Announcement

Collapse
No announcement yet.

President asserts right to pardon himself

Collapse
X
  • Filter
  • Time
  • Show
Clear All
new posts

  • #16
    Originally posted by TheKiwi View Post

    So, a known liar from an organisation with a very long history of lying. Well you've convinced me, it must be true.

    I simply do not swallow the line that the entire law enforcement/intelligence establishment is out to get Trump in a massive conspiracy of fabricated evidence and media propaganda. That's foolish paranoia. The simpler explanation is he did it. Just like Nixon. Occam's Razor or whatever.

    Comment


    • #17
      It's got nothing do with "out to get Trump". It's just that you're taking the word of a group of known liars - who've lied under oath, to the press, to the public and to the judiciary on matters completely unrelated to this. I don't think this makes them credible on ANY matters, not just Trump related ones.

      If your partner lies to you about sleeping with other people, what are the odds they're also lying to you about their finances. Liars are going to lie, doesn't matter what about. If you chose to believe them because this particular set of lies appeals to you, I can only wish you luck with the rest of your life.

      Comment


      • #18
        Originally posted by Linedoggie View Post
        A real Dictator doesn't give a rats ass and would ignore a indictment or order it ignored and have the persons who did it imprisoned or shot

        name 1 Dictator who willingly rendered himself over for trial?
        Most dictators aren't useful idiots who lucked out into failing upwards in life.

        Indeed, it's been over a year and Nothing tangible that says Trump committed any crime. For all the mental masturbation of poutraged lefty they still haven't been able to tie trump to any crime. In fact I believe most of the US left doesn't want trump indicted. they would much rather the investigation go on for years and use it to distract trump
        The Mueller investigations has already brought down over 100 indictments against 20 people. That's more than the Benghazi commission and Ken Starr ever did combined. Nearly all of them are against people who were part of the Trump campaign and/or administration. The investigation is also nowhere done yet. It's also absurd to believe that any investigation goes after the top dog without laying out the groundwork necessary to do so. Also worth noting that the investigation has also been a fraction of the cost of the other two.

        Trump and his administration are breaking laws left and right on a daily basis. Here's just one example:

        Meet the guys who tape Trump's papers back together


        Solomon Lartey spent the first five months of the Trump administration working in the Old Executive Office Building, standing over a desk with scraps of paper spread out in front of him.

        Lartey, who earned an annual salary of $65,969 as a records management analyst, was a career government official with close to 30 years under his belt. But he had never seen anything like this in any previous administration he had worked for. He had never had to tape the president’s papers back together again

        Under the Presidential Records Act, the White House must preserve all memos, letters, emails and papers that the president touches, sending them to the National Archives for safekeeping as historical records.
        ......



        Despite the president’s apparent disregard of the Presidential Records Act, sources said, aides around him have tried to take an overly inclusive approach to what would be considered a presidential record.

        .....
        Lartey, 54, and Young, 48, were both career government officials who worked together in records management until this spring, when both were abruptly terminated from their jobs. Both men are now unemployed and still full of questions about why they were stripped of their badges with no explanation and marched off of the White House grounds by Secret Service.
        Irene Porada, the head of human resources who personally terminated both men, did not respond to an email requesting comment. A White House spokesman also did not respond to a request for comment about the terminations.



        https://www.politico.com/story/2018/...-system-635164

        Trump's actions throughout his life, not just his presidency, have always been that of a man who sees himself above the rules. Dude's never taken responsibility for anything, all he does is whine and deflect.

        This isn't even delving into his cabinet, which is comprised of some of the most corrupt and incompetent people out there (Pruitt, Pai, DeVos, Mulvaney, etc.).

        Comment


        • #19
          Originally posted by Derbedeu View Post
          ...


          The Mueller investigations has already brought down over 100 indictments against 20 people. ...
          How many of those are for "lying to the FBI"? A charge that is about as full of irony as you can get.

          Originally posted by Derbedeu View Post
          ...
          This isn't even delving into his cabinet, which is comprised of some of the most corrupt and incompetent people out there (Pruitt, Pai, DeVos, Mulvaney, etc)
          I've not seen anything with those three to indicate that they're any worse than their D predecessors. Pai gets good marks from me for his FCC work.

          Comment


          • #20
            Originally posted by TheKiwi View Post
            It's got nothing do with "out to get Trump". It's just that you're taking the word of a group of known liars - who've lied under oath, to the press, to the public and to the judiciary on matters completely unrelated to this. I don't think this makes them credible on ANY matters, not just Trump related ones.

            If your partner lies to you about sleeping with other people, what are the odds they're also lying to you about their finances. Liars are going to lie, doesn't matter what about. If you chose to believe them because this particular set of lies appeals to you, I can only wish you luck with the rest of your life.

