There is no underlying crime for obstruction of justice against Donald Trump.

[deanrd]

There is no underlying crime for obstruction of justice against Donald Trump.

The thing is that there really aren’t that many laws against a president working with foreign adversary against the best interest of America.

Because we never thought that we could have a traitor in the White House. There are no plans to protect us from that.

So the argument is that Trump didn’t break any laws. So even if he worked for Russia and with Russia he didn’t commit any crimes so he can’t be charged with obstruction of justice.

Oh that sounds well and good. It sounds like a good argument. But is it?

Nixon was involved with burglary. That’s a definite crime. So you could certainly charge obstruction of justice there. Which they did. And it’s why he resigned.

But Bill Clinton was impeached over obstruction of justice because he lied. The lie was the obstruction. But what was the underlying crime that caused him to lie? A BJ. In which state is a BJ illegal?

So Republicans, by impeaching Bill Clinton for obstruction of justice without an underlying crime, have set a precedent that a president can be charged with obstruction of justice even though no crime was committed.

When Trump wrote a letter trying to clear Don Junior and the letter was filled with lies, that’s obstruction of justice. In writing.

That’s basically the same as lying about getting a BJ.

Clinton was impeached. And because Republicans impeached Clinton over a BJ, Democrats can impeach Trump for colluding against the United States with our adversary, Russia, and the despot Vladimir Putin, one of trumps best friends.

So if Trump is impeached for obstruction of justice then the table has been set and the precedent created when Republicans impeached Bill Clinton over a legal BJ.

So this means I’m about to get swarmed by ignorant Republicans on the USMB who have no idea what I’m talking about and will leave a little crazy thought bubble things or some weird, head scratching emoji‘s so go for it. I love it when you guys show how ignorant you are, it’s very entertaining.

You can’t prove me wrong, so you attack my character. That’s how you guys run. So let’s see it. Go for it.

 

[progressive hunter]

medication man,,,take your medication!!!!

 

[petro]

You have no character to attack.

Your rambling nonsense deserves nothing but scorn and ridicule as you twist what you believe as logic into an unrecognizable pretzel.

There will be no impeachment and your time would be better spent propping up the next candidate the DFL masters will shove down your throat. Time is running out and your party has yet to come up with a viable candidate that isn't another old white person like Biden or Sanders.
My belief is your blinding hatred of Trump and fellow Americans will bite you right in the ass.

 

[Bruce_T_Laney]

Dean,

Your threads have been nothing but your opinion of the situation with Trump and Russia.

As you sit there the fact is Trump will never be impeached and you shouldn't blame the GOP seeing Pelosi holds the Speaker Seat.

So knowing this why is it that Pelosi is smarter than you and knows impeachment is going to cause more trouble than letting Trump sit there and focus on the 2020 election instead?

Simple, you fear Trump will win in 2020 so your only choice is beat the impeachment drum.

Now if you can get Trump under oath and have him lie to Congress like his friend Bill Clinton did then go for it but until then there will be no impeachment and Pelosi is smarter than you...

 

[Oddball]

There is no underlying crime for obstruction of justice against Donald Trump.

The thing is that there really aren’t that many laws against a president working with foreign adversary against the best interest of America.

Because we never thought that we could have a traitor in the White House. There are no plans to protect us from that.

So the argument is that Trump didn’t break any laws. So even if he worked for Russia and with Russia he didn’t commit any crimes so he can’t be charged with obstruction of justice.

Oh that sounds well and good. It sounds like a good argument. But is it?

Nixon was involved with burglary. That’s a definite crime. So you could certainly charge obstruction of justice there. Which they did. And it’s why he resigned.

But Bill Clinton was impeached over obstruction of justice because he lied. The lie was the obstruction. But what was the underlying crime that caused him to lie? A BJ. In which state is a BJ illegal?

So Republicans, by impeaching Bill Clinton for obstruction of justice without an underlying crime, have set a precedent that a president can be charged with obstruction of justice even though no crime was committed.

When Trump wrote a letter trying to clear Don Junior and the letter was filled with lies, that’s obstruction of justice. In writing.

That’s basically the same as lying about getting a BJ.

Clinton was impeached. And because Republicans impeached Clinton over a BJ, Democrats can impeach Trump for colluding against the United States with our adversary, Russia, and the despot Vladimir Putin, one of trumps best friends.

So if Trump is impeached for obstruction of justice then the table has been set and the precedent created when Republicans impeached Bill Clinton over a legal BJ.

So this means I’m about to get swarmed by ignorant Republicans on the USMB who have no idea what I’m talking about and will leave a little crazy thought bubble things or some weird, head scratching emoji‘s so go for it. I love it when you guys show how ignorant you are, it’s very entertaining.

You can’t prove me wrong, so you attack my character. That’s how you guys run. So let’s see it. Go for it.

 

[Sunni Man]

Poor deluded Deanie boy is having a mental breakdown over the fact that Mueller didn't find any Russian collusion by Pres.Trump. ...

 

[BULLDOG]

Dean,

Your threads have been nothing but your opinion of the situation with Trump and Russia.

As you sit there the fact is Trump will never be impeached and you shouldn't blame the GOP seeing Pelosi holds the Speaker Seat.

So knowing this why is it that Pelosi is smarter than you and knows impeachment is going to cause more trouble than letting Trump sit there and focus on the 2020 election instead?

Simple, you fear Trump will win in 2020 so your only choice is beat the impeachment drum.

Now if you can get Trump under oath and have him lie to Congress like his friend Bill Clinton did then go for it but until then there will be no impeachment and Pelosi is smarter than you...

The decision to impeach or not is a completely different subject than the OP. The Clinton example proves that it would certainly be possible to impeach Trump for his lies if the decision to do that is made. Cohen lied to congress at the direction of Trump, so there is a check mark by that detail.

 

[BULLDOG]

Poor deluded Deanie boy is having a mental breakdown over the fact that Mueller didn't find any Russian collusion by Pres.Trump. ...

How do you know that? Have you seen Mueller's report?

 

[Sunni Man]

How do you know that? Have you seen Mueller's report?

Try reading Mueller's statement. ..

 

[deanrd]

Poor deluded Deanie boy is having a mental breakdown over the fact that Mueller didn't find any Russian collusion by Pres.Trump. ...

How do you know that? Have you seen Mueller's report?

They don’t need to. Once I was taking a cab and because of something that was on the radio we started talking politics.
The cab driver brought up Jesus, God, and the Bible. And then he said something ridiculous I don’t even remember what it was.
But I asked him did you read that in the Bible and he said no I never read that. So I said will how do you know it’s in the Bible?
He said he doesn’t need to read the Bible because his pastor tells him what it says. And his pastor is a man of God.

So that was the end of the argument. You can’t argue with that.

 

[BULLDOG]

How do you know that? Have you seen Mueller's report?

Try reading Mueller's statement. ..

Mueller hasn't made a statement. Barr's little note is not Mueller's statement.

 

[Oddball]

Poor deluded Deanie boy is having a mental breakdown over the fact that Mueller didn't find any Russian collusion by Pres.Trump. ...

How do you know that? Have you seen Mueller's report?

They don’t need to. Once I was taking a cab and because of something that was on the radio we started talking politics.
The cab driver brought up Jesus, God, and the Bible. And then he said something ridiculous I don’t even remember what it was.
But I asked him did you read that in the Bible and he said no I never read that. So I said will how do you know it’s in the Bible?
He said he doesn’t need to read the Bible because his pastor tells him what it says. And his pastor is a man of God.

So that was the end of the argument. You can’t argue with that.

Gee, that sounds exactly like you listening to the DNC propaganda and talking points, as issued to you by your pastors at CNN, MSNBC, NYT, et. al.

Never heard of "introspection" have ya?

 

[Sunni Man]

Mueller hasn't made a statement. Barr's little note is not Mueller's statement.

Barr summarized the report for him.

Same thing ...

"Attorney General William Barr said Sunday that special counsel Robert Mueller's Russia investigation did not find sufficient evidence to establish that President Donald Trump committed obstruction of justice, or that the president's campaign coordinated with Moscow's efforts to influence the 2016 election."

Trump didn't collude with Russia, Mueller says, while attorney general clears him of obstruction

 

[deanrd]

How do you know that? Have you seen Mueller's report?

Try reading Mueller's statement. ..

Can you post a link to it. Because I want to see it.

 

[deanrd]

Poor deluded Deanie boy is having a mental breakdown over the fact that Mueller didn't find any Russian collusion by Pres.Trump. ...

How do you know that? Have you seen Mueller's report?

They don’t need to. Once I was taking a cab and because of something that was on the radio we started talking politics.
The cab driver brought up Jesus, God, and the Bible. And then he said something ridiculous I don’t even remember what it was.
But I asked him did you read that in the Bible and he said no I never read that. So I said will how do you know it’s in the Bible?
He said he doesn’t need to read the Bible because his pastor tells him what it says. And his pastor is a man of God.

So that was the end of the argument. You can’t argue with that.

Gee, that sounds exactly like you listening to the DNC propaganda and talking points, as issued to you by your pastors at CNN, MSNBC, NYT, et. al.

Never heard of "introspection" have ya?

From someone who believes fox, Breitbart, and Newsmax.

 

[progressive hunter]

How do you know that? Have you seen Mueller's report?

Try reading Mueller's statement. ..

Can you post a link to it. Because I want to see it.

so you make dumbass comments and havent even read the report yet???

what a dumbass,,take youre medication

 

[Oddball]

From someone who believes fox, Breitbart, and Newsmax.

I get my information from far more and broader sources than that.....But I did note that you accepted the premise that you do nothing but regurgitate DNC yammering points, as dispensed to you by your media clergy.

 

[BULLDOG]

Mueller hasn't made a statement. Barr's little note is not Mueller's statement.

Barr summarized the report for him.

Same thing ...

"Attorney General William Barr said Sunday that special counsel Robert Mueller's Russia investigation did not find sufficient evidence to establish that President Donald Trump committed obstruction of justice, or that the president's campaign coordinated with Moscow's efforts to influence the 2016 election."

Trump didn't collude with Russia, Mueller says, while attorney general clears him of obstruction

No, not the same thing. Barr released another note saying his first specifically was not a summary.

 

[deanrd]

Mueller hasn't made a statement. Barr's little note is not Mueller's statement.

Barr summarized the report for him.

Same thing ...

"Attorney General William Barr said Sunday that special counsel Robert Mueller's Russia investigation did not find sufficient evidence to establish that President Donald Trump committed obstruction of justice, or that the president's campaign coordinated with Moscow's efforts to influence the 2016 election."

Trump didn't collude with Russia, Mueller says, while attorney general clears him of obstruction

Same thing? You can condense nearly 400 pages of report and possibly thousands of pages of attachments down to four pages using only 72 words from the original report and it’s the same thing?

Is that like saying a beater is the same as a brand new car since they’re both cars so it’s the same thing?

 

[deanrd]

Mueller hasn't made a statement. Barr's little note is not Mueller's statement.

Barr summarized the report for him.

Same thing ...

"Attorney General William Barr said Sunday that special counsel Robert Mueller's Russia investigation did not find sufficient evidence to establish that President Donald Trump committed obstruction of justice, or that the president's campaign coordinated with Moscow's efforts to influence the 2016 election."

Trump didn't collude with Russia, Mueller says, while attorney general clears him of obstruction

No, not the same thing. Barr released another note saying his first specifically was not a summary.

Wasn’t that hilarious? He called the first report a summary and then said he never called the first report a summary. It’s like Republicans all drink from the same well.