|
Owlofcreamcheese posted:heh, a republican special counsel would never.... uh... I mean these republican judges would never uhh.... I mean the republican head of the FBI would never... I uh He's right about Congress.
|
#
?
Apr 10, 2018 12:19
|
|
|
|
| # ? Jun 11, 2024 11:57 |
|
|
Chinese Gordon posted:He's having a tantrum about the raid, not somehow unilaterally declaring a change in the law. I know that.
|
|
#
?
Apr 10, 2018 12:20
|
|
|
Chinese Gordon posted:He's having a tantrum about the raid, not somehow unilaterally declaring a change in the law. The question still stands.
|
|
#
?
Apr 10, 2018 12:20
|
|
|
Remember that Trump thinks attorney-client privelege applies if he conspired with someone else in the same room as his lawyer
|
|
#
?
Apr 10, 2018 12:24
|
|
|
KickerOfMice posted:The question still stands. Why is it a surprise that Trump doesn't understand the law?
|
|
#
?
Apr 10, 2018 12:24
|
|
|
God bless America!
|
|
#
?
Apr 10, 2018 12:24
|
|
|
It’s surprising he hasn’t had a medical emergency of some sort with so much rage making GBS threads when gets up in the morning.
|
|
#
?
Apr 10, 2018 12:27
|
|
|
Attorney-client privilege does not apply if you discuss a crime, no?
|
|
#
?
Apr 10, 2018 12:27
|
|
|
Chinese Gordon posted:He's right about Congress. Wah Wah, I know daddy will use his super powers when the moment is right. he is just hiding the extreme loyalty everyone has to him to lull hillary into a false confidence. *gets his personal lawyer arrested on a warrant signed by a republican judge he appointed like a month ago*
|
|
#
?
Apr 10, 2018 12:29
|
|
|
Chinese Gordon posted:Why is it a surprise that Trump doesn't understand the law? It's not, but still, "what the gently caress?" Hah, zero coverage on Foxnews.com
|
|
#
?
Apr 10, 2018 12:31
|
|
|
Slowpoke! posted:Attorney-client privilege does not apply if you discuss a crime, no? There's some pretty good write ups if you just google it, something our Commander In Chief can't do.
|
|
#
?
Apr 10, 2018 12:32
|
|
|
Slowpoke! posted:Attorney-client privilege does not apply if you discuss a crime, no? It doesn’t apply if your attorney is helping you commit a crime. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Attorney%E2%80%93client_privilege?wprov=sfti1
|
|
#
?
Apr 10, 2018 12:32
|
|
|
Donnie when you commit fraud with your lawyers there is no such thing as attorney client privilege. Keep talking though Mueller has his note pad and screenshot shortcuts at the ready
|
|
#
?
Apr 10, 2018 12:33
|
|
|
Slowpoke! posted:Attorney-client privilege does not apply if you discuss a crime, no? IANAL, but I’d bet that if you are conspiring to/already committed a crime with your attorney, and evidence of that gets discovered in an investigation, then it would absolutely not protect your records for that particular client from the investigators.
|
|
#
?
Apr 10, 2018 12:33
|
|
|
Arglebargle III posted:This is a captivating cat.
|
|
#
?
Apr 10, 2018 12:33
|
|
|
KickerOfMice posted:It's not, but still, "what the gently caress?" Big lead article on CNN! And it is on Foxnews.com's main page, it's just well below the feature article about a "rogue governor" not wanting to deploy the National Guard to the border, and even below a human-interest piece about a "Women For Trump" college senior flashing a gun in her graduation photo. And the main article isn't about the raid, it's Dershowitz calling out the ACLU for not rallying to Trump's defense. And then a piece from an unnamed White House source calling the investigation "out of control." Seriously, there's "slant" and then there's this.
|
|
#
?
