- Joined
- Nov 10, 2016
- Messages
- 14,607
- Reaction score
- 9,303
- Gender
- Undisclosed
- Political Leaning
- Undisclosed
There is discussion again on talking heads shows about several of the convicted and indicted Trump people being given pardons by Trump. Who do you think should be pardoned and why?
Also, what if Mueller let Manafort lie, and let Trump install Whitaker? Now you have Manafort and Whitaker feeding Trump bad info. Trump then based off those lies, answered Mueller's questions. It's the perfect trap for an egomaniac who never admits he is wrong.
Looks like Manafort will probably be getting a Trumpov pardon.....
Manafort Breached Plea Deal by Repeatedly Lying, Mueller Says
This is the most likely scenario in my opinion, and par for the course in investigations like these. Liars and double-dealers are far more dangerous to their co-conspirators than the investigator would have ever been if they think the investigator believes they are being honest.
There is discussion again on talking heads shows about several of the convicted and indicted Trump people being given pardons by Trump. Who do you think should be pardoned and why?
He should pardon every single person Mueller attacked who's crime is not related to 'collusion'. Ad every US citizen should support those pardons, unless you are really excited about law enforcement having carte blanche in attacking citizens without cause.
He should pardon every single person Mueller attacked who's crime is not related to 'collusion'. Ad every US citizen should support those pardons, unless you are really excited about law enforcement having carte blanche in attacking citizens without cause.
Should the FBI or police have carte blanche to investigate you and every one you know without cause and limit and act on anything they find?Just a question, should the FBI and Mueller look the other way when someone commits a crime, even if it did not start with the investigation of the Russian's interference with the 2016 election? Just asking so I know where you stand on crime.
i) any matters that arose or may arise directly from the investigation;I figured someone would be along to repeat the same old painfully stupid lie.
(b) The Special Counsel is authorized to conduct the investigation confirmed by then-FBI Director James B. Comey in testimony before the House Permanent Select Committee on Intelligence on March 20, 2017, including:
(i) any links and/or coordination between the Russian government and individuals associated with the campaign of President Donald Trump; and
(ii) any matters that arose or may arise directly from the investigation; and
(iii) any other matters within the scope of 28 C.F.R. s. 600.4(a).
https://www.nytimes.com/interactive...nt-Robert-Mueller-Special-Counsel-Russia.html
:lamo
i) any matters that arose or may arise directly from the investigation;
You probably shouldnt talk about 'painfully stupid'....
like...at all....
Nothing I can say to you or of you will contribute to the level of stupid you create for yourself.read more carefully: You pretended it's about "collusion". Your comment - it's still actually on this page of the thread, you realize? - is triply stupid.
(i) of the letter is far broader than "collusion";
(ii) of the letter says what anyone who has ever pretended to be concerned about government exercise of power should pretend to respect: that if the special counsel uncovers evidence of other crimes, he doesn't turn a blind eye because of (i), or because someone wanted to say something he thought was snappy on the internet.
(iii) of the letter makes the scope of the investigation even broader, since it refers to regulations you've never tried to read. And to summarize, the relevant regulations do things like expand the investigation to any cover-up (be it 'obstruction' or another crime), gives the special counsel the full authority of a US Attorney.....meaning they have to, must, and WILL investigate anything they fine.
I understand that think you're scoring an Internets Point, but you're just making more obvious how idiotically dishonest your whine is.
For once, I invite you to resist the urge to try to throw some blinkered word salad at me to make a show of *getting* me back. You're just wrong. Plain and simple. So stop.
read more carefully: You pretended it's about "collusion". Your comment - it's still actually on this page of the thread, you realize? - is triply stupid.
(i) of the letter is far broader than "collusion";
(ii) of the letter says what anyone who has ever pretended to be concerned about government exercise of power should pretend to respect: that if the special counsel uncovers evidence of other crimes, he doesn't turn a blind eye because of (i), or because someone wanted to say something he thought was snappy on the internet.
(iii) of the letter makes the scope of the investigation even broader, since it refers to regulations you've never tried to read. And to summarize, the relevant regulations do things like expand the investigation to any cover-up (be it 'obstruction' or another crime), gives the special counsel the full authority of a US Attorney.....meaning they have to, must, and WILL investigate anything they fine.
I understand that think you're scoring an Internets Point, but you're just making more obvious how idiotically dishonest your whine is.
For once, I invite you to resist the urge to try to throw some blinkered word salad at me to make a show of *getting* me back. You're just wrong. Plain and simple. So stop.
Nothing I can say to you or of you will contribute to the level of stupid you create for yourself.
Or perhaps you can explain how alleged tax records from 2006 are related to Russian Collusion.
GTFOH.
Should the FBI or police have carte blanche to investigate you and every one you know without cause and limit and act on anything they find?
Should the FBI or police have carte blanche to investigate you and every one you know without cause and limit and act on anything they find?
There is discussion again on talking heads shows about several of the convicted and indicted Trump people being given pardons by Trump. Who do you think should be pardoned and why?
The good things are:
A. Trump can't do a damned thing about state law prosecutions.
B. Manafort's plea agreement sacrificed literally all his wealth. No matter what happens, he's a broken, destitute man.
We use cookies and similar technologies for the following purposes:
Do you accept cookies and these technologies?
We use cookies and similar technologies for the following purposes:
Do you accept cookies and these technologies?