- My Forums
- Tiger Rant
- LSU Recruiting
- SEC Rant
- Saints Talk
- Pelicans Talk
- More Sports Board
- Coaching Changes
- 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: Newly Released Peter Strzok Doc
Posted on 8/8/25 at 2:29 pm to SlowFlowPro
Posted on 8/8/25 at 2:29 pm to SlowFlowPro
quote:
Obama ordering this may insulate the people under him from criminal liability.
That sounds like a Nuremberg defense.
1
Posted on 8/8/25 at 2:29 pm to Darth_Vader
quote:
was (1) made at the orders of Obama
Very likely true
quote:
(2) a proven complete fabrication
This has not occurred.
Assessment reports over the analysis involved criticized the process involved and said it didn't meet applicable standards of judgment/statecraft.
That subjective evaluation is not a factual assertion, let alone one claiming it was a "complete fabrication"
That's 0/3, Darth. Stop making shite up.
Posted on 8/8/25 at 2:30 pm to Jbird
quote:
Drop an is or two in there Mr Clinton.
Yeah I edited.
What's = That's. My b
Posted on 8/8/25 at 2:31 pm to teke184
quote:
That sounds like a Nuremberg defense.
This comparison only really applies if it's illegal.
The larger point was Obama ordering it makes that much less likely to be illegal.
However, it would be cool if these cases does establish the existence (or non-existence) of qualified or quasi-immunity for higher-level executive agents. If this is litigated, I'm sure that will go to the Supreme Court at some point.
Posted on 8/8/25 at 2:32 pm to SlowFlowPro
quote:
It was a question...
Backtracking already.
Posted on 8/8/25 at 2:34 pm to moneyg
quote:
Backtracking already.
Naw. It was a question, for the discussion.
If this was a lawful order by the President, how can following it be illegal?
Posted on 8/8/25 at 2:39 pm to SlowFlowPro
quote:
Naw. It was a question, for the discussion.
Crawfish
I know that you know it was a dumb stance.
That you won’t admit it and instead want to pretend you were just asking a question doesn’t change that.
This happens a lot. You backed yourself into a logical corner.
Posted on 8/8/25 at 2:41 pm to moneyg
quote:
I know that you know it was a dumb stance.
How?
If this was a lawful order by the President, how can following it be illegal?
quote:
You backed yourself into a logical corner.
Implying that following a lawful order being legal isn't "backing myself down" into any corner"
Posted on 8/8/25 at 2:49 pm to SlowFlowPro
quote:
I said that the underlying analyses at issue are subjective and based on opinions, and proving otherwise at a criminal trial will require a mind reader or smoking gun.
I would argue that when you have meeting notes and correspondence that state clearly all parties knew this was fabricated by HRC but then presented it as fact in order to meet a specified goal - malicious intent isn’t an opinion.
What other intent could you infer from their actions given what we know?
Posted on 8/8/25 at 2:50 pm to SlowFlowPro
quote:
You framed your question bad.
Badly.
He framed his question badly. Or poorly would work, as well.
I’d expect somebody gifted to have better command of the English language.
Posted on 8/8/25 at 2:56 pm to SDVTiger
Don’t be too hard on slo joes bro. All his friends have left town suddenly
Posted on 8/8/25 at 3:05 pm to yakster
I bet you could do a Few Good Men number on Obama and Brennan and they’d gladfully admit they staged all of this to protect the country from Trump.
Posted on 8/8/25 at 3:09 pm to SquatchDawg
quote:
I bet you could do a Few Good Men number on Obama and Brennan and they’d gladfully admit they staged all of this to protect the country from Trump.
Brennan would be the more likely of the two. He strikes me as a powder keg with a lit fuse. Obama is a little bit slicker than that.
Posted on 8/8/25 at 3:17 pm to Bunk Moreland
The crazy just flows from that video. Wonder what they all think of black Jesus now being outed as the one that actually committed the treason.
Posted on 8/8/25 at 7:02 pm to SlowFlowPro
quote:
That's 0/3, Darth. Stop making shite up.
That’s rush coming from you. You’ve the biggest lying sack of shite on this site. Every post you e made in this thread has been noting but lie after lie. You’ve yet to say even one thing that is true.
Posted on 8/8/25 at 7:06 pm to SlowFlowPro
quote:
following those non-illegal orders?
Of course they are illegal orders, just because Obama MIGHT have immunity doesn’t make them legal.
Posted on 8/8/25 at 7:10 pm to Jbird
Posted on 8/8/25 at 7:11 pm to SallysHuman
quote:
So... "just following orders", you say?
Posted on 8/8/25 at 7:15 pm to SlowFlowPro
quote:
The larger point was Obama ordering it makes that much less likely to be illegal.
The other night, you said that the drone pilots who killed the US citizen (that Obama ordered to be blasted to the afterlife) were responsible for murder…not him.
Which is it?
Posted on 8/8/25 at 7:17 pm to SlowFlowPro
"but it rings true, doesn't it?"
--John Brennan
Throw away the key
--John Brennan
Throw away the key
Page 11 of 16
Popular
Back to top
Follow TigerDroppings for LSU Football News