Official Thread - The Mueller Report is Announced... USE THIS thread til at least end of Saturday.

[ThisIsMe]

Why people are going into a frenzy over foreign governments interfering with out elections this time, I dont know. Yeah, it's bad, but it's not new. Foreign governments interfere with our elections every time, and we do it as well to other countries.

Yes, it should be stopped. No, this is not a practice that happened specifically during this administration.

 

[nat4900]

No indictments...impeachment off the table..

The above moron "learned" all his legal expertise from the back of a cereal box......

Hey, DOTR who turns on your computer for you???......LOL

 

[OldLady]

Mueller's opinion is that you can't indict a sitting president, isn't it?

Lets see the fact whatever they are. How about that?

I've always expected Mueller's report to be just that--a report of what he has unearthed in his investigation. He would not be indicting the President. It would be up to Congress to impeach the Pres and then let the powers that be indict him based on Mueller's facts.

At least that is the way the lawyer talking heads were describing the process way back when this started.

The House indicts a President.

The Senate convicts and then removes.

There have only ever been two impeachments in our history. Both were dimocrap scum. Shock

A sitting president is immune from criminal prosecution.

So the Senate acts as a court of law and convicts the President of the crime? There is no indictment necessary? The Senate can send a President to jail? I thought an impeachment just removed the President from office.

 

[LordBrownTrout]

How many, fuckface?

Tell us how many have been indicted for 'collusion'

Lying piece of shit scumbag dimocrap

Speaking of **** FACES......care to tell us how Bill Clinton got in a bit of trouble from a WHITEWATER investigation.......to a BLOW JOB????

I don't give a crap whether collusion (which is NOT an official crime) or a bunch of other **** ups by the orange clown eventually kicks his fat ass to the curb......Just as long as he lands in the heap of trash outside of the WH...

LMAO

Hang in there big boy, they've got the ward overstaffed so you won't hurt yourself.

 

[easyt65]

There should be quite a few more indictments....not as part of the Mueller investigation but from the one that should follow, investigating all the crime Mueller uncovered but refused to acknowledge / investigate:

Hillary
Holder
Lynch
Rosenstein
Clapper
Brennan
Comey
McCabe
Strzok
Baker
...and possibly even Obama himself.

 

[easyt65]

Roger Stone indicted..

No evidence of illegal Russian Collusion involving Trump....

NEXT...

 

[Ambivalent1]

Hoo boy, how many "no more indictments" threads today?

Yep, as I guessed, it's Friday.

ABC news is one of the least reliable outlets.

They're owned by Disney.

So is FOX

 

[BlindBoo]

Mueller's opinion is that you can't indict a sitting president, isn't it?

Lets see the fact whatever they are. How about that?

I've always expected Mueller's report to be just that--a report of what he has unearthed in his investigation. He would not be indicting the President. It would be up to Congress to impeach the Pres and then let the powers that be indict him based on Mueller's facts.

At least that is the way the lawyer talking heads were describing the process way back when this started.

The House indicts a President.

The Senate convicts and then removes.

There have only ever been two impeachments in our history. Both were dimocrap scum. Shock

A sitting president is immune from criminal prosecution.

So the Senate acts as a court of law and convicts the President of the crime? There is no indictment necessary? The Senate can send a President to jail? I thought an impeachment just removed the President from office.

The Senate has to hold a trial based on the Articles of Impeachment (charges). If they vote to convict, then they get to vote on removal from office. After being removed from office, then the president can be indicted for his crimes. That's what I remember from Gov 101.

 

[Marion Morrison]

Hoo boy, how many "no more indictments" threads today?

Yep, as I guessed, it's Friday.

ABC news is one of the least reliable outlets.

They're owned by Disney.

So is FOX

True!

Fox wasn't at the time I was checking up on all of that, though. They were 4-6 on the reliability scale. All I remember is the top 2 were CBS and C-Span.

 

[OldLady]

Mueller's opinion is that you can't indict a sitting president, isn't it?

Lets see the fact whatever they are. How about that?

I've always expected Mueller's report to be just that--a report of what he has unearthed in his investigation. He would not be indicting the President. It would be up to Congress to impeach the Pres and then let the powers that be indict him based on Mueller's facts.

At least that is the way the lawyer talking heads were describing the process way back when this started.

The House indicts a President.

The Senate convicts and then removes.

There have only ever been two impeachments in our history. Both were dimocrap scum. Shock

A sitting president is immune from criminal prosecution.

So the Senate acts as a court of law and convicts the President of the crime? There is no indictment necessary? The Senate can send a President to jail? I thought an impeachment just removed the President from office.

The Senate has to hold a trial based on the Articles of Impeachment (charges). If they vote to convict, then they get to vote on removal from office. After being removed from office, then the president can be indicted for his crimes. That's what I remember from Gov 101.

That's what I thought. Edgetho is a little confused, I think.

