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.

 

Democrats and Media currently commiting Obstruction of Justice by own definition

page: 4
67
<< 1  2  3    5  6 >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Apr, 21 2019 @ 02:32 PM
link   
a reply to: loam


2020 is on track to be Trump's. But 2024 will be the most fascinating election in my lifetime. What happens when Trump is gone?


Ivanka!!




posted on Apr, 21 2019 @ 02:32 PM
link   
a reply to: loam


2020 is on track to be Trump's. But 2024 will be the most fascinating election in my lifetime. What happens when Trump is gone?


Ivanka!!



posted on Apr, 21 2019 @ 02:33 PM
link   
a reply to: loam


2020 is on track to be Trump's. But 2024 will be the most fascinating election in my lifetime. What happens when Trump is gone?


Ivanka!!



posted on Apr, 21 2019 @ 03:27 PM
link   
a reply to: mikell

Mike Pence with Nikki Haley as his running mate is the most likely bet.



posted on Apr, 21 2019 @ 03:40 PM
link   

originally posted by: mikell
a reply to: loam


2020 is on track to be Trump's. But 2024 will be the most fascinating election in my lifetime. What happens when Trump is gone?


Ivanka!!


Ivanka for Secretary of State !!!! 😎



posted on Apr, 21 2019 @ 03:54 PM
link   
a reply to: Grambler

You are running for office? And you willfully ignore what the report really said? Mueller expected an impartial Congress would bring charges against Trump, and you conclude that it is all a lie? Quit drinking the Kool-Aid dude.

And on this Easter Sunday I will also state that Jesus would reject Trump and all he stands for. If you think otherwise, then you also misinterpreted his teachings and have fallen for Satan's biggest lie of all.
edit on 21-4-2019 by sligtlyskeptical because: (no reason given)



posted on Apr, 21 2019 @ 04:17 PM
link   

originally posted by: Sookiechacha
Obstruction was always a front and center charge, and not some new form of deflection the Dems drummed up because they didn't get a criminal conspiracy charge. People have been screaming obstruction from the day Trump fired Comey.


You are right,

The Dems knew the Mueller investigation wouldn't find anything regarding Russia, because they themselves created the Russia hoax. The entire purpose of the investigation was to coax Trump into obstruction, and keep some deep state members in position.

They put key deep state members in the Mueller investigation so they can't be touched by Trump, otherwise if he did touch anyone they could get him with obstruction. It was a catch 22.

That didn't work out in their favor, as deep state agents like Peter Strzok were outed by other means.



posted on Apr, 21 2019 @ 05:51 PM
link   

originally posted by: Sookiechacha
a reply to: whywhynot

cdn.cnn.com...


First, a traditional prosecution or declination decision entails a binary determination to initiate or decline a prosecution, but we determined not to make a traditional prosecutorial judgment. The Office of Legal Counsel (OLC) has issued an opinion finding that "the indictment or criminal prosecution of a sitting President would impermissibly undermine the capacity of the executive branch to perform its constitutionally assigned functions" in violation of "the constitutional separation of powers." 1 Given the role of the Special Counsel as an attorney in the Department of Justice and the framework of the Special Counsel regulations , see 28 U.S.C. § 515;28 C.F.R. § 600.7(a), this Office accepted OLC's legal conclusion for the purpose of exercising prosecutorial jurisdiction. And apart from OLC's constitutional view, we recognized that a federal criminal accusation against a sitting President would place burdens on the President's capacity to govern and potentially preempt constitutional processes for addressing presidential misconduct.



"With respect to whether the President can be found to have obstructed justice by exercising his powers under Article II of the Constitution, we concluded that Congress has the authority to prohibit a President's corrupt use of his authority in order to protect the integrity of the administration of justice,"




If we had confidence after a thorough investigation of the facts that the President clearly did not commit obstruction of justice, we would so state,” ...However, we are unable to reach that judgment."


And


“The conclusion that Congress may apply the obstruction laws to the President’s corrupt exercise of the powers of office accords with our constitutional system of checks and balances and the principle that no person is above the law,”




Your usual weak reply. CNN article? Because of all of their lies for the last two years they are now rated 15th in viewership, that’s behind the Food Channel. Nope don’t care whatever they say.

It’s simple you said Mueller said he didn’t proceed against Trump due to DOJ rules. Just link that quote from him. I’ll wait.



posted on Apr, 21 2019 @ 06:37 PM
link   

originally posted by: sligtlyskeptical
a reply to: Grambler

You are running for office? And you willfully ignore what the report really said? Mueller expected an impartial Congress would bring charges against Trump, and you conclude that it is all a lie? Quit drinking the Kool-Aid dude.

And on this Easter Sunday I will also state that Jesus would reject Trump and all he stands for. If you think otherwise, then you also misinterpreted his teachings and have fallen for Satan's biggest lie of all.


