POLL: Should Trump appoint a Special Prosecutor?

[L.K.Eder]

Then no one will do.

The person under investigation doesn't hire an investigator to investigate him--LOL

I think Republicans may carry on with this a little longer. But if any more Devin Nunes incidents come out, the American public will explode and their wrath will be aimed at Republicans--and then they'll be forced to turn this over to an Independent investigator.

By not doing so will only implicate all of them in the Cover--Up. I doubt they'll want to put that sign on their backs going into the mid-term election cycle.

You really couldn't have given Democrats a more powerful weapon than electing Donald Trump. They are going to ride this one to hell and back. If Republicans can do 8 investigations into Benghazi--it's not too hard to imagine what Democrats wil do with Treason, Obstruction and Lies when they take over in 2018. They're also going to hammer away at the Emoluments clause in the Constitution.
The Emoluments Clause: Its text, meaning, and application to Donald J. Trump | Brookings Institution

WHO is under investigation, Herr Goebbels?

BTW, to announce a special prosecutor, you have to have a crime. We're all still waiting.

you stupid stupid stupid person.

§600.1 Grounds for appointing a Special Counsel.

The Attorney General, or in cases in which the Attorney General is recused, the Acting Attorney General, will appoint a Special Counsel when he or she determines that criminal investigation of a person or matter is warranted and—

(a) That investigation or prosecution of that person or matter by a United States Attorney's Office or litigating Division of the Department of Justice would present a conflict of interest for the Department or other extraordinary circumstances; and

(b) That under the circumstances, it would be in the public interest to appoint an outside Special Counsel to assume responsibility for the matter.

Apparently you didn't understand your own post. Without some evidence a crime may have been committed there are no grounds for a special prosecutor as you quote states.

nigga please. i cited the code. it is plain for everyone with a brain. try to sell your bullshit to someone else.

 

[L.K.Eder]

determination if a crime happened is the result of the investigation by a special prosecutor. if the crime is evident for everyone, even terminally stupid usmb scumbags, why appoint a special prosecutor. duh

 

[toomuchtime_]

The person under investigation doesn't hire an investigator to investigate him--LOL

I think Republicans may carry on with this a little longer. But if any more Devin Nunes incidents come out, the American public will explode and their wrath will be aimed at Republicans--and then they'll be forced to turn this over to an Independent investigator.

By not doing so will only implicate all of them in the Cover--Up. I doubt they'll want to put that sign on their backs going into the mid-term election cycle.

You really couldn't have given Democrats a more powerful weapon than electing Donald Trump. They are going to ride this one to hell and back. If Republicans can do 8 investigations into Benghazi--it's not too hard to imagine what Democrats wil do with Treason, Obstruction and Lies when they take over in 2018. They're also going to hammer away at the Emoluments clause in the Constitution.
The Emoluments Clause: Its text, meaning, and application to Donald J. Trump | Brookings Institution

WHO is under investigation, Herr Goebbels?

BTW, to announce a special prosecutor, you have to have a crime. We're all still waiting.

you stupid stupid stupid person.

§600.1 Grounds for appointing a Special Counsel.

The Attorney General, or in cases in which the Attorney General is recused, the Acting Attorney General, will appoint a Special Counsel when he or she determines that criminal investigation of a person or matter is warranted and—

(a) That investigation or prosecution of that person or matter by a United States Attorney's Office or litigating Division of the Department of Justice would present a conflict of interest for the Department or other extraordinary circumstances; and

(b) That under the circumstances, it would be in the public interest to appoint an outside Special Counsel to assume responsibility for the matter.

Apparently you didn't understand your own post. Without some evidence a crime may have been committed there are no grounds for a special prosecutor as you quote states.

nigga please. i cited the code. it is plain for everyone with a brain. try to sell your bullshit to someone else.

Again, you apparently didn't understand your own post. If there is no evidence a crime had been committed there are no grounds for a special prosecutor according to your own post. Are you just ******* around or are you really too stupid to understand it?

