Predictions for mueller's testimony

[trenchfoot]

I'm thinking Pelosi is getting second thoughts about her strategy for getting Trump's ass dragged out of office and kicked out into the streets where the New York people are impatiently waiting for him.

Protecting her vulnerable House members (about 30 of them?) by designing a slam dunk impeachment of Trump that takes more time than most folks are willing to bear is a risk that depended on having the Mueller hearings seal Trump's fate as far as public opinion is concerned. Did it though?

Seems to me the hearings didn't have the effect Pelosi wanted out of them so I'm wondering what's the next move and if there was a contingency plan prepped for this eventuality.

Stay the course? Pretty inflexible for a fluid situation such as this one.

Should be really interesting to see how the Dems react to the consequences that the hearings brought to bear.

 

[ImpulsE69]

As evidenced by the poster you quoted, many people simply don't follow the complex legal reasoning and rather than educate themselves, they bluster, and call it "double talk."

Took long enough for someone to throw insults in there. Was beginning to worry. Stay classy P&N.

 

[fskimospy]

Took long enough for someone to throw insults in there. Was beginning to worry. Stay classy P&N.

Someone saying you were blustering aside do you now agree that saying there was no evidence was not only wrong but the polar opposite of reality?

 

[cytg111]

I guess you could call Trump's base "volunteer centipedes."

Centipepes

 

[Jaskalas]

It’s odd that despite repeated requests no conservative will discuss the fact that Mueller said Trump ordered his subordinates to falsify documents in order to obstruct a criminal inquiry.

Any conservative want to answer that? Even one?

Obstruct Justice? Heh... cannot obstruct FAKE JUSTICE!
Checkmate libtards. /s

(Paraphrasing from my local Trumpanzees)

 

[cytg111]

Obstruct Justice? Heh... cannot obstruct FAKE JUSTICE!
Checkmate libtards. /s

(Paraphrasing from my local Trumpanzees)

Trump used this precise argument when he fired Comey!
I knew it was fake. So it cant be Obstruction. Yesterday we heard a slew of R congress critters spew the same nonsense at a god damn live hearing? Has the world gone fucking nuts?
How many brain cells does it take to realize the simplest logical fallacy known to man since the dawn of man.

edit : first fucking hit on google :

 

[[DHT]Osiris]

Didn't read previous pages, but watched most of both hearings yesterday. Mueller did a good job of staying out of the shitstorm that is DvsR right now, and refused to become anyone's tool to bash over the head of another.

I'm irritated with the Democrats for not initiating impeachment proceedings shortly after Mueller's report was released, if only to get names in the history books. I'm irritated at the Republicans during this hearing for clearly disregarding everything that Mueller said (twice) in his initial statements that he was there to comment on the report, and only the report. Nothing else. Every goddamn R that got up there asked ridiculous convoluted questions related to absolutely nothing in the report, in some vain attempt to get a soundbite out of him.

'IS IT NOT TRUE SIR, THAT YOU DIDN'T NOT ALSO NOT INVESTIGATE CLINTON WITH THE SAME VERACITY AS YOU COULD HAVE NOT DONE TO TRUMP?!?' 'I yield my time'.

 

[VRAMdemon]

We're so fucked when we have a Republican investigator say that the president sought out help from Russia, benefited from it, lied to cover it up, and obstructed justice to hinder the investigation and a significant number of people think not only that it's not a big deal, but that it's a huge win for the Republicans.

Now...Trump supporters have pretty much gone from denying Trump's culpability to chortling that he got away with it. They're going with whatever story works best in a given context. But this one is particularly effective: the narrative of the folk hero (Robin Hood) who can commit crimes right under the noses of the clownish authorities, and get away with it.

The thing that makes it a huge win for the Trumpublicans is House Democratic inaction. They're not going to hold Trump accountable. He has license to do whatever he damn well pleases, and yesterday they renewed his license.

He's no Robin Hood, but the Dems are doing a good enough job as the clownish authorities that his clownish followers can pretend he is.

 

[vi edit]

Dems are fucked. We've hit a point where we don't have a guide or rule book. Congress has oversight authority. They ask for hearings and documents. Administration says "Nope". Fine. Issue subpoenas. Administration says "Fuck off, we're ignoring them too". Ok. Vote for contempt? Sure that passes. Your're in contempt. Now what? There's no good path or guide what to do here.

Impeachment is futile. All it does is give the biggest victim in the history of American politics an even bigger badge of dishonor to play the victim card with. The constitution has some guides but not everything we need right now. It doesn't have a good solution for a complicit and enabling Republican party that won't put country before their own party or individual greed. It doesn't really give a good way to resolve an administration that outright ignores congressional oversight. Impeachment only goes so far and assumes you have intellectual honesty and integrity in both branches of government and on both sides of the isle within them. But it doesn't know what to do when all of these ugly elements rear their head at the same time.

 

[dank69]

Dems are fucked. We've hit a point where we don't have a guide or rule book. Congress has oversight authority. They ask for hearings and documents. Administration says "Nope". Fine. Issue subpoenas. Administration says "Fuck off, we're ignoring them too". Ok. Vote for contempt? Sure that passes. Your're in contempt. Now what? There's no good path or guide what to do here.

Impeachment is futile. All it does is give the biggest victim in the history of American politics an even bigger badge of dishonor to play the victim card with. The constitution has some guides but not everything we need right now. It doesn't have a good solution for a complicit and enabling Republican party that won't put country before their own party or individual greed. It doesn't really give a good way to resolve an administration that outright ignores congressional oversight. Impeachment only goes so far and assumes you have intellectual honesty and integrity in both branches of government and on both sides of the isle within them. But it doesn't know what to do when all of these ugly elements rear their head at the same time.

Look on the bright side: at least we didn't elect Hillary. That might have been a disaster.

 

[UNCjigga]

The problem is that as push turns to shove, and our institutions start succumbing to attack, the people in a position of power to do anything about it are too old, too feeble, and too protective of their own legacies to do anything about it. Witness Robert Mueller on July 24, 2019. He chose his own integrity over the country’s.

 

[VRAMdemon]

This exchange might be the most important of the day:

“Could you charge the president with a crime after he left office?” Buck asked.

“Yes,” Mueller replied instantly.

Buck went on: “You believe that he committed — you could charge the President of the United States with obstruction of justice after he left office?”

“Yes,” Mueller said again.

This is why the president is desperate to win next year. He is fighting for his survival.

Think you've seen racism now? He will only get nastier.

 

[VRAMdemon]

Trump's inner circle parroting Trumps bullshit. Just using Sarah Huckabee Sanders as an example, who tweeted:

"Didn’t take long for Mueller to once again vindicate President @realDonaldTrump. No collusion. No obstruction. And now Mueller all but admits it was all along a total witch hunt"

Now, it doesn't take a lot to show that this is clearly untrue. Mueller specifically said the opposite of this.

The psychology is simple. The average person isn't going to read 100s of pages of government reports. The average person isn't going to listen to 7 hours of "could you repeat that question" No. The average person is going to tune into their preferred news network and listen for a few minutes to some "analyst" that they already agree with tell them what they want to hear. Sad state of affairs

 

[Hayabusa Rider]

This exchange might be the most important of the day:

“Could you charge the president with a crime after he left office?” Buck asked.

“Yes,” Mueller replied instantly.

Buck went on: “You believe that he committed — you could charge the President of the United States with obstruction of justice after he left office?”

“Yes,” Mueller said again.

This is why the president is desperate to win next year. He is fighting for his survival.

Think you've seen racism now? He will only get nastier.

No one will charge Trump even if they are able. We're folding now, maybe, so don't expect a spine later. Nixon showed what this country could do and now we are showing that we're lesser people than then. I cling to the possibility of some real stand being taken, a reason to vote based on principles and a sense of duty, but it will be the lesser of two evils/business as usual it seems. I'll bother to vote against Trump and Republicans but not because the leadership in Congress has shown a shred of courage by meeting its Constitutional obligations.

Let's just go back to the illusion that the system works.

 

[[DHT]Osiris]

Let's just go back to the illusion that the system works.

The surest sign that the system doesn't work is that those in power let us participate.

 

[Hayabusa Rider]

The surest sign that the system doesn't work is that those in power let us participate.

Participation? Us? It seems that "we" are second class citizens then. The party systems are designed to provide an illusion while in most cases we are led by the nose. Our "betters" work to game the system and do so quite well.

 

[TheVrolok]

Took long enough for someone to throw insults in there. Was beginning to worry. Stay classy P&N.

What was an insult? Sounds like you got a case of "the feels."

Saying you don't follow something isn't insulting, it's objectively true as demonstrated by your post. You are free to educate yourself to follow better.

There are toonnnnssss of things I don't follow or understand. I don't find it insulting when someone points that out. Seems like an odd reaction.

 

[SMOGZINN]

This exchange might be the most important of the day:

“Could you charge the president with a crime after he left office?” Buck asked.

“Yes,” Mueller replied instantly.

Buck went on: “You believe that he committed — you could charge the President of the United States with obstruction of justice after he left office?”

“Yes,” Mueller said again.

This is why the president is desperate to win next year. He is fighting for his survival.

Think you've seen racism now? He will only get nastier.

It is worth noting that Mueller has come back and publically said that this statement is being misconstrued. All he meant is that the president does not have any specific protections from prosecution once leaving office and was not giving an opinion of if there is anything specific to charge this particular President with.

 

[Hayabusa Rider]

It is worth noting that Mueller has come back and publically said that this statement is being misconstrued. All he meant is that the president does not have any specific protections from prosecution once leaving office and was not giving an opinion of if there is anything specific to charge this particular President with.

Did someone think otherwise? They shouldn't have.

 

[SMOGZINN]

Did someone think otherwise? They shouldn't have.

Yes, a number of news sources went with the reading that Mueller was saying that while Trump can not be prosecuted now, and that is why Mueller made no recommendations for prosecution, he would recommend they pursue prosecution once Trump leaves office.

 

[brandonbull]

Any thoughts about how Trump ordered his subordinates to falsify documents?

What news article was that summarized from again? Wasn't Volume II mostly news story summaries?

 

[IronWing]

What news article was that summarized from again? Wasn't Volume II mostly news story summaries?

Dodge, duck, dip, dive and dodge!

 

[compuwiz1]

Yes, a number of news sources went with the reading that Mueller was saying that while Trump can not be prosecuted now, and that is why Mueller made no recommendations for prosecution, he would recommend they pursue prosecution once Trump leaves office.

While true today, the problem is, if Trump is reelected, the statute of limitations would most likely run out before he's out of office. If he doesn't get impeached, he's probably going to get reelected. Reality sux sometimes.

 

[[DHT]Osiris]

What news article was that summarized from again? Wasn't Volume II mostly news story summaries?

No, volume II was an analysis of 10 obstruction of justice events. By nature of how outwardly facing our President lives his life, there was a lot of public record information which could be included in that analysis.

 

[[DHT]Osiris]

While true today, the problem is, if Trump is reelected, the statute of limitations would most likely run out before he's out of office. If he doesn't get impeached, he's probably going to get reelected. Reality sux sometimes.

It's possible there will end up being an SC trial to determine whether or not one can 'escape' a statute of limitations by being un-indictable during its duration. I won't feign to know which direction that will go, but I have doubts that if it comes to that and the FBI truly thinks they have something worth indicting for (Narrator: They do), they'll pursue it anyhow, and see what the courts say about it.