The 'Deep State:' Fact Or Fable

[PoliticalChic]

America was founded by religious men, followers of the Judeo-Christian faith.

Their Christianity wasn't "the same" as others. My understanding though is that they did respect the wisdom of the Bible and other thinkers, such as the Puritans, but their system was not a direct copy of the text of the Bible and included other lines of thinking which had developed over the centuries.

The Bible and other older legal system did play a role in the development of Common Law, which is what the states are governed by. (Common Law is effectively based off of the Golden Rule, or respect for people, their families, their property, and so forth - which interestingly was a principle which the Ten Commandants seemed to include - nevertheless, the governmental systems of America were not a direct copy of the Bible or the Ten Commandments, but were much more complicated than that).

What is the attitude toward religion in government school?

Non-sequitur.

Here's a hint.

"The biblical view holds that wisdom begins with acknowledging God. The secular view is that is that God is unnecessary for wisdom, and the left-wing view is that God is destructive to wisdom. But if you want to know which view is more accurate, look at the most godless and Bible-less institution in our society: the universities.

They are, without competition, the most foolish institutions in our society.

For nearly all of American history, the Bible was the most important book in America. It is no longer. This is a moral and intellectual catastrophe."
Why the Left Mocks the Bible

The governmental system of the Biblical Old Testament was more or less an authoritarian system ruled by religious elites or kings, and didn't contain a Constitution or Bill of Rights. Something more akin to a monarchy, given it was an Iron Age government after all.

So no, if you're comparing the Constitution and the Bill of Rights to the legal system of Iron Age Israel, they wouldn't be the same. (Given that you're a woman, I'm unsure if you would have been allowed to participate in government, unless you were born into a royal family, like that of the Biblical Queen Ester).

"The Bible and other older legal system did play a role in the development of Common Law, which is what the states are governed by."

Gads.....so much of what you think you know is confused and just wrong.


"In 528 Tribonian was selected, with John the Cappodocian, to prepare the new imperial legal code, the Codex Juris Civilis, or the Code of Justinian.. Rome had a legal system dating back to the ‘Twelve Tables,’ written in 451 BCE, based on the 6th century BCE work of Solon of Athens. Rome, unlike Greece, treated the interpretation of law (statutes and precedents) as a profession.

In 530 a second commission led by Tribonian had the objective of revising the way lawyers were educated. Fifteen centuries later, the Codex still exerts its influence on Europe and is known as the Civil Law tradition. The Inquisition, Renaissance, the Napoleonic Code, and the Holocaust are all, in part, an outgrowth of the lex regia: “The will of the prince has the force of law.”( Quod principi placuit, legis haget vigorem) Today, European law gives preeminence to legislatures, the institution that drafted the statute prevails.

In Anglo-American Common Law tradition, the institution that interprets and adjudicates the statute has the final word. Due to the absence of a jury, and the deference to whomever writes the laws, Civil Law tradition is friendlier to tyrannical regimes than the Common Law tradition. Under Justinians’ code the emperor is named nomos empsychos, “law incarnate.”
"Justinian's Flea," Rosen

 

[Questioner]

America was founded by religious men, followers of the Judeo-Christian faith.

Their Christianity wasn't "the same" as others. My understanding though is that they did respect the wisdom of the Bible and other thinkers, such as the Puritans, but their system was not a direct copy of the text of the Bible.

The Bible and other older legal system did play a role in the development of Common Law, which is what the states are governed by. (Common Law is effectively based off of the Golden Rule, or respect for people, their families, their property, and so forth - which interestingly was a principle which the Ten Commandants seemed to include - nevertheless, the governmental systems of America were not a direct copy of the Bible or the Ten Commandments, but were much more complicated than that).

What is the attitude toward religion in government school?

Non-sequitur.

Here's a hint.

"The biblical view holds that wisdom begins with acknowledging God. The secular view is that is that God is unnecessary for wisdom, and the left-wing view is that God is destructive to wisdom. But if you want to know which view is more accurate, look at the most godless and Bible-less institution in our society: the universities.

They are, without competition, the most foolish institutions in our society.

For nearly all of American history, the Bible was the most important book in America. It is no longer. This is a moral and intellectual catastrophe."
Why the Left Mocks the Bible

The governmental system of the Biblical Old Testament was more or less an authoritarian system ruled by religious elites or kings, and didn't contain a Constitution or Bill of Rights. Something more akin to a monarchy, given it was an Iron Age government after all.

