• 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!

Trump lashed out at Whitaker after explosive Cohen revelations

I see you are now couching your statements with supposition.
Good idea. ;)

I’ve always agreed that the meeting was completely inappropriate. Do you agree with that?
 
He is neither a witness to obstruction or a participant. He is the acting AG. He has a responsibility to supervise the work of his subordinates.

And his subordinates did what they did. What is being obstructed? Nothing.

Expect Whittaker to testify on his role in OoJ, either in Congressional hearings, a jury or both.
 
I know that everything that's happening right now is making you numb and it's difficult to place anything into a larger context, but before you read this, remember that just a little over two years ago, Attorney General Loretta Lynch met with the husband of somebody under FBI investigation on an airport tarmac. Maybe they talked about their grandkids, maybe they didn't. Whatever happened, the impression their meeting created was enough to cause such a scandal that a mere two weeks later, Lynch recused herself from overseeing any aspect of the investigation into Hillary Clinton's emails. Just to avoid the appearance of bias.

Now that you've got that locked into your mind, read about how the President is yelling at his Attorney General for not doing enough to obstruct justice. Whittaker has not been confirmed by the Senate and he has refused to recuse himself in spite of ethics advisors' counsel to do so.



https://www.cnn.com/2018/12/21/poli...-after-explosive-cohen-revelations/index.html
So an article by CNN saying Trump vented his anger about Whitaker but without direct Trump quotes.....right. :roll: Trump hasn't ever been reluctant to give statements to the press.
 
Expect Whittaker to testify on his role in OoJ, either in Congressional hearings, a jury or both.

Of course he will be summoned to testify before Congress.
 
So an article by CNN saying Trump vented his anger about Whitaker but without direct Trump quotes.....right. :roll: Trump hasn't ever been reluctant to give statements to the press.

I think the O/P CNN article is what our CIC would commonly refer to as "fake news" :)
 
Of course he will be summoned to testify before Congress.

At least. And then he will have to say under oath what trump told him. And of course since OoJ is one of Mueller’s investigations he’ll have something to say about that as well.
 
I see you are now couching your statements with supposition.
Good idea. ;)
It's amusing that he even uses the word IF
there is no doubt it was a scandal that led Lynch to advocate her job to Comey which led to Rosenstein recommending to Trump that Comey be fired. And now we have Mueller that interviewed for Comey's job the night before being appointed to investigate Comey's termination. Hollywood couldn't write it any better.
 
At least. And then he will have to say under oath what trump told him. And of course since OoJ is one of Mueller’s investigations he’ll have something to say about that as well.

Sure. And then it will be pointed out, under oath, that nothing happened-- the investigation continued. And then it will be pointed out-- under oath--- that its the AG's job to supervise the work of the local DA's.
And doing so isnt obstruction, but rather the job.
 
At least. And then he will have to say under oath what trump told him. And of course since OoJ is one of Mueller’s investigations he’ll have something to say about that as well.
Or he could take a page from Comey and Hillary and just say "I forgot."
 
Sure. And then it will be pointed out, under oath, that nothing happened-- the investigation continued. And then it will be pointed out-- under oath--- that its the AG's job to supervise the work of the local DA's.
And doing so isnt obstruction, but rather the job.

How do you know that nothing happened?
 
The problem here is TRump cultists adjustable ethics. The mere appearance of malfeasance on the part of Democrats and they will screem to high heaven that it must be investigated endlessly until a crime is found. Then when they elect a criminal like King Tangface, I'm convinced, regardless of stated position, a large percentage of them cheer inwardly at every morsel of corruption the GOP gets away with. One it "get's the libs" which is far more important than solving problems, and two, in their way of "thinking" it's just fair play, they feel (facts are completely unnecessary) that "Democrats got away with worse", so it's "fair play", and I think they kinda delight in each revealed crime that goes un-punished.:roll:

They'd deny it endlessly, but it's pretty much how they operate.
 
Or he could take a page from Comey and Hillary and just say "I forgot."

You are one of the worst too. You keep claiming Trump is innocent, though I think deep down you know he's dirty as ****, you just don't care cuz you delight in it, because your feelings tell you Obama and Clinton were worse. The stuff you post suggests that you are a confirmation bias junkie.
 
You are one of the worst too. You keep claiming Trump is innocent, though I think deep down you know he's dirty as ****, you just don't care cuz you delight in it, because your feelings tell you Obama and Clinton were worse. The stuff you post suggests that you are a confirmation bias junkie.
Thank you for telling me what I think. Do you make a living reading palms too.? I just don't think that Trump colluded
 
The problem here is TRump cultists adjustable ethics. The mere appearance of malfeasance on the part of Democrats and they will screem to high heaven that it must be investigated endlessly until a crime is found. Then when they elect a criminal like King Tangface, I'm convinced, regardless of stated position, a large percentage of them cheer inwardly at every morsel of corruption the GOP gets away with. One it "get's the libs" which is far more important than solving problems, and two, in their way of "thinking" it's just fair play, they feel (facts are completely unnecessary) that "Democrats got away with worse", so it's "fair play", and I think they kinda delight in each revealed crime that goes un-punished.:roll:

They'd deny it endlessly, but it's pretty much how they operate.

