Don't worry...you're dead wrong. While he'd definitively put a up a fuss if he lost and would be a terror during the transition period (remember the Bush Sr. to Clinton transition? It'd be the complete opposite of that). But this notion of him refusing to leave and being worried about that ("for our sakes" as you said), is just in your head...and the heads of others perhaps. It's a delusion.
How about some bloodshed on the streets? We've never seen the cultlike devotion to anyone else that we're seeing all. I don't see Trump losing, but if he does, the next is going to be ugly...particularly if Trump asks his followers to do anything.
as the biggest snowflake that ever was, he will bitch and moan and there might be pockets of some violence, but nothing significant.
He is going willingly. But in the unlikely scenario that he does not go, I suspect there will be no shortage of police or military personnel that would gladly volunteer and uphold the constitution and haul his orange ass out of the WH kicking and screaming...
Some of you Americans might have the weed that causes paranoia...
I grow my own not paranoia at all it’s very soothing great to just relax , I’ll be the 1st to admit my mistakes if this goes the way you think it will I wonder if you would come here and do the same if my scenario plays out ?
First off I was only joking about the weed...please take no offence. Please explain the highlighted.
I just believe the military and police personnel would do what they are sworn to uphold, and that is the US Constitution. I also believe Trump lawyers will tell him to muzzle it and go quietly or risk spending life in jail...
I’m saying that if he does fail to comply if voted out would you come here and state that you misjudged him that’s all and no I didn’t take offense I’m joking about that !!
If he somehow he does not leave and it becomes a problem...I will admit I am wrong.
Don't worry...you're dead wrong. While he'd definitively put a up a fuss if he lost and would be a terror during the transition period (remember the Bush Sr. to Clinton transition? It'd be the complete opposite of that). But this notion of him refusing to leave and being worried about that ("for our sakes" as you said), is just in your head...and the heads of others perhaps. It's a delusion.
How about some bloodshed on the streets? We've never seen the cultlike devotion to anyone else that we're seeing all. I don't see Trump losing, but if he does, the next is going to be ugly...particularly if Trump asks his followers to do anything.
Many Trump supporters are actually swearing violence if Trump doesn't win, and Trump is encouraging them. I think a really fucking disastrous transition is entirely possible TBH. I would like to think that all those idiots would wuss out at the end of the day, but I wouldn't assume it.
With all its sham, drudgery, and broken dreams, it is still a beautiful world. Be careful. Strive to be happy. ~ Desiderata
Don't worry...you're dead wrong. While he'd definitively put a up a fuss if he lost and would be a terror during the transition period (remember the Bush Sr. to Clinton transition? It'd be the complete opposite of that). But this notion of him refusing to leave and being worried about that ("for our sakes" as you said), is just in your head...and the heads of others perhaps. It's a delusion.
How about some bloodshed on the streets? We've never seen the cultlike devotion to anyone else that we're seeing all. I don't see Trump losing, but if he does, the next is going to be ugly...particularly if Trump asks his followers to do anything.
Oh yes this much more likely than Trump refusing to leave.
Ex-DOJ prosecutors: Trump would have been charged with obstruction if he weren't president
Nearly 400 federal prosecutors on Monday said they believe President Donald Trump would have been charged with obstruction of justice if not for a longstanding Justice Department policy barring the indictment of a sitting president.
In a letter posted online, 370 Justice alumni with up to four decades of service with the department wrote that special counsel Robert Mueller’s report — a redacted version of which was publicly released last month — formed a case for obstruction against the president for which there is “overwhelming” evidence.
Mueller concluded his report in March after a nearly two-year investigation, and though his team found insufficient evidence of a criminal conspiracy between the Trump campaign and Russian agents to interfere in the 2016 election, Mueller did not make a determination on whether Trump obstructed justice in the investigation.
Instead, Attorney General William Barr and Deputy Attorney General Rod Rosenstein made the decision that there was insufficient evidence to charge Trump with obstruction, a move that has outraged congressional Democrats who have argued that Mueller left the matter up to Congress.
The attorneys said Monday that “the Mueller report describes several acts that satisfy all of the elements for an obstruction charge: conduct that obstructed or attempted to obstruct the truth-finding process, as to which the evidence of corrupt intent and connection to pending proceedings is overwhelming.”