            I'll simply refer to what Derbedu posted below:

            "The Mueller investigations has already brought down over 100 indictments against 20 people. That's more than the Benghazi commission and Ken Starr ever did combined. Nearly all of them are against people who were part of the Trump campaign and/or administration. The investigation is also nowhere done yet. It's also absurd to believe that any investigation goes after the top dog without laying out the groundwork necessary to do so. Also worth noting that the investigation has also been a fraction of the cost of the other two."

            It's becoming painfully apparent President Chump is guilty as hell.

            Comment


            • #21
              A bunch of "lying to the FBI" convictions are about as convincing as "failed to pay parking fines". Come back when there is something - anything - more solid.

              Comment


              • #22
                Originally posted by TheKiwi View Post
                A bunch of "lying to the FBI" convictions are about as convincing as "failed to pay parking fines". Come back when there is something - anything - more solid.
                Mean like a videotaped confession of obstruction of justice? Where would we find such a rare gem?

                The chump is guilty. Who else would want to pardon himself?

                Comment


                • #23
                  AKA Lying to the FBI. The FIB are not the friends of justice and democracy you seem to think they are. Never have been (c.f. Church report), not about to start.

                  Comment


                  • #24
                    It's almost ludicrous to think at this point that Trump himself did not know about meetings with russians to get dirt on his opponent. His talk of pardoning himself as virtually evidence in itself he's guilty.

                    Come on, he did it.

                    The big joke is when it comes out in the wash, how many pundits and hacks will come on TV and claim it was 'legal' or 'justified'? How many here will?

                    Comment


                    • #25
                      No one should be above law even for the first citizen, king etc

                      Comment


                      • #26
                        Originally posted by TheKiwi View Post
                        AKA Lying to the FBI. The FIB are not the friends of justice and democracy you seem to think they are. Never have been (c.f. Church report), not about to start.
                        Agreed. That's the problem with the US justice apparatus, it's a hugely complex beast with so many different agencies, where the pursuit of justice seems to come secondary to the political aspirations of its Heads.

                        Comment


                        • #27
                          Originally posted by budgie View Post

                          The big joke is when it comes out in the wash, how many pundits and hacks will come on TV and claim it was 'legal' or 'justified'? How many here will?
                          Let me dust off my post from about 14 months ago... ahem....

                          Any day now bud. You must be so close now. Just don’t lose hope and keep on believing. Any day.

                          Comment


                          • #28
                            Plenty of evidence of collusion.

                            Yes, any day now - or at least any week. It will all come out in the wash because investigations take time. Watergate took two years. So yeah, 14 months sounds about right. And when Trump's crimes are exposed and the charges laid I'll get to say the opposite: all those months ago 14, 18, 24 or whatever, I told you so.
                            ,
                            https://www.vox.com/2018/6/11/174383...ssia-collusion

                            "Here, ultimately, is where Paul Ryan’s argument completely falls apart. The speaker says “there’s no evidence of collusion” but also isn’t willing to go full Trump, denounce the investigation as a fraud, and call for its end. Instead, he says, “this is about Russia and what they did and making sure they don’t do it again.” But Trump has always been clear that he doesn’t think Russia did anything wrong, doesn’t want the full details to become known, doesn’t want anyone punished, and has no particular interest in making sure they don’t do it again. And that, itself, is perhaps the most powerful evidence of collusion."

                            Comment


                            • #29
                              Originally posted by budgie View Post
                              Plenty of evidence of collusion.

                              Yes, any day now - or at least any week. It will all come out in the wash because investigations take time. Watergate took two years. So yeah, 14 months sounds about right. And when Trump's crimes are exposed and the charges laid I'll get to say the opposite: all those months ago 14, 18, 24 or whatever, I told you so.
                              ,
                              https://www.vox.com/2018/6/11/174383...ssia-collusion

                              "Here, ultimately, is where Paul Ryan’s argument completely falls apart. The speaker says “there’s no evidence of collusion” but also isn’t willing to go full Trump, denounce the investigation as a fraud, and call for its end. Instead, he says, “this is about Russia and what they did and making sure they don’t do it again.” But Trump has always been clear that he doesn’t think Russia did anything wrong, doesn’t want the full details to become known, doesn’t want anyone punished, and has no particular interest in making sure they don’t do it again. And that, itself, is perhaps the most powerful evidence of collusion."
                              What a pisspoor argument from a pisspoor source.

                              Comment


                              • #30
                                It's certainly an interesting definition of the word "evidence". You see, in most courts hearsay isn't actually what one would call evidence. Instead one needs something of a higher level of proof. Even for a crime as nebulous as "conspiracy".

                                Comment

                                Working...
                                X