Trump's Second and Third year in office
Quote: FleaswatterNew Standard Of Proof: Guilty Unless Exonerated By The Prosecutor
Let's try some word substitution from yesterday's statement.
Here's the original.
“As I said forth in the report after that investigation, if we had had confidence that the President clearly did not commit a crime, we would have said so,” Mueller said during brief remarks at the Justice Department. "
Here's the substitution
“As I said forth in the report after that investigation, if we had had confidence that the Fleaswatter clearly was not an ass, we would have said so,” Mueller said during brief remarks at the Justice Department."
Anyone think I did not just insult Fleaswatter and infer he's pretty much an ass. I might start phrasing all my insults like that, if you guys think it's not one.
Quote: beachbumbabs....But Trump 'loves' Kim. BFFs. Please don't try and suggest he doesn't know this happened, and before the rest of us.
Where did I suggest Trump didn't know?
Anyone of our trump supporters believe he is above the law? If not, what is the problem with Congress investigating him?
Quote: rxwineQuote: FleaswatterNew Standard Of Proof: Guilty Unless Exonerated By The Prosecutor
Let's try some word substitution from yesterday's statement.
Here's the original.
“As I said forth in the report after that investigation, if we had had confidence that the President clearly did not commit a crime, we would have said so,” Mueller said during brief remarks at the Justice Department. "
Here's the substitution
“As I said forth in the report after that investigation, if we had had confidence that the Fleaswatter clearly was not an ass, we would have said so,” Mueller said during brief remarks at the Justice Department."
Anyone think I did not just insult Fleaswatter and infer he's pretty much an ass. I might start phrasing all my insults like that, if you guys think it's not one.
Awwww, someone having a bad day??
My posts getting to you?
MAGA!!!!!
Quote: FleaswatterAwwww, someone having a bad day??
My posts getting to you?
MAGA!!!!!
?????????
Why do you post stuff like this that adds absolutely NOTHING to the discussion
How old are you?
It would be pretty naive to think a POTUS can't have someone killed.Quote: beachbumbabsQuote: petroglyphBecause we are americans does not give us the authority to go into every country in the world, against their rules and start spreading religion.
Being POTUS comes with certain responsibility's and decisions as CIC that any president may not like. A president may not like having to press the "big red button", but that comes with the office.
In negotiating with Kim, he needs to be allowed to save face. Humiliating him will just cost more lives. He's already shown he is a maniac when he machine gunned his relatives, who knows how many are dying in the slave camps?
The POTUS has to deal with dictator's like king Salman of Saudi Arabia who is a rampant beheader. He had 130 heads removed last year and is making headway [pun] toward that number again this year. He is disgusting imo, but he has to be dealt with, unless we are just going to kill everybody we don't like on the planet. When Saudi runs out of oil, we'll see how much they get away with then.
If Trump or other POTUS po's the king of SA, he can just call up the head jailer and tell him to kill the next 50 in line, it doesn't matter. Kim is the same way.
There is no leader on the planet that doesn't know who the world's premier military belongs to. Allowing Kim to save face is the smart move. Belittling him won't save lives or bring peace, or get us access to China's border, whatever the real motive is there.
These maniacal dictators are following a different set of rules. How many years did we have to let the Khmer rouge chop off heads? Now Cambodia has a tourism industry. Rome wasn't built in a day.
So, in March, Kim and Trump had that summit in Hanoi. It failed, and Trump left early. Coverage here was upstaged by Michael Cohen testimony, and may have contributed to the "diplomatic" failure there.
Since then, Kim's sister (the one who went to the Seoul Olympics) has not been seen. Kim's SoS or rough counterpart to Pompeo, has been relocated to a forced labor and re-education camp. And Kim's nuclear envoy and 4 of his executives who ran the summit were executed by firing squad.
But Trump 'loves' Kim. BFFs. Please don't try and suggest he doesn't know this happened, and before the rest of us.