 

[L.K.Eder]

WHO is under investigation, Herr Goebbels?

BTW, to announce a special prosecutor, you have to have a crime. We're all still waiting.

you stupid stupid stupid person.

§600.1 Grounds for appointing a Special Counsel.

The Attorney General, or in cases in which the Attorney General is recused, the Acting Attorney General, will appoint a Special Counsel when he or she determines that criminal investigation of a person or matter is warranted and—

(a) That investigation or prosecution of that person or matter by a United States Attorney's Office or litigating Division of the Department of Justice would present a conflict of interest for the Department or other extraordinary circumstances; and

(b) That under the circumstances, it would be in the public interest to appoint an outside Special Counsel to assume responsibility for the matter.

Apparently you didn't understand your own post. Without some evidence a crime may have been committed there are no grounds for a special prosecutor as you quote states.

nigga please. i cited the code. it is plain for everyone with a brain. try to sell your bullshit to someone else.

Again, you apparently didn't understand your own post. If there is no evidence a crime had been committed there are no grounds for a special prosecutor according to your own post. Are you just ******* around or are you really too stupid to understand it?

read jc-supermorons post instead of bloviating, hero. then come back to the table, or not. this is done.

 

[Crixus]

They just fired that guy. Next.

Nixon thought his problems were over when he fired Archibald Cox...

Oh, and your Hero JFK looks to have been in bed with Russia to. It was in the internet so it's true.

You're not going to spin out of this one it is very serious. Collusion with a foreign adversary to interfere into an American election is TREASON. And if you knew anything about JFK--he would have already dragged Trump's ass out of the Oval office and had him down on the Senate floor beating informatiion out of him.

Analysis | 5 times Donald Trump’s team denied contact with Russia



Trump aides were in constant touch with senior Russian officials during campaign - CNNPolitics.com

so what is the crime that warrants a special prosecutor? where is the grand jury?

You would think they wouldn't say wouldn't you? I mean, elected officials have all but promised us Russia installed Trump. As fast as a special investigator, a very carefully selected one can put an end to this. But they won't because there is nothing to find. That's why'd Adem Schiff ain't on TVwith his crap anymore.

 

[toomuchtime_]

determination if a crime happened is the result of the investigation by a special prosecutor. if the crime is evident for everyone, even terminally stupid usmb scumbags, why appoint a special prosecutor. duh

lol So you are saying the AG can appoint a special prosecutor any time to investigate anyone even if there is no evidence a crime has been committed? What planet are you living on?

 

[toomuchtime_]

BTW, to announce a special prosecutor, you have to have a crime. We're all still waiting.

you stupid stupid stupid person.

§600.1 Grounds for appointing a Special Counsel.

The Attorney General, or in cases in which the Attorney General is recused, the Acting Attorney General, will appoint a Special Counsel when he or she determines that criminal investigation of a person or matter is warranted and—

(a) That investigation or prosecution of that person or matter by a United States Attorney's Office or litigating Division of the Department of Justice would present a conflict of interest for the Department or other extraordinary circumstances; and

(b) That under the circumstances, it would be in the public interest to appoint an outside Special Counsel to assume responsibility for the matter.

Apparently you didn't understand your own post. Without some evidence a crime may have been committed there are no grounds for a special prosecutor as you quote states.

nigga please. i cited the code. it is plain for everyone with a brain. try to sell your bullshit to someone else.

Again, you apparently didn't understand your own post. If there is no evidence a crime had been committed there are no grounds for a special prosecutor according to your own post. Are you just ******* around or are you really too stupid to understand it?

read jc-supermorons post instead of bloviating, hero. then come back to the table, or not. this is done.

You should have been done before you started since you clearly had nothing to say.

 

[hunarcy]

This Comey firing and its aftermath aren't going away soon, and calls for a Special Prosecutor on the Russia probe will only get louder.

Should Trump step up, quell the complaints, and appoint an SP?

I vote yes.

