- 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 8:59 am to tigerinDC09
Posted on 6/3/19 at 8:59 am to tigerinDC09
tigerinDC09
Can you please identify those 5 as I am not seeing that. TIA.
quote:
The more than 5 instances of Obstruction of Justice outlined in the Mueller report where Mueller says that the acts meet all 3 requirements for obstruction
Can you please identify those 5 as I am not seeing that. TIA.
0
Posted on 6/3/19 at 9:00 am to RockyMtnTigerWDE
quote:
At the very least he should have laid out the crimes committed
He laid them out as "investigative notes" which is BS I agree.
quote:
and give it to congress to follow through with impeachment.
I agree again, he should say, here congress, go to work.
Posted on 6/3/19 at 9:01 am to tigerinDC09
Are you stating they have substantial evidence or they don't?
Posted on 6/3/19 at 9:01 am to tigerinDC09
quote:He did not issue a charge.
Because he explicitly says so in relation to Don Jr and his conduct regarding the Trump tower meeting.
He claims the OLC memo prevented that. It does not. It questions ability to indict which inturn could could offer the judiciary an avenue for POTUS removal independent of Congress. Issuing a charge or recommending one to be addressed by Congress is a different matter. Suspending the OLC memo altogether was another possibility. Mueller states very clearly the OLC memo did not interfere with the team's findings in this case.
quote:Specific to DJTJr . . . HE HAS NO PROTECTIONS from indictment.
in relation to Don Jr
Mueller could have indicted him in a heartbeat.
He didn't.
Posted on 6/3/19 at 9:03 am to tigerinDC09
quote:I pray the Dems pull the trigger and go all in.
I agree again, he should say, here congress, go to work.
Posted on 6/3/19 at 9:03 am to NC_Tigah
Still waiting on these 5 alleged crimes ...
Posted on 6/3/19 at 9:03 am to RockyMtnTigerWDE
quote:
Are you stating they have substantial evidence or they don't?
Mueller report says that they have substantial evidence to support the underlying acts described in volume 2.
Tell me this, do you dispute that the acts described in volume 2 happened?
Posted on 6/3/19 at 9:05 am to dafif
quote:
Still waiting on these 5 alleged crimes ...
On this chart, where Obstruction, Intent, and Nexus all have YES, then there are your alleged crimes.
This post was edited on 6/3/19 at 9:06 am
Posted on 6/3/19 at 9:07 am to tigerinDC09
Link to your chart, one more time Schiff09.
Posted on 6/3/19 at 9:11 am to tigerinDC09
quote:
Mueller report says that they have substantial evidence to support the underlying acts described in volume 2.
You stated there isn't enough evidence for congress to impeach on those 5 supposed charges. Which one is it son?
quote:
do you dispute that the acts described in volume 2 happened?
I dispute that they are criminal because after two years of investigation Mueller and team couldn't clearly state any wrongdoing. They couldn't pass along a strong position for congress to proceed with impeachment.
If it was substantial, the congress would have already been dick deep in impeachment proceedings. They are not. So yes I dispute that they possess all three elements for obstruction.
Posted on 6/3/19 at 9:12 am to Jbird
I noticed he couldn't leave a link because that is not directly from the report he claims he is fully versed on.
Why can't he reference directly from the report?
Why can't he reference directly from the report?
Posted on 6/3/19 at 9:14 am to tigerinDC09
How about listing the statute(s) instead of listing a bull shite info-graphic of what you think the statute says? People are not criminally charge for actions contrary to an info-graphic made after the fact of said actions. They are criminally charged for breaking laws.
List the laws broken.
Legislatures pass laws, not info-graphics.
List the laws broken.
Legislatures pass laws, not info-graphics.
Posted on 6/3/19 at 9:16 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.
These two might be comparable if the FBI killed Nicole and then chased down the white bronco, and then when they caught up to OJ and asked why he ran he said "you are trying to frame me for murder" and then the FBI arrested him on obstruction.
Posted on 6/3/19 at 9:16 am to RockyMtnTigerWDE
quote:
I dispute that they are criminal because after two years of investigation Mueller and team couldn't clearly state any wrongdoing. They couldn't pass along a strong position for congress to proceed with impeachment.
Right, so the dispute isn't over whether this stuff happened, but if it was criminal.
Congress is still stuck on if this was criminal enough to warrant an impeachment process.
Posted on 6/3/19 at 9:17 am to tigerinDC09
quote:
Congress is still stuck on if this was criminal enough to warrant an impeachment process.
Posted on 6/3/19 at 9:18 am to tigerinDC09
quote:
The more than 5 instances of Obstruction of Justice outlined in the Mueller report where Mueller says that the acts meet all 3 requirements for obstruction and where it says there is substantial evidence to prove it.
This isn’t true. An outright lie. Not one of the acts described on the Mueller report states that element of “corrupt intent” was met. Cite the page you claim Mueller stated this or admit you were lying (or were ignorant).
Posted on 6/3/19 at 9:18 am to GumboPot
quote:
How about listing the statute(s) instead of listing a bull shite info-graphic of what you think the statute says? People are not criminally charge for actions contrary to an info-graphic made after the fact of said actions. They are criminally charged for breaking laws.
List the laws broken.
Legislatures pass laws, not info-graphics.
They're all listed in Volume 2 of the Mueller report.
Posted on 6/3/19 at 9:19 am to tigerinDC09
quote:
Right, so the dispute isn't over whether this stuff happened, but if it was criminal.
just another ignorant leftist. Only you think you aren’t ignorant, which makes it more fun. This post was edited on 6/3/19 at 9:20 am
Posted on 6/3/19 at 9:21 am to tigerinDC09
firing Comey is obstruction of justice?
Sure. When all of the Democrats were clamoring for him to be fired only months earlier. He could be fired for his incompetence at any point. This is just stupid.
There is no underlying crime. It was a hoax, a witch hunt. THE ENTIRE THING. What in the exact frick was he obstructing?????????????????????????
Sure. When all of the Democrats were clamoring for him to be fired only months earlier. He could be fired for his incompetence at any point. This is just stupid.
There is no underlying crime. It was a hoax, a witch hunt. THE ENTIRE THING. What in the exact frick was he obstructing?????????????????????????
Posted on 6/3/19 at 9:21 am to GumboPot
quote:
How about listing the statute(s) instead of listing a bull shite info-graphic of what you think the statute says?
Because he is ignorant and doesn’t know that his graphic is hilariously incorrect. It lists “intent” as an element. The actual element is “corrupt intent”. A VERY big difference. His entire argument is based upon ignorance of the elements of the law. That is ignorance of the most basic piece of this entire thing.
Page 4 of 7
Popular
Back to top
Follow TigerDroppings for LSU Football News