whining, lying, trolling, deflecting, weeping, and and tonguing Putin's keister, that it's just gotten steadily worse for you?

I can see why that would bother you. All that asskissing and shilling, with nothing to show for it, except the certainty of how it's going to get much worse for you. No wonder all the Trump-snowflakes are in a complete meltdown state.

worse?

Per Comeys testimony, Trump is innocent of collusion.

How is that 'worse' for the Republicans?

No Trump collusion?? Well that's just typical, now how is Trump going to be impeached, goddamnit all to hell.

now answer the bigger question, how does one obstruct something that isn't?

 

[jc456]

On December 29 ... General Flynn and Russian Ambassador Sergey Kislyak spoke several times.

quite honestly I don't fking care. I don't live within the looking glass as you all do. so I see everything normal.

NSA says Flynn talked to Kislyak about the Trump administration undoing the sanctions Obama just put onto Russia.

The next day, Putin announces he will not retaliate against the sanctions.

and again, what is illegal about that through a transition of administrations? give me the crime?

 

[radical right]

and what is illegal about that when in a transition?

The logan act prohibits it.

 

[jc456]

and what is illegal about that when in a transition?

The logan act prohibits it.

no it doesn't. try again. he'd be out. yo hear anyone quoting logan act? eight months now.

 

[mamooth]

ow answer the bigger question, how does one obstruct something that isn't?

Ask Newt Gingrich, who impeached Clinton for such a thing.

The point? You're hilariously ignorant of the law. Obstruction only requires intent to obstruct. It doesn't matter if the case isn't against yourself, if the case is just starting, or if the case is later dropped.

 

[jc456]

ow answer the bigger question, how does one obstruct something that isn't?

Ask Newt Gingrich, who impeached Clinton for such a thing.

he lied under oath. he did not have sexual relations with that woman. ooops, but ya kinda did cause she told us what she did.

 

[BluesLegend]

Trump-Snowflakes, does it bother you that after a month of whining, lying, trolling, deflecting, weeping, and and tonguing Putin's keister, that it's just gotten steadily worse for you?

I can see why that would bother you. All that asskissing and shilling, with nothing to show for it, except the certainty of how it's going to get much worse for you. No wonder all the Trump-snowflakes are in a complete meltdown state.

worse?

Per Comeys testimony, Trump is innocent of collusion.

How is that 'worse' for the Republicans?

No Trump collusion?? Well that's just typical, now how is Trump going to be impeached, goddamnit all to hell.

now answer the bigger question, how does one obstruct something that isn't?

You mean the investigations were never obstructed, they have continued unimpeded??? Hold on...hello, yes Resist Trump headquarters, rational people are saying there wasn't any obstruction in the first place. What's that, there wasn't, well goddamn now I look like a stupid moron liberal thanks.

 

[CrusaderFrank]

Trump-Snowflakes, does it bother you that after a month of whining, lying, trolling, deflecting, weeping, and and tonguing Putin's keister, that it's just gotten steadily worse for you?

I can see why that would bother you. All that asskissing and shilling, with nothing to show for it, except the certainty of how it's going to get much worse for you. No wonder all the Trump-snowflakes are in a complete meltdown state.

worse?

Per Comeys testimony, Trump is innocent of collusion.

How is that 'worse' for the Republicans?

It just is. Don't ask questions

 

[Auld Phart]

ow answer the bigger question, how does one obstruct something that isn't?

Ask Newt Gingrich, who impeached Clinton for such a thing.

The point? You're hilariously ignorant of the law. Obstruction only requires intent to obstruct. It doesn't matter if the case isn't against yourself, if the case is just starting, or if the case is later dropped.

Ask Newt Gingrich, who impeached Clinton for such a thing.

Uh...

He admitted the day he left office that he did indeed have sex with that woman, Ms Lewinsky...

Proving he did, indeed, lie under oath.

 

[BluesLegend]

ow answer the bigger question, how does one obstruct something that isn't?

Ask Newt Gingrich, who impeached Clinton for such a thing.

The point? You're hilariously ignorant of the law. Obstruction only requires intent to obstruct. It doesn't matter if the case isn't against yourself, if the case is just starting, or if the case is later dropped.

Hillary didn't intend to be a stupid moron and break the law so Comey let her off the hook for being ignorant of the law...even though she's a trained lawyer, and spent 8 years in the White House. Something fishy about that actually

 

[radical right]

and what is illegal about that when in a transition?