I vote it doesn't matter as anything done by either party will be dismissed by rabid partisan hacks on the opposite side. From President Barak Obama down to James Clapper said them selves there was no effective meddling by the Russians. None. No vote tampering nothing other then saying stuff. Best to get news guys back on real news like third world countries with H-bombs and shit. Political vendetta's are to expensive to toss around Willy nilly.

That's not what Clapper said. “I don’t know what they have" is not the same as "I've seen everything and they have nothing". Clapper didn't know the FBI was investigating.

Please show me vote tamper by Russia then. Or show where Clapper said they did anything but say bad unflattering things about Hillary. They can't and have said as mush from black Jesus on down to the guy who just got fired on twitter.

You know Clappers memory is fuzzy, as close as the true numbers came out last night of how many people may have been unmasked and it's not even close to what Clapper said.

The U.S. government has never claimed the Russians tampered with the Voting Machines, so let get that clear right now. Now if you disagree show where there is evidence to prove the Russians tampered with the machines and not just your worthless opinion!?!

Also using fake news to duped the stupid, well what does that tell you about the American voter and how ******* stupid are they?

It show to me that if true the American voter is ignorant and deserve the government they voted for!

Also let me add the reason why Clinton lost those swing states had to do with the Green voter willing to vote for Sanders that voted for Stein, but you will claim that is a lie because you can not accept Clinton was beaten by a third party candidate by taking green votes from the Democratic Party in 2016 like what happen in Florida in 2000!

I think you are EXACTLY correct, but it wasn't just green votes. Anyone who opposed the banksters and Wall Street controlling us had to vote for Stein because Hillary had sold herself to the corporations years ago in return for getting paid gigantic amounts of money to make meaningless speeches.

 

[hunarcy]

No, Trump should not...the Speaker of the House or the AG should. (Although we know the AG is tainted)

He is? Was he caught meeting the husband of a person under investigation on a tarmac at some remote airport?

No, he had to recuse himself from anything Trump/campaign or Hillary/anything investigations. Why? Because he's tainted.

He is not.

Ah, so he recused himself from any investigation into Trump/Russia or Hillary/anything because why?

Because people like you DEMANDED that he recuse himself and he went along with it.

 

[Uncensored2008]

The person under investigation doesn't hire an investigator to investigate him--LOL

I think Republicans may carry on with this a little longer. But if any more Devin Nunes incidents come out, the American public will explode and their wrath will be aimed at Republicans--and then they'll be forced to turn this over to an Independent investigator.

By not doing so will only implicate all of them in the Cover--Up. I doubt they'll want to put that sign on their backs going into the mid-term election cycle.

You really couldn't have given Democrats a more powerful weapon than electing Donald Trump. They are going to ride this one to hell and back. If Republicans can do 8 investigations into Benghazi--it's not too hard to imagine what Democrats wil do with Treason, Obstruction and Lies when they take over in 2018. They're also going to hammer away at the Emoluments clause in the Constitution.
The Emoluments Clause: Its text, meaning, and application to Donald J. Trump | Brookings Institution

WHO is under investigation, Herr Goebbels?

BTW, to announce a special prosecutor, you have to have a crime. We're all still waiting.

you stupid stupid stupid person.

§600.1 Grounds for appointing a Special Counsel.

The Attorney General, or in cases in which the Attorney General is recused, the Acting Attorney General, will appoint a Special Counsel when he or she determines that criminal investigation of a person or matter is warranted and—

(a) That investigation or prosecution of that person or matter by a United States Attorney's Office or litigating Division of the Department of Justice would present a conflict of interest for the Department or other extraordinary circumstances; and

(b) That under the circumstances, it would be in the public interest to appoint an outside Special Counsel to assume responsibility for the matter.

Apparently you didn't understand your own post. Without some evidence a crime may have been committed there are no grounds for a special prosecutor as you quote states.

nigga please. i cited the code. it is plain for everyone with a brain. try to sell your bullshit to someone else.