I would hope everybody on here would be appalled by this. Not bad enough that Trump didn't stand up for Warmbeer, that he didn't support Japan and his own intelligence people in recognizing Kim is breaking his agreement...but this? Trump is probably wishing he had a firing squad of his own rather than recognizing how he played into this, and still is.
https://theintercept.com/2017/01/30/obama-killed-a-16-year-old-american-in-yemen-trump-just-killed-his-8-year-old-sister/
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Disposition_Matrix
Quote: beachbumbabsNot bad enough that Trump didn't stand up for Warmbeer,
It is Warmbier not Warmbeer.
Quote: rxwine“As I said forth in the report after that investigation, if we had had confidence that the Fleaswatter clearly was not an ass, we would have said so,” Mueller said during brief remarks at the Justice Department."
Anyone think I did not just insult Fleaswatter and infer he's pretty much an ass. I might start phrasing all my insults like that, if you guys think it's not one.
I think it is one. Per the Martingale policy, seven days for the second recent offense.
Of the 1,295 registered voters polled, only 37 percent support impeaching and removing President Trump from office."
Translation: Impeachment would guarantee a
landslide in 2020.
Quote: EvenBob"The majority of American voters oppose impeachment, according to the latest Harvard CAPS/Harris Poll survey.
Of the 1,295 registered voters polled, only 37 percent support impeaching and removing President Trump from office."
Translation: Impeachment would guarantee a
landslide in 2020.
Not if it was successful
You cant re-elect a president removed from office.
I dont think the Senate will do their job so he probably does fails to be impeached.
Quote: darkozNot if it was successful
You cant re-elect a president removed from office.
I dont think the Senate will do their job so he probably does fails to be impeached.
The democrats are all talk and do not have the guts to try and impeach the President. If by some chance I am wrong (which I doubt in this case) and do impeach, the senate will do their job and find the President NOT guilty.
Quote: darkozNot if it was successful
You cant re-elect a president removed from office.
I dont think the Senate will do their job so he probably does fails to be impeached.
I assume you feel the same about Clinton, that the Senate failed to do its job?
Quote: BozI assume you feel the same about Clinton, that the Senate failed to do its job?
If clinton had done even 1/10 the crimes trump did he should have been impeached
He did lie to the fbi to avoid exposure of an affair.
I guess we can state thats 1/232 of what trump does.
Those my estimate numbers. Dont ask me some longform mathematics to prove a point
You didn't like Bill Clinton? If not, why?Quote: BozI assume you feel the same about Clinton, that the Senate failed to do its job?
Quote: AxelWolfYou didn't like Bill Clinton? If not, why?
No I loved Bill, country did good under him and wasn’t crazy leftist. And his crime bill is still paying dividends.
My point was he was impeached by the house and not by the Senate. Since Oz thinks this is what would happen with Trump, I asked if he felt the same when Clinton was in the same type situation.
Nafta, Glass Stegall, Hedonic adjustments, Waco, putting HRC in charge of writing a national health plan, Hillary, Mena Iran/Contra connection , Tyson connection, Jessica Flowers, 29 recorded trips to Epsteins kiddy island, Marc Rich pardon, Roger Clinton pardon, Susan McDougal pardon, etc.Quote: AxelWolfYou didn't like Bill Clinton? If not, why?
OK, cool, we are on the same page then. I know others close to me and myself were doing very well during that time.Quote: BozNo I loved Bill, country did good under him and wasn’t crazy leftist. And his crime bill is still paying dividends.
Quote: darkozIf clinton had done even 1/10 the crimes trump did he should have been impeached
He did lie to the fbi to avoid exposure of an affair.
I guess we can state thats 1/232 of what trump does.
Those my estimate numbers. Dont ask me some longform mathematics to prove a point
You are really understating the information concerning Clinton. As a result of the Starr report, Clinton was cited for 11 specific possible grounds for impeachment in four categories:
-five counts of lying under oath
-four counts of obstruction of justice
-one count of witness tampering and
-one count of abuse of constitutional authority.
