Will Trump Be Impeached ?
Poll
 | 20 votes (32.25%) | ||
| | 42 votes (67.74%) |
62 members have voted
Quote: SOOPOOI watched too. Shiff I thought looked good and made good points. That being said, I would just ask him, so with an unlimited budget and unlimited time and half the country hoping to 'get' Trump, why is it that Mueller couldn't? Is Mueller that poor of an investigator/prosecutor?
I am not sure that Schiff is "crazy" or "rabid" but I also don't see the point of keeping the focus on the investigations he is going to do as loudly as he seems to want to do so. At this point, I think it would be prudent to hold the hearings, investigate away, and let the actual results speak for themselves. The Democrats have hammered these issues for a couple of years and the Mueller report--so far--does not seem to support the case against Trump.
The less the Democrats find and the less they focus on things other than "Trump" the better for both Trump and the Republicans in the next election.
Quote: EvenBobHow long does it take to go over 400
pages line by line and redact everything
that's illegal to be made public. At least
2 weeks, What's the rush anyway, it's
been 2 years, what's a few more weeks.
Do you see what you're doing, though?
You were so convinced Trump would
be nailed by Mueller. Now that he wasn't,
you're totally convinced Barr is holding
back. What will you do when you find
he held back nothing. It's a very slippery
slope you're on.
He's already hit his high point on the usefulness of Barr's delay tactics. It's only going to get uglier, because there's going to be lots of questionable stuff in there.
How long did it take for the full Starr report to be released to the public, unredacted? 48 hours. Impeachment hearings started immediately after that.
Barr is giving Trump etc. extra time to spin the narrative and lock in the lies he's telling with his base. You're the ones who are on the slippery slope. He and you are conflating things that a prosecutor feels can be proven beyond a reasonable doubt, with things that are possibly unethical, crooked, impeachable offenses. And those are going to come out, either through this report, or through other prosecutions that were not within the narrow scope of Mueller's task.
Quote: beachbumbabsHe's already hit his high point on the usefulness of Barr's delay tactics. It's only going to get uglier, because there's going to be lots of questionable stuff in there.
How long did it take for the full Starr report to be released to the public, unredacted? 48 hours. Impeachment hearings started immediately after that.
Barr is giving Trump etc. extra time to spin the narrative and lock in the lies he's telling with his base. You're the ones who are on the slippery slope. He and you are conflating things that a prosecutor feels can be proven beyond a reasonable doubt, with things that are possibly unethical, crooked, impeachable offenses. And those are going to come out, either through this report, or through other prosecutions that were not within the narrow scope of Mueller's task.
ROFL
Quote: ams288The Mueller report is SOOOOO exonerating for Trump that his cronies are desperately trying to ensure that no one is ever able to read the whole thing.
Give 'em time... they need to redact all the incriminating portions and wait a few more news cycles: "The Mueller Report? That's old news... we've moved on from that...."
Gaslight
Obstruct
Project
Quote: RonCHe hasn't necessarily said a whole lot, but there was a fairly quick response when something inaccurate came out in testimony about the investigation:
"Special Counsel Robert Mueller's office issued a rare public rebuke on Friday of elements of a stunning report that alleged President Donald Trump directed his former legal counsel to lie in sworn Congressional testimony."
Yet he's being totally silent on all
the damning evidence Barr left
out of his summary. That's because
Barr left nothing out.
Quote:I don't think AG Barr has a whole lot of latitude in what he releases beyond the stuff that can't be released..
He has NONE. It's illegal to release grand
jury testimony, which is half the report.
It's illegal to release what any of the 500
witnesses said, unless they were charged.
And that's the other half of the report.
Quote: beachbumbabs
How long did it take for the full Starr report to be released to the public, unredacted? 48 hours. .
Absolutely untrue. It took Starr months to
write the report. He turned it over to congress
and it took THEM 2 days to release it.
Why do you keep comparing the two. Starr
was under a totally different set of guidelines.
Congress changed them in 1999 because
the Starr report so embarrassed Clinton.
It goes to the AG now, and not congress. He
writes a summary, Starr didn't have to. Then
the AG has to redact all that's illegal, Starr had
to redact nothing.
Mueller and Starr have nothing in common, they're
apples and oranges.
Quote: EvenBobYet he's being totally silent on all
the damning evidence Barr left
out of his summary. That's because
Barr left nothing out.
