Welcome to the Utopia Forums! Register a new account
The current time is Tue Dec 18 08:46:08 PST 2018

Utopia Talk / Politics / Session Resigns
Hot Rod
Revved Up
Wed Nov 07 13:47:40

Per Trumps Request.

obaminated
Member
Wed Nov 07 13:52:32
Hey, he never went about the weed.
tumbleweed
the wanderer
Wed Nov 07 13:53:46
shocking, no one saw it coming!
tumbleweed
the wanderer
Wed Nov 07 13:56:21
here's Sessions' letter
http://pbs.twimg.com/media/DrbKTWKXQAA40Yy.jpg

noting Trump is an idiot in his expectations of the job (not in those words exactly)
tumbleweed
the wanderer
Wed Nov 07 13:58:40
"Because Sessions technically resigned, Trump can move any Senate-confirmed government official over to serve as attorney general."
~reporter

...end of America coming
Dukhat
Member
Wed Nov 07 14:01:07
Makes his strategic move to doom the house majority and go all-in on the senate make more sense. It will cover up for his crimes.
Rugian
Member
Wed Nov 07 14:02:19
Today Sessions...tomorrow Mueller!
Rugian
Member
Wed Nov 07 14:03:41
tumbleweed
the wanderer Wed Nov 07 13:58:40
"Because Sessions technically resigned, Trump can move any Senate-confirmed government official over to serve as attorney general."

Too bad he already lost Pruitt for that.
Dukhat
Member
Wed Nov 07 14:07:09
He'll promise whoever fires Mueller a supreme court seat. It will be incredibly brazen.
tumbleweed
the wanderer
Wed Nov 07 14:13:08
it should be noted Trump's sole reason for hating Sessions is Sessions not protecting him on the Russia investigation (something that's not the AG's job to do)... & he says it publicly, like so many other unacceptable things (like threatening to use Justice Dept against Dems if they investigate him)

(he also pretends to blame Sessions for the separating kids blowback, but he has openly embraced that policy more then once, just his typical 'always blame others' behavior)
Im better then you
2012 UP Football Champ
Wed Nov 07 14:15:17
Good grief the letter is undated.
Paramount
Member
Wed Nov 07 14:16:38
I noticed that as well. Doesn’t that letter need to have a date?
McKobb
Member
Wed Nov 07 14:17:39
Sessions actually cares about the rule of law and that is unacceptable to Trump!
tumbleweed
the wanderer
Wed Nov 07 14:22:49
coward Trump, as always, did not deliver the news himself... Kelly was the hatchet-man
kargen
Member
Wed Nov 07 16:44:13
President Trump has already named the temporary replacement. Forget the name but is a person that agrees with the president that some documents should be released.
People are speculating this isn't about getting rid of Mueller or halting the investigation. It is about controlling how the information found during the investigation is released. Most people think Mueller is about to rap up anyway and was waiting until after midterms himself to do so.
tumbleweed
the wanderer
Wed Nov 07 16:45:57
the guy appointed is not in the line of succession, and has openly criticized Mueller investigation in the past... plus Trump tweeted a negative opinion poll about Mueller hours before announcing this change

more obstruction of justice in plain view
tumbleweed
the wanderer
Wed Nov 07 16:48:08
but yeah, the move may not be about firing Mueller... the guy appointed has suggested starving the investigation's funds (one of his past comments), & he would now be in position to just sit on any conclusions found
kargen
Member
Wed Nov 07 17:16:40
I'm guessing the investigation will stay fully funded. Cutting funding is something that can easily be made public with no repercussions for the release. Sitting on conclusions would be the more likely outcome depending on what the report says. Everybody is assuming it will be bad for the president but really we do not know that.
tumbleweed
the wanderer
Wed Nov 07 18:01:28
he would also be able to shut down lines of investigation

"Mueller's investigation of Trump is going too far"
is an actual article written by him... (Matthew Whitaker)... agreeing that Trump's finances should be off limits (when they absolutely should be looked at... he is quite proud of his Russian money laundering*)

given Whitaker is not in line of succession, pretty clear why he's been shoved in by the fraud


*”I bought a house a number of years ago in Palm Beach, Florida...for $40 million, and I sold it to a Russian for $100 million”
...plus numerous other connections
kargen
Member
Wed Nov 07 18:29:26
You have to remember he is just temporary. He is probably there to just sit in the chair and do nothing until the new congress takes office. Really a non issue. Who the president picks to actually go through the process will be the one to look at. Not like much is going to get done before January anyway because we have two breaks coming up.

