TrumpPutingate III: the beginning of the end

#2,876
#2,876
BowlBrother85 said:
You didn't answer the question. Based on who has already been interviewed, it's easy to see who the end game is... Split hairs all you want, Mueller isn't hunting rabbits.
Click to expand...

He’s looking into the entire campaign, along with anything outside that can go anywhere to anyone or anything that leads to Russia. Even the opposition.
 
  • Like
Reactions: 1 person
#2,882
#2,882
luthervol said:
Now it's your turn.
Click to expand...

I3USsSN.gif
 
  • Like
Reactions: 1 person
#2,883
#2,883
All you commies and kooks unite for just this night.

We finished the sweep of Kentucky, winning the game in the last minute to get the win at Rupp.
 
  • Like
Reactions: 2 people
#2,884
#2,884
luthervol said:
Of course they harmed him. Look no further than all of the propagandized Fox based opinions on this board.

Look no further than Trump's election. Many have said Trump is the public's response to 8 years of Obama. Those Trump voters were all effected by the right wing media's non-stop efforts to portray Obama in the worst possible light (same with Clinton). The MSM has never been remotely as slanted and biased as the right wing media.
Click to expand...

:lolabove: you need to take a chill pill & mellow out some.
 
#2,888
#2,888
Mick said:
Natalia Veselnitskaya, the Russian attorney with close ties to the Kremlin who met with Trump, Jr, Paul Manafort and Jared Kushner at Trump Tower, told Bloomberg News that she was offered a quid pro quo — dirt on Hillary Clinton for the lifting of sanctions on Russia.
Veselnitskaya: Trump, Jr. Offered Quid Pro Quo on Sanctions

A Russian lawyer who met with President Donald Trump’s oldest son last year says he indicated that a law targeting Russia could be re-examined if his father won the election and asked her for written evidence that illegal proceeds went to Hillary Clinton’s campaign.

The lawyer, Natalia Veselnitskaya, said in a two-and-a-half-hour interview in Moscow that she would tell these and other things to the Senate Judiciary Committee on condition that her answers be made public, something it hasn’t agreed to. She has received scores of questions from the committee, which is investigating possible collusion between Russia and the Trump campaign. Veselnitskaya said she’s also ready -- if asked -- to testify to Special Counsel Robert Mueller.
Click to expand...

You got him now. Just a matter of time before she testifies and then it will be all over.
 
#2,889
#2,889
Grassley has told the Judiciary panel that the transcripts he plans to release include interviews with those who attended the Trump Tower meeting with Russian lawyer Natalia Veselnitskaya. That will include the transcript of Trump Jr.’s interview, several other attendees, and a written response from Veselnitskaya.

Several Democrats, however, say there’s no substitute for the key eyewitnesses appearing in public.

“For me, I’m going to push back with everything I have, if somebody tries to say this is over without Jared Kushner and Donald Trump Jr. coming to the committee to answer questions,” said Democrat Ron Wyden of Oregon, an Intelligence Committee member.
 
#2,890
#2,890
Another option for Trump, Re: Mueller. This would be crazy, but it seems apropos for Trump.

"There's one more option: Trump could flat-out refuse to talk to Mueller in any way and refuse a grand jury subpoena.

If that happened, the federal courts would surely be called upon to decide whether the president can be compelled to testify in a criminal matter like this.

Federal courts have a long history of resolving contentious disputes between the branches of the federal government, which would presumably include this kind of largely intrabranch dispute. The Supreme Court in United States v. Nixon long ago recognized that the constitutional need for relevant evidence in criminal cases can overpower the president's claim of executive privilege. A federal court would likely order Trump to appear.

What if he ignores a federal court order?

There's historical precedent: Presidents Andrew Jackson and Abraham Lincoln arguably defied or ignored federal court orders.

And there really isn't a lot the federal judiciary could do to physically force the president to comply. What it could do is find him in contempt. Trump could try to ignore that, too.

Whether the president could even be held in criminal contempt is not as important as the fact that criminal contempt is undoubtedly a high (official) crime or misdemeanor — itself an impeachable offense."
 
  • Like
Reactions: 1 person
#2,891
#2,891
OuterBanksVol said:
Another option for Trump, Re: Mueller. This would be crazy, but it seems apropos for Trump.

"There's one more option: Trump could flat-out refuse to talk to Mueller in any way and refuse a grand jury subpoena.

If that happened, the federal courts would surely be called upon to decide whether the president can be compelled to testify in a criminal matter like this.

Federal courts have a long history of resolving contentious disputes between the branches of the federal government, which would presumably include this kind of largely intrabranch dispute. The Supreme Court in United States v. Nixon long ago recognized that the constitutional need for relevant evidence in criminal cases can overpower the president's claim of executive privilege. A federal court would likely order Trump to appear.

What if he ignores a federal court order?

There's historical precedent: Presidents Andrew Jackson and Abraham Lincoln arguably defied or ignored federal court orders.

And there really isn't a lot the federal judiciary could do to physically force the president to comply. What it could do is find him in contempt. Trump could try to ignore that, too.

Whether the president could even be held in criminal contempt is not as important as the fact that criminal contempt is undoubtedly a high (official) crime or misdemeanor — itself an impeachable offense."
Click to expand...

Muller needs to **** or get off the pot, issue Trump a subpoena if he’s got the goods.
 
  • Like
Reactions: 5 people
#2,893
#2,893
OuterBanksVol said:
Another option for Trump, Re: Mueller. This would be crazy, but it seems apropos for Trump.

"There's one more option: Trump could flat-out refuse to talk to Mueller in any way and refuse a grand jury subpoena.

If that happened, the federal courts would surely be called upon to decide whether the president can be compelled to testify in a criminal matter like this.

Federal courts have a long history of resolving contentious disputes between the branches of the federal government, which would presumably include this kind of largely intrabranch dispute. The Supreme Court in United States v. Nixon long ago recognized that the constitutional need for relevant evidence in criminal cases can overpower the president's claim of executive privilege. A federal court would likely order Trump to appear.

What if he ignores a federal court order?

There's historical precedent: Presidents Andrew Jackson and Abraham Lincoln arguably defied or ignored federal court orders.

And there really isn't a lot the federal judiciary could do to physically force the president to comply. What it could do is find him in contempt. Trump could try to ignore that, too.

Whether the president could even be held in criminal contempt is not as important as the fact that criminal contempt is undoubtedly a high (official) crime or misdemeanor — itself an impeachable offense."
Click to expand...

That too would still require the House to choose Country over Party. The only way to even get that ball rolling is for Mueller to make a public statement recommending charges. Right now Trump is stonewalling Mueller and he will also stonewall the Grand Jury. He is buying time through legal means. Time which Mueller is more than willing to allow so he can continue his investigation into other areas. Keep in mind that the whole conspiracy may not even lead to the Dotard, just his family and Trump is protecting them. The first step is to take off the head and remove the pardon umbrella for his family and associates.
 
  • Like
Reactions: 1 person
#2,894
#2,894
Mick said:
Natalia Veselnitskaya, the Russian attorney with close ties to the Kremlin who met with Trump, Jr, Paul Manafort and Jared Kushner at Trump Tower, told Bloomberg News that she was offered a quid pro quo — dirt on Hillary Clinton for the lifting of sanctions on Russia.
Veselnitskaya: Trump, Jr. Offered Quid Pro Quo on Sanctions

A Russian lawyer who met with President Donald Trump’s oldest son last year says he indicated that a law targeting Russia could be re-examined if his father won the election and asked her for written evidence that illegal proceeds went to Hillary Clinton’s campaign.

The lawyer, Natalia Veselnitskaya, said in a two-and-a-half-hour interview in Moscow that she would tell these and other things to the Senate Judiciary Committee on condition that her answers be made public, something it hasn’t agreed to. She has received scores of questions from the committee, which is investigating possible collusion between Russia and the Trump campaign. Veselnitskaya said she’s also ready -- if asked -- to testify to Special Counsel Robert Mueller.
Click to expand...

#FullOfSchiff colluded with Russian pranksters on the phone to get dirt for 8 minutes...LOL, what a hypocrite,as usual.

Adam Schiff spoofed with Russian claim of nude Trump pic | Daily Mail Online


DVZvkWBVoAEoo4W.jpg
 
Last edited:
  • Like
Reactions: 4 people
#2,896
#2,896
I find him to be very credible. This was almost 2 months ago.


[youtube]https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=YjvK1Sz2Waw[/youtube]
 
#2,899
#2,899
Mick said:
Grassley has told the Judiciary panel that the transcripts he plans to release include interviews with those who attended the Trump Tower meeting with Russian lawyer Natalia Veselnitskaya. That will include the transcript of Trump Jr.’s interview, several other attendees, and a written response from Veselnitskaya.

Several Democrats, however, say there’s no substitute for the key eyewitnesses appearing in public.

“For me, I’m going to push back with everything I have, if somebody tries to say this is over without Jared Kushner and Donald Trump Jr. coming to the committee to answer questions,” said Democrat Ron Wyden of Oregon, an Intelligence Committee member.
Click to expand...

Shocking, Wyden's 'going to push back'...the sound of that guys voice makes me curl up in a defensive position...he's always on attack in front of the camera.
 
#2,900
#2,900
Mick said:
That too would still require the House to choose Country over Party. The only way to even get that ball rolling is for Mueller to make a public statement recommending charges. Right now Trump is stonewalling Mueller and he will also stonewall the Grand Jury. He is buying time through legal means. Time which Mueller is more than willing to allow so he can continue his investigation into other areas. Keep in mind that the whole conspiracy may not even lead to the Dotard, just his family and Trump is protecting them. The first step is to take off the head and remove the pardon umbrella for his family and associates.
Click to expand...

Muller hasn't even formally requested an interview with Trump. All we have seen are rumors that Muller wants to talk to him. If Muller wants to interrogate Trump, go to a judge and get a subpoena! Let the courts decide if he has the authority to interrogate POTUS.
 
  • Like
Reactions: 2 people
New posts
You must log in or register to reply here.

VN Store



Back
Top