He has NONE. It's illegal to release grand
jury testimony, which is half the report.
It's illegal to release what any of the 500
witnesses said, unless they were charged.
And that's the other half of the report.
That's not wholly correct. They (Congress and/or the Administration ) can go to court, as they did in Watergate, and ask for consideration for the greater good (paraphrasing the process) and have all of that released. But Barr is not cooperating with that process so far.
I think (speculation ) that part of what's important about the Mueller interviews of people not charged is that most of them also testified under oath to Congress, and Congress has evidence and other indications that some of them lied. They will insist on reviewing those Mueller interviews/ report appendices and comparing them, and other testimony related, to the Congressional record.
Quote: aceofspadesROFL
"If you can't make something better, you can always laugh at it. " -Erma Bombeck
Quote: beachbumbabsThat's not wholly correct. They (Congress and/or the Administration ) can go to court, a
They have to have a valid reason, which
they won't have. 'Getting Trump' at all
costs is not a valid reason.
What Mueller concluded after 2 years
and $30 mil spent carries tremendous
weight. He left no stone unturned,
it can't be dismissed just because
CNN and MS promised something
else 24/7.
are good because they protect innocent
people. The Starr report hurt a lot of
lives because all the testimony was
released, even from the grand juries.
Innocent peoples lives were besmirched
and changed. Can't happen now, all
that gets redacted.
Quote: EvenBobThey have to have a valid reason, which
they won't have. 'Getting Trump' at all
costs is not a valid reason.
What Mueller concluded after 2 years
and $30 mil spent carries tremendous
weight. He left no stone unturned,
it can't be dismissed just because
CNN and MS promised something
else 24/7.
That's not why they would go. 80% + of the public wants the report released. 420-0 vote in Congress to release it. Administration is being undermined by distrust and publicly known evidence.
The funny thing is, if it exonerates people, why do they want it hidden? They've set themselves up to be investigated with all the lying. So what's the truth?
Quote: TigerWuGetting back to the title of the thread, I suspect once the Mueller Report is released we'll know for sure if the House will attempt impeachment proceedings this term or not.
They'll find a reason to impeach in 2020,
the election year. It will help Trump
win a landslide. Schumer and Pelosi
know it will be a bad idea, but the newbies
seem to be all morons, they're all for
the it.
Quote: EvenBobThey have to have a valid reason, which
they won't have. 'Getting Trump' at all
costs is not a valid reason.
What Mueller concluded after 2 years
and $30 mil spent carries tremendous
weight. He left no stone unturned,
it can't be dismissed just because
CNN and MS promised something
else 24/7.
Again. You don't know what Mueller concluded. Neither do I. Or what bar he was using to make a collusion decision. Trump was not exonerated, no matter how many times he lies about it.
Quote: EvenBobThey'll find a reason to impeach in 2020,
the election year. It will help Trump
win a landslide.
No. Trump will lose the popular vote again, guaranteed. He's not any more popular now than he was in 2016. Maybe even slightly less so. If he does win the electoral again it will be by the skin of his teeth.
Quote: beachbumbabsThat's not why they would go. 80% + of the public wants the report released. 420-0 vote in Congress to release it. Administration is being undermined by distrust and publicly known evidence.
House GOP voted to release it because they knew McConnell would block it in the Senate. They get to look like "the good guys" but behind the scenes they knew their party would try to roadblock it.
Quote: beachbumbabsAgain. You don't know what Mueller concluded.
Read the Barr summary, you'll find
it there. What do you think, Mueller
concluded that Trump colluded
and Barr left it out?
Quote: EvenBobRead the Barr summary, you'll find
it there.
What summary?
Barr specifically wrote a 2nd letter saying he DIDN'T write a summary of anything.
Quote: ams288What summary?
Barr specifically wrote a 2nd letter saying he DIDN'T write a summary of anything.
Letter, summary, whatever. He forgot
to put in the collusion part, that's
what Maddowland is saying on MS.
Quote: EvenBobLetter, summary, whatever. He forgot
to put in the collusion part, that's
what Maddowland is saying on MS.
That’s definitely NOT what Maddow is saying.
If your side is winning this debate as you appear to think, why do you keep having to make stuff up?
Quote: ams288What summary?
Barr specifically wrote a 2nd letter saying he DIDN'T write a summary of anything.