“We believe strongly that, but for the OLC memo, the overwhelming weight of professional judgment would come down in favor of prosecution for the conduct outlined in the Mueller Report,” they said, referring to a policy issued by the Justice Department’s Office of Legal Counsel.
Last, the attorneys cite Trump’s efforts to prevent witnesses from cooperating with investigators, citing his public and private statements to his former personal attorney Michael Cohen and his former campaign chairman Paul Manafort throughout the investigation.
“All of this conduct — trying to control and impede the investigation against the President by leveraging his authority over others — is similar to conduct we have seen charged against other public officials and people in powerful positions,” they wrote.
They also argued that not only was there sufficient evidence to charge the president with obstruction, but also that it would not have been a close call.
“We emphasize that these are not matters of close professional judgment,” they said, though they noted that, if charged, Trump would be presumed innocent until proven guilty and that “there are potential defenses or arguments that could be raised in response to an indictment of the nature we describe here.”
“But, to look at these facts and say that a prosecutor could not probably sustain a conviction for obstruction of justice — the standard set out in Principles of Federal Prosecution — runs counter to logic and our experience,” they continued.
Trump and his allies have simultaneously assailed and praised Mueller’s findings, calling the 400-plus-page report at once an exoneration and a one-sided prosecutorial document that is riddled with inaccuracies.
Trump’s personal lawyer took issue not just with the letter’s content but also the political stripes of its signers.
“I didn’t see a person there who’d be described as a Trump supporter,” Rudy Giuliani told POLITICO.
“I’m pretty sure that Jeff is a Democrat,” Giuliani said of his former colleague Jeffrey Harris, who worked with him in the Ronald Reagan Justice Department.
Of William Weld, another signer, he noted that the former Massachusetts governor and Reagan-era assistant U.S. attorney isn’t just running against Trump in 2020. He also “ran against him three years ago as a vice presidential candidate” for the libertarians.
Giuliani also pushed back against the idea that Trump could be charged for obstruction when there was no proof of an underlying crime.
“Could we argue like law school professors about whether there’s some theoretical possible attempt? Yeah,” he said. “But then you have to credit all the witnesses on one side but not the witnesses on the other side.”
“If it didn’t get laughed out of court, I think a jury would acquit in a half hour,” Giuliani added.
In the aftermath of the report’s release, tensions between the White House and Democratic members of Congress have erupted into a legal battle to have an unredacted version of the report and its underlying evidence made public. And Barr’s initial handling of Mueller’s findings have placed the attorney general and special counsel, who are friends and former colleagues, at odds with each other.
Ex-DOJ prosecutors: Trump would have been charged with obstruction if he weren't president
Nearly 400 federal prosecutors on Monday said they believe President Donald Trump would have been charged with obstruction of justice if not for a longstanding Justice Department policy barring the indictment of a sitting president.
In a letter posted online, 370 Justice alumni with up to four decades of service with the department wrote that special counsel Robert Mueller’s report — a redacted version of which was publicly released last month — formed a case for obstruction against the president for which there is “overwhelming” evidence.
Mueller concluded his report in March after a nearly two-year investigation, and though his team found insufficient evidence of a criminal conspiracy between the Trump campaign and Russian agents to interfere in the 2016 election, Mueller did not make a determination on whether Trump obstructed justice in the investigation.
Instead, Attorney General William Barr and Deputy Attorney General Rod Rosenstein made the decision that there was insufficient evidence to charge Trump with obstruction, a move that has outraged congressional Democrats who have argued that Mueller left the matter up to Congress.
The attorneys said Monday that “the Mueller report describes several acts that satisfy all of the elements for an obstruction charge: conduct that obstructed or attempted to obstruct the truth-finding process, as to which the evidence of corrupt intent and connection to pending proceedings is overwhelming.”
“We believe strongly that, but for the OLC memo, the overwhelming weight of professional judgment would come down in favor of prosecution for the conduct outlined in the Mueller Report,” they said, referring to a policy issued by the Justice Department’s Office of Legal Counsel.
Last, the attorneys cite Trump’s efforts to prevent witnesses from cooperating with investigators, citing his public and private statements to his former personal attorney Michael Cohen and his former campaign chairman Paul Manafort throughout the investigation.
