|
Nor obstruction of justice re: Mueller apparently.
|
#
?
Dec 10, 2019 03:55
|
|
|
|
| # ? May 31, 2024 10:23 |
|
|
Phil Moscowitz posted:Nor obstruction of justice re: Mueller apparently. That's bullshit.
|
|
#
?
Dec 10, 2019 04:03
|
|
|
Phil Moscowitz posted:Nor obstruction of justice re: Mueller apparently. i can understand mueller because of the politics (lol) but obstruction should be one.
|
|
#
?
Dec 10, 2019 04:12
|
|
|
Dapper_Swindler posted:i can understand mueller because of the politics (lol) but obstruction should be one. I guess obstruction of Congress is it. Could it be Obstruction of Justice because it wasn't a criminal proceeding? I don't know how that works.
|
|
#
?
Dec 10, 2019 04:15
|
|
|
BigBallChunkyTime posted:I guess obstruction of Congress is it. Could it be Obstruction of Justice because it wasn't a criminal proceeding? I don't know how that works. i mean like i said, i doubt it will lead to conviction no matter what but my guess is they are trying to hit with stuff that will stick and doesnt muddy the water.
|
|
#
?
Dec 10, 2019 04:16
|
|
|
a few reporters have said they're actually mulling OOJ still, but 2 are definite.
|
|
#
?
Dec 10, 2019 04:27
|
|
|
BigBallChunkyTime posted:I guess obstruction of Congress is it. Could it be Obstruction of Justice because it wasn't a criminal proceeding? I don't know how that works. Obstruction of Congress is the refusal to comply with subpoenas from the House. Obstruction of justice would be all the poo poo Trump did to shut down the Mueller investigation, starting with firing Comey.
|
|
#
?
Dec 10, 2019 04:27
|
|
|
it's gonna die in the senate no matter what I'm actually not sure why they didn't at least try to symbolically make up for the years of inaction by including poo poo like the border crimes and his outright support of war crimes and all. Why not go for broke if this is all about the morality of the nation
|
|
#
?
Dec 10, 2019 04:31
|
|
|
sexpig by night posted:it's gonna die in the senate no matter what I'm actually not sure why they didn't at least try to symbolically make up for the years of inaction by including poo poo like the border crimes and his outright support of war crimes and all. Why not go for broke if this is all about the morality of the nation because theoretically that makes it alot easier for the GOP to twist their justifications and get way with it. with it being focused, they are having a harder time. i am not disagreeing with you mind you. i am just assuming thats the rational.
|
|
#
?
Dec 10, 2019 04:34
|
|
|
sexpig by night posted:it's gonna die in the senate no matter what I'm actually not sure why they didn't at least try to symbolically make up for the years of inaction by including poo poo like the border crimes and his outright support of war crimes and all. Why not go for broke if this is all about the morality of the nation All that takes testimony to get the evidence into the record and then debate as to whether the behavior merits impeachment, which means more time that they don't have. They've got two solid articles that are thoroughly valid and well-documented despite Trump's best efforts. If the Republicans are going to acquit no matter what, it doesn't matter how many articles there are. If they're going to convict, it only takes one.
|
|
#
?
Dec 10, 2019 04:38
|
|
|
They’ll impeach him for everything and the kitchen sink if he somehow gets re-elected and they keep the majority.
|
|
#
?
Dec 10, 2019 04:40
|
|
|
sexpig by night posted:it's gonna die in the senate no matter what I'm actually not sure why they didn't at least try to symbolically make up for the years of inaction by including poo poo like the border crimes and his outright support of war crimes and all. Why not go for broke if this is all about the morality of the nation Because then they'd have to investigate themselves.
|
|
#
?
Dec 10, 2019 05:04
|
|
|
sexpig by night posted:it's gonna die in the senate no matter what I'm actually not sure why they didn't at least try to symbolically make up for the years of inaction by including poo poo like the border crimes and his outright support of war crimes and all. Why not go for broke if this is all about the morality of the nation americans are dumb as hell about understanding why an obvious mafia style shakedown is bad. So why in the world would the dems throw in something like the border camps, which would not only give the GOP a chance to muddy the waters, but also force the "good" half of the nation to think long and hard about how actually Obama really was bad too?
|
|
#
?
