- My Forums
- Tiger Rant
- LSU Recruiting
- SEC Rant
- Saints Talk
- Pelicans Talk
- More Sports Board
- Fantasy Sports
- Golf Board
- Soccer Board
- O-T Lounge
- Tech Board
- Home/Garden Board
- Outdoor Board
- Health/Fitness Board
- Movie/TV Board
- Book Board
- Music Board
- Political Talk
- Money Talk
- Fark Board
- Gaming Board
- Travel Board
- Food/Drink Board
- Ticket Exchange
- TD Help Board
Customize My Forums- View All Forums
- Show Left Links
- Topic Sort Options
- Trending Topics
- Recent Topics
- Active Topics
Started By
Message
Dems claim President Trump did commit obstruction
Posted on 4/19/19 at 9:32 am
Posted on 4/19/19 at 9:32 am
The Dums are now claiming the real reason why Mueller didn't indict President Trump for obstruction was because of the DOJ's policy that a POTUS can't be indicted while in office.
They are even claiming the Mueller report's main conclusion was that there was enough evidence of obstruction not to exonerate President Trump from an obstruction charge.
Boy, I can't wait to hear Barr's and Mueller's response to that claim.
They are even claiming the Mueller report's main conclusion was that there was enough evidence of obstruction not to exonerate President Trump from an obstruction charge.
Boy, I can't wait to hear Barr's and Mueller's response to that claim.
This post was edited on 4/19/19 at 9:52 am
24
Posted on 4/19/19 at 9:33 am to DawgfaninCa
quote:
The Dums are now claiming the real reason why Mueller's didn't indict President Trump for obstruction was because of the DOJ's policy that a sitting POTUS can't be indicted while in office.
Barr was asked this question at the press conference. And he explicitly stated this was NOT the case.
Fake News.
Posted on 4/19/19 at 9:34 am to DawgfaninCa
James Comey and Andrew McCabe disagree.
Posted on 4/19/19 at 9:35 am to DawgfaninCa
Ok, so impeach and indict him for it.
I dare you.
I dare you.
Posted on 4/19/19 at 9:35 am to DawgfaninCa
'muh russians' has crashed and burned
so the narrative of the moment is 'muh obstruction'
when that gets blow up they will move back to 'muh emoluments'
That's how they roll in clownworld.
so the narrative of the moment is 'muh obstruction'
when that gets blow up they will move back to 'muh emoluments'
That's how they roll in clownworld.
This post was edited on 4/19/19 at 9:38 am
Posted on 4/19/19 at 9:36 am to DawgfaninCa
quote:
The Dums are now claiming the real reason why Mueller's didn't indict President Trump for obstruction was because of the DOJ's policy that a sitting POTUS can't be indicted while in office.
Mueller does state this.
quote:
They are even claiming the Mueller report's main conclusion was that there was enough evidence of obstruction not to exonerate President Trump from an obstruction charge.
But this is a reach.
I believe Mueller was 50/50 on whether obstruction occurred especially with the private Comey conversations.
Posted on 4/19/19 at 9:38 am to DawgfaninCa
quote:Are they asserting he obstructed all by himself??
The Dums are now claiming the real reason why Mueller's didn't indict President Trump for obstruction was because of the DOJ's policy that a sitting POTUS can't be indicted while in office.
Posted on 4/19/19 at 9:39 am to BobBoucher
quote:
The Dums are now claiming the real reason why Mueller's didn't indict President Trump for obstruction was because of the DOJ's policy that a sitting POTUS can't be indicted while in office.
quote:
Barr was asked this question at the press conference. And he explicitly stated this was NOT the case.
Dums are saying Barr is lying to protect President Trump and that Mueller will state that was the real reason why he didn't indict President Trump for obstruction when he testifies before Congress.
Posted on 4/19/19 at 9:39 am to DawgfaninCa
I'm surprised they haven't blamed the demise of the dinosaurs on him.
This post was edited on 4/19/19 at 11:21 am
Posted on 4/19/19 at 9:43 am to DawgfaninCa
quote:
Dums are saying Barr is lying to protect President
It’s not a lying or not lying thing. Prosecutors/AGs are tasked with determining whether legal findings are enough to warrant charges. Two separate prosecutors can view things differently. Mueller specifically states in his report that he is doing away with this level of prosecutorial discretion because the DOJ can’t indict a sitting President regardless of the findings.
Also, people are focusing on the ten counts of obstruction naturally but are wholly ignoring the potential Constitutional and other legal defenses - the primary one being that the US President controls the Executive Branch and as a result it may be constitutionally impossible for him to obstructing an investigation under his purview.
This post was edited on 4/19/19 at 9:44 am
Posted on 4/19/19 at 9:46 am to DawgfaninCa
So, name me one part of the investigation he obstructed, just one....?
Posted on 4/19/19 at 9:46 am to DawgfaninCa
He obstructed an investigation into a crime he didn’t commit.
Posted on 4/19/19 at 9:47 am to Antonio Moss
quote:
it may be constitutionally impossible for him to obstructing an investigation under his purview.
that, and the fact that there was no crime to "obstruct" the investigation of
Posted on 4/19/19 at 9:48 am to ShortyRob
quote:
The Dums are now claiming the real reason why Mueller's didn't indict President Trump for obstruction was because of the DOJ's policy that a sitting POTUS can't be indicted while in office.
quote:
Are they asserting he obstructed all by himself??
Apparently.
Abrams is on little Georgey's show right now asserting the only reason why Mueller didn't indict President Trump for obstruction was because of the DOJ's policy that a sitting POTUS can't be indicted.
Posted on 4/19/19 at 9:48 am to DawgfaninCa
I am checking out of here (US) when an investigation does not exonerate someone so therefore they are guilty.
Posted on 4/19/19 at 9:50 am to DawgfaninCa
From the quotes from the report which I have read, it looks like the “did he or didn’t he commit a crime?” question is close enough to be a judgment call. Did Trump obstruct? Yes. Was it criminal? Could go either way. IMO that’s not enough to indict or impeach. My guess is that this will be the substantive position that the Democrats take as a party.
Posted on 4/19/19 at 9:50 am to TrueTiger
quote:
the fact that there was no crime to "obstruct" the investigation of
Yep. I would think there would have to be some sort of corrupt intent in order for obstruction to really come into play. If i'm wrong, someone please correct me. I don't see someone who is trying to put an end or at the very least make a fairer investigation to a corrupt investigation by politicized people into crimes that didn't happen as obstructing justice. That's just an innocent man trying to deal with baseless accusations about them.
Posted on 4/19/19 at 9:51 am to TBoy
Again, what part of the investigation did he obstruct? I’m waiting????
Posted on 4/19/19 at 9:52 am to DawgfaninCa
quote:Which, even if true, would not prevent charging the people who participated in said obstruction.
Apparently.
Abrams is on little Georgey's show right now asserting the only reason why Mueller didn't indict President Trump for obstruction was because of the DOJ's policy that a sitting POTUS can't be indicted.
So these stupid fricks think Muller has real evidence supporting an obstruction charge that Trump effectively carried out all by his fricking self!
Posted on 4/19/19 at 9:53 am to TrueTiger
It has been proven the whole investigation was a hoax meant to prevent him from properly governing.
The Dems are claiming obstruction because he constantly called it exactly what it was and wanted it ended. At no point is he worried about covering up the crime that never occurred.
Page 1 of 11
Popular
Back to top
Follow TigerDroppings for LSU Football News