Judiciary Committee hearing on IG report - Wray and Rosenstein - 6/28 live feed

I see the activation is started.

tik tock

💥💥💥

originally posted by: shooterbrody
a reply to: introvert

The recommendations for firing WITH CAUSE make the obstruction moot.
Unless you are for charging rosenstein and sessions as well.

I don't think you are understanding. It depends on his intent and his reasoning behind his actions.

If his intent was to fire Comey because of the Russia investigation, that could be considered obstruction.

It doesn't matter what was recommended to Trump if he fired Comey because of the investigations.

a reply to: introvert

Actually, the RR recommendation means a lot.

😎

a reply to: introvert

That is trying to split and unsplittable hair.

Unless Trump flat out admits to it, the plausible answer will provide the reasonable doubt needed for any sane person to just shrug and move on.

Otherwise, there are a whole lot more conspiracies with more evidence that need digging into.

originally posted by: introvert

originally posted by: shooterbrody
HAHAHAHA
you people are a riot
how is there obstruction when the deputy director recommends firing for cause
how is there obstruction when the ag recommends firing for cause
or are they both in on the obstruction too?
or is the potus not to follow the recommendations of government officials?

It would be obstruction if he fired Comey because of the "Russia thing" and not because of the recommendations made to him.

Intent appears to be very important in the matter of obstruction.

gee, did trump fire comey before he got the recommendation from comeys boss and from the AG?
NO
did trump shut down the investigation or did it continue?
oh it continued

and we're back

originally posted by: Xcathdra
and we are off to the races... Democrats are already trying to derail the hearings by either not being present and by requesting a recorded vote on previous business.

Now Democrats are wanting to know why procedure was not followed by holding this hearing today.

That's called being the Opposition.

Don't pretend that Republicans don't do the same and worse.

This a perfect example of our broken system.

and we're back...

originally posted by: introvert

originally posted by: shooterbrody
a reply to: introvert

The recommendations for firing WITH CAUSE make the obstruction moot.
Unless you are for charging rosenstein and sessions as well.

I don't think you are understanding. It depends on his intent and his reasoning behind his actions.

If his intent was to fire Comey because of the Russia investigation, that could be considered obstruction.

It doesn't matter what was recommended to Trump if he fired Comey because of the investigations.

No you are the one who does not understand
Potus has the constitutional authority to fire the fbi director with NO reason needed
trump fired comey AFTER the recommendation of the dd and the ag for cause
questions about his "intent" are moot because of the recommendations and the timing of the firing
or was trump NOT to have followed the dd and ags recommendations?

originally posted by: bigfatfurrytexan
a reply to: introvert

That is trying to split and unsplittable hair.

Unless Trump flat out admits to it, the plausible answer will provide the reasonable doubt needed for any sane person to just shrug and move on.

Otherwise, there are a whole lot more conspiracies with more evidence that need digging into.

We are not at this moment privvy to all the evidence that Special Counsel Mueller has access to.

I will wait and see. If the President did cross the line, and did Obstruct Justice (and he most certainly can, acting as Chief Law Enforcement Officer does not place him above the law) then appropriate actions should be taken by the Congress.

If not (and I would assume this is the case) we should move on.

a reply to: Xcathdra

Because he resigned DURING THE IMPEACHMENT PROCEEDINGS!!!Man you people really grasp! Then Ford had to PARDON him so he didn't do jail time!

a reply to: xuenchen

BWAHAHAHA

a reply to: bigfatfurrytexan

That is trying to split and unsplittable hair.

Is intent not part of the language regarding obstruction law?

Unless Trump flat out admits to it, the plausible answer will provide the reasonable doubt needed for any sane person to just shrug and move on.

Your logical fallacy aside, we must ask if he did admit it. Did he not say on TV that despite the recommendation, he was going to fire Comey and then specifically mentioned the Russia investigation?

“[Deputy Attorney General Rod J. Rosenstein] made a recommendation, but regardless of recommendation I was going to fire Comey knowing there was no good time to do it. And in fact when I decided to do it, I said to myself, I said, you know, this Russia thing with Trump and Russia is a made-up story.”

www.washingtonpost.com... oredirect=on&utm_term=.171e2aeac1ea

So how is any "sane person" supposed to take what he said?

He used very specific language that clearly implies he was going to fire Comey, regardless of the recommendation, and the Russia issue was on his mid when he decided to do it.

Otherwise, there are a whole lot more conspiracies with more evidence that need digging into.

Sure...

So tired of hearing the same line about duty and service.

Past heroism doesnt excuse present misconduct.

RR in total cya mode.

Good sign
😎

originally posted by: shooterbrody

originally posted by: introvert

originally posted by: shooterbrody
HAHAHAHA
you people are a riot
how is there obstruction when the deputy director recommends firing for cause
how is there obstruction when the ag recommends firing for cause
or are they both in on the obstruction too?
or is the potus not to follow the recommendations of government officials?

It would be obstruction if he fired Comey because of the "Russia thing" and not because of the recommendations made to him.

Intent appears to be very important in the matter of obstruction.

gee, did trump fire comey before he got the recommendation from comeys boss and from the AG?
NO
did trump shut down the investigation or did it continue?
oh it continued

I did not say the investigation was shut down and when he received the recommendation is irrelevant, if we believe what he said.

Please try to stay focused and no deflect.

originally posted by: Gryphon66

originally posted by: bigfatfurrytexan
a reply to: introvert

That is trying to split and unsplittable hair.

Unless Trump flat out admits to it, the plausible answer will provide the reasonable doubt needed for any sane person to just shrug and move on.

Otherwise, there are a whole lot more conspiracies with more evidence that need digging into.

We are not at this moment privvy to all the evidence that Special Counsel Mueller has access to.

I will wait and see. If the President did cross the line, and did Obstruct Justice (and he most certainly can, acting as Chief Law Enforcement Officer does not place him above the law) then appropriate actions should be taken by the Congress.

If not (and I would assume this is the case) we should move on.

Agreed.

originally posted by: kurthall
a reply to: Xcathdra

Because he resigned DURING THE IMPEACHMENT PROCEEDINGS!!!Man you people really grasp! Then Ford had to PARDON him so he didn't do jail time!

again no he didnt. He resigned 14 days after the Supreme court ruled he had to turn over tapes. Articles of impeachment werent even drafted when he resigned.

a reply to: shooterbrody

Ok sparky.

OOooo

RR getting snippie already !!

He's got a problem.

😃