The code did not list rabid hatred as a valid reason. Yes, you're butt-hurt, but the statute says "CRIMINAL INVESTIGATION OF A PERSON OR MATTER." You fascist have yet to point to a crime, other than denying you power that you think is your right.

 

[oreo]

No, Trump should not...the Speaker of the House or the AG should. (Although we know the AG is tainted)

He is? Was he caught meeting the husband of a person under investigation on a tarmac at some remote airport?

No, he had to recuse himself from anything Trump/campaign or Hillary/anything investigations. Why? Because he's tainted.

He is not.

Ah, so he recused himself from any investigation into Trump/Russia or Hillary/anything because why?

Because people like you DEMANDED that he recuse himself and he went along with it.

I vote it doesn't matter as anything done by either party will be dismissed by rabid partisan hacks on the opposite side. From President Barak Obama down to James Clapper said them selves there was no effective meddling by the Russians. None. No vote tampering nothing other then saying stuff. Best to get news guys back on real news like third world countries with H-bombs and shit. Political vendetta's are to expensive to toss around Willy nilly.

That's not what Clapper said. “I don’t know what they have" is not the same as "I've seen everything and they have nothing". Clapper didn't know the FBI was investigating.

Please show me vote tamper by Russia then. Or show where Clapper said they did anything but say bad unflattering things about Hillary. They can't and have said as mush from black Jesus on down to the guy who just got fired on twitter.

You know Clappers memory is fuzzy, as close as the true numbers came out last night of how many people may have been unmasked and it's not even close to what Clapper said.

The U.S. government has never claimed the Russians tampered with the Voting Machines, so let get that clear right now. Now if you disagree show where there is evidence to prove the Russians tampered with the machines and not just your worthless opinion!?!

Also using fake news to duped the stupid, well what does that tell you about the American voter and how ******* stupid are they?

It show to me that if true the American voter is ignorant and deserve the government they voted for!

Also let me add the reason why Clinton lost those swing states had to do with the Green voter willing to vote for Sanders that voted for Stein, but you will claim that is a lie because you can not accept Clinton was beaten by a third party candidate by taking green votes from the Democratic Party in 2016 like what happen in Florida in 2000!

I think you are EXACTLY correct, but it wasn't just green votes. Anyone who opposed the banksters and Wall Street controlling us had to vote for Stein because Hillary had sold herself to the corporations years ago in return for getting paid gigantic amounts of money to make meaningless speeches.

There's nothing "criminal" about politicians giving speeches and recieving money for it--they've been doing it for decades.

 

[Wry Catcher]

No, Trump should not...the Speaker of the House or the AG should. (Although we know the AG is tainted)

The AG has zero credibility and has recused himself from the issue; the Speaker is the leader of the Republican Party who could if so inclined draft articles of impeachment and let the Senate Decide, That he won't is too fold: He is ambitious and wants the oval office for himself, and thus will not offend other Republicans by doing so; and knows he will lose the election in 2018 if he does anything to upset the control the R's have now.

 

[oreo]

No, Trump should not...the Speaker of the House or the AG should. (Although we know the AG is tainted)

The AG has zero credibility and has recused himself from the issue; the Speaker is the leader of the Republican Party who could if so inclined draft articles of impeachment and let the Senate Decide, That he won't is too fold: He is ambitious and wants the oval office for himself, and thus will not offend other Republicans by doing so; and knows he will lose the election in 2018 if he does anything to upset the control the R's have now.

Republicans don't have a snowballs chance in hell of retaining their seats in 2018. It's going to be a blood-bath similar to what happened to Democrats in 2010. The only thing they can do is save their "honor" by removing Trump from office asap--so they can make a comeback down the road.
Republican town halls are getting very, very nasty

THE LESSONS OF THIS ELECTION CYCLE hopefully will remain for decades to come and there are many lessons to be learned.