 

[Edgetho]

That's what I thought. Edgetho is a little confused, I think.

What am I confused about??

I just condensed it down a little bit.

 

[OldLady]

That's what I thought. Edgetho is a little confused, I think.

What am I confused about??

I just condensed it down a little bit.

Oh. Okay. I got the impression you were saying the House impeaches and the Senate convicts on the crime.

 

[Edgetho]

That's what I thought. Edgetho is a little confused, I think.

What am I confused about??

I just condensed it down a little bit.

Oh. Okay. I got the impression you were saying the House impeaches and the Senate convicts on the crime.

That's the way it works. The House Impeaches (indicts) and the Senate Convicts then removes from Office.

A SITTING President can not be criminally indicted. One reason is, he can Pardon himself. The power of the Presidential Pardon is absolute; except in the case of Treason.

If there is sufficient reason, he can be criminally indicted AFTER he is removed from Office but that would be superfluous. And that probably wouldn't happen since whoever succeeds the then-removed President would almost certainly pardon him.

Had the Senate convicted and removed The Rapist, do you think for one second that ManBearPig wouldn't have pardoned him?

Ford pardoned Nixon but that was mostly to keep the Republic from an armed conflict.

I lived through it. People were PISSED. Nixon did the right thing by stepping down. He got caught in too many lies.

Clinton, too. He just got caught in too many lies but didn't have the grace to step down. Had either or both of them just told the DISGUSTING FILTH to go **** their dead aunts, nothing would have happened. They just kept talking and kept digging their own graves.

Watch and listen as this life support system for a vag talks about the latest news re no indictments.

Andrea Ruth on Twitter

 

[OldLady]

That's what I thought. Edgetho is a little confused, I think.

What am I confused about??

I just condensed it down a little bit.

Oh. Okay. I got the impression you were saying the House impeaches and the Senate convicts on the crime.

That's the way it works. The House Impeaches (indicts) and the Senate Convicts then removes from Office.

A SITTING President can not be criminally indicted. One reason is, he can Pardon himself. The power of the Presidential Pardon is absolute; except in the case of Treason.

If there is sufficient reason, he can be criminally indicted AFTER he is removed from Office but that would be superfluous. And that probably wouldn't happen since whoever succeeds the then-removed President would almost certainly pardon him.

Had the Senate convicted and removed The Rapist, do you think for one second that ManBearPig wouldn't have pardoned him?

Ford pardoned Nixon but that was mostly to keep the Republic from an armed conflict.

I lived through it. People were PISSED. Nixon did the right thing by stepping down. He got caught in too many lies.

Clinton, too. He just got caught in too many lies but didn't have the grace to step down. Had either or both of them just told the DISGUSTING FILTH to go **** their dead aunts, nothing would have happened. They just kept talking and kept digging their own graves.

Watch and listen as this life support system for a vag talks about the latest news re no indictments.

Andrea Ruth on Twitter

If there is sufficient reason, he can be criminally indicted AFTER he is removed from Office but that would be superfluous. And that probably wouldn't happen since whoever succeeds the then-removed President would almost certainly pardon him.
Why would it be "superfluous," if a President has committed serious criminal acts, to criminally indict him/her afterwards? The intention of impeachment is to remove a President from office, yes, but do you think that should be the extent of their "sentence" if they have committed extensive fraud or money laundering or collusion or obstruction of justice, for example?

It would be political suicide for a VP to pardon a President who has been found guilty of serious criminal activity. Campaign financing or lying to Congress about something like having a bj - type affair with a staffer isn't worth it. But if the rest of us go to jail for breaking certain laws, should the President be above that, even if he has "lost his job?"

 

[basquebromance]

need a crying towel, Dick?

No more indictments expected in Mueller probe, ABC News reports

 

[basquebromance]

it is 1930

"Hot Dog! Mistah Mueller just handed out his report to the boys down at the courthouse. COPY! Stop the presses, this one's a real humdinger. Tell the newsboys we're doing a late edition, see. Extry extry, Mueller Report drops, details sent by teletype..."

 

[Tumblin Tumbleweed]

Bob cannot produce a scintilla of evidence to back up his collusion conspiracy theories

You know precisely **** all about the evidence in the investigation. I don't know how many times I need to illustrate this fact. Another stupid partisan circle-jerk thread.

 

[dudmuck]

it says "sources tell ABC news".
Wonder what this source is. Anonymous source. could be Trump.
Nobody has a source inside the Mueller team.
But John Dean says there will be indictments.

 

[Maxdeath]

it says "sources tell ABC news".
Wonder what this source is. Anonymous source. could be Trump.
Nobody has a source inside the Mueller team.
But John Dean says there will be indictments.

I did not realize that John Dean was a part of the Mueller team. Or perhaps you think he has the inside scoop that you claim nobody has?

 

[basquebromance]

The old world is dying, and the new world struggles to be born: now is the time of monsters