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.
The evidence would have been sufficient for an indictment apart from the absurd DOJ policy that the president is above the law that Mueller felt he had to follow.
How can we fix this?
I realize this has not been given great consideration before since he haven’t had a president so willfully hostile to our laws and system of government before but this has to change.
No one can be above the law.
I'm sure they can find more Trump hating lawyers than that.
These lawyers are all looking ignorant and being openly political and unprofessional.
"Someone obstructs justice when that person has a specific intent to obstruct or interfere with a judicial proceeding. For a person to be convicted of obstructing justice, that person must not only have the specific intent to obstruct the proceeding, but that person must know (1) that a proceeding was actually pending at the time; and (2) there must be a connection between the endeavor to obstruct justice and the proceeding, and the person must have knowledge of this"
Neither Mueller, nor Barr, found any evidence of obstruction of justice. Give it a rest already. These lawyers are trying to twist and contort the meaning of the law and hoping people are ignorant enough to bite.
They're not giving us their professional opinions.
No, they are giving us their political opinions, and outing themselves as people afflicted with Trump Derangement Syndrome. They have lowered their professional status, because anyone with even a passing curiosity knows that the guidelines for obstruction of justice were not met.
What serious person will want any of these people as their lawyer, when they have just shown the world how easily their emotions can make them blind to the law.
No, they are giving us their political opinions, and outing themselves as people afflicted with Trump Derangement Syndrome. They have lowered their professional status, because anyone with even a passing curiosity knows that the guidelines for obstruction of justice were not met.
What serious person will want any of these people as their lawyer, when they have just shown the world how easily their emotions can make them blind to the law.
How so? They opinion they are endorsing addresses the allegations set forth in the Mueller Report and how those allegations would have been dealt with in their professional experience. It makes no mention of political allegiance.
If you are going to accuse these former prosecutors (who, incidentally, run the gamut of political leanings having served under Republicans and Democrats) of being biased, you are going to have to come up with a better basis for doing so than "I don't like what they have to say, so they must be biased."
600 former prosecutors from both sides of the aisle. You can't claim that everyone who doesn't kowtow to Trump is a partisan without looking foolish, which is exactly what you are doing.
Again, completely meaningless except to those in the media who get paid to write such articles.
Again, completely meaningless except to those in the media who get paid to write such articles.
Meaningless in the sense that they are powerless. Not meaningless if you value informing yourself by listening to the opinions of people with (collectively) centuries of experience on the subject. I know that doesn't mean much to some people in our current post-fact world, but I still see value in being informed.
Meaningless in the sense that they are powerless. Not meaningless if you value informing yourself by listening to the opinions of people with (collectively) centuries of experience on the subject. I know that doesn't mean much to some people in our current post-fact world, but I still see value in being informed.
I don't value opinions from only one side of a hoax. The fact that you do without seeking the truth speaks volumes to what you believe in.
If I asked my co-workers to sign a petition stating that orange man bad, I'm sure about 50% of them would sign it. If I then asked my co-workers to sign a petition stating that orange man good, the other half would sign.
I don't value opinions from only one side of a hoax. The fact that you do without seeking the truth speaks volumes to what you believe in.
If I asked my co-workers to sign a petition stating that orange man bad, I'm sure about 50% of them would sign it. If I then asked my co-workers to sign a petition stating that orange man good, the other half would sign.
Do your co-workers have some type of specialized knowledge that should garner respect on the issue? Is your petition based on some type of analytical reasoning rather than emotion and baseless conjecture? No and no. Therein lies the difference.
Do your co-workers have some type of specialized knowledge that should garner respect on the issue? Is your petition based on some type of analytical reasoning rather than emotion and baseless conjecture? No and no. Therein lies the difference.
Hence lies the fault in the above petition signed by partisan hacks. It's founded on a lie and therefore invalid as a analytical paper. It's not done in a scientific setting, with control and placebos, but rather by a far left leaning arm of the media with an agenda. If, let's say, a non-partisan group had put this poll together, not the Commies and not the Never Trumpers, you would still get I'm sure 1000's to volunteer to sign their name that orange man bad. But, you would also get 1000's who would sign that orange man good.
It's politics my friend.
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.
