|
Xombie posted:He literally said so in his interview with Lester Holt. and to the russians
|
#
?
Jun 8, 2017 19:03
|
|
|
|
| # ? May 10, 2024 05:52 |
|
|
Kaddish posted:You are impressively naive if you think congress is going to impeach based on an obstruction argument based on the Comey firing. There may be better argument for the Flynn conversation but not the firing. Hey dipshit, these two statements are not mutually exclusive: 1. Trump obviously committed obstruction of justice 2. Republicans won't impeach them because they are amoral
|
|
#
?
Jun 8, 2017 19:03
|
|
|
Comey is the SEXUAL SAMURAI we needed, today
|
|
#
?
Jun 8, 2017 19:03
|
|
|
TGLT posted:That was the goal. It gets a lot of those questions into the public arena and on people's minds and Comey for his part won't definitively say no. whether or not that is actually the case. Plus the Republican lines of attack had been shut down by that point. I don't get how that helped considering the question she was asking, which was mainly a repeat from other senators.
|
|
#
?
Jun 8, 2017 19:03
|
|
|
Crows Turn Off posted:I'm not sure why The Hill is tweeting this out now, this is news from yesterday. Pence cancelled his PBS interview last night, due to Comey releasing his remarks yesterday. It even says that in the article. So people click it and they get ad revenue.
|
|
#
?
Jun 8, 2017 19:04
|
|
|
Kaddish posted:Right, but intention is the key word there. If Trump says "I fired Comey because I don't like how he handled the Russian investigation" (which he did say), that's still perfectly fine. Yeah but he implied that he would fire Comey if he didn't stop the Russia investigation, then fired him and confirmed that he fired him about the Russia investigation. I don't think it would be a good idea for you to keep posting. Would be a shame if all these high effort posts had something happen to them. Maybe shitpost replies? There would only be intent there if someone acted on it. Which is what happened.
|
|
#
?
Jun 8, 2017 19:04
|
|
|
Kaddish posted:I'm very confused - you seem to have actual evidence that Trump fired Comey to end the Russia investigation. Where is this evidence? I don't think anyone here is going to do your research for you. Comey saying Trump fired him and said it was because of the Russian Investigation IS a factual statement though.
|
|
#
?
Jun 8, 2017 19:04
|
|
|
Xombie posted:He literally said so in his interview with Lester Holt. I guess I need to re-watch it - I remember him saying something more general than that.
|
|
#
?
Jun 8, 2017 19:05
|
|
|
Bottom Liner posted:He tweeted a screenshot of his computer and he had hentai open in a separate tab. Yes, really.  Fwd: fwd: fwd: Look at these LIBERALS looking at their DEVIANT FOREIGN PORNOGRAPHY and not even paying attention to the hearing! Yet they have the nerve to write these FAKE NEWS articles about OUR PRESIDENT!
|
|
#
?
Jun 8, 2017 19:05
|
|
|
Retro42 posted:I don't think anyone here is going to do your research for you. Comey saying Trump fired him and said it was because of the Russian Investigation IS a factual statement though. Yes, the last part is factual AND PERFECTLY LEGAL.
|
|
#
?
Jun 8, 2017 19:05
|
|
|
Kaddish posted:Right, but intention is the key word there. If Trump says "I fired Comey because I don't like how he handled the Russian investigation" (which he did say), that's still perfectly fine. He's repeatedly said in both his interviews and conversations with Comey that the part he doesn't like is that it exists.
|
|
#
?
Jun 8, 2017 19:05
|
|
|
Kaddish posted:Yes, the last part is factual AND PERFECTLY LEGAL. wrong, idiot
|
|
#
?
Jun 8, 2017 19:05
|
|
|
Kaddish posted:Yes, the last part is factual AND PERFECTLY LEGAL. Obstruction of justice is not legal. Saying it's legal doesn't make it legal.
|
|
#
?
Jun 8, 2017 19:06
|
|
|
DaveWoo posted:Are they aware that Hillary Clinton is not president and Loretta Lynch is longer AG? But but Shadow Prez of the Deep State and her death note!!!!!!
|
|
#
?
Jun 8, 2017 19:06
|
|
|
https://twitter.com/JakeSherman/status/872876855673724928 https://twitter.com/CahnEmily/status/872877127292645376
|
|
#
?
Jun 8, 2017 19:06
|
|
|
Flip Yr Wig posted:They're trying to gin up Fox News headlines. Dude, if I accidentally posted a screenshot with some hardcore gay BDSM porn in a tab (not what he did but closer to what likely happen to me), I'd just go "gently caress it, I masturbate to weird poo poo: get over it." Likely work out better, especially on the modern internet.
|
|
#
?
