Kemp Posted September 21, 2018 Share Posted September 21, 2018 On 9/19/2018 at 7:30 AM, Koko78 said: He never claimed Clinton wasn't impeached. He said Clinton was never convicted of anything, but he certainly was impeached. Since nothing has happened to Trump, yet, what's his point? If Trump were to be convicted of something he might have a point. Then again, if Trump is convicted of something in the future, it will all be moot. By the way, the notion that a President cannot be prosecuted for a crime is pure nonsense. It's certainly not in the Constitution. On 9/19/2018 at 9:05 AM, 4merper4mer said: Dude. You think The Big Lebowski tried to break into the voting machines? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Tiberius Posted September 21, 2018 Share Posted September 21, 2018 20 minutes ago, Kemp said: He said Clinton was never convicted of anything, but he certainly was impeached. Since nothing has happened to Trump, yet, what's his point? If Trump were to be convicted of something he might have a point. Then again, if Trump is convicted of something in the future, it will all be moot. By the way, the notion that a President cannot be prosecuted for a crime is pure nonsense. It's certainly not in the Constitution. You think The Big Lebowski tried to break into the voting machines? But it is Justice Department policy, just saying. Who knows what they will do. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Deranged Rhino Posted September 21, 2018 Share Posted September 21, 2018 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Tiberius Posted September 21, 2018 Share Posted September 21, 2018 9 minutes ago, Deranged Rhino said: And 37 people are talking about it! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Koko78 Posted September 21, 2018 Share Posted September 21, 2018 1 hour ago, Kemp said: He said Clinton was never convicted of anything, but he certainly was impeached. I believe you were the one who said he was convicted. 1 hour ago, Kemp said: By the way, the notion that a President cannot be prosecuted for a crime is pure nonsense. It's certainly not in the Constitution. I suggest you read the Federalist Papers #69. The founding fathers, specifically Alexander Hamilton, disagree with you. It was their pretty clear intent that impeachment was the remedy for a sitting president, with criminal liability only attaching once he is removed from office. http://avalon.law.yale.edu/18th_century/fed69.asp 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Pine Barrens Mafia Posted September 22, 2018 Share Posted September 22, 2018 Hey any evidence of Russian collusion yet? Just checking. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Buffalo_Gal Posted September 22, 2018 Share Posted September 22, 2018 26 minutes ago, joesixpack said: Hey any evidence of Russian collusion yet? Just checking. From Trump? Nyet. From others? Da. 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
DC Tom Posted September 22, 2018 Share Posted September 22, 2018 31 minutes ago, joesixpack said: Hey any evidence of Russian collusion yet? Just checking. https://www.huffingtonpost.com/william-bradley/from-russia-with-love-the_b_627368.html Particularly, "Skolkovo." If you want to know where the Russian capacity for "hacking elections" came from. 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
njbuff Posted September 22, 2018 Share Posted September 22, 2018 1 hour ago, joesixpack said: Hey any evidence of Russian collusion yet? Just checking. This probe is the biggest fraud in American history. Fact. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
3rdnlng Posted September 22, 2018 Share Posted September 22, 2018 On 9/20/2018 at 1:42 PM, Boyst62 said: What was his name? Get your own guy. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Nanker Posted September 22, 2018 Share Posted September 22, 2018 7 hours ago, DC Tom said: https://www.huffingtonpost.com/william-bradley/from-russia-with-love-the_b_627368.html Particularly, "Skolkovo." If you want to know where the Russian capacity for "hacking elections" came from. Sure, but that was from 2010 when Russia was our friend. Trump’s election ruined that beautiful relationship. Now they’re our hated enemy. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
boyst Posted September 22, 2018 Share Posted September 22, 2018 15 hours ago, Kemp said: He said Clinton was never convicted of anything, but he certainly was impeached. Since nothing has happened to Trump, yet, what's his point? If Trump were to be convicted of something he might have a point. Then again, if Trump is convicted of something in the future, it will all be moot. By the way, the notion that a President cannot be prosecuted for a crime is pure nonsense. It's certainly not in the Constitution. You think The Big Lebowski tried to break into the voting machines? You can't convict a sitting president of a crime. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
DC Tom Posted September 22, 2018 Share Posted September 22, 2018 18 hours ago, Kemp said: By the way, the notion that a President cannot be prosecuted for a crime is pure nonsense. It's certainly not in the Constitution. He can't be. He has to be impeached, convicted, and removed from office before a criminal charge can be brought against him. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Deranged Rhino Posted September 22, 2018 Share Posted September 22, 2018 “I’ve read it. Some of it’s embarrassing for the Department of Justice — some of it’s embarrassing for the FBI. Embarrassment is not a reason to classify something,” said Gowdy. “A lot of it should be embarrassing to John Brennan, and maybe therein lies why he is so adamant that this information not be released.” (Should be.... but Brennan isn't a principled or honorable man, he views what he did as his duty - to to the country, but to his wallet) 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
GG Posted October 2, 2018 Share Posted October 2, 2018 Still in Putin's back pocket, or maybe not. Funny how the narrative suddenly shifts from a Putin stooge to threatening a nukular war. Nope, there's absolutely nothing in between. Quote The U.S. ambassador to NATO set off alarm bells Tuesday when she suggested that the United States might “take out” Russian missiles that U.S. officials say violate a landmark arms control treaty. Although Ambassador Kay Bailey Hutchison’s comments were somewhat ambiguous, arms control experts said they could be interpreted to mean a preemptive strike against Russian missiles. Such a move could lead to nuclear war. 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Nanker Posted October 2, 2018 Share Posted October 2, 2018 43 minutes ago, GG said: Still in Putin's back pocket, or maybe not. Funny how the narrative suddenly shifts from a Putin stooge to threatening a nukular war. Nope, there's absolutely nothing in between. Well it's obvious if Trump did order the military to take out the Russian missiles, it would be at the expense of the Democrats new best friend and ally - Russia. 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
B-Man Posted October 3, 2018 Share Posted October 3, 2018 . 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
B-Man Posted October 4, 2018 Share Posted October 4, 2018 SO YOU’RE SAYING IT WAS ALL A PUT-UP JOB? Russia collusion bombshell: DNC lawyers met with FBI on dossier before surveillance warrant. “This is a bombshell that unequivocally shows the real collusion was between the FBI and Donald Trump’s opposition — the DNC, Hillary and a Trump-hating British intel officer — to hijack the election, rather than some conspiracy between Putin and Trump.” 2 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Deranged Rhino Posted October 4, 2018 Share Posted October 4, 2018 1 hour ago, B-Man said: SO YOU’RE SAYING IT WAS ALL A PUT-UP JOB? Russia collusion bombshell: DNC lawyers met with FBI on dossier before surveillance warrant. “This is a bombshell that unequivocally shows the real collusion was between the FBI and Donald Trump’s opposition — the DNC, Hillary and a Trump-hating British intel officer — to hijack the election, rather than some conspiracy between Putin and Trump.” There's more to come on this. I assume the FBI presser tomorrow morning will be about the arrest of the ricin suspect ... but it could be much more interesting. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
B-Man Posted October 8, 2018 Share Posted October 8, 2018 Democrats Are Failing On Russia For The Same Reason They Failed On Kavanaugh . 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts