• This is a political forum that is non-biased/non-partisan and treats every person's position on topics equally. This debate forum is not aligned to any political party. In today's politics, many ideas are split between and even within all the political parties. Often we find ourselves agreeing on one platform but some topics break our mold. We are here to discuss them in a civil political debate. If this is your first visit to our political forums, be sure to check out the RULES. Registering for debate politics is necessary before posting. Register today to participate - it's free!

House announces new investigation into Trump. Did he lie to the special counsel?

The AntiDonald

Fight The Fascism
Supporting Member
DP Veteran
Joined
Oct 12, 2019
Messages
31,692
Reaction score
36,947
Location
N. Virginia
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Slightly Liberal
It appears some really interesting information came from the Roger Stone trial. Since Trump lies about 98% of the time, I find it hard to believe he did not lie to Mueller.

His written answers were submitted under oath. Hence, if they can prove he lied, it looks like he adds another felony to his resume.

BILL CLINTON WAS IMPEACHED FOR THIS ONE INFRACTION.
 

Not just perjury. Also, obstruction of justice.

Other counts related to supposed interference in the Jones case, and an 'abuse of power' one failed.
 
Mr Person said:
Not just perjury. Also, obstruction of justice.

Other counts related to supposed interference in the Jones case, and an 'abuse of power' one failed.
Click to expand...

You can only go a little bit at a time with the Trumpster divers. They don't absorb truth very well.
 
I'd love to see lindsey Graham and Mitch McConnell sleaze their way out of this one, if he actually lied to Mueller.
 
Mr Person said:
Not just perjury. Also, obstruction of justice.

Other counts related to supposed interference in the Jones case, and an 'abuse of power' one failed.
Click to expand...
I believe the perjury in Jones case failed, while the testimony to Starr was where the case for perjury was clear.

It goes to show that sitting down with Starr was the dumbest thing Clinton ever did.
 
Is there an article related to this claim or are we supposed to just speculate about what this new investigation might be about?
 
I don't see this passing in an article.

The only evidence for this is Gates and he's a convicted liar himself. Further, the fact that Mueller never raised concerns about the conflict between their testimony, makes it difficult for Democrats to second guess his decision to not suggest that Trump might have lied in his affidavit.
 

So...what's this "really interesting information"?
 
Lutherf said:
Is there an article related to this claim or are we supposed to just speculate about what this new investigation might be about?
Click to expand...

Read the transcript of the Roger Stone trial. Better yet, quit getting all your news from the right wing propaganda outlets. They are sure to hide this as long as they can.
 
The AntiDonald said:
Read the transcript of the Roger Stone trial. Better yet, quit getting all your news from the right wing propaganda outlets. They are sure to hide this as long as they can.
Click to expand...

Never mind. After looking at Media Matters and Daily Kos I found a link to a CNN article. I assume that this is what you're talking about -

House investigating whether Trump lied to Robert Mueller - CNNPolitics

 
Last edited:
Obscurity said:
I'd love to see lindsey Graham and Mitch McConnell sleaze their way out of this one, if he actually lied to Mueller.
Click to expand...

That would be interesting to watch.

McConnell and the big money guys have almost certainly been discussing the possibility of dumping Trump. I’m sure these discussions have been going on for at least a month.

The swamp is what will keep him in power, not the talk radio mob.

Steve Mnuchin’s banker buddies, the secretive billionaires like Robert Mercer, and, of course the Russians.

The latter doesn’t care if Trump falls or survives. But the spectacle and chaos has served their interests for three years now.
 

LOL. First, Bill Clinton was not removed from office. Second, have you already given up on the Ukrainian thing? That was fast.
 
Mr Person said:
Not just perjury. Also, obstruction of justice.

Other counts related to supposed interference in the Jones case, and an 'abuse of power' one failed.
Click to expand...

There is already precedent that a president can obstruct justice and not be removed from office.
 
Moderate Right said:
There is already precedent that a president can obstruct justice and not be removed from office.
Click to expand...

Did Trump obstruct an inquiry into whether he cheated on his wife in the oval office? No?

Then your "precedent" is completely irrelevant, but what else is new.
 
Lutherf said:
Is there an article related to this claim or are we supposed to just speculate about what this new investigation might be about?
Click to expand...

Oh give them a break. That's all they ever do is speculate. It's the only thing left in their sorry ass lives. Apparently they've already given up on this Ukraine thing. They haven't even formerly voted to impeach and now they're already redirecting to something else.
 
Mycroft said:
So...what's this "really interesting information"?
Click to expand...

As with everything else in this "investigation", it really doesn't matter what is being investigated, why it's being investigated or who is doing the investigating. What matters is that there is an investigation providing selective leaks of highly incriminating evidence provided by anonymous sources, third and fourth parties and highly respected analysts in the media.
 
Mr Person said:
Did Trump obstruct an inquiry into whether he cheated on his wife in the oval office? No?

Then your "precedent" is completely irrelevant, but what else is new.
Click to expand...

LOL. Obstruction is obstruction. But, I get your point. If a Democrat does it then it is fine but if a Republican does it then they should be impeached.
 

I really wish that both sides would stop treating the existence of an investigation as if it were evidence. You find it hard to believe. Sure. You're just stating your confirmation bias. It's not going to convince anyone. It's just contributing to group think on your side and polarization in general. While Trump was obstructing Mueller and the GOP controlled Congress, sure. But now the Democrats have Congress and they're investigating the hell out of Trump. Can't we wait to see what they can actually prove instead of jumping to the conclusion right away? It would be more intellectually honest and therefor might encourage some people on the other side to follow suit.
 
The AntiDonald said:
Read the transcript of the Roger Stone trial. Better yet, quit getting all your news from the right wing propaganda outlets. They are sure to hide this as long as they can.
Click to expand...

so its a secret....got it

let us know when it hits mainstream media
 
Digger said:
I really wish that both sides would stop treating the existence of an investigation as if it were evidence.
Click to expand...
I understand your point, but in this instance, the existence of an investigation is predicated upon a direct contradiction between Trump's written answers to Mueller and the testimony provided by Rick Gates in the criminal trial of Roger Stone.

In this case, Trump's attorneys framed his answer to Mueller with something to the effect of Trump "doesn't recall" the issue any question, which is what provides the room for spin.
gdgyva said:
so its a secret....got it

let us know when it hits mainstream media
Click to expand...
A link has been posted by no less than 3 people in this thread...
 
It's a new day and with it comes another damn investigation of Trump by the unhinged asinine left.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Menu
Log in
Register
Cookies are required to use this site. You must accept them to continue using the site. Learn more…