Its more along the lines of the double standard and the use of law enforcement to score political points.
So yes, when Ms Lynch decides not to prosecute Mrs. Clinton when the FBI finds that she mishandled classified information, nobody argues the AG is guilty of obstruction of justice. Instead the argument is that the DOJ would have prosecuted nobody with what the FBI had on Ms. Clinton. Maybe so. The point is that its understood the AG is EXPECTED to make those kinds of decions. Its not OOJ simply because a decion is made not to prosecute.
Meanwhile, Trump screams and yells about Mueller & Co.- and the investigation continues, prosecutions and plea deals occur. Nothing happens to stop it. Yet somehow that is considered possible OOJ. Or if Whittaker or somebody looks askance at the investigation or some portion thereof... OOJ. Its the job of Mueller's supervisor to review Mueller's work. Its not OOJ because that person does that.
Double-Standard.
 
Has the investigation stopped tic toc and all that?

You predicted that it will be shown that "nothing happened." How do you know that "nothing happened"?
 
I know that everything that's happening right now is making you numb and it's difficult to place anything into a larger context, but before you read this, remember that just a little over two years ago, Attorney General Loretta Lynch met with the husband of somebody under FBI investigation on an airport tarmac. Maybe they talked about their grandkids, maybe they didn't. Whatever happened, the impression their meeting created was enough to cause such a scandal that a mere two weeks later, Lynch recused herself from overseeing any aspect of the investigation into Hillary Clinton's emails. Just to avoid the appearance of bias.

Now that you've got that locked into your mind, read about how the President is yelling at his Attorney General for not doing enough to obstruct justice. Whittaker has not been confirmed by the Senate and he has refused to recuse himself in spite of ethics advisors' counsel to do so.



https://www.cnn.com/2018/12/21/poli...-after-explosive-cohen-revelations/index.html

Because of threads like this. Another thread about a non-crime. Didn't see that coming.
 
You predicted that it will be shown that "nothing happened." How do you know that "nothing happened"?

The objective is to show "something happened". If that can't be accomplished, then nothing happened.
 
You predicted that it will be shown that "nothing happened." How do you know that "nothing happened"?

The investigation continues... It didnt stop.
 
The investigation continues... It didnt stop.

Tell you what: let's make a friendly wager. I say that when Whittaker is inevitably brought to testify in front of Congress, it will be discovered that Whittaker was coerced or ordered by Trump to undermine the investigation in ways we don't yet know about. Interested?
 
Tell you what: let's make a friendly wager. I say that when Whittaker is inevitably brought to testify in front of Congress, it will be discovered that Whittaker was coerced or ordered by Trump to undermine the investigation in ways we don't yet know about. Interested?

The problem here will be definitions. The expectation seems to be that there can be zero controls and supervision on Mueller's work by anyone. It doesnt work that way. Mueller is not a free agent, nor a rogue agent. That natural and expected control and supervision has to be factored in. But it appears that such would be defined as proof of OOJ.
 
The problem here will be definitions. The expectation seems to be that there can be zero controls and supervision on Mueller's work by anyone. It doesnt work that way. Mueller is not a free agent, nor a rogue agent. That natural and expected control and supervision has to be factored in. But it appears that such would be defined as proof of OOJ.

Then you acknowledge that Trump could very well be attempting to obstruct an investigation into himself. Very well.
 
The difference is this: In one instance, the Lynch thing, we have a named reporter who took a freaking picture of the get together. In the other instance, we have a news article, based on spin, speculation, innuendo, hyperbole...and on unsupported rumors from unnamed sources.

Somehow, we've move from being a people who cherished facts to a rabid consumers of salacious rumor. Our most venerated news sources have devolved to tabloid journalism.

It's sad.

Oh sure. Of course. Everybody knows the best way to hold a nefarious clandestine meeting with someone is to do it in the middle of a major airport in broad daylight with a bunch of staff, security and media in tow. And don’t forget to make it a point to go around and personally greet the crew just to make sure that everybody knows you were there. You conservative ‘super sleuths’ are a riot.
 
Oh sure. Of course. Everybody knows the best way to hold a nefarious clandestine meeting with someone is to do it in the middle of a major airport in broad daylight with a bunch of staff, security and media in tow. And don’t forget to make it a point to go around and personally greet the crew just to make sure that everybody knows you were there. You conservative ‘super sleuths’ are a riot.

Neither Bill nor Loretta had a bunch of media in tow. It was pure luck (bad for those two) that a local LV media guy was there and noticed the meet.
 
Neither Bill nor Loretta had a bunch of media in tow. It was pure luck (bad for those two) that a local LV media guy was there and noticed the meet.
Yeah Bill just happened to wait a fairly long time for Loretta's jet to show up. IIRC.
 
Back
Top Bottom