Another day, another five scandals. The Orange Klown is an embarrassment to our country.

Political debate. Welcome Yahoo Message Board exiles and everybody else !!
User avatar
brookboy123
Imperial Majesty
Posts: 6942
Joined: Thu Sep 04, 2014 8:48 pm

Re: Another day, another five scandals. The Orange Klown is an embarrassment to our country.

Post by brookboy123 » Thu Mar 08, 2018 2:32 pm

donttreadonme wrote:
Thu Mar 08, 2018 6:25 am
Trump Reportedly Asked About and Pushed Back Against Key Witnesses’ Russia Investigation Testimony


In the age of Donald Trump, conservative jurists, legal theorists, and political commentators have adopted a very, very narrow definition of what constitutes “obstruction of justice.” That’s because the current Republican president of the United States’ conduct—irrespective of what did or did not happen during the campaign—clearly violates the spirt of the “obstruction” law, if not (yet) the letter. The president can fire who he wants; he can bully and cajole, order and insinuate, their thinking goes, but, throughout, the one thing these definitional constrictionists have agreed upon as legally problematic—and often point to as a counterexample of what would constitute obstruction of justice—is if the president ordered a witness to lie to investigators. A New York Times report Wednesday doesn’t go that far, but it does reveal that President Trump discussed with witnesses after the fact their testimony to investigators, which has the president again tiptoeing along a very slippery legal slope.

It’s hard to overstate the recklessness of Trump engaging with high-profile witnesses—the current White House counsel and former chief of staff—about their testimony, no matter how innocuous. It indicates an awareness on the part of the president of the potential impropriety of past actions and gives the appearance of possible coordination of testimony to square any discrepancies. Even if you assume, or believe, Trump has done nothing wrong at any point, the discussions with witnesses would require extra scrutiny by Mueller’s investigative team as the kernel of potential wrongdoing.

The first instance of Trump discussing the testimony of a key witness was with White House Counsel Don McGahn in January after a New York Times article reported that the White House lawyer told investigators Trump has ordered him to fire Special Counsel Robert Mueller, but McGahn refused and threatened to resign if Mueller was sacked.

Mr. McGahn did not publicly deny the article, and the president later confronted him in the Oval Office in front of the White House chief of staff, John F. Kelly, according to the people. The president said he had never ordered Mr. McGahn to fire the special counsel. Mr. McGahn replied that the president was wrong and that he had in fact asked Mr. McGahn in June to call the deputy attorney general, Rod J. Rosenstein, to tell him that the special counsel had a series of conflicts that disqualified him for overseeing the investigation and that he had to be dismissed. The president told Mr. McGahn that he did not remember the discussion that way. Mr. Trump moved on, pointing out that Mr. McGahn had never told him that he was going to resign over the order to fire the special counsel. Mr. McGahn acknowledged that that was true but said that he had told senior White House officials at the time that he was going to quit.

The second instance involves former chief of staff Reince Priebus, who left the White House in July 2017 but has maintained contact with Trump and occasionally visits the White House. During one visit, in December, Trump met with Priebus in the West Wing.

Mr. Trump asked [-] Priebus, how his interview had gone with the special counsel’s investigators and whether they had been “nice,” according to two people familiar with the discussion… Mr. Priebus replied that the investigators were courteous and professional. He shared no specifics and did not say what he had told investigators, and the conversation moved on after a few minutes, those briefed on it said. Mr. Kelly was present for that conversation as well, and it was not clear whether he tried to stop the discussion.

To get a sense of how McGahn and Preibus and the others present for these conversations interpreted the interactions, the Times reports, “[the] witnesses and lawyers who learned about the conversations viewed them as potentially a problem and shared them with Mr. Mueller.”
https://slate.com/news-and-politics/201 ... imony.html
I am MORE PROUD of my vote for Mrs. Clinton with each and EVERY passing day.

Who whoulda thought?
0 x

User avatar
barrysoetoro
Somebody please hep me I been hypmotized
Posts: 31308
Joined: Fri Sep 05, 2014 7:55 pm

Re: Another day, another five scandals. The Orange Klown is an embarrassment to our country.

