Mueller report

[DriveInDriveOut]

Yet you (falsely) posture that you are more intelligent than the rest of the world. Since you obviously have some evidence, or insight, that we mere mortals lack, you have a responsibility to act. Unless.......

You sound like an idiot when you try to look smart buddy.

 

[DriveInDriveOut]

Then you have NO case or evidence of obstruction. Very irresponsible to want a witch-hunt

The evidence is in the Mueller report my guy.

Try turning off fox news and actually read it. Then you won't be so ignorant on the topic.

Hope this helps.

 

[floridays]

You sound like an idiot when you try to look smart buddy.

Wrong

 

[floridays]

The evidence is in the Mueller report my guy.

Try turning off fox news and actually read it. Then you won't be so ignorant on the topic.

Hope this helps.

Wrong

 

[1989]

The evidence is in the Mueller report my guy.

Try turning off fox news and actually read it. Then you won't be so ignorant on the topic.

Hope this helps.

You are always short on details. Seems that the people who’s job it is to prosecute, say you are WRONG. I’ll bet you will become Ricky’s roommate.

 

[DriveInDriveOut]

You are always short on details. Seems that the people who’s job it is to prosecute, say you are WRONG.

Trump's lackey doesn't want to prosecute him. Big surprise.

Your unwavering support of big federal government executive power with no accountability is sad bro.

 

[1989]

Trump's lackey doesn't want to prosecute him. Big surprise.

Your unwavering support of big federal government executive power with no accountability is sad bro.

You have NO case. They must feel there is no case. Again, obstruction is very broad. Ken Starr tried it, and failed.

 

[floridays]

Trump's lackey doesn't want to prosecute him. Big surprise.

Your unwavering support of big federal government executive power with no accountability is sad bro.

Nothing to warrant a prosecution, how could a warrantless action produce what your side clamors?

 

[DriveInDriveOut]

They must feel there is no case.

Who is "they"?

 

[Rutherford B Hays]

You have NO case. They must feel there is no case. Again, obstruction is very broad. Ken Starr tried it, and failed.

https://www.google.com/amp/s/www.history.com/.amp/topics/us-government/obstruction-of-justice


Bill Clinton’s Impeachment
Famously, in the late 1990s, Independent Counsel Kenneth Starr attempted to charge former President Bill Clinton with obstruction of justice by accusing the latter of denying to friends and subordinates that he had had a sexual relationship with Monica Lewinsky, in hopes (according to Starr) that they would repeat the denials to the grand jury investigating the matter.

The House of Representatives voted to charge Clinton with perjury and obstruction of justice, and the matter was sent to the U.S. Senate for trial.

In the end, Starr wasn’t able to prove the charges, the Senate failed to muster enough votes to find him guilty, and Clinton finished out his term in office



Yeah that's similar to what they are accusing Trump with

 

[floridays]

Who is "they"?

Barr answered that question, formatted differently, yesterday.

 

[1989]

Who is "they"?

“They” would be the person/people who’s job it is to make a case for a crime, and prosecute. As you say, it’s not your job. Could you really not figure out who I was referring to when I said “they”?

 

[Fred's Myth]

What’s it like, clinging to a splinter, with no lifeboat in sight?

Time to make your peace with your Maker.

 

[DriveInDriveOut]

“They” would be the person/people who’s job it is to make a case for a crime, and prosecute. As you say, it’s not your job. Could you really not figure out who I was referring to when I said “they”?

I was leading you to the obvious.
The Trump lackey who was chosen because of his love for executive power doesn't want to prosecute him for his overreach.

You think that proves there wasn't obstruction, it doesn't.

 

[BrownFlush]

 

[1989]

I was leading you to the obvious.
The Trump lackey who was chosen because of his love for executive power doesn't want to prosecute him for his overreach.

You think that proves there wasn't obstruction, it doesn't.

Convenient that you have no case for anything. I think that obstruction is very broad. Can you define it? I think it must be narrowly defined. Then a prosecution could stick.

 

[DriveInDriveOut]

Convenient that you have no case for anything. I think that obstruction is very broad. Can you define it? I think it must be narrowly defined. Then a prosecution could stick.

Just read article one of Nixon's impeachment. It's basically a list of what you're asking for.

 

[Rutherford B Hays]

Trump Claims He Can Ignore Subpoenas Because Congress Is Mean

 

[floridays]

I was leading you to the obvious.
The Trump lackey who was chosen because of his love for executive power doesn't want to prosecute him for his overreach.

You think that proves there wasn't obstruction, it doesn't.

Lay out the case, smart guy.

 

[Old Man Jingles]

Why do you believe anything you read on the inter web?

fixed it for you