Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
I don't think he should of made that comment but he is right. If Mueller and his boatload of high priced lawyers who specialize in just about any illegal activity he might of been involved with do not come up with anything it's time to let it go already.
I don't think he should of made that comment but he is right. If Mueller and his boatload of high priced lawyers who specialize in just about any illegal activity he might of been involved with do not come up with anything it's time to let it go already.
That doesn’t make Trump right. You’re saying that the investigation should end if it doesn’t turn up anything. That’s generally how investigations work - you investigate until the trail ends.
What Trump said - and has been saying all along - is that Mueller should not have been allowed to investigate him at all.
That doesn’t make Trump right. You’re saying that the investigation should end if it doesn’t turn up anything. That’s generally how investigations work - you investigate until the trail ends.
What Trump said - and has been saying all along - is that Mueller should not have been allowed to investigate him at all.
I believe what Trump was referring to in his speech was the investigations being opened by the House. Mueller and his team of high priced lawyers who have the authority to investigate anything have been at it for two years. If the result of this investigation is that Trump has committed no crimes I think it's time to give it up. What are they going to do, open House investigations for the next two years?
That doesn’t make Trump right. You’re saying that the investigation should end if it doesn’t turn up anything. That’s generally how investigations work - you investigate until the trail ends.
What Trump said - and has been saying all along - is that Mueller should not have been allowed to investigate him at all.
The trail of evidence leads to Andrew McCabe's office where he and Peter Strzok concocted an "insurance policy" against a Trump victory.
If you don't acknowledge that, you are either uninformed or a coup supporter/sympathizer.
That doesn’t make Trump right. You’re saying that the investigation should end if it doesn’t turn up anything. That’s generally how investigations work - you investigate until the trail ends.
What Trump said - and has been saying all along - is that Mueller should not have been allowed to investigate him at all.
Trump is right about that also.
The motivation was political and a target to investigate selected, not a crime.
The same target was told more than once he wasn't the target of investigation. All of the nonsense could have been avoided if both parties were subject of investigation and prosecution.
The trail of evidence leads to Andrew McCabe's office where he and Peter Strzok concocted an "insurance policy" against a Trump victory.
If you don't acknowledge that, you are either uninformed or a coup supporter/sympathizer.
You lost me at “concocted.” I have no doubt that people in the FBI don’t want Trump to be President. But Strzok didn’t fabricate all of the evidence that has led to numerous criminal convictions of people in Trump’s orbit. Those are bad people who did bad things, and Strzok didn’t hold a gun to their heads.
By way of analogy, Republicans went after Bill Clinton, and when they couldn’t make the original charges stick, they ran with perjury over a sex act. It was clearly politically motivated, but they didn’t force him to lie to Congress. He chose to do that, and he’s accountable for it.
But Strzok didn’t fabricate all of the evidence that has led to numerous criminal convictions of people in Trump’s orbit.
Those crimes have been after the fact (e.g. pejury) or unrelated to Trump (e.g. tax fraud). That doesn't justify them but Stone for example committed no crime prior to the investigation.
Quote:
By way of analogy, Republicans went after Bill Clinton, and when they couldn’t make the original charges stick, they ran with perjury over a sex act. It was clearly politically motivated, but they didn’t force him to lie to Congress. He chose to do that, and he’s accountable for it.
Clinton was being sued for sexual abuse. They were trying to establish a pattern of abuse and during a deposition while under oath he lied. This is fact by his own admission and it's a felony if a prosecutor wanted to pursue it. Ultimately he was disbarred and paid a hefty fine for it.
End the wars and I will care less what the investigations find.
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.
Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
