It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.

Please white-list or disable AboveTopSecret.com in your ad-blocking tool.

Thank you.

 

Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.

 

AG Jeff Sessions resigns....

page: 16
56
<< 13  14  15    17  18 >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Nov, 8 2018 @ 08:27 AM
link   
a reply to: soberbacchus

But choosing his AG is. You're not this dense. Quit pretending to be.




posted on Nov, 8 2018 @ 08:27 AM
link   
The fact you continually regurgitate the same arguments after repeatedly being shown where they fail tells me you are more concerned with propaganda than facts.


originally posted by: Grambler
a reply to: Swills

1. trump may fire any of his people for any reason, including comey.


Correct. And Trump can also be found guilty of Obstruction of Justice and impeached.
No law forbids a CEO from firing a subordinate for any reason.
No law dictates who a CEO must hire or fire.
But if a CEO fires a secretary for not performing sexual acts, that act of firing, while not illegal in itself, becomes EVIDENCE of sexual harassment.

Firing Comey was not illegal, it was however strong EVIDENCE of Obstruction of Justice.



in addition comey admitted trump was never a suspect in the investigation.


Comey told Trump he was not the SUBJECT of an investigation at the time.
Everyone is a suspect depending on where the evidence leads.
At the time Comey told him that, they had no evidence to suggest that Trump himself should be the SUBJECT of an investigation.



And the investigation continued unabated, even picking up steam, showing no obstruction occured at all.



Weird. How do you know what the conclusion of the Special Counsel report is?



posted on Nov, 8 2018 @ 08:29 AM
link   
a reply to: soberbacchus

I believe it was in August. He said he would not subpoena trump in accordance with the Doj guidelines on the matter.



posted on Nov, 8 2018 @ 08:35 AM
link   

originally posted by: Dfairlite
a reply to: soberbacchus

I believe it was in August. He said he would not subpoena trump in accordance with the Doj guidelines on the matter.


That did not happen.

It's possible one of Trump's minions like Giuliani suggested something that was not true, as he often does, but the Special Counsel's Office, Mueller and DOJ have never made any statements like you claim.

That claim is false.



posted on Nov, 8 2018 @ 08:36 AM
link   
a reply to: soberbacchus

You really are clueless aren't you? Inspector General Michael Horowitz gave all the reason to remove Comey he needed.

In his report he details Comey's incompetence in handling the Hillary Clinton investigation. Horowitz said that Comey was "extraordinary and insubordinate," and did not agree with any of his reasons for deviating from "well-established Department policies."



posted on Nov, 8 2018 @ 08:40 AM
link   

originally posted by: Dfairlite
a reply to: soberbacchus

But choosing his AG is. You're not this dense. Quit pretending to be.


The constitution requires confirmation from the Senate for the Attorney General.

Justice Department Policy (while not law) says that the Assistant AG will serve as AG until the Senate Confirms.

If the Assistant AG is unable to serve the Solicitor General.

Trump instead appointed Jeff Sessions Chief of Staff, a man who has publicly attacked the legitimacy of the Special Counsel investigation and has spoken about a strategy where it could be defunded to bring it a halt.

Again - Is the temporary appointment illegal? No.
Is it continuing strong evidence of a campaign to obstruct an investigation into himself, his cabinet, his campaign and potentially his family?

Absolutely.



posted on Nov, 8 2018 @ 08:42 AM
link   
a reply to: soberbacchus

You're arguing that his following the law which you admit supercedes policy, is obstruction. It's amazing.

I think you're confusing what you believe implies guilt with obstruction. These are two completely separate issues.
edit on 8-11-2018 by Dfairlite because: (no reason given)



posted on Nov, 8 2018 @ 08:50 AM
link   

originally posted by: dragonridr
a reply to: soberbacchus

You really are clueless aren't you?


"Clueless" insults by the RWNJ mob around here = Grounded in reality.



Inspector General Michael Horowitz gave all the reason to remove Comey he needed.