And I don't think he can shut down lines of investigation? Mueller was given the scope of the investigation when it started and from the quick articles I read that wouldn't change. Those articles were older though going back to when Sessions recused himself. He could perhaps take over the investigation but that would have the same political backlash as firing Mueller would have.
tumbleweed
the wanderer
Wed Nov 07 19:23:53
I know Mueller needs permission to get subpoenas or something, don't really know how it works though


I just saw a clip of Whitaker defending the Don Jr. meeting, apparently siding with Giuliani's nonsense claims over factual info by saying Don Jr didn't know who he'd be meeting with (even though the emails were remarkably clear about it)

so he's on Trumps side with regard to finances and his son...

good luck finding a non-corrupt reason this guy got the nod
Hot Rod
Revved Up
Wed Nov 07 21:03:27

Should he recuse himself?

tumbleweed
the wanderer
Wed Nov 07 21:06:28
if they cared about the public maintaining faith in the process he would... but this guy probably has sworn a blood oath to Trump not to recuse
tumbleweed
the wanderer
Wed Nov 07 21:13:31
this is the Trump tweet immediately preceding his announcement of Whitaker:

"According to NBC News, Voters Nationwide Disapprove of the so-called Mueller Investigation (46%) more than they Approve (41%). You mean they are finally beginning to understand what a disgusting Witch Hunt, led by 17 Angry Democrats, is all about!"

(It's not led by 17 angry democrats)

a non-idiot adult wouldn't put an obvious spotlight on his corrupt action... but Trump is Trump
Hot Rod
Revved Up
Wed Nov 07 23:23:45

There are Mueller and 16 lawyers in the witch hunt.

tumbleweed
the wanderer
Thu Nov 08 11:39:09
Mueller's a Republican, appointed by Republican Rod Rosenstein, and Christopher Wray (Trump's appointment to FBI) has said more than once it's not a witch hunt... good luck finding anyone saying it who isn't just a Trump shill

------

"
People close to Whitaker also say he would not approve any potential subpoena of the president.
"

is in a Washington Post article... you can decide those people don't exist based on nothing or whatever, but still the notion that the AG has control is true

if Trump is actually innocent, he's now destroying any faith in the results that would show it
kargen
Member
Thu Nov 08 12:34:26
Nah you had no faith anyway and are assuming the worst. Until Whitaker actually does something to hinder the investigation this is a non story.

I still think he is there to sit in the chair and do nothing until a new congress is in place.
tumbleweed
the wanderer
Thu Nov 08 12:43:46
what is your explanation as to why he was picked?

there has to be a reason they skipped line of succession & he got the nod specifically
kargen
Member
Thu Nov 08 12:56:00
I gave you my explanation. To sit there and do nothing. When picking a seat warmer you don't go with the best and brightest. You pick someone that doesn't matter much.
It is also true when you are setting up someone to be the scapegoat you don't pick the best and brightest.
You think he was picked to do the dirty work of President Trump. I think he was picked to do nothing. We will see who is right in the next two months.
tumbleweed
the wanderer
Thu Nov 08 13:24:11
your two scenarios are both corrupt intent

--------

"
...A principal officer must be confirmed by the Senate. And that has a very, very significant consequence today.

It means that President Trump’s installation of Matthew Whitaker as acting attorney general of the United States after forcing the resignation of Jeff Sessions is unconstitutional. It’s illegal. And it means that anything Mr. Whitaker does, or tries to do, in that position is invalid.
"
~ George Conway, lawyer... (& disgruntled husband of Kellyanne Conway)

(more details in article if interested)
http://www...sessions-unconstitutional.html
kargen
Member
Thu Nov 08 15:36:47
Because Sessions resigned and Whitaker is temporary he need not be confirmed by the Senate. Whitaker is a senior Department of Justice official and the Federal Vacancies Reform Act allows for what President Trump has done.
tumbleweed
the wanderer
Thu Nov 08 16:10:45
Sessions didn't really resign... but they address it anyway in that article

"
Much of the commentary about Mr. Whitaker’s appointment has focused on all sorts of technical points about the Vacancies Reform Act and Justice Department succession statutes. But the flaw in the appointment of Mr. Whitaker, who was Mr. Sessions’s chief of staff at the Justice Department, runs much deeper. It defies one of the explicit checks and balances set out in the Constitution, a provision designed to protect us all against the centralization of government power.

If you don’t believe us, then take it from Supreme Court Justice Clarence Thomas, whom Mr. Trump once called his “favorite” sitting justice. Last year, the Supreme Court examined the question of whether the general counsel of the National Labor Relations Board had been lawfully appointed to his job without Senate confirmation. The Supreme Court held the appointment invalid on a statutory ground.

Justice Thomas agreed with the judgment, but wrote separately to emphasize that even if the statute had allowed the appointment, the Constitution’s Appointments Clause would not have. The officer in question was a principal officer, he concluded. And the public interest protected by the Appointments Clause was a critical one: The Constitution’s drafters, Justice Thomas argued, “recognized the serious risk for abuse and corruption posed by permitting one person to fill every office in the government.” Which is why, he pointed out, the framers provided for advice and consent of the Senate.

What goes for a mere lawyer at the N.L.R.B. goes in spades for the attorney general of the United States, the head of the Justice Department and one of the most important people in the federal government. It is one thing to appoint an acting underling, like an acting solicitor general, a post one of us held. But those officials are always supervised by higher-ups; in the case of the solicitor general, by the attorney general and deputy attorney general, both confirmed by the Senate.
"
------------

TLDR: given the extreme power of this position (reports to no one but the 'president'), it's not allowed
kargen
Member
Thu Nov 08 16:39:18
Read it and while interesting doesn't negate what the Federal Vacancies Reform Act says. Looking at Justice Thomas' argument they were ruling on a temporary appointment that was then submitted as the full time person to fill the position. The ruling has to do with actions taken between the time he was nominated to the position full time but before he had been approved by Senate. Actions he took before the permanent nomination were not questioned as part of the case.
This only applies if President Trump decides to nominate Whitaker and then only for the time from nomination to confirmation.

