Page 5 of 5 FirstFirst ... 45
Results 141 to 160 of 160

Thread: The 2017-present Special Counsel investigation

  1. #141
    Join Date
    Oct 2004
    Location
    oklahoma
    Posts
    3,725

    Default Re: The 2017-present Special Counsel investigation

    Norman, i’ve noticed that you are quick to indulge in anti-Trump literature, as in Wolff and Comey’s books. I would recommend one straight source that you might stomach. Andrew McCarthy is a journalist who was once the Assistant US Attorney for the SDNY. He knows law and the legal process from experience. He doesn’t seem to be a fan of Trump, as he criticizes him frequently. But he is dismayed at the antics of the intelligence agencies and the Obama administration in their Trump/Russia travesty. It wouldn’t take much time to keep up with his columns and be informed as to how an impartial investigator sees events.

    https://www.nationalreview.com/autho...ew-c-mccarthy/
    Ask not what your country can do for you; ask what you can do for your country. John Fn Kennedy. (D)

  2. #142
    Join Date
    Mar 2006
    Location
    Entry Level
    Posts
    17,455

    Default Re: The 2017-present Special Counsel investigation

    Quote Originally Posted by mdh View Post
    From the 2000 memoranda:
    The indictment or criminal prosecution of a sitting President would unconstitutionally undermine the capacity of the executive branch to perform its constitutionally assigned functions.

    https://biotech.law.lsu.edu/blaw/olc..._president.htm
    You're right, the 2000 memo says that. I was reading something I thought was the memo but was an article, suggesting the possibility of indicting without prosecuting. Problem: what's the diff?

    Quote Originally Posted by mdh View Post
    Are you suggesting that Rosenstein would, or should, disobey his agency’s policy?
    I suggest he should set it aside so the question can be settled. It's important by itself and especially in these circumstances. If it's to be done, I don't think it should be done without the AG's approval.
    He's a Mexican. -- Donald Trump.
    America cannot survive another four years of Barack Obama. -- Governor Chris Christie (R) New Jersey
    It wasn't racism, it was an attack on Christianity. -- Fox News
    Crying white mothers are ratings gold. -- National Rifle Association

  3. #143
    Join Date
    Nov 2004
    Location
    Sharon, MA
    Posts
    20,668

    Default Re: The 2017-present Special Counsel investigation

    Quote Originally Posted by mdh View Post
    Norman, i’ve noticed that you are quick to indulge in anti-Trump literature, as in Wolff and Comey’s books.
    The so-called 'anti-Trump' literature wouldn't exist, if Donald Trump didn't fuel it so prodigiously.


    Quote Originally Posted by mdh View Post
    I would recommend one straight source that you might stomach. Andrew McCarthy is a journalist who was once the Assistant US Attorney for the SDNY. He knows law and the legal process from experience. He doesn’t seem to be a fan of Trump, as he criticizes him frequently. But he is dismayed at the antics of the intelligence agencies and the Obama administration in their Trump/Russia travesty. It wouldn’t take much time to keep up with his columns and be informed as to how an impartial investigator sees events.
    Sorry, but 'straight shooter'? From his latest column:

    But that’s not even the most important of the buried ledes. What the Times story makes explicit, with studious understatement, is that the Obama administration used its counterintelligence powers to investigate the opposition party’s presidential campaign.

    That is, there was no criminal predicate to justify an investigation of any Trump-campaign official. So, the FBI did not open a criminal investigation. Instead, the bureau opened a counterintelligence investigation and hoped that evidence of crimes committed by Trump officials would emerge.
    Sorry, but McCarthy provides NO support or evidence for this contention... it's not in HIS column, and it's not in the NYT piece. Where is the evidence that 'Obama', as he claims, opened up a counterintelligence investigation? What evidence did the FBI or DOJ have to justify ANY investigation? Are you suggesting that there was none... and if so, how do YOU know that there wasn't?

    Sorry, but this doesn't even come close to a 'straight shooting' opinion piece.... it's rumor, innuendo, and conjecture.

    ONCE AGAIN: neither you, nor I, know what evidence Mueller has managed to find, in the course of his investigation... and we're not going to know, until/unless it's made public. Relative to these kinds of investigations, Mueller is going at breakneck speed, so the argument about this all taking too long is bullsh|t (do you remember how long Ken Starr took.... 2 years and $70M... to find nothing more than a stain on a blue dress?)
    "Reason and facts are sacrificed to opinion and myth. Demonstrable falsehoods are circulated and recycled as fact. Narrow minded opinion refuses to be subjected to thought and analysis. Too many now subject events to a prefabricated set of interpretations, usually provided by a biased media source. The myth is more comfortable than the often difficult search for truth."