The logan act prohibits it.

no it doesn't. try again. he'd be out. yo hear anyone quoting logan act? eight months now.

The Logan Act (1 Stat. 613, 18 U.S.C. § 953, enacted January 30, 1799) is a United States federal law that details the fine and/or imprisonment of unauthorized citizens who negotiate with foreign governments having a dispute with the United States.

 

[CrusaderFrank]

Several lines of investigation have resulted.

1) The Russians interfered in our electoral process. Several times. Not just the DNC hack, but many, many more attacks. Did Trump or anyone on his team collude with the Russians in these attacks? If anyone colluded, the two most likely are Roger Stone and Paul Manafort.

2) Flynn speaks with Russian ambassador several times on the day sanctions are imposed. Did Trump direct him to do so? What promises were made to the Russians about Obama's sanctions?

3) Why did Jared Kushner meet during the transition with the President of a Russian bank under US sanctions?

4) What did Trump know, and when did he know it?

"Dah dah! This is the mind control array Vlad directed at G5000 and made him vote for Trump"

 

[mamooth]

You mean the investigations were never obstructed, they have continued unimpeded???

So just like jc, you're a complete 'effin moron as well.

It doesn't matter if the obstruction was unsuccessful. At that matters is that it was attempted.

So why do you do this? Is Putin's ass that delicious, that you can't bear to stop kissing it?

 

[jc456]

and what is illegal about that when in a transition?

The logan act prohibits it.

no it doesn't. try again. he'd be out. yo hear anyone quoting logan act? eight months now.

The Logan Act (1 Stat. 613, 18 U.S.C. § 953, enacted January 30, 1799) is a United States federal law that details the fine and/or imprisonment of unauthorized citizens who negotiate with foreign governments having a dispute with the United States.

how is he unauthorized?

 

[Auld Phart]

and what is illegal about that when in a transition?

The logan act prohibits it.

no it doesn't. try again. he'd be out. yo hear anyone quoting logan act? eight months now.

The Logan Act (1 Stat. 613, 18 U.S.C. § 953, enacted January 30, 1799) is a United States federal law that details the fine and/or imprisonment of unauthorized citizens who negotiate with foreign governments having a dispute with the United States.

unauthorized citizens

if I remember correctly, he had been chosen to be a member of Trumps team before those conversations.

 

[PredFan]

Firing the guy directing the investigation into Trump’s campaign and it’s dealings with Russia to influence (i.e. win) an election does.

You mean the guy who repeatedly and publicly stated that Trump was not under investigation. You lefties are sick in the head.

 

[mamooth]

He admitted the day he left office that he did indeed have sex with that woman, Ms Lewinsky...

Proving he did, indeed, lie under oath.

That's nice. Why did you think it had anything to do with the discussion?

As you seem to be completely ignorant of history, I'll help you out. After all, I live to educate.

Bill Clinton was impeached on 4 separate counts. 2 perjury, 2 obstruction of justice.

He was charged with obstruction of justice over the Paula Jones sexual harassment lawsuit, which had already been dismissed.

By your side's kook standards, that shouldn't have been possible, being that the obstruction didn't have any effect, and being that no crime had been committed.

That should clue you in that your side's standards are a bizarre fiction.

 

[BluesLegend]

You mean the investigations were never obstructed, they have continued unimpeded???

So just like jc, you're a complete 'effin moron as well.

It doesn't matter if the obstruction was unsuccessful. At that matters is that it was attempted.

So why do you do this? Is Putin's ass that delicious, that you can't bear to stop kissing it?

Poor lib here's what's going to happen, president Trump will not be charged, there is no obstruction, he will continue to be our president. I hear this may help those on the left in the coming weeks...

 

[jc456]

He admitted the day he left office that he did indeed have sex with that woman, Ms Lewinsky...

Proving he did, indeed, lie under oath.

That's nice. Why did you think it had anything to do with the discussion?

As you seem to be completely ignorant of history, I'll help you out. After all, I live to educate.

Bill Clinton was impeached on 4 separate counts. 2 perjury, 2 obstruction of justice.

He was charged with obstruction of justice over the Paula Jones sexual harassment lawsuit, which had already been dismissed.

By your side's kook standards, that shouldn't have been possible, being that the obstruction didn't have any effect, and being that no crime had been committed.

That should clue you in that your side's standards are a bizarre fiction.

hairball, this is so stupid no normal person could respond to this. I mean, cuckoo comes to mind or maybe an exlax for ya. but the stupid that is your post here, that sane men and women just can't help you with.