My goodness, doesn't anyone actually read the source documents that they talk about? (other than terapined, because he wants to read everything)
You can read the entire 2nd Barr letter here:
https://www.axios.com/mueller-investigation-report-william-barr-congress-6db8958b-2657-475b-a045-9b1648c959a8.html
I quote a portion:
Quote:My March 24 letter was not, and did not purport to be, an exhaustive recounting of the Special Counsel's investigation or report. As my letter made clear, my notification to Congress and the public provided, pending release of the report, a SUMMARY of its "principal conclusions" - that is, its bottom line.
emphasis and capitalization mine
Barr SPECIFICALLY wrote in his 2nd letter that he DID write a SUMMARY of it's principal conclusion.
Quote: FleaswatterBarr SPECIFICALLY wrote in his 2nd letter that he DID write a SUMMARY of it's principal conclusion.
But not of the entire ~400 page report, which is what we’re talking about here.
K thnx bye.
Quote: ams288But not of the entire ~400 page report, which is what we’re talking about here.
K thnx bye.
Nice spin. Did you forget that you said:
Quote:Barr specifically wrote a 2nd letter saying he DIDN'T write a summary of anything.
your're welcome
The FBI [Mueller] sent 3 times as many commandos to arrest a friend of Trumps than spec ops did to get the most wanted man in the world, OBL.
"No innocent American merits the governmental treatment Stone received. It was the behavior of a police state where the laws are written to help the government achieve its ends, not to guarantee the freedom of the people — and where police break the laws they are sworn to enforce. Regrettably, what happened to Roger Stone could happen to anyone"
http://www.judgenap.com/post/an-american-nightmare
This is the "intelligence agency" that you expect Trump to trust?
Quote: petroglyphThis is the "intelligence agency" that you expect Trump to trust?
Yes.
Quote: petroglyphA friend sends us old newspapers for our enjoyment. I was just reading Judge Napolitano's column from 2/1/19 and enjoyed his description of Roger Stones arrest.
The FBI [Mueller] sent 3 times as many commandos to arrest a friend of Trumps than spec ops did to get the most wanted man in the world, OBL.
"No innocent American merits the governmental treatment Stone received. It was the behavior of a police state where the laws are written to help the government achieve its ends, not to guarantee the freedom of the people — and where police break the laws they are sworn to enforce. Regrettably, what happened to Roger Stone could happen to anyone"
http://www.judgenap.com/post/an-american-nightmare
This is the "intelligence agency" that you expect Trump to trust?
And you think you know everything there is to know about Roger Stone, right? His 50+ year history as a whackjob, the Russian and wikileaks people he has claimed to work with, whatever else his FBI files show towards being a threat or a conspirator of some kind? I certainly don't know what pre-raid intel they had on him - I don't know how you could.
OBL was a very specific covert op, according to the reports we got on it. They chose to go in on a laser focus rather than overwhelming force. There are spies everywhere in the area OBL was holed up - apparently it was smarter to put a small strike team together than a larger force that might indicate action coming to the locals.
IDK. I just trust those with the intel to make those decisions. And none of Trump's loudmouthed lies about our federal LEOs has made a dent in that.
Quote: FleaswatterMy goodness, doesn't anyone actually read the source documents that they talk about? (other than terapined, because he wants to read everything)
You can read the entire 2nd Barr letter here:
https://www.axios.com/mueller-investigation-report-william-barr-congress-6db8958b-2657-475b-a045-9b1648c959a8.html
I quote a portion:Quote:My March 24 letter was not, and did not purport to be, an exhaustive recounting of the Special Counsel's investigation or report. As my letter made clear, my notification to Congress and the public provided, pending release of the report, a SUMMARY of its "principal conclusions" - that is, its bottom line.
emphasis and capitalization mine
Barr SPECIFICALLY wrote in his 2nd letter that he DID write a SUMMARY of it's principal conclusion.
Always good of you to only quote the portion that (sort of) supports your contention. From the same references you posted:
Quote:"Everyone will soon be able to read [the report] on their own. I do not believe it in the public's interest for me to attempt to summarize."
Mueller needs to be investigated not revered.Quote: TigerWuYes.
Quote: petroglyph
The FBI [Mueller] sent 3 times as many commandos to arrest a friend of Trumps than spec ops did to get the most wanted man in the world, OBL.
First of all, that should tell you something about Stone, not the FBI....