A. When you have politicians promising the "Moon & the Stars" and it sounds too good to be true it probably is.
B. That candidates are required to tell and campaign on TRUTH--not made up bullshit.
C. That they should have honor, respect & dignity and respect for everyone in this country not just appeal to certain segments of the population.
D. That candidates should not prey on ignorance to get elected.
E. That throwing your vote away by casting a 3rd party vote is really not a good idea.
F. That we really do not elect Kings and Dictators in this country.
G. That if a news article sounds unbelievable--it probably is.
H. That Wikileaks is NOT a friend to this nation.
I. Russia is NOT a friend.
J. Living in a right wing or left wing media bubble aka (the news you want to hear) doesn't make you smarter--it makes you dumber.

Finally--That basic CIVICS makes a come back in every school across this country. So people realise there are 3 branches of government--the Executive, the Legislative, & the Judicial branch and they all have their OWN authority on certain issues, regardless of what any Presidential candidate is campaigning on.

 

[Crixus]

No, Trump should not...the Speaker of the House or the AG should. (Although we know the AG is tainted)

The AG has zero credibility and has recused himself from the issue; the Speaker is the leader of the Republican Party who could if so inclined draft articles of impeachment and let the Senate Decide, That he won't is too fold: He is ambitious and wants the oval office for himself, and thus will not offend other Republicans by doing so; and knows he will lose the election in 2018 if he does anything to upset the control the R's have now.

Republicans don't have a snowballs chance in hell of retaining their seats in 2018. It's going to be a blood-bath similar to what happened to Democrats in 2010. The only thing they can do is save their "honor" by removing Trump from office asap--so they can make a comeback down the road.
Republican town halls are getting very, very nasty

THE LESSONS OF THIS ELECTION CYCLE hopefully will remain for decades to come and there are many lessons to be learned.

A. When you have politicians promising the "Moon & the Stars" and it sounds too good to be true it probably is.
B. That candidates are required to tell and campaign on TRUTH--not made up bullshit.
C. That they should have honor, respect & dignity and respect for everyone in this country not just appeal to certain segments of the population.
D. That candidates should not prey on ignorance to get elected.
E. That throwing your vote away by casting a 3rd party vote is really not a good idea.
F. That we really do not elect Kings and Dictators in this country.
G. That if a news article sounds unbelievable--it probably is.
H. That Wikileaks is NOT a friend to this nation.
I. Russia is NOT a friend.

Finally--That basic CIVICS makes a come back in every school across this country. So people realise there are 3 branches of government--the Executive, the Legislative, & the Judicial branch and they all have their OWN authority on certain issues, regardless of what any candidate is campaigning on.

Trump Will Never Be President – Here's Why

 

[Ame®icano]

No, Trump should not...the Speaker of the House or the AG should. (Although we know the AG is tainted)

He is? Was he caught meeting the husband of a person under investigation on a tarmac at some remote airport?

No, he had to recuse himself from anything Trump/campaign or Hillary/anything investigations. Why? Because he's tainted.

He is not.

Ah, so he recused himself from any investigation into Trump/Russia or Hillary/anything because why?

Because he was part of the campaign.

 

[hunarcy]

He is? Was he caught meeting the husband of a person under investigation on a tarmac at some remote airport?

No, he had to recuse himself from anything Trump/campaign or Hillary/anything investigations. Why? Because he's tainted.

He is not.

Ah, so he recused himself from any investigation into Trump/Russia or Hillary/anything because why?

Because people like you DEMANDED that he recuse himself and he went along with it.

That's not what Clapper said. “I don’t know what they have" is not the same as "I've seen everything and they have nothing". Clapper didn't know the FBI was investigating.

Please show me vote tamper by Russia then. Or show where Clapper said they did anything but say bad unflattering things about Hillary. They can't and have said as mush from black Jesus on down to the guy who just got fired on twitter.

You know Clappers memory is fuzzy, as close as the true numbers came out last night of how many people may have been unmasked and it's not even close to what Clapper said.

The U.S. government has never claimed the Russians tampered with the Voting Machines, so let get that clear right now. Now if you disagree show where there is evidence to prove the Russians tampered with the machines and not just your worthless opinion!?!

