Mueller Investigation pt 6

Status
Not open for further replies.
Segnosaur said:
Looks like there are some opinions that Trump's actions since the Mueller report was released could be considered 'new' crimes....

From: https://www.politico.com/story/2019/04/24/mueller-report-trump-evidence-1288798
Team Trump’s bellicose tweets and public statements in the last few days are potentially exposing Trump to fresh charges of witness intimidation, obstruction of justice and impeding a congressional investigation...Already, a fusillade of verbal assaults aimed at former White House counsel Don McGahn, a star witness in the Mueller report, have sparked questions about obstruction and witness intimidation as Democrats fight the Trump White House to get McGahn’s documents and testimony. “This is risky,” said William Jeffress, a prominent Washington defense attorney who represented President Richard Nixon after he left the White House. “I find it surprising because he’s taking these shots at witnesses who gave information to Mueller, and I think he’s got to be careful because there’s an explicit federal statute punishing retaliation against witnesses.”

So, to paraphrase:

Mueller: There is evidence Trump did illegal stuff
Trump: I was exonerated. Now hold my beer while I do more stupid stuff.

ETA: In theory Trump can be charged on these crimes after he leaves office. But, there is a 5 year statute of limitations on many of these crimes. The problem is, Trump KEEPS committing the same crime.
Click to expand...

For his entire life, Trump has has that really odd habit of continually getting himself into trouble and yet is always able to keep moving along because Trump always find new people who will trust him in spite of his well documented history of being so very untrustworthy.

As for me, I still fail to understand what it is that makes Trump so charming to so many. So perhaps this is one of those cases that Lincoln described when he said:

"You can fool some of the people all of the time."
 
Crossbow said:
Thanks much. This is just about what I was thinking as well.

After all, while I sure do despise Trump, I really do not want to see him dealing with dozens, hundreds, thousands, or even millions of legal challenges while he is in office because such actions could make the Executive branch nonfunctional. Also, I expect that any future President would have the exact same problems since it is nearly certain that some sort of legal challenge could be provided to any President.

Therefore, a better approach is to impeach Trump then throw him out of office, or not re-elect him. In either case, Trump would become a private citizen and as such he could be forced to deal with all of the illegal things that he has done while he was the President and/or before he became the President.
Click to expand...
You say that highlighted bit like it's a bad thing.
 
Zambo said:
And if that was the case I strongly suggest that both Democrats and Republicans would support the action.
Click to expand...

I see no reason to believe that. There have been many instances where some group or party conceals and puts up with corruption from within simply to preserve appearances. Take Republicans under Trump, for one example. Take the Catholic Church for another.

And you voted for him.
Click to expand...

I did?!!?? I don't seem to recall doing that. Do you have any evidence I did?
 
Captain_Swoop said:
Trump Retweeted

Rep. Jim Jordan
@Jim_Jordan
Peter Strzok told us that he would “love to answer each and every one of [our] questions" once the Mueller investigation concluded.
The investigation is over. Time to bring Strzok and the rest of the Comey Cabal back in to get those answers.

It’s time to figure out what the Comey Cabal did at the start of the fake “Russia collusion” investigation.
Comey, Andy McCabe, Jim Baker, Lisa Page and Peter Strzok need to be held accountable for launching this hoax.
Each of them were either fired or demoted and left the FBI.
Click to expand...
Jordan is reminiscing about those good ol' Benghazi days when the GOP controlled those committees.
 
Crossbow said:
As for me, I still fail to understand what it is that makes Trump so charming to so many.
Click to expand...

In some cases, it's an "enemy of my enemy" thing. For example, a lot of people dislike Hillary and a lot of Hollywood, and Trump disses Hillary and a lot of Hollywood.

Seriously, I've been in a conversation where the whole Jussie Smollett debacle is somehow connected to Hollywood support for Democrats, and Democrats pushed the investigation, so (I swear this was implied) the Mueller investigation is suspect because Smollett lied about being attacked.
 
Cabbage said:
L
I did?!!?? I don't seem to recall doing that. Do you have any evidence I did?
Click to expand...

Well you may deny it, but somebody (in fact many) did and it wasn't me. Maybe it was your family and friends. But in any event, he might not have won the popular vote but I caution you that Trump has the support that brought him into office. And moreso I again caution, even if you don't like my caution, that the whole start to inevitable finish of this administration is a quagmire of corruption and scandal supported by the majority of the senate and beyond. I say get him out by the vote and do not attempt a partisan attempt to "lock him up" on return to civilian life - I have already described the countries that follow this perpetual circus of electing and the prosecuting their leaders.
 
dasmiller said:
In some cases, it's an "enemy of my enemy" thing. For example, a lot of people dislike Hillary and a lot of Hollywood, and Trump disses Hillary and a lot of Hollywood.

Seriously, I've been in a conversation where the whole Jussie Smollett debacle is somehow connected to Hollywood support for Democrats, and Democrats pushed the investigation, so (I swear this was implied) the Mueller investigation is suspect because Smollett lied about being attacked.
Click to expand...

Indeed so.

I have often noticed that Trump lovers tend to be Clinton and/or Obama haters.

However, that business about questioning the Mueller work just because of that weird Smollett business is quite odd in so many ways.
 
Upchurch said:
Well, no. That burden of proof is whether or not he's guilty, not whether his actions, as described in the report, are legal.
Click to expand...
In addition, Barr's interpretation of the Mueller report is not a legal finding.

And as we can see now that some of the report has been released, Barr's interpretation was dishonest.
 