Post by barrysoetoro » Thu Mar 08, 2018 2:46 pm

brookboy123 wrote:
Thu Mar 08, 2018 2:32 pm
donttreadonme wrote:
Thu Mar 08, 2018 6:25 am
Trump Reportedly Asked About and Pushed Back Against Key Witnesses’ Russia Investigation Testimony


In the age of Donald Trump, conservative jurists, legal theorists, and political commentators have adopted a very, very narrow definition of what constitutes “obstruction of justice.” That’s because the current Republican president of the United States’ conduct—irrespective of what did or did not happen during the campaign—clearly violates the spirt of the “obstruction” law, if not (yet) the letter. The president can fire who he wants; he can bully and cajole, order and insinuate, their thinking goes, but, throughout, the one thing these definitional constrictionists have agreed upon as legally problematic—and often point to as a counterexample of what would constitute obstruction of justice—is if the president ordered a witness to lie to investigators. A New York Times report Wednesday doesn’t go that far, but it does reveal that President Trump discussed with witnesses after the fact their testimony to investigators, which has the president again tiptoeing along a very slippery legal slope.

It’s hard to overstate the recklessness of Trump engaging with high-profile witnesses—the current White House counsel and former chief of staff—about their testimony, no matter how innocuous. It indicates an awareness on the part of the president of the potential impropriety of past actions and gives the appearance of possible coordination of testimony to square any discrepancies. Even if you assume, or believe, Trump has done nothing wrong at any point, the discussions with witnesses would require extra scrutiny by Mueller’s investigative team as the kernel of potential wrongdoing.

The first instance of Trump discussing the testimony of a key witness was with White House Counsel Don McGahn in January after a New York Times article reported that the White House lawyer told investigators Trump has ordered him to fire Special Counsel Robert Mueller, but McGahn refused and threatened to resign if Mueller was sacked.

Mr. McGahn did not publicly deny the article, and the president later confronted him in the Oval Office in front of the White House chief of staff, John F. Kelly, according to the people. The president said he had never ordered Mr. McGahn to fire the special counsel. Mr. McGahn replied that the president was wrong and that he had in fact asked Mr. McGahn in June to call the deputy attorney general, Rod J. Rosenstein, to tell him that the special counsel had a series of conflicts that disqualified him for overseeing the investigation and that he had to be dismissed. The president told Mr. McGahn that he did not remember the discussion that way. Mr. Trump moved on, pointing out that Mr. McGahn had never told him that he was going to resign over the order to fire the special counsel. Mr. McGahn acknowledged that that was true but said that he had told senior White House officials at the time that he was going to quit.

The second instance involves former chief of staff Reince Priebus, who left the White House in July 2017 but has maintained contact with Trump and occasionally visits the White House. During one visit, in December, Trump met with Priebus in the West Wing.

Mr. Trump asked [-] Priebus, how his interview had gone with the special counsel’s investigators and whether they had been “nice,” according to two people familiar with the discussion… Mr. Priebus replied that the investigators were courteous and professional. He shared no specifics and did not say what he had told investigators, and the conversation moved on after a few minutes, those briefed on it said. Mr. Kelly was present for that conversation as well, and it was not clear whether he tried to stop the discussion.

To get a sense of how McGahn and Preibus and the others present for these conversations interpreted the interactions, the Times reports, “[the] witnesses and lawyers who learned about the conversations viewed them as potentially a problem and shared them with Mr. Mueller.”
https://slate.com/news-and-politics/201 ... imony.html
I am MORE PROUD of my vote for Mrs. Clinton with each and EVERY passing day.

Who whoulda thought?
That's because you're stupid.

She voted for the war you were against, xxxx.

Why is Trump an embarrassment? Do you even know.
0 x
☪ "May God d*mn the Saudis and America.", brookboy123 (nobrain & dope are fine with this )

User avatar
Scooter
Heir Apparent
Posts: 3623
Joined: Tue Mar 06, 2018 1:56 pm

Re: Another day, another five scandals. The Orange Klown is an embarrassment to our country.