Also using fake news to duped the stupid, well what does that tell you about the American voter and how ******* stupid are they?

It show to me that if true the American voter is ignorant and deserve the government they voted for!

Also let me add the reason why Clinton lost those swing states had to do with the Green voter willing to vote for Sanders that voted for Stein, but you will claim that is a lie because you can not accept Clinton was beaten by a third party candidate by taking green votes from the Democratic Party in 2016 like what happen in Florida in 2000!

I think you are EXACTLY correct, but it wasn't just green votes. Anyone who opposed the banksters and Wall Street controlling us had to vote for Stein because Hillary had sold herself to the corporations years ago in return for getting paid gigantic amounts of money to make meaningless speeches.

There's nothing "criminal" about politicians giving speeches and recieving money for it--they've been doing it for decades.

You ignorant Hillarybot, you can't point to a place in my post that said the word criminal...but you KNOW it is a sign of her corruption, which is why you try to change the subject. Go back to complaining about Trump and try not to notice the exit of people with integrity as they abandon the Democratic Party.

 

[Wry Catcher]

No, Trump should not...the Speaker of the House or the AG should. (Although we know the AG is tainted)

The AG has zero credibility and has recused himself from the issue; the Speaker is the leader of the Republican Party who could if so inclined draft articles of impeachment and let the Senate Decide, That he won't is two fold: He is ambitious and wants the oval office for himself, and thus will not offend other Republicans by doing so; and knows he will lose the election in 2018 if he does anything to upset the control the R's have now; too allow President Trump to do so would be laughable.

 

[Ame®icano]

No, Trump should not...the Speaker of the House or the AG should. (Although we know the AG is tainted)

The AG has zero credibility and has recused himself from the issue; the Speaker is the leader of the Republican Party who could if so inclined draft articles of impeachment and let the Senate Decide, That he won't is two fold: He is ambitious and wants the oval office for himself, and thus will not offend other Republicans by doing so; and knows he will lose the election in 2018 if he does anything to upset the control the R's have now; too allow President Trump to do so would be laughable.

Desperate for "ratings" so you quoted yourself just to "agree" with you?

 

[The Original Tree]

20 months investigating this.
24-7 surveillance on the Trump Campaign team whenever they spoke to anyone representing Russia.
ZERO surveillance on The Clinton Crew despite the fact they spoke to all of the same people.

The FBI, CIA, NSA, NSI, & Treasury all stated categorically that there was NO EVIDENCE of Collusion.

Lefty can go phuck himself, and jump out of a window from a very tall building.

The Left knows that what they have No Evidence, and that this is their ONE TRICK PONY......their only hope.....their Hail Mary to gain back power in 2018.

When a Party like THE DNC has to stoop to lies, innuendos, rigging primaries, and wiretapping their rivals, Using The MEDIA as a Weapon and Propagandizing our neighbors and friends and our children and loved ones.....

When The DNC uses the IRS as a weapon, and the Intelligence Community as an EXECUTIONER, and commits felony espionage and treason to simply try to win an election....then they are people who are NEVER to be trusted again with the reigns of power!

NEVER..... NEVER AGAIN. To trust them would be to INVITE A NEW HOLOCAUST against anyone who would dare stand against them.

If The People of THE DEMOCRATIC WIEMAR REPUBLIC knew what The NAZIS had in store for their country, & how they plotted to take control of The Media First, then THE MINDS of The GERMAN PEOPLE, and then ultimately Control of The Government, the German People would have risen up and slaughtered every NAZI they could get their hands on to save their country from the horror of The Nazi Regime.

Yah, I know what you are thinking......and you are probably right....but barring a Civil War that Lefty Starts, all we can do is Daily Refute their LIES, and Daily resist them mentally and physically if necessary.

 

[easyt65]

'Should Trump appoint a Special Prosecutor?'

No = comey already testified Hillary broke laws and that he had protected her from prosecution. indict her already.