Second of all, there were 79 Navy SEALs and CIA agents directly involved in the death of Osama. 24 to actually raid the building, and the rest nearby on standby. On top of that, they had support from drones and fighter jets. Stone himself claimed the FBI sent less than 30 agents, a far cry from the "3 times as many commandos" claim by Napolitano, even if you were only count the SEALs responsible for the actual raid.
Third of all, "Was the FBI's show of force too heavy-handed, as has been alleged? Absolutely not," wrote James Gagliano, a former FBI agent, in a column for the Washington Examiner. "In the FBI, we tend to defuse situations by removing the fight-or-flight inclination, via our overwhelming presence. To arrest one, we bring 10. For 10, we'll bring 100," he also explained. (emphasis added)
More info about the Stone arrest.
Quote: petroglyphMueller needs to be investigated not revered.
For what?
You don't escalate a situation just because you can.
They pick and chose which non-violent offenders to arrest and make a show of and which to just let show up for a court date. Just like in this "Varsity Blue" scandal. They want to remind millions of people who couldn't afford to bribe anyone not to bribe folks to get a kid into college. I am not saying that people shouldn't be arrested and charged upon reporting, but why use all the resources necessary to properly knock on a door? Use that stuff on people who are real danger when charged.
I support the police and other policing agencies, but they need to take a step or two back and be less like a military unit and more like peace officers.
Quote: RonCThe Stone thing was a joke. They could have simply told him to report and not wasted the time and money...it was simply a show put on for CNN. He may be a "whack job" and "out there" but isn't like he is a physical danger.
Roger Stone trained with Alex Jones to prep for Civil War in case Trump was impeached, said politicians who oppose Trump could be endangering their own lives, threatened Republican delegates during the 2016 election, and threatened to kill a witness.
If you ask me they didn't send ENOUGH agents to arrest this lunatic.
EDIT:
Quote: RonC
You don't escalate a situation just because you can.
The reason they sent the number of agents they did is so the situation WOULDN'T escalate.
What should it tell me about Stone?Quote: TigerWuQuote: petroglyph
The FBI [Mueller] sent 3 times as many commandos to arrest a friend of Trumps than spec ops did to get the most wanted man in the world, OBL.
First of all, that should tell you something about Stone, not the FBI........
Couldn't you, Tiger Wu, have subdued this one ole man? I think you could. But instead, they bring in helicopters and gunboats in the middle of the night and ****up everybody's head within a mile or two forever. Control by fear. These guys are thugs. Just thugs with immunity.
****, I could have taken him. It doesn't take dozens of agents to arrest one old man, that would have walked into their office upon advice of his lawyers on Monday morning.
Obviously no one here is going to have an epiphany from their experience here at wov.
edit: You posted while I was typing,,, I misjudged you, I guess you couldn't bring him in without dozens of agents. My god what a bunch of kitty cats our "intelligence agents" are. We need to hire tougher agents.
Quote: petroglyph
The FBI [Mueller] sent 3 times as many commandos to arrest a friend of Trumps than spec ops did to get the most wanted man in the world, OBL.
C'mon it was a seal team for OBL, and probably worth 5 times as many men. The FBI probably sent their office clerks to get Stone.
Quote: beachbumbabsQuote: FleaswatterMy goodness, doesn't anyone actually read the source documents that they talk about? (other than terapined, because he wants to read everything)
You can read the entire 2nd Barr letter here:
https://www.axios.com/mueller-investigation-report-william-barr-congress-6db8958b-2657-475b-a045-9b1648c959a8.html
I quote a portion:Quote:My March 24 letter was not, and did not purport to be, an exhaustive recounting of the Special Counsel's investigation or report. As my letter made clear, my notification to Congress and the public provided, pending release of the report, a SUMMARY of its "principal conclusions" - that is, its bottom line.
emphasis and capitalization mine
Barr SPECIFICALLY wrote in his 2nd letter that he DID write a SUMMARY of it's principal conclusion.
Always good of you to only quote the portion that (sort of) supports your contention. From the same references you posted:Quote:"Everyone will soon be able to read [the report] on their own. I do not believe it in the public's interest for me to attempt to summarize."
Nice try.
Glad that you took the time to actually read the source document.
I astounds me that it appears that those on the left here are unable to admit the possibility that they may be wrong even in the light of irrefutable evidence.