Zambo said:
Well you may deny it, but somebody (in fact many) did and it wasn't me. Maybe it was your family and friends. But in any event, he might not have won the popular vote but I caution you that Trump has the support that brought him into office. And moreso I again caution, even if you don't like my caution, that the whole start to inevitable finish of this administration is a quagmire of corruption and scandal supported by the majority of the senate and beyond. I say get him out by the vote and do not attempt a partisan attempt to "lock him up" on return to civilian life - I have already described the countries that follow this perpetual circus of electing and the prosecuting their leaders.
Click to expand...

I have just as much evidence that it was, in fact, you, as you have that it was me.
 
Crossbow said:
For his entire life, Trump has has that really odd habit of continually getting himself into trouble and yet is always able to keep moving along because Trump always find new people who will trust him in spite of his well documented history of being so very untrustworthy.
Click to expand...

I don't think he's finding new people. You may want to consider other mechanisms. I can probably suggest one or two, if you get stumped.
 
Cabbage said:
I have just as much evidence that it was, in fact, you, as you have that it was me.
Click to expand...

I absolutely don't care, but regardless of whether I care or not or who you voted for, or claim you did not vote for, I see no good ending apart from a Democratic win at the election in 2020.

I see Biden entered the fray today, let's hope he falls at the first hurdle.
 
Zambo said:
What i am "trying to say" is that waiting until Trump (or any other head of state or head of government) is a private citizen and then charging him with crimes when the other party in a 2 party state is in control stinks.

My concluding sentence, the 3rd one, merely pointed out that although not the majority many voters voted for him. I suggest they knew well what they voted for, indeed they wanted exactly what they have received.
Click to expand...

Sure, waiting 'til the Prez is outta office before charging him "stinks", but that's the cost of a policy of not being able to indict in an expeditious manner. It's even worse if the clock is running all the while on the statute of limitations. Then the bastage could escape justice. (So you Trumpistas can count that as a win.)

As to the electorate knowing what a piece of work they voted into office. Surely you're not suggesting that just because a grifter is acceptable to even a majority of the populace that we should accept his gritting ways and ignore the law?
 
Zambo said:
What i am "trying to say" is that waiting until Trump (or any other head of state or head of government) is a private citizen and then charging him with crimes when the other party in a 2 party state is in control stinks.
Click to expand...

Why?

The president cannot be tried while in office. Are you suggesting that he ought to never be tried for crimes committed prior to or in office? Would this be better than trying him once he's out of office?

If he committed crimes (or if there is convincing evidence that he did so, whether he did or not), he should be tried after leaving office, no matter which party controls the White House.

My concluding sentence, the 3rd one, merely pointed out that although not the majority many voters voted for him. I suggest they knew well what they voted for, indeed they wanted exactly what they have received.
Click to expand...

The majority of those who voted for him do not believe he's done anything illegal, I'd wager. But we don't leave matters of criminal justice in the hands of public opinion. Thus, the fact that he has supporters is utterly irrelevant to whether he ought eventually be tried as well as whether he should be impeached, as far as matters of justice are concerned.

As far as political advantage is concerned, impeachment is pretty darned difficult to pull off and still hold onto power if the president isn't removed, but that's a whole other issue. If we're discussing what would happen in an ideal world, one where such weighty matters are decided on the basis of justice, we have sufficient evidence to warrant impeachment in my view.
 
Zambo said:
Yes investigate, charge, impeach whatever you want. But all I am saying is that if that seems somehow difficult or politically inexpedient then is it wise to wait until he is out of office and then "lock him up"
Click to expand...

Suppose a president committed crimes while in office, though these crimes were not discovered until after he left. Did he just get a "Get out of jail free" card?

I do not want prosecutions of political enemies (nor refusal of prosecutions of political friends) to be based on partisanship. But I'll accept the possibility of that before I'd accept that a president cannot be prosecuted for any crimes that happened prior to or during his administration after he leaves office.
 
Zambo said:
And if that was the case I strongly suggest that both Democrats and Republicans would support the action. They don't. And you voted for him.
Click to expand...

If that was the case and both Democrats and Republicans recognized that was the case then they'd both support the action. Let's suppose that this is true.

Since they don't, the antecedent must be false. And it is false. Most Republicans do not accept that Trump is corrupt. This doesn't mean that Trump isn't corrupt. It doesn't even mean that there is little evidence of his corruption.

Of course, it's not even clear that the conditional statement is true. Political advantage is a powerful motive and it may be that some recognize Trump is corrupt, but think things are better for them to deny it. Others may fail to recognize corruption because few people are capable of unbiased assessment of their favored leaders. And, just to be clear, I'll admit there's a possibility that he isn't corrupt and that the prevailing view among Democrats are due to the same conditions.
 
Zambo said:
Well you may deny it, but somebody (in fact many) did and it wasn't me. Maybe it was your family and friends. But in any event, he might not have won the popular vote but I caution you that Trump has the support that brought him into office. And moreso I again caution, even if you don't like my caution, that the whole start to inevitable finish of this administration is a quagmire of corruption and scandal supported by the majority of the senate and beyond. I say get him out by the vote and do not attempt a partisan attempt to "lock him up" on return to civilian life - I have already described the countries that follow this perpetual circus of electing and the prosecuting their leaders.
Click to expand...

That could be out of the hands of the Democrats or any partisan considerations. Trump is in big legal jeopardy in the State of New York for tax and insurance fraud. The NY AG is gunning for Trump's hide. Feds have no jurisdiction over the individual states.
 
smartcooky said:
That could be out of the hands of the Democrats or any partisan considerations. Trump is in big legal jeopardy in the State of New York for tax and insurance fraud. The NY AG is gunning for Trump's hide. Feds have no jurisdiction over the individual states.
Click to expand...

I also don't believe there is anything stopping the State of New York from sending to the House Oversight Committee the newly received financial information on Donald Trump that they received from Deutsche Bank.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.

Back
Top Bottom