Apr 10, 2018 12:35
|
|
|
Owlofcreamcheese posted:Wah Wah, I know daddy will use his super powers when the moment is right. he is just hiding the extreme loyalty everyone has to him to lull hillary into a false confidence. I'm not saying at all saying Nothing Matters. Things absolutely do and are mattering. Just saying there is no way 15+ Republican Senators vote to convict. The only way that would happen is if Trump lost the majority of the primary-voting base.
|
|
#
?
Apr 10, 2018 12:35
|
|
|
Chinese Gordon posted:15+ Republican Senators vote to convict This isn't nearly as much of an obstacle as getting Articles of Impeachment passed in the House in the first place. That will literally never happen in a Republican-controlled House. By comparison the Senate is conceivable (though still very outlandish).
|
|
#
?
Apr 10, 2018 12:37
|
|
|
Chinese Gordon posted:I'm not saying at all saying Nothing Matters. Things absolutely do and are mattering. Just saying there is no way 15+ Republican Senators vote to convict. The only way that would happen is if Trump lost the majority of the primary-voting base. I think you underestimate how sensitive the rats are to sinking ships.
|
|
#
?
Apr 10, 2018 12:37
|
|
|
Oh my god yes, he's tweeted Why is this so enjoyable? We're not supposed to view the president of the USA so flippantly like this.
|
|
#
?
Apr 10, 2018 12:37
|
|
|
Zedsdeadbaby posted:Why is this so enjoyable? We're not supposed to view the president of the USA so flippantly like this. Humor is a valid coping mechanism.
|
|
#
?
Apr 10, 2018 12:38
|
|
|
Zedsdeadbaby posted:Oh my god yes, he's tweeted Well, it's his fault. He's a flippant president. 
|
|
#
?
Apr 10, 2018 12:39
|
|
|
Liquid Communism posted:I think you underestimate how sensitive the rats are to sinking ships. Oh they would dump Trump in a heartbeat if the chuds abandoned him en masse. Unless/until that happens though, he's safe from conviction.
|
|
#
?
Apr 10, 2018 12:40
|
|
|
Chinese Gordon posted:I'm not saying at all saying Nothing Matters. Things absolutely do and are mattering. Just saying there is no way 15+ Republican Senators vote to convict. The only way that would happen is if Trump lost the majority of the primary-voting base. How is that different than "there is no way a republican special counsel would really investigate him" or "there is no way a republican judge he appointed would sign off on searching his personal lawyer" or "there is no way a republican judge would block his immigration crackdown" or even "there is no way a republican FBI would work against him". Maybe at some point it's okay to drop the idea that he's beloved and all are loyal to him. No one is impeaching him now but maybe every time something else happens and more republican people in power turn against him it just starts looking more and more shook when people rush to the thread to say 'he is UNIMPEACHABLE, no one would EVER turn against him"
|
|
#
?
Apr 10, 2018 12:41
|
|
|
Zedsdeadbaby posted:Oh my god yes, he's tweeted Seeing the worst of America suffer should give you pleasure no shame.
|
|
#
?
Apr 10, 2018 12:42
|
|
|
Chinese Gordon posted:Oh they would dump Trump in a heartbeat if the chuds abandoned him en masse. Unless/until that happens though, he's safe. That's the thing you're right about though - that base is hard as granite. He could be roasting white Christian babies in NASCAR onesies on a spit and they'd find an excuse.
|
|
#
?
Apr 10, 2018 12:43
|
|
|
Drone posted:This isn't nearly as much of an obstacle as getting Articles of Impeachment passed in the House in the first place. That will literally never happen in a Republican-controlled House. I'm assuming the Dems win the House in November. Even if they impeach him, the Senate will not convict Trump unless it is clear he's lost the support of GOP primary voters, and I honestly don't think anything Mueller/SDNY comes up with will lose him enough of the chuds. He will absolutely be a lame duck post November and will get destroyed/not run in 2020 though. That's where the Mattering is. Owlofcreamcheese posted:How is that different than "there is no way a republican special counsel would really investigate him" or "there is no way a republican judge he appointed would sign off on searching his personal lawyer" or "there is no way a republican judge would block his immigration crackdown" or even "there is no way a republican FBI would work against him". Neither the judge nor Rosenstein are answerable to the rabid GOP base. Senators are, and in order for them to convict Trump he would have to lose the support of the chuds. I don't think that happens pre 2020. Chinese Gordon fucked around with this message at 12:49 on Apr 10, 2018 |
|
#
?