In his report he details Comey's incompetence in handling the Hillary Clinton investigation. Horowitz said that Comey was "extraordinary and insubordinate," and did not agree with any of his reasons for deviating from "well-established Department policies."


The IG Report was issued long after Comey was fired and thus could not have had any bearing on Trump's decision.

Trump explained clearly and publicly his reasoning for firing Comey was the "Russia thing".
He shared his relief with Russia's Chief representative in the Oval Office near immediately afterwards.

The above is supported by things like phenomena of TIME, aka one thing happening before or after another.
It is also supported by televised interviews and statements.



posted on Nov, 8 2018 @ 09:00 AM
link   

originally posted by: Dfairlite
a reply to: soberbacchus

You're arguing that his following the law which you admit supercedes policy, is obstruction. It's amazing.


It is strong evidence of obstruction.

Again, hiring and firing decisions by executives are not "illegal".
If they do so based on requests for sexual favors, those hiring and firing decisions become strong evidence of an act that is illegal.

Firing Comey does not = Obstruction of Justice
Firing Comey does = Evidence of Obstruction of Justice

What determines whether it is evidence of obstruction of justice or not? = Reason for firing.

If your ideology forbids you from understanding that basic reasoning, I am sorry for you.

Outrage and insults do not alter basic reasoning and reality.



posted on Nov, 8 2018 @ 09:00 AM
link   

originally posted by: soberbacchus

originally posted by: dragonridr
a reply to: soberbacchus

You really are clueless aren't you?


"Clueless" insults by the RWNJ mob around here = Grounded in reality.



Inspector General Michael Horowitz gave all the reason to remove Comey he needed.

In his report he details Comey's incompetence in handling the Hillary Clinton investigation. Horowitz said that Comey was "extraordinary and insubordinate," and did not agree with any of his reasons for deviating from "well-established Department policies."


The IG Report was issued long after Comey was fired and thus could not have had any bearing on Trump's decision.

Trump explained clearly and publicly his reasoning for firing Comey was the "Russia thing".
He shared his relief with Russia's Chief representative in the Oval Office near immediately afterwards.

The above is supported by things like phenomena of TIME, aka one thing happening before or after another.
It is also supported by televised interviews and statements.


I dont think your aware that mueller wad hired after Comey was fired. In fact Comey leaking classified information was one of the reasons Muellers investigation was started. Had he not leaked his memo there would have been an investigation.
edit on 11/8/18 by dragonridr because: (no reason given)



posted on Nov, 8 2018 @ 09:03 AM
link   

originally posted by: JBurns
a reply to: Butterfinger

I have a feeling the enemies of Freedom are going to sleep a little less easily tonight.



If reports are to be believed, he only sleeps about 4 hours a night and spends most of the evening on twitter.



posted on Nov, 8 2018 @ 09:05 AM
link   

originally posted by: dragonridr

originally posted by: soberbacchus

originally posted by: dragonridr
a reply to: soberbacchus

You really are clueless aren't you?


"Clueless" insults by the RWNJ mob around here = Grounded in reality.



Inspector General Michael Horowitz gave all the reason to remove Comey he needed.

In his report he details Comey's incompetence in handling the Hillary Clinton investigation. Horowitz said that Comey was "extraordinary and insubordinate," and did not agree with any of his reasons for deviating from "well-established Department policies."


The IG Report was issued long after Comey was fired and thus could not have had any bearing on Trump's decision.

Trump explained clearly and publicly his reasoning for firing Comey was the "Russia thing".
He shared his relief with Russia's Chief representative in the Oval Office near immediately afterwards.

The above is supported by things like phenomena of TIME, aka one thing happening before or after another.
It is also supported by televised interviews and statements.


I dont think your aware that mueller wad hired after Comey was fired. In fact Comey leaking classified information was one of the reasons Muellers investigation was started. Had he not leaked his memo there would have been an investigation.


Well aware.

And?

You suggested the IG Report was a reason that Trump fired Comey.

Time itself debunks that assertion.

YOU WROTE:



Inspector General Michael Horowitz gave all the reason to remove Comey he needed.