  4. #144
    Join Date
    Oct 2004
    Location
    oklahoma
    Posts
    3,725

    Default Re: The 2017-present Special Counsel investigation

    Quote Originally Posted by Norman Bernstein View Post
    Ordinarily, I'd say no... with the possible exception if a President achieved office by fraud.

    Let's hypothesize a little.

    There's room for argument from both sides here... but I'd say that, in a case like this, then yes, the DOJ rule should not apply, and the President should be indicted.
    I’d like to continue to believe that virtuous men would prevail.

    As to “High crimes and misdemeanors”, those that have delved into the history of the phrase, give it a definition of crime, or malfeasance against the State, much as treason or bribery would fall. I believe murder would also qualify, by the way. If you’re hypothetical should happen, it would indicate that more than one impeachment, or recall was in order.
    Ask not what your country can do for you; ask what you can do for your country. John Fn Kennedy. (D)

  5. #145
    Join Date
    Dec 2006
    Location
    afloat with at least 6' of water under me.
    Posts
    58,500

    Default Re: The 2017-present Special Counsel investigation

    Quote Originally Posted by mdh View Post
    I’d like to continue to believe that virtuous men would prevail.

    As to “High crimes and misdemeanors”, those that have delved into the history of the phrase, give it a definition of crime, or malfeasance against the State, much as treason or bribery would fall. I believe murder would also qualify, by the way. If you’re hypothetical should happen, it would indicate that more than one impeachment, or recall was in order.
    Virtuous men? They don't exist in Trump's Administration.

  6. #146
    Join Date
    Nov 2008
    Posts
    24,397

    Default Re: The 2017-present Special Counsel investigation

    Quote Originally Posted by mdh View Post
    I’d like to continue to believe that virtuous men would prevail.

    As to “High crimes and misdemeanors”, those that have delved into the history of the phrase, give it a definition of crime, or malfeasance against the State, much as treason or bribery would fall. I believe murder would also qualify, by the way. If you’re hypothetical should happen, it would indicate that more than one impeachment, or recall was in order.
    If this is the criterion, then Trump should hang.
    Rattling the teacups.

  7. #147
    Join Date
    Nov 2004
    Location
    Sharon, MA
    Posts
    20,668

    Default Re: The 2017-present Special Counsel investigation

    Quote Originally Posted by mdh View Post
    I’d like to continue to believe that virtuous men would prevail.
    So would I... but we seem to have set a VERY low bar for what constitutes 'virtue', if Donald Trump is representative of the word.

    Quote Originally Posted by mdh View Post
    As to “High crimes and misdemeanors”, those that have delved into the history of the phrase, give it a definition of crime, or malfeasance against the State, much as treason or bribery would fall.
    It is still a political action, not a criminal one... since, by definition, the legislature is not an objective body.

    Bill Clinton was impeached for lying to a grand jury... the evidence of that was virtually irrefutable, but he was not convicted. Would you argue that his support in the Senate was not THE reason he wasn't convicted? I think my argument that impeachment is purely a 'political' process, is proven.

    Quote Originally Posted by mdh View Post
    I believe murder would also qualify, by the way. If you’re hypothetical should happen, it would indicate that more than one impeachment, or recall was in order.
    To be completely fair, in a case like the present one, where the actual value and influence of the meddling with our electoral process would be completely impossible to prove, it does make impeachment highly questionable.... IF impeachment were an objective process, which it most decidedly is NOT. So, if there is any evidence that some in the Trump campaign did indeed collude with Russians on some provable basis, perhaps THEY can be indicted... but it might fail to make for a case for impeachment, unless the President's direct involvement could be proved... and it might even be a reasonable qualification under the DOJ interpretation of law, that a sitting President cannot be indicted (although after he leaves office, all bets are off, on that score).

    I'm OK with that. I'd actually prefer that Trump be impeached on the basis of the long littany of other behaviors which, I believe, disqualifies him from the Presidency. In particular, I think that he is guilty of violating the emoluments clause of the Constitution, which most decidedly IS an impeachable offense, by ANY definition; violating the Constitution is a violation of the oath of office.
    Last edited by Norman Bernstein; 05-17-2018 at 02:33 PM.
    "Reason and facts are sacrificed to opinion and myth. Demonstrable falsehoods are circulated and recycled as fact. Narrow minded opinion refuses to be subjected to thought and analysis. Too many now subject events to a prefabricated set of interpretations, usually provided by a biased media source. The myth is more comfortable than the often difficult search for truth."







  8. #148
    Join Date
    Jun 2001
    Posts
    28,420

    Default Re: The 2017-present Special Counsel investigation

    Quote Originally Posted by Keith Wilson View Post
    Oh, sweet Jesus . . . Can you possibly get any more delusional?

    There you go reds. A CHALLENGE! Show us your psychotic props.

    Oops, too late with this post.

    LMAO
    The best statement I've seen from this latest carnage came from a student who lived through it -

    "My generation will not allow this to continue!"

    Remember voting age is 18. Read it and weep reds.

  9. #149
    Join Date
    Oct 2004
    Location
    oklahoma
    Posts
    3,725

    Default Re: The 2017-present Special Counsel investigation

    Quote Originally Posted by Norman Bernstein View Post



    Sorry, but 'straight shooter'? From his latest column:



    Sorry, but McCarthy provides NO support or evidence for this contention... it's not in HIS column, and it's not in the NYT piece. Where is the evidence that 'Obama', as he claims, opened up a counterintelligence investigation? What evidence did the FBI or DOJ have to justify ANY investigation? Are you suggesting that there was none... and if so, how do YOU know that there wasn't?

    Sorry, but this doesn't even come close to a 'straight shooting' opinion piece.... it's rumor, innuendo, and conjecture.
    Yeah. You won’t get it from just today’s column. He’s writing as if you’d been following for awhile. Stay tuned and you’ll catch up.

    If you read the NYT piece, keeping in mind the McCarthy column, you should be able to discern that, yes, the investigation was initiated with no evidence: that the Popadopoulos story is a frame up, performed by a cooperative Russian and an FBI plant. I’ll conject here, that the Trump Tower incident will prove to be a related operation.

    “Once you eliminate the impossible, whatever remains, no matter how improbable, must be the truth.”
    Arthur Conan Doyle, Sr.

    The bank records and testimony are possessed by congressional committees, and likely the DoJ, showing money going from hiliary’s campaign and the DNC, to PerkinsCoui, to Fusion GPS, to Christopher Steele, who paid Russians for stories that he compiled into the dossier that was used for fraudulent FISA surveillance applications. A payment that wasn’t disclosed until the bank records were subpoenaed. If Muler had anything remotely similar on Trump, he couldn’t keep a lid on it for 3 seconds.
    Ask not what your country can do for you; ask what you can do for your country. John Fn Kennedy. (D)

  10. #150
    Join Date
    Nov 2004
    Location
    Sharon, MA
    Posts
    20,668

    Default Re: The 2017-present Special Counsel investigation

    Quote Originally Posted by mdh View Post
    If you read the NYT piece, keeping in mind the McCarthy column, you should be able to discern that, yes, the investigation was initiated with no evidence: that the Popadopoulos story is a frame up, performed by a cooperative Russian and an FBI plant. I’ll conject here, that the Trump Tower incident will prove to be a related operation.
    I have no doubt that you BELIEVE that. For myself, I have yet to see any evidence that it's true. At least, you're admitting it's conjecture, whose value is essentially zero.

    Quote Originally Posted by mdh View Post
    “Once you eliminate the impossible, whatever remains, no matter how improbable, must be the truth.”
    Arthur Conan Doyle, Sr.
    This isn't a Victorian crime novel... it's real life... and real life doesn't work that way.

    Quote Originally Posted by mdh View Post
    The bank records and testimony are possessed by congressional committees, and likely the DoJ, showing money going from hiliary’s campaign and the DNC, to PerkinsCoui, to Fusion GPS, to Christopher Steele, who paid Russians for stories that he compiled into the dossier that was used for fraudulent FISA surveillance applications. A payment that wasn’t disclosed until the bank records were subpoenaed. If Muler had anything remotely similar on Trump, he couldn’t keep a lid on it for 3 seconds.
    Once again, where do you get your bona fides as an experienced federal prosecutor? It is FAR more likely (on the basis of common sense alone), that Mueller, running a tight ship, isn't going to release ANYTHING until he gets his ducks in a row.

    As for those 'fraudulent' FISA applications, perhaps you have some inside source that informs YOU (but not the rest of us) as to what was presented to a panel of judges to get those warrants?

    Your entire thesis, on this whole affair, is endlessly repetitive: rumor, innuendo, conjecture.... wishful thinking heavily weighted with political bias. I certainly have a political bias, myself.... but NOT when it comes to what evidence Mueller does or doesn't have. For THAT stuff, I have NO idea... and neither do you.

    I'll repeat: YOU don't know, and I don't know, what evidence Mueller has obtained, so far... so all your conjecture is just meaningless partisan drivel.

    When you have some actual evidence, let us know.
    "Reason and facts are sacrificed to opinion and myth. Demonstrable falsehoods are circulated and recycled as fact. Narrow minded opinion refuses to be subjected to thought and analysis. Too many now subject events to a prefabricated set of interpretations, usually provided by a biased media source. The myth is more comfortable than the often difficult search for truth."