The impeachment of Clinton was initiated in the House, citing 4 articles of impeachment: 1 charge of obstruction of justice, 1 charge of abuse of power and 2 charges of perjury.
Clinton was subsequently impeached by the house on the grounds of perjury to a grand jury and obstruction of justice. Two other articles of impeachment failed – a second count of perjury in the Jones case and one accusing Clinton of abuse of power (constitutional authority).
Quote: FleaswatterClinton was cited for 11 specific possible grounds for impeachment in four categories:
-five counts of lying under oath
-four counts of obstruction of justice
-one count of witness tampering and
-one count of abuse of constitutional authority.
All that happened while he was in
office. The witch hunt after Trump
wasn't about collusion, which is
not even a crime. It was about
finding something, anything,
to impeach him on.
Problem was, it was started just
4 months after he took office. Not
enough time to have done much
wrong. Clinton was in office 6 years
before he was investigated, plenty
of time to screw up. The Dems
shot their wad too early, they
have zero patience.
'Shot their wad' is not a sexual
reference. In the Revolutionary War,
when you ran out of ammo, you
could shoot the wad of cloth you
stuffed down the gun barrel, if
the enemy was a few feet away
from you. It means you were
using desperate measures.
Quote: EvenBobProblem was, it was started just
4 months after he took office.
That's a weird way to spell 2 and a half months before he took office.
Quote: BozNo I loved Bill, country did good under him and wasn’t crazy leftist. And his crime bill is still paying dividends.
My point was he was impeached by the house and not by the Senate. Since Oz thinks this is what would happen with Trump, I asked if he felt the same when Clinton was in the same type situation.
I think Clinton was saved by a partisan senate. I think Trump would be saved by a partisan senate. I think most people believe the same thing, and that is why most people are currently not in favor of impeaching Trump. Why bother when a no-action result is inevitable?
Quote: Dalex64I think Clinton was saved by a partisan senate. I think Trump would be saved by a partisan senate.
It's the House first. I just heard that
out of 2 hundred plus Dems in the
House, only 60 of them are sure
votes for impeachment. Insiders
say there's no way it would even get
thru the House, let alone the Senate.
This is all just political posturing because
the unhinged insane base of the Dems
has to be appeased. Some are even
saying the Russia Collusion Hoax
is now followed be the Dem Impeachment
Hoax. Makes sense. Keep the idea alive,
but never bring it up for a vote. It would
die an ugly death and you won't be able
to talk about it anymore.
Quote: EvenBobIt's the House first. I just heard that
out of 2 hundred plus Dems in the
House, only 60 of them are sure
votes for impeachment. Insiders
say there's no way it would even get
thru the House, let alone the Senate.
This is all just political posturing because
the unhinged insane base of the Dems
has to be appeased. Some are even
saying the Russia Collusion Hoax
is now followed be the Dem Impeachment
Hoax. Makes sense. Keep the idea alive,
but never bring it up for a vote. It would
die an ugly death and you won't be able
to talk about it anymore.
Last week it was 14 Dems. This week 60 and 1 Rep. Next week? More hearings more subpoenas, more pressure in all directions. This is far from leveling off.
Quote: BozNo I loved Bill, country did good under him and wasn’t crazy leftist. And his crime bill is still paying dividends.
Joe Biden wrote that excellent bill which provided funding for 100,000 more police officers, and crime prevention programs . 188 Dems voted in favor, and 135 Republicans voted against it.
Angling for the Black vote (fat chance), Trump is siding with the dems who are afraid of losing the Black vote, against Biden for supporting that bill.
“The 1994 Crime Bill passed by Pres. Clinton and Speaker Gingrich, with Biden & Schumer as the leaders in Senate and House, helped me and the NYPD reduce murder from @ 1,900 a year to @ 500 and then under Mayor Bloomberg to @ 350. That’s over 20,000 lives saved,” - Rudy Guiliani
Blacks claim the bill put a disproportionate number of them in prison.