My challenge to ams’ statement has to do with, and only has to do with is the word “anything”.
-ams said that Barr did not write a summary of anything
-I wrote (with documentation provided) that Barr did write summary of its "principal conclusions".
Case Closed.
The fact that Barr said the following(and I noticed that you did not provide Barr’s entire sentence in your post)is not germane to the original disagreement
There was no need me to include that quote because as I said, it is not germane to the original disagreement.Quote:“I do not believe it would be in the public's interest for me to attempt to summarize the full report or release it in serial or piecemeal fashion.
Your use of the quote, is – using one of your words is – deflection.
If ams stated that Barr did not summarize the report, there would be no discussion, but the claim that Barr did not summarize “ANYTHING” continues to be factually incorrect and your spin attempt failed.
Quote: petroglyph
edit: You posted while I was typing,,, I misjudged you, I guess you couldn't bring him in without dozens of agents. My god what a bunch of kitty cats our "intelligence agents" are. We need to hire tougher agents.
Haha... The armchair law enforcement going on in this thread is hilarious...
I guess we should hire tougher Navy SEALs, too, since it took almost 80 of them to take down 4 men, 5 women, and 13 children during the Osama raid. What a bunch of p***ies those SEALs are, amirite?
"We’ve Never Seen Anything Like This": Migrants Overwhelm Texas Cities
Border Patrol agents expect to see more than 100,000 apprehensions and encounters with migrants in March, the highest monthly total in over a decade... busload after busload of weary, bedraggled migrants crowd into the Catholic Charities Humanitarian Respite Center in McAllen, Texas. Organizers there are used to handling 200 to 300 migrants a day. Lately, the migrants have been arriving at a clip of around 800 a day, overflowing the respite center
https://www.usatoday.com/story/news/nation/2019/03/30/migrants-overflow-border-federal-facilities-local-strain-wall-trump/3309462002/
Quote: EvenBobNo crisis there, nothing to see.
"We’ve Never Seen Anything Like This": Migrants Overwhelm Texas Cities
Don't worry, Trump declared an emergency like a month and a half ago. I'm sure he'll get around to doing something about it any day now....
any... day... now....
Quote: TigerWuGive 'em time... they need to redact all the incriminating portions and wait a few more news cycles: "The Mueller Report? That's old news... we've moved on from that...."
Gaslight
Obstruct
Project
The Left did this by releasing Smollett -- took away some of the sting of no collusion
Quote: petroglyphMueller needs to be investigated not revered.
Wasn't he hailed as a savior at one point?
They certainly deserve more respect than this.Quote: TigerWuHaha... What a bunch of p***ies those SEALs are, amirite?
It's always the same faces. They turn up again and again. I hope this action will bring some peace to the family's. Mueller was in charge of the FBI at the time.Quote: aceofspadesWasn't he hailed as a savior at one point?
"Families, Lawyers, AE911Truth File Lawsuit against FBI over '9/11 Review Commission Report'
For the first time ever, 9/11 family members and advocates are taking legal action against the FBI aimed at forcing the Bureau to assess and report the evidence known to the FBI of the World Trade Center’s explosive demolition as well as other unreported 9/11 evidence. "
https://www.ae911truth.org/fbi
Quote: petroglyphThey certainly deserve more respect than this.
The same respect you're giving to "kitty cat" federal agents?
Quote: aceofspadesThe Left did this by releasing Smollett -- took away some of the sting of no collusion
"The Left" released Smollett?
LOL
The shadowy cabal known as "The Left" strikes again...
Quote: TigerWuDon't worry, Trump declared an emergency like a month and a half ago. I'm sure he'll get around to doing something about it any day now....
any... day... now....
He got a billion from the Pentagon
this week for more wall. He said
he's shutting the border next week.
It's a start.
Quote: EvenBobHe got a billion from the Pentagon
this week for more wall. He said
he's shutting the border next week.
It's a start.
I just saw that. We'll see what happens. Trump is not exactly known for consistency from one minute to the next, let alone a week from now.
If he does manage to "shut the border" somehow, I'll be interested to see the repercussions, and if it actually stops any illegal immigration. Could be an interesting test.
Fixx received hundreds of thousands of dollars from the likes of moveon.org, a radical left money channel if there was ever one.Quote: TigerWu"The Left" released Smollett?
LOL
The shadowy cabal known as "The Left" strikes again...