Comey was fired May 9th 2017

That report was issued June 14th 2017

How can an investigation begun after James Comey's firing and a report issued after his firing have been the reason Trump fired him?

This is not a political question. It is a question about time travel.


edit on 8-11-2018 by soberbacchus because: (no reason given)



posted on Nov, 8 2018 @ 09:07 AM
link   
a reply to: soberbacchus

Speaks with world leaders too.



posted on Nov, 8 2018 @ 09:14 AM
link   
a reply to: soberbacchus

Is there something wrong with being gay?

Whats your problem with it?

Take your democratic hypocrisy elsewhere ya muppet



posted on Nov, 8 2018 @ 09:14 AM
link   
a reply to: soberbacchus


What determines whether it is evidence of obstruction of justice or not? = Reason for firing. 


That's not true. Sorry.

Here's what obstruction is:

A person obstructs justice when they have a specific intent to obstruct or interfere with a judicial proceeding. For a person to be convicted of obstructing justice, they must not only have the specific intent to obstruct the proceeding, but the person must know (1) that a proceeding was actually pending at the time; and (2) there must be a nexus between the defendant’s endeavor to obstruct justice and the proceeding, and the defendant must have knowledge of this nexus.



posted on Nov, 8 2018 @ 09:18 AM
link   
a reply to: Dfairlite

Didn't that Rosenstien guy write a recommendation for Comey to be fired?
Didn't that Rosenstein guy pass that recommendation on to Sessions?
Didn't sessions pass that on to the POTUS?

Yet only the POTUS obstructed?



posted on Nov, 8 2018 @ 09:21 AM
link   

originally posted by: Butterfinger
a reply to: soberbacchus

Is there something wrong with being gay?

Whats your problem with it?



How would I know you are gay or even man or woman. Is there some gender or sexual orientation tag around here I missed?

I only teased you for lusting after Whittaker and swooning over his profile and jawline.

Your sexual orientation is your own business. I don't care, but all teasing aside, good for you for being yourself.



posted on Nov, 8 2018 @ 09:22 AM
link   
a reply to: Dfairlite

How do you think that definition helps your argument?



posted on Nov, 8 2018 @ 09:30 AM
link   
a reply to: soberbacchus

Because the president doesn't need a reason to fire someone. Meanwhile obstruction requires specific intent. So anything short of trump saying I fired him solely to end the Russia investigation, is not obstruction (and even then, you get into whether a president can determine the priorities of the doj and what they investigate). Last I checked Mueller just has a new boss, so obstruction has not happened.



posted on Nov, 8 2018 @ 09:31 AM
link   

originally posted by: BlackJackal
You think too highly of Trump, he has already replaced him with loyalist Whitaker who wrote an op-ed in 2017 condemning the Mueller probe.

The Mueller Special Investigation should be condemned--it is so far off of it's original intent and has found nothing of substance to do with that original intent that it should have been wrapped up a while ago. And let's not even get into the thick foundation of bullsh*t upon which it was initiated in the first place.

From the actual op-ed:

It does not take a lawyer or even a former federal prosecutor like myself to conclude that investigating Donald Trump's finances or his family's finances falls completely outside of the realm of his 2016 campaign and allegations that the campaign coordinated with the Russian government or anyone else. That goes beyond the scope of the appointment of the special counsel.

...

If he were to continue to investigate the financial relationships without a broadened scope in his appointment, then this would raise serious concerns that the special counsel's investigation was a mere witch hunt.

CNN Op-Ed

He wasn't wrong then, and it still holds true today.

But, we'll see how it works itself out, though, in regards to Session's replacement. I never liked Sessions to begin with, although it did allow Kate McKinnon to do a very funny impression.

In reality, though, you think too lowly of Trump, and are always unnecessarily suspect of everything that happens under his administration and are too quick to be hopeful for failings from within the administration and from him directly. I prefer to be a bit more hopeful than that, but if you're content in wallowing in your political misery, by all means...
edit on 8-11-2018 by SlapMonkey because: coding issue







 
56
<< 13  14  15    17  18 >>

log in

join