Disproportionate Crime Statistics: FBI Uniform Crime Report
Quote: beachbumbabsLast week it was 14 Dems. This week 60 and 1 Rep. Next week? More hearings more subpoenas, more pressure in all directions. This is far from leveling off.
Point is, unless real impeachable crimes
committed while in office are uncovered,
ain't never gonna happen. So far, they
have not one.
Quote: EvenBobPoint is, unless real impeachable crimes
committed while in office are uncovered,
ain't never gonna happen. So far, they
have not one.
I have to disagree. There are more than a dozen impeachable offenses in part 2 of the Mueller report. But politics are overwhelming patriotism and Constitutional duties for both major parties at the moment. The question is whether that will change.
Quote: beachbumbabsI have to disagree. There are more than a dozen impeachable offenses in part 2 of the Mueller report. But politics are overwhelming patriotism and Constitutional duties for both major parties at the moment. The question is whether that will change.
That is your OPINION, and you are entitled to it, however, the DOJ has made a determination that the evidence developed during Mueller's investigation is NOT sufficient to establish that President Trump committed an obstruction-of-justice offense, therefore, no impeachable offenses.
Quote: FleaswatterThat is your OPINION, and you are entitled to it, however, the DOJ has made a determination that the evidence developed during Mueller's investigation is NOT sufficient to establish that President Trump committed an obstruction-of-justice offense, therefore, no impeachable offenses.
The problem is the DOJ decision was by Barr and he seems more snd more like trump appointed him to be a stoolie.
This was a concern before the appointment because of positions and written statements he had made about his feelings on the matter.
Further complicating the issue is that reading the Mueller report a number of crimes are described particularly obstruction.
The Jussie Smollet case is coming to mind. The evidence shows he did some type of false report. The DA said no charges. Now everyone wants to know why and try to understand how he is getting away with it.
Based on your statement there should be no further discussion of either scenario. But its difficult to just ignore what seems like corrupt decisions from district attorneys
I have misplaced my memo, is this democrat talking point #5 or #6??Quote: darkozThe problem is the DOJ decision was by Barr and he seems more snd more like trump appointed him to be a stoolie.
See my response above.Quote:This was a concern before the appointment because of positions and written statements he had made about his feelings on the matter.
As I responded to BBB, the DOJ has made a determination that the evidence developed during Mueller's investigation is NOT sufficient to establish that President Trump committed an obstruction-of-justice offense.Quote:Further complicating the issue is that reading the Mueller report a number of crimes are described particularly obstruction.
Comparing apples and oranges. Jussie Smollett was INDICTED by a grand jury in Chicago on 16 felony counts. The DA was an idiot and dropped the charges.Quote:The Jussie Smollet case is coming to mind. The evidence shows he did some type of false report. The DA said no charges. Now everyone wants to know why and try to understand how he is getting away with it.
I do not see how you came to this conclusion.Quote:Based on your statement there should be no further discussion of either scenario. But its difficult to just ignore what seems like corrupt decisions from district attorneys
Quote: FleaswatterI have misplaced my memo, is this democrat talking point #5 or #6??
See my response above.
As I responded to BBB, the DOJ has made a determination that the evidence developed during Mueller's investigation is NOT sufficient to establish that President Trump committed an obstruction-of-justice offense.
Comparing apples and oranges. Jussie Smollett was INDICTED by a grand jury in Chicago on 16 felony counts. The DA was an idiot and dropped the charges.
I do not see how you came to this conclusion.
If righties ignore the truth then the left has no choice but to talk about it
Quote: FleaswatterThat is your OPINION, and you are entitled to it, however, the DOJ has made a determination that the evidence developed during Mueller's investigation is NOT sufficient to establish that President Trump committed an obstruction-of-justice offense, therefore, no impeachable offenses.