“All of this conduct — trying to control and impede the investigation against the President by leveraging his authority over others — is similar to conduct we have seen charged against other public officials and people in powerful positions,” they wrote.
They also argued that not only was there sufficient evidence to charge the president with obstruction, but also that it would not have been a close call.
“We emphasize that these are not matters of close professional judgment,” they said, though they noted that, if charged, Trump would be presumed innocent until proven guilty and that “there are potential defenses or arguments that could be raised in response to an indictment of the nature we describe here.”
“But, to look at these facts and say that a prosecutor could not probably sustain a conviction for obstruction of justice — the standard set out in Principles of Federal Prosecution — runs counter to logic and our experience,” they continued.
Trump and his allies have simultaneously assailed and praised Mueller’s findings, calling the 400-plus-page report at once an exoneration and a one-sided prosecutorial document that is riddled with inaccuracies.
Trump’s personal lawyer took issue not just with the letter’s content but also the political stripes of its signers.
“I didn’t see a person there who’d be described as a Trump supporter,” Rudy Giuliani told POLITICO.
“I’m pretty sure that Jeff is a Democrat,” Giuliani said of his former colleague Jeffrey Harris, who worked with him in the Ronald Reagan Justice Department.
Of William Weld, another signer, he noted that the former Massachusetts governor and Reagan-era assistant U.S. attorney isn’t just running against Trump in 2020. He also “ran against him three years ago as a vice presidential candidate” for the libertarians.
Giuliani also pushed back against the idea that Trump could be charged for obstruction when there was no proof of an underlying crime.
“Could we argue like law school professors about whether there’s some theoretical possible attempt? Yeah,” he said. “But then you have to credit all the witnesses on one side but not the witnesses on the other side.”
“If it didn’t get laughed out of court, I think a jury would acquit in a half hour,” Giuliani added.
In the aftermath of the report’s release, tensions between the White House and Democratic members of Congress have erupted into a legal battle to have an unredacted version of the report and its underlying evidence made public. And Barr’s initial handling of Mueller’s findings have placed the attorney general and special counsel, who are friends and former colleagues, at odds with each other.
Only 370?
Well, Mitt did say no obstruction!
"Mostly I think that people react sensitively because they know you’ve got a point"
So Stevie “Sweet Nuthin” Mnuchin appears to be refusing a request from Congress to release Team Trump Treason’s tax returns. Apparently “breaking news” on WaPo declared as much, as in formally denying the request and setting up a court challenge. So, Team Trump Treason was “Fully exonerated,” believes Team Mueller shouldn’t testify before congress and is encouraging Administration officials to ignore subpoenas from Congress. What are they hiding? Particularly if,
“There was no collusion.”
“I have nothing to hide.”
“I don’t know any Russians.”
“I’ll sit down and talk with anyone.”
“We do everything by the book.”
“Only the guilty plea the fifth.”
“Very legal, very cool.”
“Fully exonerated.”
Follow the damn money, from Russia with love and a PTape, all the way to impeachment.
So Stevie “Sweet Nuthin” Mnuchin appears to be refusing a request from Congress to release Team Trump Treason’s tax returns. Apparently “breaking news” on WaPo declared as much, as in formally denying the request and setting up a court challenge. So, Team Trump Treason was “Fully exonerated,” believes Team Mueller shouldn’t testify before congress and is encouraging Administration officials to ignore subpoenas from Congress. What are they hiding? Particularly if,
“There was no collusion.”
“I have nothing to hide.”
“I don’t know any Russians.”
“I’ll sit down and talk with anyone.”
“We do everything by the book.”
“Only the guilty plea the fifth.”
“Very legal, very cool.”
“Fully exonerated.”
Follow the damn money, from Russia with love and a PTape, all the way to impeachment.
Let it go, bro. Let it go. Crying on the Internet simply isn’t a good look for anyone. Who do you think the DoNothingbutCry is going to screw over in the primaries this time?
So Stevie “Sweet Nuthin” Mnuchin appears to be refusing a request from Congress to release Team Trump Treason’s tax returns. Apparently “breaking news” on WaPo declared as much, as in formally denying the request and setting up a court challenge. So, Team Trump Treason was “Fully exonerated,” believes Team Mueller shouldn’t testify before congress and is encouraging Administration officials to ignore subpoenas from Congress. What are they hiding? Particularly if,
“There was no collusion.”
