Russia Collusion Scandal (aka A Leftist fantasy)

I'm just waiting to see the full report to make the conclusion.

I find it interesting how impatient you were for a long time about when is the report gonna drop. Barr makes a summary in less than 2 days and you are running with it.

I am just awaiting to see the report. The 9/11 commission released a report. That was involving a major national security issue. I see McConnell blocked a resolution in Senate today to release the full report. House passed a resolution 420-0 last week.

When the full report is released you'll have my full thoughts. Until then, the right can run as many victory laps as possible whilst still being weird about releasing the report to the public. No collusion or obstruction should mean there was no devil in the details and there shouldn't be much of anything redacted.
 
Hawk said:
Uh, no.

A Supreme Court ruling ... hell, even a SCOTUS opinion and a legal position paper are completely and entirely different.

****.

Just stop. Stick with the crackpot theories. At least those you don't need to substantiate with fact.
Click to expand...

So what you're telling me is when the DOJ says (and later reaffirms) they don't believe it's constitutional to indict a sitting pre somehow contradicts what I said?
 
thethe said:
He didnt go against the constituion. Executive branch was given the power by congress which is constitutional.

And the border is the very definition of an emergency and now that wall is being built!
Click to expand...
[MENTION=128]sturg33[/MENTION] I'm giving you one chance here to redeem yourself and come here and declare shenanigans on thethe.

Update to after sturg's post, still waiting.
 
zitothebrave said:
[MENTION=128]sturg33[/MENTION] I'm giving you one chance here to redeem yourself and come here and declare shenanigans on thethe.

Update to after sturg's post, still waiting.
Click to expand...

sturg already said Trump has abused his authority in declaring national emergency for the wall. That was weeks ago when Trump declared it. Nothing to see here.
 
zitothebrave said:
[MENTION=128]sturg33[/MENTION] I'm giving you one chance here to redeem yourself and come here and declare shenanigans on thethe.

Update to after sturg's post, still waiting.
Click to expand...

I think Trump is a clown with the national emergency.

I dont think its constitutional.

I have no idea how that relates to Russia fantasy conspiracy
 
thethe said:
Because there was no factual basis to substantiate the need to spy on an American citizen? They purposely obfuscated the fact that is bought and paid for research by Hillary.


And those 'Shady' ties to Russia is complete bunk which ended up being another weak link that led to absolute zero convictions.

To be so comfortable with this obvious abuse of power is sickening.
Click to expand...

For you to be so comfortable with Trump is mindblowing. Will you continue this craziness when he refuses to leave on 1/20/21? Or will you cry the election was a sham to be headed up by Obama?
 
Last edited:
what conspiracy have i embraced and supposedly still embracing exactly?


i have said, no one has seen the report and for some reason it isn't released to the public yet


again, what i do or don't do or say or don't say doesn't matter to you. you have your agenda to post what you have concocted in your brain from your "news sources" on what i believe and you run with it.
 
sturg33 said:
I think Trump is a clown with the national emergency.

I dont think its constitutional.

I have no idea how that relates to Russia fantasy conspiracy
Click to expand...

I'm glad you haven't totally slipped into the deep end. Sometimes I feel the need to check on people.
 
zitothebrave said:
So what you're telling me is when the DOJ says (and later reaffirms) they don't believe it's constitutional to indict a sitting pre somehow contradicts what I said?
Click to expand...

Yes.

You said that the Department of Justice had a "long standing policy" which prevented a sitting President from being indicted, which is false.

Two separate Departments opined on the constitutionality of the issue, but, again: not a policy, not a law.
 
Individual-1 said:
I'm just waiting to see the full report to make the conclusion.

I find it interesting how impatient you were for a long time about when is the report gonna drop. Barr makes a summary in less than 2 days and you are running with it.

I am just awaiting to see the report. The 9/11 commission released a report. That was involving a major national security issue. I see McConnell blocked a resolution in Senate today to release the full report. House passed a resolution 420-0 last week.

When the full report is released you'll have my full thoughts. Until then, the right can run as many victory laps as possible whilst still being weird about releasing the report to the public. No collusion or obstruction should mean there was no devil in the details and there shouldn't be much of anything redacted.
Click to expand...

Can y'all stop pretending that you will actually read a single word of the full report when it is released?

I'm calling it now. The next "THIS IS BIG" conspiracy theories are going to involve redactions of random **** like people's cell phone numbers.

Also, impatient? I've sat here for two years choking on bull**** hot air about how 'big investigations take a long time', and then, when the investigation actually concludes you still don't have the balls to accept the results?

Please.
 
Hawk said:
Yes.

You said that the Department of Justice had a "long standing policy" which prevented a sitting President from being indicted, which is false.

Two separate Departments opined on the constitutionality of the issue, but, again: not a policy, not a law.
Click to expand...

So wait, let me try rewording this.

the DOJ believes that it's unconstitutional to indict a sitting president. How is that not policy?

I never said it was law. You're the one who keeps harping on that.
 
zitothebrave said:
So wait, let me try rewording this.

the DOJ believes that it's unconstitutional to indict a sitting president. How is that not policy?

I never said it was law. You're the one who keeps harping on that.
Click to expand...

Good grief man.

It's not a policy either.

It's a position that the CLINTON AND NIXON Departments of Justice would have taken in the face of a Presidential indictment, based on their interpretation of the law.

That is what a Memorandum Opinion is.

And that is what context is.

Move on.
 
Hawk said:
Good grief man.

It's not a policy either.

It's a position that the CLINTON AND NIXON Departments of Justice would have taken in the face of a Presidential indictment, based on their interpretation of the law.

That is what a Memorandum Opinion is.

And that is what context is.

Move on.
Click to expand...

So what you're saying is that I'm right.

Got it.

We won't get a legal ruling unless someone attempts to indict a president, but I'm sure the Supreme Court will rule as the DOJ has. That's why the impeachment clause exists in the Constitution. It's the accepted norm. Bill wasn't indicted by a Grand Jury for Obstruction, neither would Trump.
 
zitothebrave said:
We won't get a legal ruling unless someone attempts to indict a president
Click to expand...

Ding ding.

You've come a long way from "There's been a long standing policy of the Justice Department (by my quick research since 1973) not to indict or convict a sitting president."

I accept payment by cash, check, or donations to the Roger Stone defense fund.
 
zitothebrave said:
You think I changed what I said? Are we speaking the same language? I feel like there is a disconnect
Click to expand...

You posted a factually inaccurate statement designed to prop up a ****ty argument, were schooled, and have now backpedaled to the point where you are making statements in support of my original position.

Trump has not been indicted because there aren't solid grounds, not because of State Department policy.
 
Individual-1 said:
I'm just waiting to see the full report to make the conclusion.

I find it interesting how impatient you were for a long time about when is the report gonna drop. Barr makes a summary in less than 2 days and you are running with it.

I am just awaiting to see the report. The 9/11 commission released a report. That was involving a major national security issue. I see McConnell blocked a resolution in Senate today to release the full report. House passed a resolution 420-0 last week.

When the full report is released you'll have my full thoughts. Until then, the right can run as many victory laps as possible whilst still being weird about releasing the report to the public. No collusion or obstruction should mean there was no devil in the details and there shouldn't be much of anything redacted.
Click to expand...

The talking point of 2 days is fake news. Stop falling for fake news.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top