Post by Scooter » Thu Mar 08, 2018 2:49 pm

nolaxride wrote:
Thu Mar 08, 2018 2:18 pm
barrysoetoro wrote:
Thu Mar 08, 2018 9:58 am
nolaxride wrote:
Thu Mar 08, 2018 8:40 am
Scooter wrote:
Thu Mar 08, 2018 8:37 am
Image
I guess you missed the POINT. This is about the president, not Clinton.

And let's not forget that Clinton was found not guilty.
this is the same moron who said that it's the GOP fault That Bill Clinton didn't stop 9/11. All he had to do is Monitor terrorists and that would have stopped them.
Your jeremiad never changes. The GOP congress refused to allow him to monitor terrorists. The GOP was worried about privacy.
There goes asshole again, blaming the GOP Congress for Clinton's failures. Yet for 8 years blamed everything on Bush. Like you asshole ssaid about Bush, the BUCK STOPS WITH HIM, his watch, HIS FAULT, so go #@%$ yourself Ahmed
0 x
Image
"When we correct this mistake you forced on us, we need to take away your right to vote" - EConTheNaziPigMoron

User avatar
Scooter
Heir Apparent
Posts: 3623
Joined: Tue Mar 06, 2018 1:56 pm

Re: Another day, another five scandals. The Orange Klown is an embarrassment to our country.

Post by Scooter » Thu Mar 08, 2018 2:51 pm

nolaxride wrote:
Thu Mar 08, 2018 2:26 pm
Scooter wrote:
Thu Mar 08, 2018 10:13 am
nolaxride wrote:
Thu Mar 08, 2018 8:51 am
Scooter wrote:
Thu Mar 08, 2018 8:43 am
Eat scheiße loser, this is about you defending lying corrupt criminals like Bill Clinton. I guess in your tiny vapid little mind, acquitted means there was no crime committed. #@%$@#$ idiot. Not guilty does not mean innocent.
I see you're still trying to shred the Constitution. He was found not guilty. Three different investigations found he committed no crime in Whitewater. The witch hunt was unsuccessful. Hundreds of millions of dollars and nothing.
Look at the shaved ape inbreeder with his stupid "still trying to shred the Constitution" line again. I'll respond with whatever the fkcuck I want to on here, and if you don't like it, take a #@%$@#$ hike and stop responding to me. If you don't like your blatant hypocrisy thrown in your face, to gssamned bad, boy.
:finger: :finger: :finger: :finger: :finger:
My... my... look who's so upset... did I hit a nerve? Are you upset that your 'Clinton did it first' deflection isn't working? Maybe you're upset because you don't have a cogent reply to the simple observation that conservatives have abandoned their principles?
Hit a nerve? Hell no asshole, I LAUGH at your Liberal hypocrisy and defence of Democrat crooks and criminals. So eat $#@%.
0 x
Image
"When we correct this mistake you forced on us, we need to take away your right to vote" - EConTheNaziPigMoron

User avatar
nolaxride
Global Moderator
Posts: 17024
Joined: Tue Jul 01, 2014 8:09 pm

Re: Another day, another five scandals. The Orange Klown is an embarrassment to our country.