“I have nothing to hide.”
“I don’t know any Russians.”
“I’ll sit down and talk with anyone.”
“We do everything by the book.”
“Only the guilty plea the fifth.”
“Very legal, very cool.”
“Fully exonerated.”
Follow the damn money, from Russia with love and a PTape, all the way to impeachment.
Let it go, bro. Let it go. Crying on the Internet simply isn’t a good look for anyone. Who do you think the DoNothingbutCry is going to screw over in the primaries this time?
Care to answer the question posed? Good to see you’re still okay with obstruction of justice, colluding with a foreign adversary to throw an election and tax and insurance fraud. Congress will do something about it though. Please pass me a tissue, my keyboard is getting wet.
So Stevie “Sweet Nuthin” Mnuchin appears to be refusing a request from Congress to release Team Trump Treason’s tax returns. Apparently “breaking news” on WaPo declared as much, as in formally denying the request and setting up a court challenge. So, Team Trump Treason was “Fully exonerated,” believes Team Mueller shouldn’t testify before congress and is encouraging Administration officials to ignore subpoenas from Congress. What are they hiding? Particularly if,
“There was no collusion.”
“I have nothing to hide.”
“I don’t know any Russians.”
“I’ll sit down and talk with anyone.”
“We do everything by the book.”
“Only the guilty plea the fifth.”
“Very legal, very cool.”
“Fully exonerated.”
Follow the damn money, from Russia with love and a PTape, all the way to impeachment.
Let it go, bro. Let it go. Crying on the Internet simply isn’t a good look for anyone. Who do you think the DoNothingbutCry is going to screw over in the primaries this time?
Care to answer the question posed? Good to see you’re still okay with obstruction of justice, colluding with a foreign adversary to throw an election and tax and insurance fraud. Congress will do something about it though. Please pass me a tissue, my keyboard is getting wet.
His answer will consist of a quickly googled article written by.......Jay Sekulow.
At least that's what I got the last time I engaged with him.
So Stevie “Sweet Nuthin” Mnuchin appears to be refusing a request from Congress to release Team Trump Treason’s tax returns. Apparently “breaking news” on WaPo declared as much, as in formally denying the request and setting up a court challenge. So, Team Trump Treason was “Fully exonerated,” believes Team Mueller shouldn’t testify before congress and is encouraging Administration officials to ignore subpoenas from Congress. What are they hiding? Particularly if,
“There was no collusion.”
“I have nothing to hide.”
“I don’t know any Russians.”
“I’ll sit down and talk with anyone.”
“We do everything by the book.”
“Only the guilty plea the fifth.”
“Very legal, very cool.”
“Fully exonerated.”
Follow the damn money, from Russia with love and a PTape, all the way to impeachment.
Let it go, bro. Let it go. Crying on the Internet simply isn’t a good look for anyone. Who do you think the DoNothingbutCry is going to screw over in the primaries this time?
If you are in here to not add anything to the discussion, why not just leave instead?
Halifax tears are what drives this thread.
Post edited by Spiritual_Chaos on
"Mostly I think that people react sensitively because they know you’ve got a point"
0
The Juggler
Behind that bush over there. Posts: 47,214
Good article making the point for not starting impeachment proceedings just yet. I’m honestly not sure if it makes more sense to start now or to wait...
So Stevie “Sweet Nuthin” Mnuchin appears to be refusing a request from Congress to release Team Trump Treason’s tax returns. Apparently “breaking news” on WaPo declared as much, as in formally denying the request and setting up a court challenge. So, Team Trump Treason was “Fully exonerated,” believes Team Mueller shouldn’t testify before congress and is encouraging Administration officials to ignore subpoenas from Congress. What are they hiding? Particularly if,
“There was no collusion.”
“I have nothing to hide.”
“I don’t know any Russians.”
“I’ll sit down and talk with anyone.”
“We do everything by the book.”
“Only the guilty plea the fifth.”
“Very legal, very cool.”
“Fully exonerated.”
Follow the damn money, from Russia with love and a PTape, all the way to impeachment.
Let it go, bro. Let it go. Crying on the Internet simply isn’t a good look for anyone. Who do you think the DoNothingbutCry is going to screw over in the primaries this time?
He said with love bro. Wnt dont the trump bros care about the love?