Apr 10, 2018 12:44
|
|
|
The only way Trump loses the base is if another male authority figure emasculates him somehow and takes his place. While he is in the role of the most powerful single person in the world that's going to be hard but if say the next Republican Presidential candidate was charismatic and just dunked on him endlessly, the base would turn super fast and abandon him (which is a but late to be useful). I could see a powerful Senator or party leader doing something similar but the ones in Congress now are such gutless cowards that won't happen.
|
|
#
?
Apr 10, 2018 12:46
|
|
|
NEED MORE TWEETS
|
|
|
#
?
Apr 10, 2018 12:47
|
|
|
Radish posted:The only way Trump loses the base is if another male authority figure emasculates him somehow and takes his place. While he is in the role of the most powerful single person in the world that's going to be hard but if say the next Republican Presidential candidate was charismatic and just dunked on him endlessly, the base would turn super fast and abandon him (which is a but late to be useful). I could see a powerful Senator or party leader doing something similar but the ones in Congress now are such gutless cowards that won't happen. Please clap?
|
|
#
?
Apr 10, 2018 12:47
|
|
|
Smiling Jack posted:NEED MORE TWEETS I didn't know it would feel this good.
|
|
#
?
Apr 10, 2018 12:49
|
|
|
https://twitter.com/gtconway3d/status/983672662517075968 Someone's sleeping in the doghouse tonight.
|
|
#
?
Apr 10, 2018 12:49
|
|
|
Owlofcreamcheese posted:How is that different than "there is no way a republican special counsel would really investigate him" or "there is no way a republican judge he appointed would sign off on searching his personal lawyer" or "there is no way a republican judge would block his immigration crackdown" or even "there is no way a republican FBI would work against him". There’s a difference between non-elected, independent law agencies and politicians in congress, though. The former at least has the reputation for doing their job without political motivation whereas the latter has proven themselves spineless
|
|
#
?
Apr 10, 2018 12:52
|
|
|
https://twitter.com/SimonMaloy/status/983436709118570497
|
|
#
?
Apr 10, 2018 12:55
|
|
|
Mustached Demon posted:Please clap? It's JEB's time to shine.
|
|
#
?
Apr 10, 2018 12:55
|
|
|
I do enjoy the fact Trump acts like he has something to hide. Like anyone with half a brain would be like, "let them search, I'm clean I tell ya'! Clean!" But Trump complains to the world that poo poo he told his lawyer might now be admissible. Mueller would be all up in my bung hole and all he'd find is some fibrous material and maybe that quarter I swallowed when I was 8. Thanks, Bob! And it's a bicentennial quarter to boot!
|
|
#
?
Apr 10, 2018 12:56
|
|
|
"Mens rea! Mala in se!"
|
|
#
?
Apr 10, 2018 12:57
|
|
|
skeleton warrior posted:I can’t imagine that there’ll be a Trump tweet this morning - every time there’s been an obvious major event Trump would tweet the stupidest, brokest poo poo about, someone takes his access away. In a week, we’ll get a shitstorm over something completely different because of a story on Fox And Friends, and maybe he’ll bring up this raid and the “unfairness”, but not today. Never seen a post age so poorly so fast itt
|
|
#
?
Apr 10, 2018 12:58
|
|
|
Do search warrants have limits on what you can take? Or can they just grab anything and everything in that office.
|
|
#
?
Apr 10, 2018 13:00
|
|
|
|
| # ? Jun 11, 2024 11:57 |
|
|
Mr Ice Cream Glove posted:Do search warrants have limits on what you can take? Yes they can be incredibly specific sometimes. However, if the FBI agents doing the deed see like the piss tape on the big screen then they can most certainly take that too.
|
|
#
?
Apr 10, 2018 13:04
|
|