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.

 

Don McGahn, ex-White House counsel, subpoenaed over Mueller report

page: 6
12
<< 3  4  5    7  8  9 >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Apr, 23 2019 @ 02:26 PM
link   

originally posted by: Cassi3l
a reply to: shooterbrody

Congress can indeed start impeachment whenever they like
Alas, i doubt that they will do so, despite Mueller concluding on
the President’s corrupt exercise of the powers of office

This whole thing will be Trump's albatross for the next 2 years







This all reminds of the impeachment of Bill Clinton and the Starr report, for some reason. Definitely dejavu. Congress waited until after he was re-elected in 1998 to begin their impeachment process for 4 counts. Perjury, obstruction of justice, abuse of power, ect.

The thing is eventually Clinton was acquitted since many votes were along party lines and in order to impeach the President, a two-thirds vote was needed. Sigh.

My guess is the democrats will keep using the possible impeachment through the 2020 election, hoping that they can get a 2/3 majority in Congress. They already know they don't have a candidate that will beat him, but they can focus their DNC funds into congress elections in an attempt to get Trump!




posted on Apr, 23 2019 @ 02:42 PM
link   
a reply to: CynConcepts

Indeed; a 4 year free for all...
Starting off with Whitewater ending up with tearfull Bill Clinton on TV
covering 11 grounds for impeachment including perjury, obstruction
witness tampering, abuse of power...

I Wonder what ATS would have looked like
if it had been around then !



posted on Apr, 23 2019 @ 03:22 PM
link   

originally posted by: Cassi3l
a reply to: shooterbrody

Congress can indeed start impeachment whenever they like
Alas, i doubt that they will do so, despite Mueller concluding on
the President’s corrupt exercise of the powers of office

This whole thing will be Trump's albatross for the next 2 years











alas your "corrupt" is in no way criminal
just as no "exoneration" from from mueller is required

so when will the impeachment begin?



posted on Apr, 23 2019 @ 03:35 PM
link   
a reply to: shooterbrody

From re-reading some of your posts,
it seems that English may not be your 1st language
so just to clarify for you ...


alas your "corrupt" is in no way criminal


"Your" - should read "Mueller's"
"Corrupt" - in modern day language, often includes the notion of criminality

Impeachment would begin at the behest of Congress
if they deem that there is a need to do so

Why don't you go and start a new thread ?
Something along the lines of, i don't know....
"Trump won't be impeached over the Mueller report"

I'm sure the flags and stars garnered would be good for you
Let off some steam elsewhere
edit on 23-4-2019 by Cassi3l because: (no reason given)



posted on Apr, 23 2019 @ 03:37 PM
link   
a reply to: Cassi3l

Lol is this what desperation looks like?

Its fugly lol



posted on Apr, 23 2019 @ 03:49 PM
link   
a reply to: Cassi3l

From name caling to grammar errors
No substance from you
Want to know why?
What you are championing has no substance.
No amount of mewling will change that.



posted on Apr, 23 2019 @ 03:56 PM
link   
a reply to: shooterbrody

Hmm hmm
And yet you continue to reply with little-to-nothing to add...



posted on Apr, 23 2019 @ 04:08 PM
link   

originally posted by: Cassi3l
I Wonder what ATS would have looked like
if it had been around then !


Likely you and a few of the obvious regulars scrambling to defend Clinton at all costs, even going so far as to suggest that since Starr didn't himself prosecute, Congress had no right to seek impeachment.

I'd say that the current ridiculous "accusations" against Trump are even less significant and carry less weight than Clinton lying to Congress about receiving felatio from an intern. At least in the Clinton impeachment they had actual perjury, not *guffaw* someone seeking legal counsel from their own legal counsel. *chortle*



posted on Apr, 23 2019 @ 05:22 PM
link   
Impeachment Imminent doe right?



posted on Apr, 23 2019 @ 05:42 PM
link   
a reply to: burdman30ott6
You are a Mod ...


Likely you

You don't know "me", and "Likely" is pure projection


I'd say

What a self acclaimed,
pro-Trump Mod has to say
interests me this much


as to what Mueller has to say...
I'd prefer to see how Congress deals with the Mueller report



posted on Apr, 23 2019 @ 05:45 PM
link   

originally posted by: Cassi3l
a reply to: burdman30ott6
You are a Mod ...


...Mods participate in threads as members. Do politicians vote in elections? Same thing.