If the economy numbers tank, I'm sure he'll be back into the 30s, but I guess we're just no too worried about the long game, here.
1995 Milwaukee 1998 Alpine, Alpine 2003 Albany, Boston, Boston, Boston 2004 Boston, Boston 2006 Hartford, St. Paul (Petty), St. Paul (Petty) 2011 Alpine, Alpine 2013 Wrigley 2014 St. Paul 2016 Fenway, Fenway, Wrigley, Wrigley 2018 Missoula, Wrigley, Wrigley 2021 Asbury Park 2022 St Louis 2023 Austin, Austin
0
The Juggler
Behind that bush over there. Posts: 47,214
I like stollen. With my covfefe. Particularly on christmas morning.
Which is why it's so great that we can say Christmas again.
1995 Milwaukee 1998 Alpine, Alpine 2003 Albany, Boston, Boston, Boston 2004 Boston, Boston 2006 Hartford, St. Paul (Petty), St. Paul (Petty) 2011 Alpine, Alpine 2013 Wrigley 2014 St. Paul 2016 Fenway, Fenway, Wrigley, Wrigley 2018 Missoula, Wrigley, Wrigley 2021 Asbury Park 2022 St Louis 2023 Austin, Austin
0
The Juggler
Behind that bush over there. Posts: 47,214
Seems the dem house committee wants McGahn's documents as they might relate to the transfer or reassignment of SDNY staff and attorneys. Hmmmmm, I wonder why Team Trump Treason would claim executive privelege for such a request? I mean "fully exonerated," means you have nothing to hide, right? Particularly if,
“There
was no collusion.”
“I
don’t know any Russians.”
“I
have nothing to hide.”
“I’ll
sit down and talk to anyone.”
“We
do everything by the book.”
“Only
the guilty plea the fifth.”
“Very
legal, very cool.”
“Fully
exonerated.”
Follow
the damn money, from Russia with love and a PTape, all the way to impeachment.
And speaking of “only the guilty plea the fifth” guess who’s considering it as one option to the subpoena issued by the senate intelligence committee? C’mon guess. You can’t make this shit up.
Comments
Cheers,
HFD
Libtardaplorable©. And proud of it.
Brilliantati©
Pearl Jam bootlegs:
http://wegotshit.blogspot.com
EV
Toronto Film Festival 9/11/2007, '08 - Toronto 1 & 2, '09 - Albany 1, '11 - Chicago 1
https://www.politico.com/story/2019/05/06/former-doj-prosecutors-trump-obstruction-1305776
Ex-DOJ prosecutors: Trump would have been charged with obstruction if he weren't president
Nearly 400 federal prosecutors on Monday said they believe President Donald Trump would have been charged with obstruction of justice if not for a longstanding Justice Department policy barring the indictment of a sitting president.
In a letter posted online, 370 Justice alumni with up to four decades of service with the department wrote that special counsel Robert Mueller’s report — a redacted version of which was publicly released last month — formed a case for obstruction against the president for which there is “overwhelming” evidence.
Mueller concluded his report in March after a nearly two-year investigation, and though his team found insufficient evidence of a criminal conspiracy between the Trump campaign and Russian agents to interfere in the 2016 election, Mueller did not make a determination on whether Trump obstructed justice in the investigation.
Instead, Attorney General William Barr and Deputy Attorney General Rod Rosenstein made the decision that there was insufficient evidence to charge Trump with obstruction, a move that has outraged congressional Democrats who have argued that Mueller left the matter up to Congress.
The attorneys said Monday that “the Mueller report describes several acts that satisfy all of the elements for an obstruction charge: conduct that obstructed or attempted to obstruct the truth-finding process, as to which the evidence of corrupt intent and connection to pending proceedings is overwhelming.”
“We believe strongly that, but for the OLC memo, the overwhelming weight of professional judgment would come down in favor of prosecution for the conduct outlined in the Mueller Report,” they said, referring to a policy issued by the Justice Department’s Office of Legal Counsel.
Last, the attorneys cite Trump’s efforts to prevent witnesses from cooperating with investigators, citing his public and private statements to his former personal attorney Michael Cohen and his former campaign chairman Paul Manafort throughout the investigation.
“All of this conduct — trying to control and impede the investigation against the President by leveraging his authority over others — is similar to conduct we have seen charged against other public officials and people in powerful positions,” they wrote.
