re: FOX analyst says Trump should be impeached.

I think the Gay Mafia got to him.

There is a huge difference in obstructing and defending when you are being set up. Nap is an idiot and now a paid stooge. You cannot obstruct when there was no crime.

Any human being while being publicly accused of a crime would ask for it to be cleared up.

It is foolishness and Judge Nap is always wrong and a joke any more.

Not that it matters, but isn’t Napolitano a ghey?

quote:

---

There is a huge difference in obstructing and defending when you are being set up.

---

THIS -

When you KNOW you are totally INNOCENT of the chargers anything you do to halt the damage being done under "color of authority" should be viewed with that knowledge.

And if you KNOW the people 'investigating' you ALSO know you are innocent - then anything (including a duel to the death) should be considered legitimate,

This is such a perversion of NORMAL COMMON SENSE that it baffles me that there is not a common upraising against the REAL criminals in the case.

quote:

---

Are you under the impression that Congress can't impeach a president for obstruction?

---

Nope. They can impeach. That is not a criminal
Proceeding, however. It will just be a bunch of dems being partisan.

quote:

---

Because Bill Clinton would like a word

---

And I’m sure you supported that, amirite?

quote:

---

 Yet he declined to indict Trump for Obstruction. 

---

Explain to your avid readers how you already knew before I read and replied to your propaganda that it is, was and will be policy not to indict sitting presidents.


And how you knew that.
Confess.

Here let me get this out of the way. Otto Otto Otto.

Now, deal with your misdirection play.

It’s beyond unhinged. They can’t bring obstruction charges, yet libs and butthurt nevertrumpers see reams of evidence of obstruction! It’s laughable.

Exhibit A: Coates, Comey, Rodgers, Barr, and Wray are all on record saying no obstruction. That eliminates most of Muellers points.

Exhibit B: Mueller completed his investigation thoroughly without having to subpoena the president for an in-person interview.

Exhibit C: The alleged “almost firing of Mueller” in Don McGhans testimony was discussed as a remedy for his team’s well documented conflicts of interest, not to cover up a crime.

Exhibit D: Trump, and the campaign, didn’t collude. It would be extremely odd to obstruct the only mechanism that could clear his name. Unless he thought the SC was biased... see exhibit C. If he had just cause to fire Mueller - that’s not obstruction.

Exhibit E: The idea that Trump obstructed to hide embarrassing details in the report falls short. He allowed the report to be made fully public with only the legally required redactions. No executive privilege, and no suggested redactions beyond those made by Mueller and Barr.

Exhibit F: Trump, who is the most investigated human in the history of the world, has endured federal probes by the FBI, CIA, HIC, SIC, SC, and SDNY for over three years. No investigative body has been able to secure a charge of obstruction against him, much less any other crime.

Liberals are desperate, crazy, authoritarian tyrants.

quote:

---

When the president asks his former adviser and my former colleague K.T. McFarland to write an untruthful letter to the file knowing the government would subpoena it, that’s obstruction of justice,”

---

This is exactly how administrations flush out leakers. But Trump doesn't have an issue with leakers so it must be obstruction of justice, amirite?

And how tf can Eddie Munster know what Trump knew would be subpoenaed?

Crazy how many of you just think unethical and immoral and debased behavior is acceptable just because it is not illegal.

I dont even want to think about how people inclined to think this wa would have been okay with poll tax, womens in ability to vote, and the lack of civil rights for underrepresented groups back in the day just because it was the law of the land