As for "knowing you," fair enough... but one can determine a fairly reliable profile on someone based on their past positions and words. Thus, everything I posted still stands.
edit on 23-4-2019 by burdman30ott6 because: (no reason given)



posted on Apr, 23 2019 @ 05:56 PM
link   
a reply to: burdman30ott6

A 'decent' Mod should remain above the fray
A mod aught to have a seperate posting profile
so avoiding any confusion between their 'duties'
and their underlying opinions/bias



posted on Apr, 23 2019 @ 06:01 PM
link   
a reply to: Cassi3l


originally posted by: Cassi3l
a reply to: burdman30ott6

A 'decent' Mod should remain above the fray
A mod aught to have a seperate posting profile
so avoiding any confusion between their 'duties'
and their underlying opinions/bias



Thats not how ATS works.

However it is how deflection works, and pretty much goaltending(you have no counter-argument).

Way to not address anything that was said but rather create yourself as the victim.

*golfclap*

decent, should = shaming lol.

separate posting profiles? you rather even more sockpuppet accounts?



posted on Apr, 23 2019 @ 06:03 PM
link   
a reply to: Cassi3l

A biased member's attempt to bring someone's status as a Mod into a debate to squelch that member-moderator's opinion interests me this much



posted on Apr, 23 2019 @ 06:12 PM
link   
 


off-topic post removed to prevent thread-drift


 



posted on Apr, 23 2019 @ 06:16 PM
link   
a reply to: Cassi3l

Yes, let's get back to discussing how the plan is to call seeking the advice of legal counsel "obstruction of justice," shall we?
:rolleyes:
So, is it the intent of the Committee to completely destroy the 6th Amendment, or only kneecap it with this foolishness?



posted on Apr, 23 2019 @ 06:40 PM
link   
a reply to: burdman30ott6

Yeah, no, stop playing games
even as a pro-Trump Mod
you should know better

Don McGahn, ex-White House counsel, subpoenaed over Mueller report

Potus is in deep, murky, waters
I recognize it as many others can too

Only on ATS and on Fox is it still sunny days for Trump
It truly makes one truly Wonder about the integrity of this site ..



posted on Apr, 23 2019 @ 06:45 PM
link   
a reply to: Cassi3l

It's quite sunny here in reality land, where the simple fact of the matter is, at no time prior in US legal history has anyone been brazen enough to call counseling with your legal advisor, querying them over the legality of an idea, and bouncing ideas off of them related to a legal matter constitutes "obstruction of justice." I mean, seriously... does the 6h Amendment mean nothing to this committee? Does it mean nothing to you? Are we dealing with a situation that distanced from reality, legal precedent, and common legal sense that we even need to have this conversation?


So, not to beat a dead horse, but what does the committee or what do you think the purpose of a "Legal Counsel" is if not to counsel someone on legal matters?



posted on Apr, 23 2019 @ 06:51 PM
link   

originally posted by: Lysergic
Impeachment Imminent doe right?


Has Pelosi changed her mind? God I hope so!



posted on Apr, 23 2019 @ 07:03 PM
link   

originally posted by: burdman30ott6
a reply to: Cassi3lat no time prior in US legal history has anyone been brazen enough to call counseling with your legal advisor, querying them over the legality of an idea, and bouncing ideas off of them related to a legal matter constitutes "obstruction of justice."


If you've jumped on the ''Trump Collusion is dead, but obstruction is real'' bandwagon, you are desperately reaching for a oar when your boat has already gone over the waterfall.

this is what p1sses me off...
Trump had every right to defend himself, seek legal representation.
Trump didn't invoke executive privilege.
Trump and his family and his counterparts answered all questions

The footage of Mueller being asked questions as he enters his car, although unprofessional... really painted a picture for me. Mueller's been the pinup boy for 2years.. yet, no one has seen or heard a word from him.

He was suddenly put on the spot and he looked terrified.. This report was a hit job.. 0 collusion found, but they couldn't let this rest...

the idea of a coup is 'win at all costs'... if they give up now, they're exposed.

if they can keep it going to 2020, they might just pull off a miracle, win and then cover it all up
.. which is why we have the new MSM / Democratic Narrative

'' Obstruction, Tax Records and Redactions ''

They will exhaust that nonsense then move onto the next step in their ''keep this going at all costs'' charade.

Its embarrassing for America.. You've got one of the greatest presidents getting results but the rich corrupt few who are being left out would rather tear your country to pieces instead of allowing America to progress


edit on 23/4/19 by Agit8dChop because: (no reason given)




top topics



 
12
<< 3  4  5    7  8  9 >>

log in

join