So no, if you're comparing the Constitution and the Bill of Rights to the legal system of Iron Age Israel, they wouldn't be the same. (Given that you're a woman, I'm unsure if you would have been allowed to participate in government, unless you were born into a royal family, like that of the Biblical Queen Ester).

Good thing you dropped by.....you have so very much to learn.


The reason our revolution was so different from the violent, homicidal chaos of the French version was the dominant American culture was Anglo-Saxon and Christian. “52 of the 56 signers of the declaration and 50 to 52 of the 55 signers of the Constitution were orthodox Trinitarian Christians.” http://www.davidlimbaugh.com/mt/archives/2010/02/new_column_libe_4.html
Believers in the Father, Son, and Holy Ghost, or, as they would be known today, “an extremist Fundementalist hate group.”

There is a clear reference to Jesus Christ in the Constitution, and four references to the Biblical God in the Declaration.


The Constitution provides for an observance of the Sabbath in its Presentment Clause, mandating that the President has ten days, excluding Sundays, to veto a bill lest it become binding.

And the instrument was framed with a view to the Declaration, which unequivocally bestows gratitude on the God of the Bible for America's independence.


1. The most quoted source was the Bible. Established in the original writings of our Founding Fathers we find that they discovered in Isaiah 33:22 the three branches of government: Isaiah 33:22 “For the LORD is our judge, the LORD is our lawgiver, the LORD is our king; he will save us.” Here we see the judicial, the legislative and the executive branches. In Ezra 7:24 we see where they established the tax exempt status of the church: Ezra 7:24 “Also we certify you, that touching any of the priests and Levites, singers, porters, Nethinims, or ministers of this house of God, it shall not be lawful to impose toll, tribute, or custom, upon them.”

When we look at our Constitution we see in Article 4 Section 4 that we are guaranteed a Republican form of government, that was found in Exodus 18 “Moreover thou shalt provide out of all the people able men, such as fear God, men of truth, hating covetousness; and place such over them, to be rulers of thousands, and rulers of hundreds, rulers of fifties, and rulers of tens:” This indicates that we are to choose, or elect God fearing men and women. Looking at Article 3 Section 3 we see almost word for word Deuteronomy 17:6: ‘No person shall be convicted of Treason unless on the testimony of two Witnesses. . .’ Deuteronomy 17:6 “At the mouth of two witnesses, or three witnesses. . .”. The next paragraph in Article 3 Section 3 refers to who should pay the price for treason. In England, they could punish the sons for the trespasses of the father, if the father died.
Roger Anghis -- Bring America Back To Her Religious Roots, Part 7

The Founders incorporated elements of older legal systems, including those of Rome and Greece, as well as Exodus systems, and ideas which had emerged later. It was not a direct copy of the Bible or the Israelite government, no. (As far as I am aware, the Bible or Exodus played more of a role in the development of Common Law, or the states' laws than it did the Federal government, such as the Constitution and the Bill of Rights).

The government of Iron Age Israel was a monarchy or theocracy, ruled by a priesthood or kings and queens, in which family and inheritance were the primary factors. As far as I'm aware of, education in ancient Israel was limited to the priesthood or royalty, so yes it was "governmental".

The Founders were not looking to implement a monarchy, no. The ideas of Democracy or Republican government were more likely inspired by that of Greece and Rome rather than Israel.

 

[Questioner]

America was founded by religious men, followers of the Judeo-Christian faith.

Their Christianity wasn't "the same" as others. My understanding though is that they did respect the wisdom of the Bible and other thinkers, such as the Puritans, but their system was not a direct copy of the text of the Bible and included other lines of thinking which had developed over the centuries.

The Bible and other older legal system did play a role in the development of Common Law, which is what the states are governed by. (Common Law is effectively based off of the Golden Rule, or respect for people, their families, their property, and so forth - which interestingly was a principle which the Ten Commandants seemed to include - nevertheless, the governmental systems of America were not a direct copy of the Bible or the Ten Commandments, but were much more complicated than that).

What is the attitude toward religion in government school?

Non-sequitur.

Here's a hint.

"The biblical view holds that wisdom begins with acknowledging God. The secular view is that is that God is unnecessary for wisdom, and the left-wing view is that God is destructive to wisdom. But if you want to know which view is more accurate, look at the most godless and Bible-less institution in our society: the universities.

They are, without competition, the most foolish institutions in our society.