That is the problem with reading opinion pieces. The people offering up the opinion only supply what supports their opinion. Neal K. Katyal and George T. Conway III left out many facts of the case. I am going to assume since they are lawyers they left that information out on purpose because it undermines their opinions. The other option is that they are incompetent lawyers and can't comprehend written law.
tumbleweed
the wanderer
Thu Nov 08 16:53:57
I don't understand your argument as to why it matters if he's nominated later or not, the appointment itself is invalid... but I'm not a lawyer, no point in arguing


I still am waiting for a non-corrupt rationale for his appointment over anyone in the normal line of succession... why has some guy who openly criticized Mueller (including on TV which is where Trump gets all info) been hand-picked (non-corruptly)
kargen
Member
Thu Nov 08 18:16:40
The appointment is not invalid according to the Vacancies Reform Act. There is a couple of ways to make a legal appointment. The article focused only on the one that does not apply.

And I told you the non-corrupt rationale. He is there to keep the seat warm. I will offer up one ulterior motive. President Trump wants the Democrats and the press talking about this instead of something else. Can you think of anything that happened Tuesday the Democrats might have spent all day talking about if this announcement wasn't made?

And even legal experts who do not support President Trump in any way have said there is a difference in a lawyer offering opinions on a news or talk show and a lawyer offering a legal opinion. Basically things Whitaker said on a talk show would have little if any bearing on his ability to serve. One even said people were assuming intent. We don't know if he was speculating on what might happen or what he would like to see happen.
Until the Supreme Court rules otherwise or congress changes the law what happened here looks to be legal.
tumbleweed
the wanderer
Thu Nov 08 18:39:02
your 'doing nothing' claim could be ignoring any Mueller requests & sitting on any final reports

he's not exactly a neutral speed bump... surely they could find someone less conflicted, there was another old nugget released of him saying it's been proven Russia didn't interfere in the election (not sure the date, presumably he said it before Mueller findings, but it was never a true comment regardless)

btw, even Judge Napolitano on Fox says its not a legal appointment
kargen
Member
Thu Nov 08 19:58:36
Yeah I watched Judge Napolitano the day of the announcement. I like listening to him as he seems to mostly stick to constitutionality of stuff and not feelings. He said might not be legal and the White House would have to sort it out. He sited the same thing the article sited. He didn't get into the 2nd way this could be legal. Seems most people are concentrating on only one part of the law.
kargen
Member
Thu Nov 08 20:06:21
Forgot to add.

Personal opinion but I'm thinking President Trump wants Muellers report to come out some time in December. Muellers team kind of hinted (according to several media sites) that it could be out two or three weeks after the midterms. To that end Whitaker would probably just stay out of his way. Maybe he pushes a bit for a rap but it wouldn't be much of a push simply because knowing Mueller might be close you don't wanna give him reason to think he is being unduly pressured.
Hot Rod
Revved Up
Thu Nov 08 20:31:03

I hope it turns out to be a non-issue.


I like the Judge too. He has a way of explaining things that makes it easy to understand.



tumbleweed
the wanderer
Thu Nov 08 21:14:51
Whitaker has even called Muellers team a lynch mob

How blatant of abuse do you people require?

If Trump wanted no interference, appoint no one, let line of succession play out. This is so ridiculoulsy obviously not the case. A guy with numerous public attacks on Mueller hand-picked with no rationale given. Plus Trump making a "witch hunt" tweet right before the announcement.

I return to the parasite conclusion.
Hot Rod
Revved Up
Thu Nov 08 21:18:14

Ever think of waiting till he does something wrong?

tumbleweed
the wanderer
Thu Nov 08 21:29:23
it's not like we get regular updates from Rosenstein or Mueller, so no reason to think we will know what Whitaker does

and also not noted in the ridiculously clear corrupt action is the firing of Sessions itself... Trump has made it crystal clear on many occasions his main issue with Sessions was the recusal

he has said if he had known Jeff was going to recuse, he would've picked someone else, and acted like protecting Trump on this one issue is some major aspect of the job, rather than not at all ('he takes the job, the recuses, who does that?' ~shocked Trump)

Is Trump so obviously corrupt that it goes past some level of believability that you assume it must be wrong?

Hot Rod
Revved Up
Thu Nov 08 22:50:13

"Trump has made it crystal clear on many occasions his main issue with Sessions was the recusal"


With many businessmen that would be reason enough for a dismissal.

Sorry boss, I can't do what you hired me for. You see, I got this thing that prohibits me from getting involved at present.

tumbleweed
the wanderer
Thu Nov 08 23:35:44
thank you for illustrating my point... you've bought Trump's concept that the AG being involved in this single investigation is a main duty of his job

it is not... at all... people recuse all the time from single operations

but malignant narcissist dictator Trump thinks Sessions main job is protecting him
Hot Rod
Revved Up
Fri Nov 09 00:40:41

"it is not... at all... people recuse all the time from single operations"


Not right after they get the job. He blindsided Trump by not telling him in advance of his announcement for the job.

This is no more and no less than a dirty trick. I would expect it from a liberal but not someone with Sessions' reputation.

And it has nothing to do with protecting Trump. When are you going to get it? The truth is all Trump needs to protect him.

tumbleweed
the wanderer
Fri Nov 09 01:20:17
you are spewing Trump idiocy

you (& Trump) are acting like he's been twiddling his thumbs the whole time, overseeing ONE investigation is not the entirety of the job of AG

and if it's not about protecting Trump what IS it about? what would Sessions have been doing that would be so critical?
kargen
Member
Fri Nov 09 02:30:09
"Whitaker has even called Muellers team a lynch mob"

He is entitled to his opinions and in the position he was in he was free to express those opinions. How he acts on those opinions is the single thing he should be judged upon. And now that he for the time being has a position of power he should refrain from publicly expressing those opinions.

President Trump just wants the investigation to end. He is confident there is nothing that points to him as doing something illegal. Side investigations have discovered crimes by some of his associates but information from the actual Mueller investigation is scarce at best and even then most that information is speculation. He and his staff should be commended for how well they have been able to keep the investigation closed in a city where anything else would have long ago been leaked to the press.
American Democrat
Member
Fri Nov 09 05:32:13
"I am going to assume since they are lawyers they left that information out on purpose because it undermines their opinions."

Actually no, it was addressed, by the topic being brought up by the Appointment Clause.

Even though Whitaker "qualifies" in one facet it. But the caveat is this; establishing the position and if they are a "principle officer."

That is the argument.

"The appointment is not invalid according to the Vacancies Reform Act. There is a couple of ways to make a legal appointment. The article focused only on the one that does not apply. "

The appointment isn't invalid due to '90 days criterion" however, it does inherently apply as it would be used to argue the legitimacy of roles and decisions to be made.

http://www...fluence-russia-investigations/

Your devotion to Trump should be commended.
Hot Rod
Revved Up
Fri Nov 09 06:22:27

"and if it's not about protecting Trump what IS it about? what would Sessions have been doing that would be so critical?"


Yes, he has done an excellent job from what I understand.

It is hard to say why Trump fired him. It certainly was not to protect Trump. Trump has said from the get-go that he had zero collusion with the Russian government, especially as regards the election.

He kind of made a fool of Trump, maybe that was the reason.

You know, if you were to check history you may find a president that has fired more people than Trump.

Back in my 20s, I was talking to a man that hired me for a position in a women's specialty shop about people getting fired. We talked about it for quite a while the different reasons and such.

In the end, he said, 'what it boils down to is you can be fired if your boss doesn't like the way you comb your hair, he really doesn't need a reason'.

Whenever this subject comes up regarding Trump I recall that reason above all.

We hired Trump because he is a businessman and not a politician. So when he acts like a businessman, I'm happy.

It took over a hundred years to screw up this country, it's going to take more than two years to fix it.


Believe it or not, The President is doing a great job.





tumbleweed
the wanderer
Fri Nov 09 11:14:59
so you don't even know why Trump fired Sessions... even though he complained over & over & over & over about the recusal... which should not matter at all if it wasn't about protection

whatever... you will never see any of his corruption no matter how clear he makes it


Reporter: "Do you want [Whitaker] to reign in Mueller?"
Trump: "What a stupid question that is... but you ask a lot of stupid questions"

http://twitter.com/ABCPolitics/status/1060913366913314816

a) since he always lies, we have confirmation
b) he is so disgustingly unprofessional & immature

yeah, how could anyone have that question when he appoints a known Mueller hater illegally to the position that had no reason to be vacant in the first place
kargen
Member
Fri Nov 09 12:50:37
American Democrat did you actually read the article? It says what I said just in more words. Basically the more recent Supreme Court ruling was dealing with a situation different than what is happening now so doesn't fully apply. The article says several times that the legality of this is unknown because it is a unique situation.

And this isn't about President Trump this is about people getting it wrong when they say the placement is illegal.

tumbleweed
the wanderer
Fri Nov 09 13:15:03
Trump today: "I don't know Matt Whitaker"

Trump last month: “I can tell you Matt Whitaker’s a great guy. I mean, I know Matt Whitaker.”

video of him saying both for whatever good it does:

http://fin...ms-doesn-t-know-175837036.html

(that's a 100% proven lie for anyone having trouble noticing it)

there are also reports of him being seen multiple times in West Wing & being known as their eyes & ears in the justice dept
American Democrat
Member
Fri Nov 09 13:51:35
Yes, I've read it. Comprehend it. And stated the arguments from both sides. It is undetermined about the legalities of it. Which you have concluded that I am criticizing you about with your declaration that they have it wrong about it being an illegal action

Do try and keep up.
American Democrat
Member
Fri Nov 09 14:00:21
To sum it up;

Kargen: "they are wrong saying it's illegal. Because it's not."