Post by nolaxride » Thu Mar 08, 2018 3:04 pm

Scooter wrote:
Thu Mar 08, 2018 2:51 pm
nolaxride wrote:
Thu Mar 08, 2018 2:26 pm
Scooter wrote:
Thu Mar 08, 2018 10:13 am
nolaxride wrote:
Thu Mar 08, 2018 8:51 am
Scooter wrote:
Thu Mar 08, 2018 8:43 am
Eat scheiße loser, this is about you defending lying corrupt criminals like Bill Clinton. I guess in your tiny vapid little mind, acquitted means there was no crime committed. #@%$@#$ idiot. Not guilty does not mean innocent.
I see you're still trying to shred the Constitution. He was found not guilty. Three different investigations found he committed no crime in Whitewater. The witch hunt was unsuccessful. Hundreds of millions of dollars and nothing.
Look at the shaved ape inbreeder with his stupid "still trying to shred the Constitution" line again. I'll respond with whatever the fkcuck I want to on here, and if you don't like it, take a #@%$@#$ hike and stop responding to me. If you don't like your blatant hypocrisy thrown in your face, to gssamned bad, boy.
:finger: :finger: :finger: :finger: :finger:
My... my... look who's so upset... did I hit a nerve? Are you upset that your 'Clinton did it first' deflection isn't working? Maybe you're upset because you don't have a cogent reply to the simple observation that conservatives have abandoned their principles?
Hit a nerve? Hell no asshole, I LAUGH at your Liberal hypocrisy and defence of Democrat crooks and criminals. So eat scheiße.
ROTFLMAO... sure thing, Bunky. That's why you were calling me names and threatening me.
0 x
-- Ignotum per inotius

User avatar
Scooter
Heir Apparent
Posts: 3623
Joined: Tue Mar 06, 2018 1:56 pm

Re: Another day, another five scandals. The Orange Klown is an embarrassment to our country.

Post by Scooter » Thu Mar 08, 2018 3:24 pm

nolaxride wrote:
Thu Mar 08, 2018 3:04 pm
Scooter wrote:
Thu Mar 08, 2018 2:51 pm
nolaxride wrote:
Thu Mar 08, 2018 2:26 pm
Scooter wrote:
Thu Mar 08, 2018 10:13 am
nolaxride wrote:
Thu Mar 08, 2018 8:51 am
Scooter wrote:
Thu Mar 08, 2018 8:43 am
Eat scheiße loser, this is about you defending lying corrupt criminals like Bill Clinton. I guess in your tiny vapid little mind, acquitted means there was no crime committed. #@%$@#$ idiot. Not guilty does not mean innocent.
I see you're still trying to shred the Constitution. He was found not guilty. Three different investigations found he committed no crime in Whitewater. The witch hunt was unsuccessful. Hundreds of millions of dollars and nothing.
Look at the shaved ape inbreeder with his stupid "still trying to shred the Constitution" line again. I'll respond with whatever the fkcuck I want to on here, and if you don't like it, take a #@%$@#$ hike and stop responding to me. If you don't like your blatant hypocrisy thrown in your face, to gssamned bad, boy.

My... my... look who's so upset... did I hit a nerve? Are you upset that your 'Clinton did it first' deflection isn't working? Maybe you're upset because you don't have a cogent reply to the simple observation that conservatives have abandoned their principles?
Hit a nerve? Hell no asshole, I LAUGH at your Liberal hypocrisy and defence of Democrat crooks and criminals. So eat scheiße.
ROTFLMAO... sure thing, Bunky. That's why you were calling me names and threatening me.
HAHAHAHAHA! Threatening you? :rolling: :rolling: :rolling: Man you're fucking DELUSIONAL!

Image
0 x
Image
"When we correct this mistake you forced on us, we need to take away your right to vote" - EConTheNaziPigMoron

donttreadonme
God-Like
Posts: 10227
Joined: Sun Nov 15, 2015 11:46 am

Re: Another day, another five scandals. The Orange Klown is an embarrassment to our country.

Post by donttreadonme » Thu Mar 08, 2018 3:27 pm

brookboy123 wrote:
Thu Mar 08, 2018 2:32 pm
donttreadonme wrote:
Thu Mar 08, 2018 6:25 am
Trump Reportedly Asked About and Pushed Back Against Key Witnesses’ Russia Investigation Testimony


In the age of Donald Trump, conservative jurists, legal theorists, and political commentators have adopted a very, very narrow definition of what constitutes “obstruction of justice.” That’s because the current Republican president of the United States’ conduct—irrespective of what did or did not happen during the campaign—clearly violates the spirt of the “obstruction” law, if not (yet) the letter. The president can fire who he wants; he can bully and cajole, order and insinuate, their thinking goes, but, throughout, the one thing these definitional constrictionists have agreed upon as legally problematic—and often point to as a counterexample of what would constitute obstruction of justice—is if the president ordered a witness to lie to investigators. A New York Times report Wednesday doesn’t go that far, but it does reveal that President Trump discussed with witnesses after the fact their testimony to investigators, which has the president again tiptoeing along a very slippery legal slope.