For nearly all of American history, the Bible was the most important book in America. It is no longer. This is a moral and intellectual catastrophe."
Why the Left Mocks the Bible

The governmental system of the Biblical Old Testament was more or less an authoritarian system ruled by religious elites or kings, and didn't contain a Constitution or Bill of Rights. Something more akin to a monarchy, given it was an Iron Age government after all.

So no, if you're comparing the Constitution and the Bill of Rights to the legal system of Iron Age Israel, they wouldn't be the same. (Given that you're a woman, I'm unsure if you would have been allowed to participate in government, unless you were born into a royal family, like that of the Biblical Queen Ester).

"The Bible and other older legal system did play a role in the development of Common Law, which is what the states are governed by."

Gads.....so much of what you think you know is confused and just wrong.


"In 528 Tribonian was selected, with John the Cappodocian, to prepare the new imperial legal code, the Codex Juris Civilis, or the Code of Justinian.. Rome had a legal system dating back to the ‘Twelve Tables,’ written in 451 BCE, based on the 6th century BCE work of Solon of Athens. Rome, unlike Greece, treated the interpretation of law (statutes and precedents) as a profession.

In 530 a second commission led by Tribonian had the objective of revising the way lawyers were educated. Fifteen centuries later, the Codex still exerts its influence on Europe and is known as the Civil Law tradition. The Inquisition, Renaissance, the Napoleonic Code, and the Holocaust are all, in part, an outgrowth of the lex regia: “The will of the prince has the force of law.”( Quod principi placuit, legis haget vigorem) Today, European law gives preeminence to legislatures, the institution that drafted the statute prevails.

In Anglo-American Common Law tradition, the institution that interprets and adjudicates the statute has the final word. Due to the absence of a jury, and the deference to whomever writes the laws, Civil Law tradition is friendlier to tyrannical regimes than the Common Law tradition. Under Justinians’ code the emperor is named nomos empsychos, “law incarnate.”
"Justinian's Flea," Rosen

Rome and Greece are where the ideas of Democracy and Republican government came from. (Some of the DC architecture also reflects its Roman and Greek Heritage).

The Biblical government was theocratic or monarchial, not "republican" or Democratic (in the sense of voters or elected representatives). Rulers were either descended from the priesthood or from the ruling families, such as King Saul, King David, King Solomon, and so on - and inherited their power - there were no elections.

So yes, the Biblical government was the polar opposite of an anarchy - you were subordinate to a king or to a priesthood, therefore your "anti-state" rhetoric seems a bit oxymoronic.

 

[PoliticalChic]

America was founded by religious men, followers of the Judeo-Christian faith.

Their Christianity wasn't "the same" as others. My understanding though is that they did respect the wisdom of the Bible and other thinkers, such as the Puritans, but their system was not a direct copy of the text of the Bible.

The Bible and other older legal system did play a role in the development of Common Law, which is what the states are governed by. (Common Law is effectively based off of the Golden Rule, or respect for people, their families, their property, and so forth - which interestingly was a principle which the Ten Commandants seemed to include - nevertheless, the governmental systems of America were not a direct copy of the Bible or the Ten Commandments, but were much more complicated than that).

What is the attitude toward religion in government school?

Non-sequitur.

Here's a hint.

"The biblical view holds that wisdom begins with acknowledging God. The secular view is that is that God is unnecessary for wisdom, and the left-wing view is that God is destructive to wisdom. But if you want to know which view is more accurate, look at the most godless and Bible-less institution in our society: the universities.

They are, without competition, the most foolish institutions in our society.

For nearly all of American history, the Bible was the most important book in America. It is no longer. This is a moral and intellectual catastrophe."
Why the Left Mocks the Bible

The governmental system of the Biblical Old Testament was more or less an authoritarian system ruled by religious elites or kings, and didn't contain a Constitution or Bill of Rights. Something more akin to a monarchy, given it was an Iron Age government after all.

So no, if you're comparing the Constitution and the Bill of Rights to the legal system of Iron Age Israel, they wouldn't be the same. (Given that you're a woman, I'm unsure if you would have been allowed to participate in government, unless you were born into a royal family, like that of the Biblical Queen Ester).

Good thing you dropped by.....you have so very much to learn.


The reason our revolution was so different from the violent, homicidal chaos of the French version was the dominant American culture was Anglo-Saxon and Christian. “52 of the 56 signers of the declaration and 50 to 52 of the 55 signers of the Constitution were orthodox Trinitarian Christians.” http://www.davidlimbaugh.com/mt/archives/2010/02/new_column_libe_4.html
Believers in the Father, Son, and Holy Ghost, or, as they would be known today, “an extremist Fundementalist hate group.”

There is a clear reference to Jesus Christ in the Constitution, and four references to the Biblical God in the Declaration.


The Constitution provides for an observance of the Sabbath in its Presentment Clause, mandating that the President has ten days, excluding Sundays, to veto a bill lest it become binding.

And the instrument was framed with a view to the Declaration, which unequivocally bestows gratitude on the God of the Bible for America's independence.


1. The most quoted source was the Bible. Established in the original writings of our Founding Fathers we find that they discovered in Isaiah 33:22 the three branches of government: Isaiah 33:22 “For the LORD is our judge, the LORD is our lawgiver, the LORD is our king; he will save us.” Here we see the judicial, the legislative and the executive branches. In Ezra 7:24 we see where they established the tax exempt status of the church: Ezra 7:24 “Also we certify you, that touching any of the priests and Levites, singers, porters, Nethinims, or ministers of this house of God, it shall not be lawful to impose toll, tribute, or custom, upon them.”

When we look at our Constitution we see in Article 4 Section 4 that we are guaranteed a Republican form of government, that was found in Exodus 18 “Moreover thou shalt provide out of all the people able men, such as fear God, men of truth, hating covetousness; and place such over them, to be rulers of thousands, and rulers of hundreds, rulers of fifties, and rulers of tens:” This indicates that we are to choose, or elect God fearing men and women. Looking at Article 3 Section 3 we see almost word for word Deuteronomy 17:6: ‘No person shall be convicted of Treason unless on the testimony of two Witnesses. . .’ Deuteronomy 17:6 “At the mouth of two witnesses, or three witnesses. . .”. The next paragraph in Article 3 Section 3 refers to who should pay the price for treason. In England, they could punish the sons for the trespasses of the father, if the father died.
Roger Anghis -- Bring America Back To Her Religious Roots, Part 7

The Founders incorporated elements of older legal systems, including those of Rome and Greece, as well as Exodus systems, and ideas which had emerged later. It was not a direct copy of the Bible or the Israelite government, no. (As far as I am aware, the Bible or Exodus played more of a role in the development of Common Law, or the states' laws than it did the Federal government, such as the Constitution and the Bill of Rights).

The government of Iron Age Israel was a monarchy or theocracy, ruled by a priesthood or kings and queens, in which family and inheritance were the primary factors. As far as I'm aware of, education in ancient Israel was limited to the priesthood or royalty, so yes it was "governmental".

The Founders were not looking to implement a monarchy, no. The ideas of Democracy or Republican government were more likely inspired by that of Greece and Rome rather than Israel.

There is soooooo much you don't understand.


Genesis 1:26-27 makes individuals the same as kings.
Read the Magna Carta and the reference to God.


In England, from whence we derive our legal traditions, judges were paid locally, so juries became more important.


When juries became the arbiters of property disputes, and the testimony of plaintiffs, defendant and witnesses played the major roles, all were seen to be equals before the law.

Juries, after all, in Anglo-American Common Law tradition, the institution that interprets and adjudicates the statute has the final word.

were determiners of the facts.

This “turned out to have momentous economic consequences.

The new equality of status stimulated the freedom contract and the rise of an exchange economy.

The transmission of property became increasingly ‘horizontal’- from seller to buyer- and decreasingly ‘vertical’- from father to son.


Because entrepreneurial talent is by no means confined within hereditary lines, the control and disposition of wealth was democratized. Material wealth was acquired by those who, by virtue of their labor and ingenuity, merited it rather than inherited it.”
Bethell, “The Noblest Triumph,”p.58-59




Earlier you claimed that 'economics' was separate from government.

It was the give-away as to how little you understand.

 

[Questioner]

Genesis 1:26-27 makes individuals the same as kings.
Read the Magna Carta and the reference to God.

As far as the Bible is concerned, that was before the Fall of Man.

In Exodus, Leviticus, and so on - where the nation of Israel was formed - it was originally a theocracy, ruled by priests, and later became a monarchy ruled by kings - so no, it was not a "democracy" at all - the idea of democracy comes from Greece, and republic from Rome.

In England, from whence we derive our legal traditions, judges were paid locally, so juries became more important.

When juries became the arbiters of property disputes, and the testimony of plaintiffs, defendant and witnesses played the major roles, all were seen to be equals before the law.

Juries, after all, in Anglo-American Common Law tradition, the institution that interprets and adjudicates the statute has the final word.

were determiners of the facts.

This “turned out to have momentous economic consequences.

The new equality of status stimulated the freedom contract and the rise of an exchange economy.

The transmission of property became increasingly ‘horizontal’- from seller to buyer- and decreasingly ‘vertical’- from father to son.


Because entrepreneurial talent is by no means confined within hereditary lines, the control and disposition of wealth was democratized. Material wealth was acquired by those who, by virtue of their labor and ingenuity, merited it rather than inherited it.”
Bethell, “The Noblest Triumph,”p.58-59

That's something different entirely.

Earlier you claimed that 'economics' was separate from government.

It was the give-away as to how little you understand.

Economic theories such as capitalism (e.x Adam Smith) are a different subject than government.[/quote][/quote][/quote][/QUOTE]

 

[PoliticalChic]

Genesis 1:26-27 makes individuals the same as kings.
Read the Magna Carta and the reference to God.

As far as the Bible is concerned, that was before the Fall of Man.

In Exodus, Leviticus, and so on - where the nation of Israel was formed - it was originally a theocracy, ruled by priests, and later became a monarchy ruled by kings - so no, it was not a "democracy" at all - the idea of democracy comes from Greece, and republic from Rome.

In England, from whence we derive our legal traditions, judges were paid locally, so juries became more important.

When juries became the arbiters of property disputes, and the testimony of plaintiffs, defendant and witnesses played the major roles, all were seen to be equals before the law.

Juries, after all, in Anglo-American Common Law tradition, the institution that interprets and adjudicates the statute has the final word.

were determiners of the facts.

This “turned out to have momentous economic consequences.

The new equality of status stimulated the freedom contract and the rise of an exchange economy.

The transmission of property became increasingly ‘horizontal’- from seller to buyer- and decreasingly ‘vertical’- from father to son.


Because entrepreneurial talent is by no means confined within hereditary lines, the control and disposition of wealth was democratized. Material wealth was acquired by those who, by virtue of their labor and ingenuity, merited it rather than inherited it.”
Bethell, “The Noblest Triumph,”p.58-59

That's something different entirely.

Earlier you claimed that 'economics' was separate from government.

It was the give-away as to how little you understand.

Economic theories such as capitalism (e.x Adam Smith) are a different subject than government.

[/quote][/quote][/QUOTE][/QUOTE]



You couldn't be more wrong.

You could attempt to be....but you would not succeed.

 

[protectionist]

After the 2020 re-election, deep staters will be rounded up and tossed in prison s. They'll be lucky if they escape the death penalty for treason.

 

[alang1216]

It marks you as the sort who believed every one of the Democrat ploys....Russia, Stormy, obstruction, racist, Charlottesville, Quid Pro Quo, Ukraine, and hasn't learned as each and every one fails.

"fails' must be a term you're personally wedded to, huh?

Yet every 'ploy' is based on verifiable fact. 'Fact' is obviously not a term you're personally wedded to, huh?

Watch how easily I prove you the liar.


You wrote: "Obstruction of justice as outlined in the Mueller Report"

Where's the quote stating such.

If you can't provide such a quote.....I demand you change your avi to 'Low-LifeLyingLiberal"......forthwith.

What the Mueller Report Says About Obstruction

In the hours after the public release of the redacted report from special counsel Robert S. Mueller, President Donald Trump took to Twitter with a message that reads, in part, “NO OBSTRUCTION!”

That’s not at all what the Mueller report says, though.

“Our investigation found multiple acts by the President that were capable of exerting undue influence over law enforcement investigations, including the Russian-interference and obstruction investigations,” Mueller wrote. “The incidents were often carried out through one-on-one meetings in which the President sought to use his official power outside of usual channels. These actions ranged from efforts to remove the Special Counsel and to reverse the effect of the Attorney General’s recusal; to the attempted use of official power to limit the scope of the investigation; to direct and indirect contacts with witnesses with the potential to influence their testimony.”​

I accept your apology.

 

[PoliticalChic]

It marks you as the sort who believed every one of the Democrat ploys....Russia, Stormy, obstruction, racist, Charlottesville, Quid Pro Quo, Ukraine, and hasn't learned as each and every one fails.

"fails' must be a term you're personally wedded to, huh?

Yet every 'ploy' is based on verifiable fact. 'Fact' is obviously not a term you're personally wedded to, huh?

Watch how easily I prove you the liar.


You wrote: "Obstruction of justice as outlined in the Mueller Report"

Where's the quote stating such.

If you can't provide such a quote.....I demand you change your avi to 'Low-LifeLyingLiberal"......forthwith.

What the Mueller Report Says About Obstruction

In the hours after the public release of the redacted report from special counsel Robert S. Mueller, President Donald Trump took to Twitter with a message that reads, in part, “NO OBSTRUCTION!”

That’s not at all what the Mueller report says, though.

“Our investigation found multiple acts by the President that were capable of exerting undue influence over law enforcement investigations, including the Russian-interference and obstruction investigations,” Mueller wrote. “The incidents were often carried out through one-on-one meetings in which the President sought to use his official power outside of usual channels. These actions ranged from efforts to remove the Special Counsel and to reverse the effect of the Attorney General’s recusal; to the attempted use of official power to limit the scope of the investigation; to direct and indirect contacts with witnesses with the potential to influence their testimony.”​

I accept your apology.

That's not what you wrote...."Obstruction of justice as outlined in the Mueller Report"


Now you're pretending this support of your lie.

"...were capable of exerting undue influence over law enforcement investigations,..."

Are you this stupid....or simply one more lying Liberal.




This is obstruction of justice:

Hussein was not just 'capable'.....as every individual alive is.......but actually obstruction of justice in the service of his co-religioniss......Here is the only actual obstruction of justice in recent history:



This was the only obstruction of justice: Hussein Obama prevented....obstructed.....law enforcement from arresting Hezbollah agents selling cocaine in the USA.
Iran told Obama to allow Hezbollah to sell cocaine ....$1 billion worth.....in the US......so he prevented the government from arresting and charging them.....



"Project Cassandra is an effort led by the United States Drug Enforcement Administration (DEA) to undercut Hezbollah funding from illicit drug sources.[1]Launched in 2008, the project was said to be investigating the terrorist organization's funding.[2] According to the DEA, Hezbollah has become increasingly involved with drug trafficking and organized crime as a method of funding its activities.[3][4] The investigation was tracking how large sums of money were being laundered from the Americas, through Africa, and to Lebanon into Hezbollah's coffers.[5]

An investigative report published by Politico in December 2017, described how, during the Obama administration, concerns regarding the Iran nuclear deal took precedence over the DEA project."
Project Cassandra - Wikipedia




"The secret backstory of how Obama let Hezbollah off the hook

An ambitious U.S. task force targeting Hezbollah's billion-dollar criminal enterprise ran headlong into the White House's desire for a nuclear deal with Iran.


In its determination to secure a nuclear deal with Iran, the Obama administration derailed an ambitious law enforcement campaign targeting drug trafficking by the Iranian-backed terrorist group Hezbollah, even as it was funneling cocaine into the United States, according to a POLITICO investigation.

The campaign, dubbed Project Cassandra, ….”
The secret backstory of how Obama let Hezbollah off the hook





There is no disputing the facts: Hussein Obama obstructed justice in the service of Iran and Hezbollah.


Hussein effectively gave them $1 billion dollars in drug money.

Understand the difference, Pinocchio????

 

[PoliticalChic]

After the 2020 re-election, deep staters will be rounded up and tossed in prison s. They'll be lucky if they escape the death penalty for treason.

I'm not the optimist that you are.

My belief is 'One only finds justice in the dictionary and the cemetery.'

 

[Questioner]

After the 2020 re-election, deep staters will be rounded up and tossed in prison s. They'll be lucky if they escape the death penalty for treason.

Who are you talking about?

 

[alang1216]

It marks you as the sort who believed every one of the Democrat ploys....Russia, Stormy, obstruction, racist, Charlottesville, Quid Pro Quo, Ukraine, and hasn't learned as each and every one fails.

"fails' must be a term you're personally wedded to, huh?

Yet every 'ploy' is based on verifiable fact. 'Fact' is obviously not a term you're personally wedded to, huh?

Watch how easily I prove you the liar.


You wrote: "Obstruction of justice as outlined in the Mueller Report"

Where's the quote stating such.

If you can't provide such a quote.....I demand you change your avi to 'Low-LifeLyingLiberal"......forthwith.

What the Mueller Report Says About Obstruction

In the hours after the public release of the redacted report from special counsel Robert S. Mueller, President Donald Trump took to Twitter with a message that reads, in part, “NO OBSTRUCTION!”

That’s not at all what the Mueller report says, though.

“Our investigation found multiple acts by the President that were capable of exerting undue influence over law enforcement investigations, including the Russian-interference and obstruction investigations,” Mueller wrote. “The incidents were often carried out through one-on-one meetings in which the President sought to use his official power outside of usual channels. These actions ranged from efforts to remove the Special Counsel and to reverse the effect of the Attorney General’s recusal; to the attempted use of official power to limit the scope of the investigation; to direct and indirect contacts with witnesses with the potential to influence their testimony.”​

I accept your apology.

That's not what you wrote...."Obstruction of justice as outlined in the Mueller Report"


Now you're pretending this support of your lie.

"...were capable of exerting undue influence over law enforcement investigations,..."

Are you this stupid....or simply one more lying Liberal.




This is obstruction of justice:

Hussein was not just 'capable'.....as every individual alive is.......but actually obstruction of justice in the service of his co-religioniss......Here is the only actual obstruction of justice in recent history:



This was the only obstruction of justice: Hussein Obama prevented....obstructed.....law enforcement from arresting Hezbollah agents selling cocaine in the USA.
Iran told Obama to allow Hezbollah to sell cocaine ....$1 billion worth.....in the US......so he prevented the government from arresting and charging them.....



"Project Cassandra is an effort led by the United States Drug Enforcement Administration (DEA) to undercut Hezbollah funding from illicit drug sources.[1]Launched in 2008, the project was said to be investigating the terrorist organization's funding.[2] According to the DEA, Hezbollah has become increasingly involved with drug trafficking and organized crime as a method of funding its activities.[3][4] The investigation was tracking how large sums of money were being laundered from the Americas, through Africa, and to Lebanon into Hezbollah's coffers.[5]

An investigative report published by Politico in December 2017, described how, during the Obama administration, concerns regarding the Iran nuclear deal took precedence over the DEA project."
Project Cassandra - Wikipedia




"The secret backstory of how Obama let Hezbollah off the hook

An ambitious U.S. task force targeting Hezbollah's billion-dollar criminal enterprise ran headlong into the White House's desire for a nuclear deal with Iran.


In its determination to secure a nuclear deal with Iran, the Obama administration derailed an ambitious law enforcement campaign targeting drug trafficking by the Iranian-backed terrorist group Hezbollah, even as it was funneling cocaine into the United States, according to a POLITICO investigation.

The campaign, dubbed Project Cassandra, ….”
The secret backstory of how Obama let Hezbollah off the hook





There is no disputing the facts: Hussein Obama obstructed justice in the service of Iran and Hezbollah.


Hussein effectively gave them $1 billion dollars in drug money.

Understand the difference, Pinocchio????

I understand that you want to talk about Obama as if his actions excuse Trump's. They don't.

Among other examples Mueller outlined "direct and indirect contacts with witnesses with the potential to influence their testimony". He was forbidden by the rules of the investigation from saying if Trump was guilty of a crime, he could only say things like "potential" witness tampering followed by examples.

 

[PoliticalChic]

It marks you as the sort who believed every one of the Democrat ploys....Russia, Stormy, obstruction, racist, Charlottesville, Quid Pro Quo, Ukraine, and hasn't learned as each and every one fails.

"fails' must be a term you're personally wedded to, huh?

Yet every 'ploy' is based on verifiable fact. 'Fact' is obviously not a term you're personally wedded to, huh?

Watch how easily I prove you the liar.


You wrote: "Obstruction of justice as outlined in the Mueller Report"

Where's the quote stating such.

If you can't provide such a quote.....I demand you change your avi to 'Low-LifeLyingLiberal"......forthwith.

What the Mueller Report Says About Obstruction

In the hours after the public release of the redacted report from special counsel Robert S. Mueller, President Donald Trump took to Twitter with a message that reads, in part, “NO OBSTRUCTION!”

That’s not at all what the Mueller report says, though.

“Our investigation found multiple acts by the President that were capable of exerting undue influence over law enforcement investigations, including the Russian-interference and obstruction investigations,” Mueller wrote. “The incidents were often carried out through one-on-one meetings in which the President sought to use his official power outside of usual channels. These actions ranged from efforts to remove the Special Counsel and to reverse the effect of the Attorney General’s recusal; to the attempted use of official power to limit the scope of the investigation; to direct and indirect contacts with witnesses with the potential to influence their testimony.”​

I accept your apology.

That's not what you wrote...."Obstruction of justice as outlined in the Mueller Report"


Now you're pretending this support of your lie.

"...were capable of exerting undue influence over law enforcement investigations,..."

Are you this stupid....or simply one more lying Liberal.




This is obstruction of justice:

Hussein was not just 'capable'.....as every individual alive is.......but actually obstruction of justice in the service of his co-religioniss......Here is the only actual obstruction of justice in recent history:



This was the only obstruction of justice: Hussein Obama prevented....obstructed.....law enforcement from arresting Hezbollah agents selling cocaine in the USA.
Iran told Obama to allow Hezbollah to sell cocaine ....$1 billion worth.....in the US......so he prevented the government from arresting and charging them.....



"Project Cassandra is an effort led by the United States Drug Enforcement Administration (DEA) to undercut Hezbollah funding from illicit drug sources.[1]Launched in 2008, the project was said to be investigating the terrorist organization's funding.[2] According to the DEA, Hezbollah has become increasingly involved with drug trafficking and organized crime as a method of funding its activities.[3][4] The investigation was tracking how large sums of money were being laundered from the Americas, through Africa, and to Lebanon into Hezbollah's coffers.[5]

An investigative report published by Politico in December 2017, described how, during the Obama administration, concerns regarding the Iran nuclear deal took precedence over the DEA project."
Project Cassandra - Wikipedia




"The secret backstory of how Obama let Hezbollah off the hook

An ambitious U.S. task force targeting Hezbollah's billion-dollar criminal enterprise ran headlong into the White House's desire for a nuclear deal with Iran.


In its determination to secure a nuclear deal with Iran, the Obama administration derailed an ambitious law enforcement campaign targeting drug trafficking by the Iranian-backed terrorist group Hezbollah, even as it was funneling cocaine into the United States, according to a POLITICO investigation.

The campaign, dubbed Project Cassandra, ….”
The secret backstory of how Obama let Hezbollah off the hook





There is no disputing the facts: Hussein Obama obstructed justice in the service of Iran and Hezbollah.


Hussein effectively gave them $1 billion dollars in drug money.

Understand the difference, Pinocchio????

I understand that you want to talk about Obama as if his actions excuse Trump's. They don't.

Among other examples Mueller outlined "direct and indirect contacts with witnesses with the potential to influence their testimony". He was forbidden by the rules of the investigation from saying if Trump was guilty of a crime, he could only say things like "potential" witness tampering followed by examples.

I believe that you have made what is known as an “ID/ten T” error.



You understand nothing, but lie all the time.

You brought up obstruction of justice, and I smacked you in your ugly kisser with the truth.


I have a habit of doing that.



"He was forbidden by the rules of the investigation from saying if Trump was guilty of a crime,"
A lie.

What stopped him was that no such thing occurred.....as your post proved.

 

[PoliticalChic]

Interesting that this just turned up, validating the premise of the thread...



"House GOP Report Contends Impeachment Drive Advances Rule by Bureaucrats


The Republican response to House Democrats’ impeachment case asserts that “evidence does not establish” that President Donald Trump used U.S. military aid for personal political ends, while arguing that the findings amount to a policy disagreement in which unelected bureaucrats seek a final say over an elected president.

“In our system of government, power resides with the American people, who delegate executive power to the president through an election once every four years,” says the minority report from Republican members of the House Permanent Select Committee on Intelligence, a copy of which The Daily Signal reviewed Monday. The report adds:

Unelected officials and career bureaucrats assist in the execution of the laws. The unelected bureaucracy exists to serve the elected representatives of the American people. The Democrats’ impeachment narrative flips our system on its head in service of their political ambitions.'
GOP Contends Impeachment Drive Advances Rule by Bureaucrats

 

[alang1216]

Interesting that this just turned up, validating the premise of the thread...



"House GOP Report Contends Impeachment Drive Advances Rule by Bureaucrats


The Republican response to House Democrats’ impeachment case asserts that “evidence does not establish” that President Donald Trump used U.S. military aid for personal political ends, while arguing that the findings amount to a policy disagreement in which unelected bureaucrats seek a final say over an elected president.

“In our system of government, power resides with the American people, who delegate executive power to the president through an election once every four years,” says the minority report from Republican members of the House Permanent Select Committee on Intelligence, a copy of which The Daily Signal reviewed Monday. The report adds:

Unelected officials and career bureaucrats assist in the execution of the laws. The unelected bureaucracy exists to serve the elected representatives of the American people. The Democrats’ impeachment narrative flips our system on its head in service of their political ambitions.'
GOP Contends Impeachment Drive Advances Rule by Bureaucrats

An unbiased source as usual.

 

[lennypartiv]

After the 2020 re-election, deep staters will be rounded up and tossed in prison s. They'll be lucky if they escape the death penalty for treason.

I doubt they'll get the death penalty, but they should be rounded up.