Jun 8, 2017 19:06
|
|
|
Kaddish posted:I guess I need to re-watch it - I remember him saying something more general than that. "And in fact when I decided to just do it, I said to myself, I said 'you know, this Russia thing with Trump and Russia is a made-up story, it's an excuse by the Democrats for having lost an election that they should have won'." Which lines up perfectly with him asking Comey several times to drop the investigation.
|
|
#
?
Jun 8, 2017 19:06
|
|
|
I mean I don't think that Kaddish is ever going to admit he's wrong here
|
|
#
?
Jun 8, 2017 19:06
|
|
|
Lote posted:Nancy Pelosi would not be good for the Presidency. She will go to bat for the President though if asked. She got Cap and Trade through the House somehow. Yeah, she got that and public option passed the house I don't love her, but she very effective
|
|
#
?
Jun 8, 2017 19:07
|
|
|
Dogwood Fleet posted:Okay, I read through the last several pages and may have missed this, but why did Eichenwald even bring up tentacle porn in a long series of tweets? Instead of ignoring it or just saying "yeah well the internet does strange things to one's curiosity, whoops" or anything else sensible he has come up with an elaborate story about how he was winning an argument with his wife/family that tentacle porn exists and forgot to close that tab after said argument was concluded (even though there's a considerably tame wikipedia page talking about the industry of tentacle porn, and plus the hentai he had open had no tentacles in it)
|
|
#
?
Jun 8, 2017 19:07
|
|
|
The Eichenwald Challage: Successfully beat off to this porn knowing full well that Kurt Eichenwald has done the same thing.
|
|
#
?
Jun 8, 2017 19:07
|
|
|
Jaxyon posted:I mean I don't think that Kaddish is ever going to admit he's wrong here The point isn't to get him to admit he's wrong, it's to coax him into making his argument look worse and worse.
|
|
#
?
Jun 8, 2017 19:07
|
|
|
Archonex posted:When I think of viable candidates to run against Trump and his appeal to misogyny and bigotry I think of women that have been systematically slandered by conservatives since they obtained even an iota of power and influence. That will certainly win everyone over and stop the Republicans from destroying our rights! Agreed completely. The reality as we're staring into 2018/2020 is that the American liberal movement was self-destructing throughout the primaries, and while the ascendancy of Trump has papered over the ideological differences that are tearing apart the Democrats, it has done nothing to cool the slow-burning cultural war over the Democratic Party. Whoever gets picked to lead the DNC efforts in the coming elections, they're going to need to be as uncontroversial as possible, or else the next major primaries are going to seriously damage the party and will probably lead to more losses. Preferably we can find a Trudeau or a Macron: A charismatic pragmatist with decent progressive credentials, ideally a woman in their 40's. Kaal fucked around with this message at 19:15 on Jun 8, 2017 |
|
#
?
Jun 8, 2017 19:08
|
|
|
DaveWoo posted:https://twitter.com/JakeSherman/status/872876855673724928 I hope Trump made tapes
|
|
#
?
Jun 8, 2017 19:08
|
|
|
DaveWoo posted:https://twitter.com/JakeSherman/status/872876855673724928 I wonder if this is just a symantics thing.
|
|
#
?
Jun 8, 2017 19:09
|
|
|
Republicans posted:The Eichenwald Challage: Successfully beat off to this porn knowing full well that Kurt Eichenwald has done the same thing. Nakadsai? X-Ray? Smell? Let's just focus on Comey saying Trump committed obstruction of Justice, thread.
|
|
#
?
Jun 8, 2017 19:09
|
|
|
Covok posted:Dude, if I accidentally posted a screenshot with some hardcore gay BDSM porn in a tab (not what he did but closer to what likely happen to me), I'd just go "gently caress it, I masturbate to weird poo poo: get over it." Likely work out better, especially on the modern internet. Republicans posted:The Eichenwald Challage: Successfully beat off to this porn knowing full well that Kurt Eichenwald has done the same thing. Josh Marshall handled it all much better.
|
|
#
?
Jun 8, 2017 19:09
|
|
|
DaveWoo posted:https://twitter.com/JakeSherman/status/872876855673724928 I encourage Trump to say as much under oath then.
|
|
#
?
Jun 8, 2017 19:09
|
|
|
Republicans posted:The Eichenwald Challage: Successfully beat off to this porn knowing full well that Kurt Eichenwald has done the same thing. Bonus points if you do it with a full screen picture of his twitter avatar staring at you while you do it.
|
|
#
?