Not true at all.
Mueller found that the OLJ rule against indicting a sitting President constrained him from obstruction indictments via the DOJ. They (his team) determined that very early in the investigation. Had he been an INDEPENDENT counsel, and not under the DOJ, he could have made indictments.
There IS a legal, Constitutional remedy, however; Congress can impeach. So his approach has been to lay out the evidence and expect Congress to do their duty and begin impeachment proceedings.
It is NOT up to the DOJ to tell Congress whether Trump (or Barr, for that matter) have committed impeachable offenses. It is up to Congress.
It IS up to the DOJ to indict or not, anyone except the president, for criminal activity. They have done this 37 times so far. They are using a VERY different legal standard to indict than is necessary to be considered impeachable by Congress. And Congress is not bound by a criminal standard.
Quote: ams288Just want to take a second out of my Vegas trip and say that I’m glad that it looks like all the corruption and lies are starting to take their toll on this evil man.
Has nothing to do with the venue and purpose of the trip I'm sure.
Quote: MaxPenQuote: ams288Just want to take a second out of my Vegas trip and say that I’m glad that it looks like all the corruption and lies are starting to take their toll on this evil man.
Has nothing to do with the venue and purpose of the trip I'm sure.
Perhaps he could have taken the golf cleats off first. lmao
Quote: beachbumbabsI have to disagree. There are more than a dozen impeachable offenses in part 2 of the Mueller report.
Drat. You should send an immediate
email to Mueller and his 19 pit bull
Leftie prosecutors and show them
what they missed.
They only spent the last 6 weeks of
the witch hunt, er, 'investigation'
sweating out every word in the
report looking for something,
anything, to get rid of Trump.
They missed it and you found it!
I remember all those times you
said 'Just wait for the Mueller
report', and you were right.
IMPEACH!!!!
Quote: ams
Perhaps he could have taken the golf cleats off first. lmao
..........
..........
..........
.......wtaf.
What's a former president's security detail consist of? Asking for myself.
Quote: Face..........
..........
..........
.......wtaf.
What's a former president's security detail consist of? Asking for myself.
When Bill Clinton drives from Westchester to his office in Harlem, he was usually driven in an SUV and traveled in a convoy of three or more similar SUVs. Almost always accompanied by a State trooper or two until they reach the city where NYPD takes over. I've driven past his house in Chappaqua and there were a number of guards stationed outside by the driveway entrance. I'm sure there are many more unseen.
The Clintons decided ,at the last minute, to attend the 20001 US Tennis Open, and I remember the Secret Service removing a number of cars that had parked legally but now were in the no go zone around his transportation. He had just left office ,and 9-11 was still days ahead so I imagine things are even tighter now.
I'm genuinely shocked. Aren't you?
Quote: billryanNews reports are saying the Trump campaign is stiffing a Texas city for almost a half a million dollars for reimbursements from a rally they threw a few months ago..
I'm genuinely shocked. Aren't you?
That's one side of the story, certainly
enough to impeach..
Quote: billryanWhen Bill Clinton drives from Westchester to his office in Harlem, he was usually driven in an SUV and traveled in a convoy of three or more similar SUVs. Almost always accompanied by a State trooper or two until they reach the city where NYPD takes over. I've driven past his house in Chappaqua and there were a number of guards stationed outside by the driveway entrance. I'm sure there are many more unseen.
The Clintons decided ,at the last minute, to attend the 20001 US Tennis Open, and I remember the Secret Service removing a number of cars that had parked legally but now were in the no go zone around his transportation. He had just left office ,and 9-11 was still days ahead so I imagine things are even tighter now.
Positively eye opening. I'm genuinely shocked. Thanks billr.
Quote: FacePositively eye opening. I'm genuinely shocked. Thanks billr.
What's so shocking about it? Do you not think ex-presidents need protective details?