They also argued that not only was there sufficient evidence to charge the president with obstruction, but also that it would not have been a close call.
“We emphasize that these are not matters of close professional judgment,” they said, though they noted that, if charged, Trump would be presumed innocent until proven guilty and that “there are potential defenses or arguments that could be raised in response to an indictment of the nature we describe here.”
“But, to look at these facts and say that a prosecutor could not probably sustain a conviction for obstruction of justice — the standard set out in Principles of Federal Prosecution — runs counter to logic and our experience,” they continued.
Trump and his allies have simultaneously assailed and praised Mueller’s findings, calling the 400-plus-page report at once an exoneration and a one-sided prosecutorial document that is riddled with inaccuracies.
Trump’s personal lawyer took issue not just with the letter’s content but also the political stripes of its signers.
“I didn’t see a person there who’d be described as a Trump supporter,” Rudy Giuliani told POLITICO.
“I’m pretty sure that Jeff is a Democrat,” Giuliani said of his former colleague Jeffrey Harris, who worked with him in the Ronald Reagan Justice Department.
Of William Weld, another signer, he noted that the former Massachusetts governor and Reagan-era assistant U.S. attorney isn’t just running against Trump in 2020. He also “ran against him three years ago as a vice presidential candidate” for the libertarians.
Giuliani also pushed back against the idea that Trump could be charged for obstruction when there was no proof of an underlying crime.
“Could we argue like law school professors about whether there’s some theoretical possible attempt? Yeah,” he said. “But then you have to credit all the witnesses on one side but not the witnesses on the other side.”
“If it didn’t get laughed out of court, I think a jury would acquit in a half hour,” Giuliani added.
In the aftermath of the report’s release, tensions between the White House and Democratic members of Congress have erupted into a legal battle to have an unredacted version of the report and its underlying evidence made public. And Barr’s initial handling of Mueller’s findings have placed the attorney general and special counsel, who are friends and former colleagues, at odds with each other.
Well, Mitt did say no obstruction!
Follow the damn money, from Russia with love and a PTape, all the way to impeachment.
Libtardaplorable©. And proud of it.
Brilliantati©
Libtardaplorable©. And proud of it.
Brilliantati©
At least that's what I got the last time I engaged with him.
Not worth your time...
Halifax tears are what drives this thread.
Good article making the point for not starting impeachment proceedings just yet. I’m honestly not sure if it makes more sense to start now or to wait...
He said with love bro. Wnt dont the trump bros care about the love?
www.cluthelee.com
www.cluthe.com
https://thehill.com/blogs/blog-briefing-room/news/442336-trumps-approval-rating-at-all-time-high-in-gallup-poll
If the economy numbers tank, I'm sure he'll be back into the 30s, but I guess we're just no too worried about the long game, here.
2013 Wrigley 2014 St. Paul 2016 Fenway, Fenway, Wrigley, Wrigley 2018 Missoula, Wrigley, Wrigley 2021 Asbury Park 2022 St Louis 2023 Austin, Austin
42.9%.
Lower than any president other than 2 in the last 66 years....and this is with a 3.6% unemployment rate.
Anyone else would be over 60% approval.
Cheers,
HFD
Libtardaplorable©. And proud of it.
Brilliantati©
2013 Wrigley 2014 St. Paul 2016 Fenway, Fenway, Wrigley, Wrigley 2018 Missoula, Wrigley, Wrigley 2021 Asbury Park 2022 St Louis 2023 Austin, Austin
Woo!
Libtardaplorable©. And proud of it.
Brilliantati©
“There was no collusion.”
“I don’t know any Russians.”
“I have nothing to hide.”
“I’ll sit down and talk to anyone.”
“We do everything by the book.”
“Only the guilty plea the fifth.”
“Very legal, very cool.”
“Fully exonerated.”
Follow the damn money, from Russia with love and a PTape, all the way to impeachment.
Libtardaplorable©. And proud of it.
Brilliantati©
Libtardaplorable©. And proud of it.
Brilliantati©
Libtardaplorable©. And proud of it.
Brilliantati©
Cheers,
HFD
EV
Toronto Film Festival 9/11/2007, '08 - Toronto 1 & 2, '09 - Albany 1, '11 - Chicago 1