Jun 8, 2017 19:09
|
|
|
DaveWoo posted:https://twitter.com/JakeSherman/status/872876855673724928 
|
|
#
?
Jun 8, 2017 19:10
|
|
|
evilweasel posted:wrong, idiot Holy poo poo, you guys are frothing at the mouths. https://www.nytimes.com/2017/06/08/us/politics/obstruction-of-justice-trump-comey.html It was legal. Sorry for your loss. If someone can definitely prove intent to kill the investigation totally, there would be a case for impeachment, which congress sure as hell won't do. The president can't be indicted.
|
|
#
?
Jun 8, 2017 19:10
|
|
|
Bottom Liner posted:He tweeted a screenshot of his computer and he had hentai open in a separate tab. Yes, really.
|
|
#
?
Jun 8, 2017 19:10
|
|
|
DaveWoo posted:https://twitter.com/JakeSherman/status/872876855673724928 I mean, the way to counter it would be to have him swear it under oath. We're at this level now. God, I hope this ends up with Trump under oath. That deposition was a thing of beauty.
|
|
#
?
Jun 8, 2017 19:10
|
|
|
Jaxyon posted:I mean I don't think that Kaddish is ever going to admit he's wrong here I think the issue is that he either didn't know about, or forgot about the Holt interview and (more importantly) the white house transcript with the russian ambassador. If all we had was Comey's statement, then yeah, obstruction of justice would be a tougher putt because you could argue that Trump believed the investigation was handled badly, not that he wanted it to end. The transcript blows away any doubt of his intention.
|
|
#
?
Jun 8, 2017 19:11
|
|
|
Endorph posted:also his defense is that he was trying to prove that tentacle porn existed to his wife and kids, even though he could have just googled 'tentacle porn' and gotten the wikipedia article about it Much like this legal derail, the flailing is the best part. Better to just admit and move on
|
|
#
?
Jun 8, 2017 19:11
|
|
|
Kaddish posted:Holy poo poo, you guys are frothing at the mouths. This article doesn't say what you think it says.
|
|
#
?
Jun 8, 2017 19:11
|
|
|
Petr posted:I'm sitting in a room full of republicans watching Fox news coverage of this. Their takeaway is that this is very bad for democrats because of the Loretta Lynch thing. They keep saying he "dropped a bomb" on democrats. I must've blanked out during this part, because I don't remember anything about Loretta Lynch during the testimony. Or was that something that came out of McCain's muddled ramblings?
|
|
#
?
Jun 8, 2017 19:12
|
|
|
Angry_Ed posted:This article doesn't say what you think it says. Did Trump have lawful authority to fire Comey? Yes. But courts have ruled that otherwise lawful acts can constitute obstruction of justice if done with corrupt intentions. In a 1998 case, for example, a federal appeals court upheld the conviction of a lawyer who had filed legal complaints and related motions against a government agent who was investigating an illegal gambling operation. The court ruled that the defendant’s “nominally litigation-related conduct” was unlawful because his real motive was “to safeguard his personal financial interests” in the corrupt enterprise.
|
|
#
?
Jun 8, 2017 19:12
|
|
|
Kaddish posted:Yes, the last part is factual AND PERFECTLY LEGAL. i am concerned maybe you're actually stupid instead of pretend stupid here is how it works firing comey is obstruction of justice if it was done with the intent to interfere with the investigation. period. that is it. now, in your mccain-having-a-stroke head, you seem to conflate several things: 0) what obstruction of justice is 1) is there proof of trump's corrupt intent 2) is the republican congress going to impeach trump over it 3) do trump's statements alone establish corrupt intent every time it is established you are stupid, and wrong, you take the answer to one of those and claim its not an answer to a different one. perhaps because you too are having a stroke. but each is an independent question/ in order: 0) it is obstruction of justice to fire comey, if Trump had the requisite intent. you may not simply say he was allowed to fire comey, ergo no obstruction 1) trump's conduct and statements are very strong evidence, but you can't really "prove" intent in the sense that it is beyond all doubt 2) the republican congress won't impeach trump if he tortured and murdered a small child 3) probably, most definitively when you include the statements from the russians you establish (a) trump viewed the russia investigation as a problem (b) he fired comey because of the russia investigation and (c) he believed by firing comey he ended it, a chain of events that leaves no real doubt that his goal was to end the investigation by firing comey, textbook corrupt intent
|
|
#
?
Jun 8, 2017 19:12
|
|
|
|
| # ? May 10, 2024 05:52 |
|
|
While I fully expect Trump to lie about anything and everything under oat without batting an eye, I'd love to see him being grilled by Dem senators.
|
|
#
?
Jun 8, 2017 19:12
|
|