Me and other experts in the same field: "it is unprecedented and the argument presented may indicate otherwise."
hood
Member
Fri Nov 09 14:41:28
"He is entitled to his opinions"

That wasn't the reaction to the FBI agents who just had opinions that Trump was awful. It's pretty weird that in the case of the FBI, it greatly hindered their ability to do their job, yet here it's just an opinion.
tumbleweed
the wanderer
Fri Nov 09 15:10:18
and they were opinions about Trump in general

Whitaker's opinions were specific about the investigation which he now oversees

such as: 'no Russia interference, no obstruction, lynch mob, gone too far, finances off limits, an appointed AG could starve the investigation' (hey, he just got appointed AG, how bout dat)
tumbleweed
the wanderer
Fri Nov 09 15:17:41
and i left out a big one that the 'Trump Jr meeting was fine, he had no idea who he'd be meeting with'

yeah, no idea whatsoever...

subject line of email chain
"Re: Russia - Clinton - private and confidential"

one of the emails:
"Would it be possible to move tomorrow meeting to 4pm as the Russian attorney is in court until 3 i was just informed."

who could possibly be coming to the meeting?? let's just invite all heads of the campaign to the total mystery, i'm sure their time has no value
kargen
Member
Fri Nov 09 15:45:12
hood the FBI agents took action on their opinions. TO this point Whitaker has not. If he does he should quickly and summarily be removed.
tumbleweed
the wanderer
Fri Nov 09 15:49:43
"the FBI agents took action on their opinions"

such as?
delude
Member
Fri Nov 09 16:02:44
"hood the FBI agents took action on their opinions. "

Oh do tell by all means...
tumbleweed
the wanderer
Wed Nov 14 15:42:57
Jeff Flake to the rescue!... kinda...

Flake wants a bill to protect Mueller brought to vote

dickbag McConnell is refusing to allow a vote

so Flake says he won't approve any judicial nominees until the bill gets a vote
kargen
Member
Wed Nov 14 16:17:03
I bet he was also the kid on the playground that wouldn't let others have the ball unless he got to bat first.
tumbleweed
the wanderer
Wed Nov 14 16:20:43
McConnell's reasoning is that Trump has given no indication he will interfere w/ Mueller.


...probably a massive parasite infection in that turtle-man
Average Ameriacn
Member
Thu Nov 15 05:27:23
MAGA: Whitaker is also a business man, I like him!

http://new...logy-and-other-insane-products

Acting AG Matt Whitaker worked for a company that hawked “time travel” technology and other insane products

Matthew G. Whitaker, the acting attorney general of the United States, spent over a year on the advisory board of an “invention-promotion scam” firm that hawked Bigfoot paraphernalia, “masculine toilets,” and underwear with sophisticated marketing pitches like: "How are your balls feeling today?"

Whitaker’s unprecedented placement atop the Department of Justice has drawn outrage from legal experts on both sides of the aisle who argue his appointment is unconstitutional and threatens the independence of special counsel Robert Mueller, who he now technically oversees.


But his work for World Patent Marketing — a company shut down by a federal judge this year after it was accused by the Federal Trade Commission of running "a scam that has bilked thousands of consumers out of millions of dollars" — has also sounded alarms among politicians and legal officials. The company is under investigation by the FBI, according to the Wall Street Journal.

“It’s never a good thing when a law enforcement officer was employed by a company that’s under federal criminal investigation — much less the nation’s chief law enforcement officer,” said Renato Mariotti, a former prosecutor turned white-collar defense attorney.

Democrats in the House say they will launch an investigation examining Whitaker’s involvement with World Patent Marketing when they assume power in January.

Whitaker has denied any wrongdoing or knowledge of the alleged fraud at World Patent Marketing. “Acting attorney general Matt Whitaker has said he is not aware of any fraudulent activity,” Justice Department spokeswoman Kerri Kupec said in a statement to VICE News. “Any stories suggesting otherwise are false.”


But the company’s public public statements about his role suggests a relationship built on leveraging his reputation as a U.S. Attorney to defend it against charges of impropriety.

When Whitaker first joined the Florida-based company, in late 2014, a press release touted his role in “trying to educate and protect its inventors from patent troll scams and patent marketing fraud.” On Oct. 30, 2014, the company sent a press release headlined: “Former US Attorney Whitaker Joins World Patent Marketing to Protect Inventors From Patent Marketing Scam.”


By December 2014, in another press release, he came to the firm’s defense: “As a former U.S. Attorney, I would only align myself with a first-class organization,” Whitaker said. "World Patent Marketing goes beyond making statements about doing business 'ethically' and translate those words into action."

On at least one occasion, Whitaker fired off an email to someone who’d complained about the company, noting his status as a former U.S. attorney and accusing the person of attempting to “smear” the firm.

tumbleweed
the wanderer
Thu Nov 15 11:09:19
a fraud businessman who threatens people & hates Mueller... sounds like someone else...


speaking of someone else, here he is not interfering w/ Mueller again:

"
The inner workings of the Mueller investigation are a total mess. They have found no collusion and have gone absolutely nuts. They are screaming and shouting at people, horribly threatening them to come up with the answers they want. They are a disgrace to our Nation and don’t...

....care how many lives the ruin. These are Angry People, including the highly conflicted Bob Mueller, who worked for Obama for 8 years. They won’t even look at all of the bad acts and crimes on the other side. A TOTAL WITCH HUNT LIKE NO OTHER IN AMERICAN HISTORY!