It’s hard to overstate the recklessness of Trump engaging with high-profile witnesses—the current White House counsel and former chief of staff—about their testimony, no matter how innocuous. It indicates an awareness on the part of the president of the potential impropriety of past actions and gives the appearance of possible coordination of testimony to square any discrepancies. Even if you assume, or believe, Trump has done nothing wrong at any point, the discussions with witnesses would require extra scrutiny by Mueller’s investigative team as the kernel of potential wrongdoing.

The first instance of Trump discussing the testimony of a key witness was with White House Counsel Don McGahn in January after a New York Times article reported that the White House lawyer told investigators Trump has ordered him to fire Special Counsel Robert Mueller, but McGahn refused and threatened to resign if Mueller was sacked.

Mr. McGahn did not publicly deny the article, and the president later confronted him in the Oval Office in front of the White House chief of staff, John F. Kelly, according to the people. The president said he had never ordered Mr. McGahn to fire the special counsel. Mr. McGahn replied that the president was wrong and that he had in fact asked Mr. McGahn in June to call the deputy attorney general, Rod J. Rosenstein, to tell him that the special counsel had a series of conflicts that disqualified him for overseeing the investigation and that he had to be dismissed. The president told Mr. McGahn that he did not remember the discussion that way. Mr. Trump moved on, pointing out that Mr. McGahn had never told him that he was going to resign over the order to fire the special counsel. Mr. McGahn acknowledged that that was true but said that he had told senior White House officials at the time that he was going to quit.

The second instance involves former chief of staff Reince Priebus, who left the White House in July 2017 but has maintained contact with Trump and occasionally visits the White House. During one visit, in December, Trump met with Priebus in the West Wing.

Mr. Trump asked [-] Priebus, how his interview had gone with the special counsel’s investigators and whether they had been “nice,” according to two people familiar with the discussion… Mr. Priebus replied that the investigators were courteous and professional. He shared no specifics and did not say what he had told investigators, and the conversation moved on after a few minutes, those briefed on it said. Mr. Kelly was present for that conversation as well, and it was not clear whether he tried to stop the discussion.

To get a sense of how McGahn and Preibus and the others present for these conversations interpreted the interactions, the Times reports, “[the] witnesses and lawyers who learned about the conversations viewed them as potentially a problem and shared them with Mr. Mueller.”
https://slate.com/news-and-politics/201 ... imony.html
I am MORE PROUD of my vote for Mrs. Clinton with each and EVERY passing day.

Who whoulda thought?
Can you imagine how the Trumpanzees would have reacted if Obama paid $130,00.00, during a campaign, to a porn star to keep her silent about an affair? :singe2:
1 x
‘And if all others accepted the lie which the Party imposed—if all records told the same tale—then the lie passed into history and became truth.’

User avatar
brookboy123
Imperial Majesty
Posts: 6942
Joined: Thu Sep 04, 2014 8:48 pm

Re: Another day, another five scandals. The Orange Klown is an embarrassment to our country.

Post by brookboy123 » Thu Mar 08, 2018 3:30 pm

donttreadonme wrote:
Thu Mar 08, 2018 3:27 pm
brookboy123 wrote:
Thu Mar 08, 2018 2:32 pm
donttreadonme wrote:
Thu Mar 08, 2018 6:25 am
Trump Reportedly Asked About and Pushed Back Against Key Witnesses’ Russia Investigation Testimony


In the age of Donald Trump, conservative jurists, legal theorists, and political commentators have adopted a very, very narrow definition of what constitutes “obstruction of justice.” That’s because the current Republican president of the United States’ conduct—irrespective of what did or did not happen during the campaign—clearly violates the spirt of the “obstruction” law, if not (yet) the letter. The president can fire who he wants; he can bully and cajole, order and insinuate, their thinking goes, but, throughout, the one thing these definitional constrictionists have agreed upon as legally problematic—and often point to as a counterexample of what would constitute obstruction of justice—is if the president ordered a witness to lie to investigators. A New York Times report Wednesday doesn’t go that far, but it does reveal that President Trump discussed with witnesses after the fact their testimony to investigators, which has the president again tiptoeing along a very slippery legal slope.