Dec 10, 2019 05:11
|
|
|
oxsnard posted:americans are dumb as hell about understanding why an obvious mafia style shakedown is bad. So why in the world would the dems throw in something like the border camps, which would not only give the GOP a chance to muddy the waters, but also force the "good" half of the nation to think long and hard about how actually Obama really was bad too? this. as much as trump and ice should go to the hague for it, they are never gonna use that as an impeachment thing. plus the camps are way to big a horror for just an impeachment thing. that poo poo needs actual truth and reconciliation committees and systemic changes to happen.
|
|
#
?
Dec 10, 2019 05:38
|
|
|
refleks posted:Oh good. Starting out early with bullshit republican talking points I know I'm quoting from many, many pages back... but oh, the sights you have yet to see...
|
|
#
?
Dec 10, 2019 06:15
|
|
|
Phil Moscowitz posted:They’ll impeach him for everything and the kitchen sink if he somehow gets re-elected and they keep the majority. No they won't, if/when this fails and if he gets re-elected they won't impeach again. It almost took a gun to Pelosi's head to get the process started this time around.
|
|
#
?
Dec 10, 2019 06:17
|
|
|
 This is all I can see whenever Gaetz starts making GBS threads himself on camera. Acute Grill fucked around with this message at 07:41 on Dec 10, 2019 |
|
#
?
Dec 10, 2019 07:38
|
|
|
It's astonishing how bad Gaetz really is. Like, it almost makes no sense that someone that relentlessly gormless could have the position he has. Wonder what he thought of #GaetzIsATool trending at the top of Twitter half of the day...
|
|
#
?
Dec 10, 2019 08:01
|
|
|
They're idiots if they want the words "Obstruction of Congress" plastered everywhere instead of "Obstruction of Justice" jesus the first one sounds made up, nobody's ever heard that before
|
|
#
?
Dec 10, 2019 08:18
|
|
|
eke out posted:what the gently caress is he wearing LtStorm posted:Yeah, I want to know what that button is.  ... they all get one 
Cable Guy fucked around with this message at 11:04 on Dec 10, 2019 |
|
#
?
Dec 10, 2019 11:01
|
|
|
Lemming posted:They're idiots if they want the words "Obstruction of Congress" plastered everywhere instead of "Obstruction of Justice" jesus the first one sounds made up, nobody's ever heard that before Wasn't that one of the charges that they hit Nixon with?
|
|
#
?
Dec 10, 2019 11:29
|
|
|
Dapper_Swindler posted:i mean like i said, i doubt it will lead to conviction no matter what but my guess is they are trying to hit with stuff that will stick and doesnt muddy the water. Everything sticks and Republicans are always going to muddy the water. If there was any chance of democrats doing this again in three months with another set of impeachable offenses I wouldn't mind this path, but they're not going to keep banging the corruption drum. But the selection of articles make it political rather than legal or moral. It's articles of impeachment that are about the democrats not liking Trump, rather than Trump being a criminal. This is the end result of a congress that was only willing to impeach because Trump started messing with democrats and were happy to just squawk and do nothing about the rest of his crimes.
|
|
#
?
Dec 10, 2019 13:12
|
|
|
Obstruction of Justice will NOT be one of the articles of impeachment, per multiple sources.
|
|
#
?
Dec 10, 2019 14:48
|
|
|
Wait... Pelosi... bad?
|
|
#
?
Dec 10, 2019 14:51
|
|
|
the good news is that impeachment, even one article, forces republicans to choose whether they side with trump, which could prove to be a mistake if some new corruption shows up. We've got finances to look forward to in the coming months. The bad news is that dropping OOJ allows him to be able to be pardoned for this edit: whoops, that op-ed posted a few weeks ago was wrong: https://lawandcrime.com/legal-analy...rce=mostpopular oxsnard fucked around with this message at 14:57 on Dec 10, 2019 |
|
#
?
Dec 10, 2019 14:54
|
|
|
I don't understand how any Democrat, even the moderate ones, look at the Mueller Report, sees the OOJ laid out, and says "nah."
|
|
#
?