Universities will someday study what highly conflicted (and NOT Senate approved) Bob Mueller and his gang of Democrat thugs have done to destroy people. Why is he protecting Crooked Hillary, Comey, McCabe, Lisa Page & her lover, Peter S, and all of his friends on the other side?

The only “Collusion” is that of the Democrats with Russia and many others. Why didn’t the FBI take the Server from the DNC? They still don’t have it. Check out how biased Facebook, Google and Twitter are in favor of the Democrats. That’s the real Collusion!
"

#25thAmendment
Hot Rod
Revved Up
Thu Nov 15 11:18:31

Hillary has problems of her own finally.

See my 'Very' thread.

tumbleweed
the wanderer
Thu Nov 15 11:32:47
it's not real problems, there's no legal authority involved

a Trump shill filed a FOIA request & was granted it

he has no ability to charge her w/ anything, just to blow everything he learns out of proportion on his website
Hot Rod
Revved Up
Thu Nov 15 11:44:08

They said on the news that a Federal Judge gave her 30 to submit her answers.

I would imagine it will include the Server she set up in her basement and ended up in a closet in Denver, plus the hard drive she used a hammer on, The hundreds of thousands of e-mails that ended up on her assistant's laptop, not to mention doing classified work on her private phone while u=in belligerent countries.

tumbleweed
the wanderer
Thu Nov 15 11:55:25
there's no prosecutor involved, bad/fake media is all she faces

her real problems will be if the stooge Trump installed as AG (in our rapidly deteriorating democracy) goes after her as he says should be done
Hot Rod
Revved Up
Thu Nov 15 12:04:30

What the hell is wrong with you? Do you seriously think we live in a democracy?

tumbleweed
the wanderer
Thu Nov 15 12:42:12
we're supposed to be

but Trump is smearing every institution solely for his own self-interest, eroding faith in elections w/ numerous false voter fraud claims, & suggesting he will use the DoJ (now headed by his stooge) to go after Dems if they try to exercise their constitutional duty of oversight (that's EXTREME corruption)... & you idiots cheer for it
Hot Rod
Revved Up
Thu Nov 15 13:49:09

First of all, we do *****NOT***** live in a democracy. We live in a Democratic Republic. Big Difference.

If we were a pure democracy the Hillary would be The President right now.



The reason Trump is "Smearing" other institutions is that he is trying to get them to do what they are supposed to do. You watch the liberal media, do you think they are supposed to attack The President of The United States so vociferously and hatefully. Or do you think they are supposed to report the facts without expressing the negative opinions of The President that they do?



His actual comment regarding the DoJ was, he wants to work with the Democrats to get things gone for the American people. BUT, if the Democrats start using their new power to go after him, then he will use the DoJ to go after all of the people that have committed crimes since he has been in office.



There is the truth, you can go back and research it yourself or you can continue to listen to the psychopathic liars that you have been listening to.

Hot Rod
Revved Up
Thu Nov 15 13:55:30
*-gone = done
tumbleweed
the wanderer
Thu Nov 15 14:36:20
"BUT, if the Democrats start using their new power to go after him, then he will use the DoJ to go after all of the people that have committed crimes since he has been in office. "

how is this acceptable to you?

a) if people have committed crimes they SHOULD be investigated, regardless of retaliation

b) Trump accuses people of crimes w/ no evidence... none

--------

and the media noting that everything he says is a lie is not 'attacking' Trump

not sure how anyone can be 'neutral' when faced w/ such a disgusting lump of shit
Hot Rod
Revved Up
Thu Nov 15 15:08:43

It's not really.

Personally, I would like to see him make Rudy the AG or Special Prosecutor and let him go after them.

The only way the Democrats can be forced to stop their felonies is to prosecute every infraction they make to the max.

Hot Rod
Revved Up
Thu Nov 15 15:16:07

But I know why Trump is doing it.

He is trying to do what is best for the country.


To continue arguing with the Democrats like what has been going on for the last two years is not helping anyone.

tumbleweed
the wanderer
Thu Nov 15 15:25:16
so you're saying Trump will overlook all the crimes of the Democrats if they play ball

sounds like a quality foundation for governing
American Democrat
Member
Thu Nov 15 15:47:23
"First of all, we do *****NOT***** live in a democracy. We live in a Democratic Republic. Big Difference.

If we were a pure democracy the Hillary would be The President right now. "

You should stop talking about this subject. Again you are showing your lack of understanding of it.
kargen
Member
Thu Nov 15 15:54:21
Actually we live in a presidential republic. Good thing too.

A democracy is two foxes and a chicken voting on what is for lunch.