Quote: MaxPenWhat's so shocking about it? Do you not think ex-presidents need protective details?
In his later days, Nixon gave up his Secret Service protection. I think he was afraid they were spying on him.
I, for one, do not want to wake up and see any XPrez in a hostage video. Even a future XP.
Again, your OPINION.Quote: beachbumbabsNot true at all.
Quote:Mueller found that the OLJ rule against indicting a sitting President constrained him from obstruction indictments via the DOJ. They (his team) determined that very early in the investigation. Had he been an INDEPENDENT counsel, and not under the DOJ, he could have made indictments.
Partially true. This is what you left out: The OLC opinion does say you cannot indict a president while he is in office, but there was nothing that prevented Mueller from reaching a decision as to whether or not there was criminal activity.
Quote:There IS a legal, Constitutional remedy, however; Congress can impeach. So his approach has been to lay out the evidence and expect Congress to do their duty and begin impeachment proceedings.
Impeachment will not happen, as I have said before, the dems are all talk and do not have the guts to impeach.
Quote:It is NOT up to the DOJ to tell Congress whether Trump (or Barr, for that matter) have committed impeachable offenses. It is up to Congress.
Mueller could have stated that President Trump committed a crime, he did not. Mueller was a weasel and left that decision to his superiors who determined that no crime was committed. Go for impeachment Congress, if you dare.
Did what 37 times???Quote:It IS up to the DOJ to indict or not, anyone except the president, for criminal activity. They have done this 37 times so far.
Quote:They are using a VERY different legal standard to indict than is necessary to be considered impeachable by Congress. And Congress is not bound by a criminal standard.
Yes, the current legal standard for the dems is ‘guilty until proven innocent’
Quote: MaxPenWhat's so shocking about it?
About 24/7 lifetime defensive shadowing from a squad of highly trained security and military personnel that roll, according to billryan's testimony, at least 8 deep at all times, even decades after you left office?
Not a thing.
Lol.
Quote: FaceAbout 24/7 lifetime defensive shadowing from a squad of highly trained security and military personnel that roll, according to billryan's testimony, at least 8 deep at all times, even decades after you left office?
Not a thing.
Lol.
What do you think the 5000 people working for the Secret Service do? Ex-President's and their families are under constant threat.
Quote: Fleaswatter
Partially true. This is what you left out: The OLC opinion does say you cannot indict a president while he is in office, but there was nothing that prevented Mueller from reaching a decision as to whether or not there was criminal activity.’
Bingo! And you better believe he would
have screamed it from the rooftops if
he'd found something. Mueller has
been gunning for Trump for years.
Quote: MaxPenWhat do you think the 5000 people working for the Secret Service do? Ex-President's and their families are under constant threat.
Even more expensive is Jimma Carter,
he left office almost 40 years ago and
still gets 24/7 protection. If you got
elected after 1997, it's only 10 years.
Clinton and Carter will get it till they
die.
Quote: FaceAbout 24/7 lifetime defensive shadowing from a squad of highly trained security and military personnel that roll, according to billryan's testimony, at least 8 deep at all times, even decades after you left office?
Not a thing.
Lol.
They cut it to ten years for a bit, but they changed it back to lifetime a few years ago (2013).
More perks:
'The biggest personal benefit that former Presidents are entitled to is an annual pension equal to the pay for a Cabinet Secretary, which is $207,800 in 2017. Widows of former Presidents are eligible for a $20,000 yearly pension."
https://www.ntu.org/foundation/tax-page/pensions-and-perks-for-former-presidents-archive
Quote: EvenBobEven more expensive is Jimma Carter,
he left office almost 40 years ago and
still gets 24/7 protection. If you got
elected after 1997, it's only 10 years.
Clinton and Carter will get it till they
die.
That absurd 10 year rule was done away with. Carter actually flies commercial instead of taking advantage of his 7 figure travel allowance allotted by the GSA. He and his wife flew commercial to Trump's Inauguration.