Dec 10, 2019 14:59
|
|
|
BigBallChunkyTime posted:Obstruction of Justice will NOT be one of the articles of impeachment, per multiple sources. Obstruction of Congress will be, however, and that serves the same purpose.
|
|
#
?
Dec 10, 2019 15:00
|
|
|
Live stream of the presser if anyone wants it. It will start any minute. https://youtu.be/JDhWfqQ1o98
|
|
#
?
Dec 10, 2019 15:04
|
|
|
I'm prefatorily furious
|
|
#
?
Dec 10, 2019 15:05
|
|
|
BigBallChunkyTime posted:I don't understand how any Democrat, even the moderate ones, look at the Mueller Report, sees the OOJ laid out, and says "nah." i think the argument is that ooj is tougher because you have to debate the intricacies of executive power and privilege, whereas the powers granted to congress are more concrete in the constitution
|
|
#
?
Dec 10, 2019 15:05
|
|
|
oxsnard posted:i think the argument is that ooj is tougher because you have to debate the intricacies of executive power and privilege, whereas the powers granted to congress are more concrete in the constitution Yeah, they're sticking to the ones that are obvious and clear with plenty of direct evidence and for which there is no defense whatever on the facts of the matter. They don't want to give Republicans a chance to lose everyone in the weeds with gray areas.
|
|
#
?
Dec 10, 2019 15:16
|
|
|
Deteriorata posted:Yeah, they're sticking to the ones that are obvious and clear with plenty of direct evidence and for which there is no defense whatever on the facts of the matter. They don't want to give Republicans a chance to lose everyone in the weeds with gray areas. And when Lindsey Graham votes to acquit anyway, even in the face of such a slam-dunk case, then what?
|
|
#
?
Dec 10, 2019 15:19
|
|
|
mdemone posted:And when Lindsey Graham votes to acquit anyway, even in the face of such a slam-dunk case, then what? Revolution?
|
|
#
?
Dec 10, 2019 15:20
|
|
|
BigBallChunkyTime posted:I don't understand how any Democrat, even the moderate ones, look at the Mueller Report, sees the OOJ laid out, and says "nah."
|
|
#
?
Dec 10, 2019 15:25
|
|
|
mdemone posted:And when Lindsey Graham votes to acquit anyway, even in the face of such a slam-dunk case, then what? Lindsey Graham isn't who we're trying to convince.
|
|
#
?
Dec 10, 2019 15:25
|
|
|
Fritz Coldcockin posted:Obstruction of Congress will be, however, and that serves the same purpose. Yeah, and 'obstruction of congress' has more of a subtle dig to it in that it makes any member of congress have to side with Trump more explicitly vs. being able to muddy arguments with a nebulous concept of justice. It makes the question "You're a member of Congress, did the White House give you all the information your body requested" inarguable, instead of "Did the President do an arguably bad thing, maybe, based on your opinion of what is just?" They know that it'll die in the Senate, so they're make every part of the charges as weaponized as possible to drag the bastards in the future.
|
|
#
?
Dec 10, 2019 15:26
|
|
|
Fritz Coldcockin posted:Lindsey Graham isn't who we're trying to convince. That wasn't my point. They're choosing articles of impeachment based on which ones they can most easily demonstrate. When the jury disagrees, who have you convinced?
|
|
#
?
Dec 10, 2019 15:30
|
|
|
mdemone posted:That wasn't my point. They're choosing articles of impeachment based on which ones they can most easily demonstrate. When the jury disagrees, who have you convinced? Hopefully the electorate.
|
|
#
?
Dec 10, 2019 15:35
|
|
|
mdemone posted:That wasn't my point. They're choosing articles of impeachment based on which ones they can most easily demonstrate. When the jury disagrees, who have you convinced? Hopefully the American people who will nullify the jury.
|
|
#
?
Dec 10, 2019 15:35
|
|
|
|
| # ? May 31, 2024 10:23 |
|
|
Maybe two GOP senators, maybe three will lose their jobs over this. It might be enough to take the Senate, I guess that's the best-case scenario.
|
|
#
?
Dec 10, 2019 15:37
|
|