- 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
re: How do you completely mind frick a Prog/Dim leftist loon? It's easy........
Posted on 6/3/19 at 8:36 am to SDVTiger
Posted on 6/3/19 at 8:36 am to SDVTiger
The new standard for obstruction is declaring your innocence.
These people suffer from a MAJOR case of TDS and they are hurting the country because there are so many of them.
These people suffer from a MAJOR case of TDS and they are hurting the country because there are so many of them.
2
Posted on 6/3/19 at 8:38 am to GumboPot
Tigerindc09 has posted about 100+ gotcha articles all which have turned out to be fake news
That poster is mentally deranged
That poster is mentally deranged
Posted on 6/3/19 at 8:38 am to GumboPot
quote:
What was the crime?
Mueller found that Trump a potential reason for obstruction is because Trump thought he had committed crimes.
For example, the Federal Election Campaign felony that the SDNY says that Trump (Individual-1) directed.
Posted on 6/3/19 at 8:41 am to tigerinDC09
You are the Adam Schiff of this board.
Posted on 6/3/19 at 8:41 am to tigerinDC09
quote:
Are you in favor of having Mueller subpoenaed to the House and Senate?
Wouldn't bother me at all, but time to move on in the real world.
Posted on 6/3/19 at 8:41 am to GumboPot
quote:
The new standard for obstruction is declaring your innocence.
That's not listed in the report as an instance of Obstruction. I can tell you haven't read the report.
Posted on 6/3/19 at 8:43 am to Jbird
quote:
You are the Adam Schiff of this board.
I think you mean that to be an insult, but I don't think it will have the impact on me that you want.
Posted on 6/3/19 at 8:43 am to tigerinDC09
quote:Ah yes. Didn't remember it that way. Answer nonetheless remains identical.
Incorrect. He only answered questions relating to Russian interference. He refused to answer questions about Obstruction.... I see someone hasn't read the report.
Why didn't Trump respond to such questioning?
Because it was legally completely and totally unnecessary.
Why would he?
AND
As I said, Weissmann claimed there might possibly be an intent to obstruct his witch hunt. He based those conclusions on concocted theories inferred from circumstantial evidence and assessed without direct testimony from the subject of the investigation.
Posted on 6/3/19 at 8:44 am to tigerinDC09
quote:I have no doubt he is your hero.
I think you mean that to be an insult, but I don't think it will have the impact on me that you want.
Posted on 6/3/19 at 8:44 am to tigerinDC09
quote:
but I don't think it will have the impact on me that you want.
It will have exactly the impact he wants. You will never be proven right
Posted on 6/3/19 at 8:46 am to tigerinDC09
Mueller should have indicted if he believed if Trump either committed or potentially committed a crime.
The place were this question is answered in in the court of law. Mueller and his team of 18 angry Democrats obviously didn't believe they could succeed in court so they didn't indict.
It's really that simple.
There is no law against indicting a sitting president only a legal opinion...not law.
The place were this question is answered in in the court of law. Mueller and his team of 18 angry Democrats obviously didn't believe they could succeed in court so they didn't indict.
It's really that simple.
There is no law against indicting a sitting president only a legal opinion...not law.
Posted on 6/3/19 at 8:48 am to tigerinDC09
quote:
That's like asking why the OJ trial took so long to start if they had all the evidence they needed when they arrested him.
You already stated there was substantial evidence backing up those 5 instances. You can't have it both ways.
Posted on 6/3/19 at 8:49 am to tigerinDC09
While you keep grasping at straws there will be one OVERARCHING issue you cannot get past in your argument:
Mueller and his 18 angry Democrats DID NOT INDICT.
But keep pushing.
Mueller and his 18 angry Democrats DID NOT INDICT.
But keep pushing.
Posted on 6/3/19 at 8:50 am to GumboPot
quote:
Mueller should have indicted if he believed if Trump either committed or potentially committed a crime.
You and I will likely never agree on anything more than this statement. quote:
Mueller and his team of 18 angry Democrats obviously didn't believe they could succeed in court so they didn't indict.
This is incorrect in relation to Obstruction. You know why? Because he explicitly says so in relation to Don Jr and his conduct regarding the Trump tower meeting.
Posted on 6/3/19 at 8:50 am to GumboPot
quote:
Mueller should have indicted if he believed if Trump either committed or potentially committed a crime.
He didn't even have to do that. At the very least he should have laid out the crimes committed and give it to congress to follow through with impeachment.
Mueller didn't have anything and all this is orchestrated to continue bad press for Trump into 2020. I know you know this, but stating it for others.
Posted on 6/3/19 at 8:52 am to tigerinDC09
quote:Except AGAIN it is not a violation if the intent was to hide the thing from Melania.
For example, the Federal Election Campaign felony that the SDNY says that Trump (Individual-1) directed.
THAT is exactly what Cohen inadvertently admitted the result was. e.g., What the RatCohen claimed to be most bothered about had ZERO to do with campaign finance. It had to do with hiding the StormyDaniels exposé from Melania.
There is absolutely no way to establish Trump's motivation beyond a reasonable doubt. In fact, for most folks Trump's claim would ring far more true.
Posted on 6/3/19 at 8:52 am to RockyMtnTigerWDE
quote:TigerSchiff09 believes.
Mueller didn't have anything and all this is orchestrated to continue bad press for Trump into 2020. I know you know this, but stating it for others.
Posted on 6/3/19 at 8:53 am to tigerinDC09
quote:
Because he explicitly says so in relation to Don Jr and his conduct regarding the Trump tower meeting.
Then indict.
Action not words.
Indict if you have obstruction charges. Don't bloviate. Do some work.
Posted on 6/3/19 at 8:57 am to GumboPot
quote:
Then indict.
Action not words.
Indict if you have obstruction charges. Don't bloviate. Do some work.
Exactly, you can't keep claiming there were crimes, but no indictments. Especially on Don Jr who is not a sitting U.S. President.
Posted on 6/3/19 at 8:58 am to RockyMtnTigerWDE
quote:
You already stated there was substantial evidence backing up those 5 instances. You can't have it both ways.
Are you saying that these instances didn't happen or that they did happen but he can legally do what he did?
Page 3 of 7
Popular
Back to top
Follow TigerDroppings for LSU Football News