It’s hard to overstate the recklessness of Trump engaging with high-profile witnesses—the current White House counsel and former chief of staff—about their testimony, no matter how innocuous. It indicates an awareness on the part of the president of the potential impropriety of past actions and gives the appearance of possible coordination of testimony to square any discrepancies. Even if you assume, or believe, Trump has done nothing wrong at any point, the discussions with witnesses would require extra scrutiny by Mueller’s investigative team as the kernel of potential wrongdoing.

The first instance of Trump discussing the testimony of a key witness was with White House Counsel Don McGahn in January after a New York Times article reported that the White House lawyer told investigators Trump has ordered him to fire Special Counsel Robert Mueller, but McGahn refused and threatened to resign if Mueller was sacked.

Mr. McGahn did not publicly deny the article, and the president later confronted him in the Oval Office in front of the White House chief of staff, John F. Kelly, according to the people. The president said he had never ordered Mr. McGahn to fire the special counsel. Mr. McGahn replied that the president was wrong and that he had in fact asked Mr. McGahn in June to call the deputy attorney general, Rod J. Rosenstein, to tell him that the special counsel had a series of conflicts that disqualified him for overseeing the investigation and that he had to be dismissed. The president told Mr. McGahn that he did not remember the discussion that way. Mr. Trump moved on, pointing out that Mr. McGahn had never told him that he was going to resign over the order to fire the special counsel. Mr. McGahn acknowledged that that was true but said that he had told senior White House officials at the time that he was going to quit.

The second instance involves former chief of staff Reince Priebus, who left the White House in July 2017 but has maintained contact with Trump and occasionally visits the White House. During one visit, in December, Trump met with Priebus in the West Wing.

Mr. Trump asked [-] Priebus, how his interview had gone with the special counsel’s investigators and whether they had been “nice,” according to two people familiar with the discussion… Mr. Priebus replied that the investigators were courteous and professional. He shared no specifics and did not say what he had told investigators, and the conversation moved on after a few minutes, those briefed on it said. Mr. Kelly was present for that conversation as well, and it was not clear whether he tried to stop the discussion.

To get a sense of how McGahn and Preibus and the others present for these conversations interpreted the interactions, the Times reports, “[the] witnesses and lawyers who learned about the conversations viewed them as potentially a problem and shared them with Mr. Mueller.”
https://slate.com/news-and-politics/201 ... imony.html
I am MORE PROUD of my vote for Mrs. Clinton with each and EVERY passing day.

Who whoulda thought?
Can you imagine how the Trumpanzees would have reacted if Obama paid $130,00.00, during a campaign, to a porn star to keep her silent about an affair? :singe2:
I pay little attention to the salacious garbage that flows from our whore-"leaders."

I didn't even know the money was paid during the campaign!.....lol.

Mr Mueller is a busy man.
1 x

User avatar
Scooter
Heir Apparent
Posts: 3623
Joined: Tue Mar 06, 2018 1:56 pm

Re: Another day, another five scandals. The Orange Klown is an embarrassment to our country.

Post by Scooter » Thu Mar 08, 2018 3:38 pm

Nothing illegal was done, morons
0 x
Image
"When we correct this mistake you forced on us, we need to take away your right to vote" - EConTheNaziPigMoron

User avatar
nolaxride
Global Moderator
Posts: 17024
Joined: Tue Jul 01, 2014 8:09 pm

Re: Another day, another five scandals. The Orange Klown is an embarrassment to our country.

Post by nolaxride » Thu Mar 08, 2018 4:06 pm

Scooter wrote:
Thu Mar 08, 2018 3:38 pm
Nothing illegal was done, morons
Isn't adultery a crime?
0 x
-- Ignotum per inotius

Post Reply