Please

I’m not going to listen to people who bought the collusion lie yell me about drinking kool aid

Meanwhile I have discussed at great length what the report said, including the NO ILLEGAL COLLUSION part the trump haters want to ignore

But congrats on yet again being a person that ignores the whole op to make childish points



posted on Apr, 21 2019 @ 07:01 PM
link   
a reply to: whywhynot




Your usual weak reply. CNN article?


It's not an article, genius. It's the source you asked for.

If you would have clicked on the "article" you would have seen that it's not an article, but The Mueller Report. It's in a searchable format, for your convenience, so you can look up what I posted to see it's what the report really says.



Just link that quote from him. I’ll wait.


Read the post again. It's right there.

Jeeez, talk about weak!


edit on 21-4-2019 by Sookiechacha because: (no reason given)



posted on Apr, 21 2019 @ 07:24 PM
link   
a reply to: Sookiechacha

It really irritates you that your bible CCN has lost so much viewership that it has less than the food channel, doesn’t it?

Ok so what page on the report does it say what you claim? Namely that they didn’t recommend prosecutors to proceed because of the DOJ past ruling. Not your interpretation but actual words clearly to that effect.

You cannot find it only your spin.

Discredited yet again.



posted on Apr, 21 2019 @ 07:46 PM
link   
a reply to: whywhynot

Mueller did not say trump is guilty on obstruction in any way

However, he did say that they didn’t even consider a charge against him because of the olc ruling saying that prosecutors have no authority to charge the president

I’m on phone right now or I’d link it (my notes on the pages are saved on my computer)

However, that doesn’t mean that he found trump guilty and wants congress to charge him



posted on Apr, 21 2019 @ 07:53 PM
link   
And just to hit home the point

We are on page 4 of this thread, and the only response by people saying trump tweeting mean things on twitter about the investigation and wanting to fire mueller is to post memes or tell me im drinking koolaid.

If trump wanting to fire mueller was obstruction, then democrats, media people and intel people putting pressure to make barr resign are also guilty of obstruction.

And of course they ignore that, because they are fine with the double standards



posted on Apr, 21 2019 @ 08:13 PM
link   
I think many people are missing the genesis of why Mueller was unable to come to a conclusion on the obstruction part of the investigation. He basically said that without knowing the President's intent he couldn't make the determination. If the President had sat down with Mueller he would have been able to ask the questions about intent. And would have been able to come to a conclusion.

Having said that I believe Trump's legal team made the correct choice to not have him sit down with Special Counsel's staff. They would have definitely tried to get him in a perjury trap.

I also believe that even if Mueller had concluded that Trump hadn't Obstructed Justice Adam Schiff and and the resist people would still be trashing anyone and everyone around Trump.

To those who say Mueller couldn't indict a sitting President and that's reason he didn't to come to a conclusion Is silly. That's the whole point of a Special Council. To make a determination without politics over shadowing the investigation. Not to pass the torch over to Congress so they can play endless politics.



posted on Apr, 21 2019 @ 08:34 PM
link   
Trump's biggest mistake was not firing Comey on his first day in office. The left would have cheered.
At the time Comey was the lefts public enemy number one. For the left to hate Comey so much for how he publicly reopened the email investigation two weeks before the election and then switch and say he is a hero is ridiculous. He should have been fired we all know Hillary would have fired him on her first day and nobody would have screamed obstruction.



posted on Apr, 21 2019 @ 09:23 PM
link   
a reply to: loam





I keep waiting for the day the left finally decides to mount an issue based opposition to Trump's second term....a far more dangerous strategy to Trump than what they've been doing for the last three years. But I guess they won't deliver.







Only thing more dangerous than talking too much, is not listening.

Ask Hillary 2016.



posted on Apr, 21 2019 @ 09:42 PM
link   

originally posted by: ErEhWoN
a reply to: loam





I keep waiting for the day the left finally decides to mount an issue based opposition to Trump's second term....a far more dangerous strategy to Trump than what they've been doing for the last three years. But I guess they won't deliver.








Only thing more dangerous than talking too much, is not listening.

Ask Hillary 2016.


Too bad the DNC rigged it so Bernie couldn't make his case in the last presidential election.



posted on Apr, 21 2019 @ 09:43 PM
link   
a reply to: ErEhWoN

I have always maintained that had Hillary not cheated him out of the nomination, he would have won the presidency.



posted on Apr, 21 2019 @ 09:53 PM
link   
a reply to: loam

Your probably right. I disagree with some of his ideas but he did have a solid grasp on the youth vote and was a good candidate. I like how he actually believes what he is running on.



posted on Apr, 21 2019 @ 09:58 PM
link   

originally posted by: Meniscus
a reply to: loam

Your probably right. I disagree with some of his ideas but he did have a solid grasp on the youth vote and was a good candidate. I like how he actually believes what he is running on.


He does not believe what he runs on in my opinion.

Or else he wouldn't have several homes and sports cars for starters. Hes proven himself to be a hypocrite in my eyes.

But he could win for sure




top topics



 
67
<< 1  2  3    5  6 >>

log in

join