Because the school system has been failing for a few decades democracy is basically interchangeable with any government type that has some kind of election.
tumbleweed
the wanderer
Thu Nov 15 16:14:08
"
What a crazy independent nation of union of socialist republics that are together in a federation of craziness
"
~the last stand of Yakov Smirnoff
tumbleweed
the wanderer
Thu Nov 15 16:18:56
"if the Democrats are able to learn now what techniques work and don’t work, what transparency laws are going to be followed and which ones aren’t, then it gives them a road-map on how to steal the election from Donald Trump in 2020"
~Matt Gaetz (asshole & congressman)

Rick Scott & even little Marco Rubio have also joined the no-evidence voter fraud claims

Trump won't leave in 2020 unless he wants to... and HR's will be fine with it
tumbleweed
the wanderer
Mon Nov 19 13:48:52
some updates

= Trump lied that he had never heard Whitaker's views about the Mueller investigation (he just entirely skipped line of succession, and appointed a guy he both knew & didn't know, particularly not knowing his repeated public views, to be Attorney General of the United States)

- apparently they are keeping this scam artist stooge's financial disclosure forms hidden... perhaps there's more than the bigfoot & time travel scams


hopefully this will all be more fuel for the obstruction case by Mueller...
kargen
Member
Mon Nov 19 15:03:09
Mueller's case is for possible collusion. If he wants to start an obstruction case he would need to pass it off to someone else.
tumbleweed
the wanderer
Mon Nov 19 16:18:28
it's been noted repeatedly Mueller has permission to pursue any crimes uncovered during the investigation
kargen
Member
Mon Nov 19 17:53:39
yes and as you well know when he finds something that detracts from his collusion investigation he assigns the new investigation to someone else. Mueller doesn't have an obstruction case.

What he is investigating isn't really relevant to Whitaker being appointed though as you and others are still assuming some nefarious plot and so far nothing nefarious has happened.
tumbleweed
the wanderer
Mon Nov 19 18:22:12
there's a strong obstruction case

-Trump asked Comey to go easy on Flynn
-Trump clearly fired Comey over the investigation
-Trump has asked multiple people to shut down investigation
-Trump fired Sessions with his main complaint being his recusal (& seemingly to find controlling the investigation the only purpose of the AG job)
-Trump has called it illegal, & witch hunt, & falsely smeared Mueller at least 100 times
--including JUST PRIOR to tweeting his announcement of Whitaker, because the idiot can't help himself revealing what's on his mind
-Whitaker is NOT in the line of succession... he has made numerous public comments critical of the investigation... and Trump is LYING about knowing him (consciousness of guilt)


try to rationalize how Trump decided on Whitaker, while claiming not to know him or his views... how did he get the job in your mind?

AG is kind of an important position, i'd think he'd do a bit of investigation

of course idiot Trump would not do proper research, but he already knew Whitaker was anti-Mueller, and that's the SOLE CONCERN of Trump in his AG... as he has made clear over & over... 'if Sessions had told me he would recuse, i would've picked someone else'
tumbleweed
the wanderer
Mon Nov 19 18:41:18
"he took the job & then he said 'i'm going to recuse myself', i said 'what kind of a man is this?!'"

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=2c_BsPj3j-8

like what other point to the job is there in his mind

it is 100% clear he sees absolutely no role to the AG job beyond the Russia investigation, & why he fired Sessions & why he picked Whitaker

everything he says in that 30 secs of interview is fucked up
- 2 remarks about recusal negating any purpose to the AG job
- then he notes Sessions was on the campaign as if it supports his position...
'that is WHY HE HAD TO RECUSE, you fucking idiot'
(what the Fox News blonde should've said)

why must everything he says be so annoyingly stupid... every comment out of his mouth should be grounds for impeachment
kargen
Member
Mon Nov 19 23:11:38
you can't impeach stupid.
hood
Member
Mon Nov 19 23:15:00
In this case, you certainly can. The stupid has led to illegal acts.
Hot Rod
Revved Up
Tue Nov 20 07:41:53

And they are?

tumbleweed
the wanderer
Tue Nov 20 11:25:07
he's guilty of the same two campaign finance felonies Cohen pleaded guilty to... and obstruction of justice

plus he's in violation of the emoluments clause, and failing to uphold his oath of office (by siding w/ Russia over our intel agencies)

plus guilty of tax fraud, charity fraud, consumer fraud, real estate fraud... may have missed some, i had a good list somewhere :p


but mostly we need more ability to impeach someone wholly unfit, & actively harming the country daily w/ his steady stream of made-up bullshit, & picking allies by whether they flatter &/or pay him
kargen
Member
Tue Nov 20 12:13:29
No he is not guilty of the same two offenses as been explained to you several times over. The campaign finance issues do not apply to him because if he were involved it would simply be him donating to himself and he can donate as much as he wishes.

Tax fraud hasn't been proven and since the IRS did a full audit with no repercussions I'm guessing that it will be a no go on finding him guilty.

Same for the charity fraud accusations. The New York AG has made accusations but so far no convictions.

He did settle out of court with the Trump University fuck up but that isn't impeachable.

The Russian argument you are making is ludicrous.

He did all kinds of unethical things before becoming president (and maybe since) but nothing that would reach the level of impeachment.
tumbleweed
the wanderer
Tue Nov 20 12:43:24
"if he were involved it would simply be him donating to himself and he can donate as much as he wishes."

say it as often as you like it's still FALSE

Cohen's felonies were related to AMI (Enquirer) paying off one woman, and Cohen personally paying the other, then repaid by Trump Org (w/ fake invoices to boot)... Trump doesn't spend his personal money

as for all his frauds, some are in litigation, some are outside statute of limitation (like the tax frauds demonstrated in the year long investigation)... hopefully some will encourage people to not invest in his future projects

as for 'under audit'... who knows what has ever been audited, no one has confirmed any audit, he just claims a varying # of years are under audit, yet as anyone who pays attention knows, what he says has zero credibility


"The Russian argument you are making is ludicrous"

it's not ludicrous at all... we were attacked, and instead of being upset, he -covered for them- ...repeatedly... as recently as that Helsinki fiasco

he has never wanted to do anything to punish them, not one action has been advocated by Trump nor a single negative tweet (unlike many insults to our allies) & some actions forced on him were delayed
tumbleweed
the wanderer
Tue Nov 20 12:47:05
as for the Cohen thing

if it's a felony for Cohen (on Trump's orders) to promise reimbursement to AMI for them paying off a woman (& it IS as the courts accepted it)... then that seems pretty similar to Trump Org repaying Cohen for his pay-off to the other woman

if it's not, then Trump only guilty of the first felony not the second
tumbleweed
the wanderer
Tue Nov 20 16:05:50
President Trump told the White House counsel in the spring that he wanted to order the Justice Department to prosecute two of his political adversaries: his 2016 challenger, Hillary Clinton, and the former F.B.I. director James B. Comey, according to two people familiar with the conversation.

The lawyer, Donald F. McGahn II, rebuffed the president, saying that he had no authority to order a prosecution. Mr. McGahn said that while he could request an investigation, that too could prompt accusations of abuse of power. To underscore his point, Mr. McGahn had White House lawyers write a memo for Mr. Trump warning that if he asked law enforcement to investigate his rivals, he could face a range of consequences, including possible impeachment.

The encounter was one of the most blatant examples yet of how Mr. Trump views the typically independent Justice Department as a tool to be wielded against his political enemies. It took on additional significance in recent weeks when Mr. McGahn left the White House and Mr. Trump appointed a relatively inexperienced political loyalist, Matthew G. Whitaker, as the acting attorney general.

It is unclear whether Mr. Trump read Mr. McGahn’s memo or whether he pursued the prosecutions further. But the president has continued to privately discuss the matter, including the possible appointment of a second special counsel to investigate both Mrs. Clinton and Mr. Comey, according to two people who have spoken to Mr. Trump about the issue. He has also repeatedly expressed disappointment in the F.B.I. director, Christopher A. Wray, for failing to more aggressively investigate Mrs. Clinton, calling him weak, one of the people said.
...
http://www...-trump-justice-department.html

dictator Trump trying really hard to destroy America...
kargen
Member
Tue Nov 20 16:09:05
Which court found him guilty?

That aside just no. Different laws apply to what a candidate can do and what a contributor can do. You also seem to be forgetting Trump Org isn't and wasn't a part of the campaign.

You remember all the nuts claiming we needed to impeach President Obama because he was promoting Islamic ideals trying to destroy our country and wasn't even a citizen. Your impeachment cries are just as nutty.
tumbleweed
the wanderer
Tue Nov 20 16:40:10
a) if Cohen is guilty of a felony for his role in getting AMI to pay off a porn star, i don't see how Trump wouldn't be for having Cohen do it

b) i'm not arguing he should be impeached for his many crimes, i'm arguing he should be impeached as he is totally unfit for the job, totally dishonest, totally immune to facts - decides his own truth based on what's best for him, has no respect for the law, ignores our intel agencies when he doesn't like their results, is actively trying to wield the DoJ as a weapon (& to suppress their investigation of allies & himself)... there is a mountain of problems w/ the 'man'

i said we need more ability to impeach a totally unfit president, having 2 years of this blob was ridiculous enough
kargen
Member
Tue Nov 20 17:23:44
You were claiming campaign fraud. Cohen could be in trouble for making an illegal contribution because of limits. As the candidate Trump had no contribution limits.

If they do go after President Trump because of illegal contributions the usual action is paying back the illegal contributions though I'm not sure it is actually required.

And I'm telling you the nuts that wanted President Obama impeached were using the same arguments you are using now. Instead of DoJ as a weapon it was IRS but everything else pretty much the same.
tumbleweed
the wanderer
Tue Nov 20 17:42:23
candidate Trump did NOT contribute

-Cohen got AMI to pay off one woman on their behalf (felony #1)
-Cohen paid off another w/ his money then reimbursed by Trump Org (felony #2)

both w/ full knowledge & consent of Trump

--------

and there is NOTHING similar to Obama... Obama didn't use the IRS as a weapon... where is there any suggestion Obama ordered them to do anything?

and the IRS only 'went after' Tea Party groups applying to be a non-political classification which seems proper to me, but since they specifically noted tea party terms it was found to be wrong... even though only tea partiers were trying to do it

in any case it wasn't like Obama said 'audit R's' or 'audit that partcular R' or Obama said anything at all

(plus there is a MOUNTAIN of other problems with Trump beyond abuse of the DoJ)
kargen
Member
Tue Nov 20 18:13:00
"and the IRS only 'went after' Tea Party groups"

Exactly. They went after Tea Party groups or any group they thought might be Tea Party related but didn't even glance at obvious political groups on the left.
show deleted posts
Bookmark and Share