  11. #151
    Join Date
    Dec 2006
    Location
    afloat with at least 6' of water under me.
    Posts
    58,500

    Default Re: The 2017-present Special Counsel investigation

    Nice conspiracy you've got there mdh. Just like Trump saying Obama was born in Kenya!

  12. #152
    Join Date
    Jun 2001
    Posts
    28,420

    Default Re: The 2017-present Special Counsel investigation

    Same old red ****.

    "We create our own reality."
    The best statement I've seen from this latest carnage came from a student who lived through it -

    "My generation will not allow this to continue!"

    Remember voting age is 18. Read it and weep reds.

  13. #153
    Join Date
    Oct 2004
    Location
    oklahoma
    Posts
    3,725

    Default Re: The 2017-present Special Counsel investigation

    Quote Originally Posted by Norman Bernstein View Post
    I have no doubt that you BELIEVE that. For myself, I have yet to see any evidence that it's true. At least, you're admitting it's conjecture, whose value is essentially zero.



    This isn't a Victorian crime novel... it's real life... and real life doesn't work that way.



    Once again, where do you get your bona fides as an experienced federal prosecutor? It is FAR more likely (on the basis of common sense alone), that Mueller, running a tight ship, isn't going to release ANYTHING until he gets his ducks in a row.

    As for those 'fraudulent' FISA applications, perhaps you have some inside source that informs YOU (but not the rest of us) as to what was presented to a panel of judges to get those warrants?

    Your entire thesis, on this whole affair, is endlessly repetitive: rumor, innuendo, conjecture.... wishful thinking heavily weighted with political bias. I certainly have a political bias, myself.... but NOT when it comes to what evidence Mueller does or doesn't have. For THAT stuff, I have NO idea... and neither do you.

    I'll repeat: YOU don't know, and I don't know, what evidence Mueller has obtained, so far... so all your conjecture is just meaningless partisan drivel.

    When you have some actual evidence, let us know.
    Really? You’re going to quit speculating on this forum about what crimes the President may or may not be guilty of? Because you haven’t yet.
    Ask not what your country can do for you; ask what you can do for your country. John Fn Kennedy. (D)

  14. #154
    Join Date
    Jun 2001
    Posts
    28,420

    Default Re: The 2017-present Special Counsel investigation

    reds have a special thought process. "Yeah sure, the guy is a life long conman, cheat and whore monger, but he's not."
    The best statement I've seen from this latest carnage came from a student who lived through it -

    "My generation will not allow this to continue!"

    Remember voting age is 18. Read it and weep reds.

  15. #155
    Join Date
    Mar 2006
    Location
    Entry Level
    Posts
    17,455

    Default Re: The 2017-present Special Counsel investigation

    Actually one of the best arguments I've heard for impeachment first was from Robert Bork: what sense does it make to prosecute the guy in charge of the prosecutors until his powers over them have been removed? And having a special prosecutor immune from the President isn't an answer. That's de facto impeachment, without trial, before prosecution. Coup d'etat arising in the Justice Dept.

    OTOH if you can't indict, what happens with the statute of limitations? Guy could be in office eight years.
    He's a Mexican. -- Donald Trump.
    America cannot survive another four years of Barack Obama. -- Governor Chris Christie (R) New Jersey
    It wasn't racism, it was an attack on Christianity. -- Fox News
    Crying white mothers are ratings gold. -- National Rifle Association

  16. #156
    Join Date
    Feb 2010
    Location
    Freeland, WA
    Posts
    26,722

    Default Re: The 2017-present Special Counsel investigation

    No person is above the law. If SCOTUS should rule otherwise in the case of our current president, then this country is dead, and I might ad well insist that my future grandchildren learn New Zealand or something.
    Gerard>
    ​Freeland, WA

    Resistance is NOT futile.

  17. #157
    Join Date
    Jan 2000
    Location
    Portland, Maine
    Posts
    16,820

    Default Re: The 2017-present Special Counsel investigation


  18. #158
    Join Date
    Jan 2000
    Location
    Portland, Maine
    Posts
    16,820

    Default Re: The 2017-present Special Counsel investigation


  19. #159
    Join Date
    Jan 2000
    Location
    Portland, Maine
    Posts
    16,820

    Default Re: The 2017-present Special Counsel investigation

    Was it Franklin Pierce that was arrested while President Of The United States?

  20. #160
    Join Date
    Dec 2009
    Location
    Frankfort, MI
    Posts
    6,927

    Default Re: The 2017-present Special Counsel investigation

    Quote Originally Posted by StevenBauer View Post
    Was it Franklin Pierce that was arrested while President Of The United States?
    Yes, in 1853.

    Jeff C

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •