teedubbya
6 years ago
Both are dirty but you ignore one. Thatโ€™s the problem.
DrafterX
6 years ago
The precedent has been set.. if you're not prosecuted there was no crime... ๐Ÿ˜Ÿ
Krazeehorse
6 years ago

I do agree with Opel in that this presidency is going to make it harder on future presidencies. There likely will be an over correction as a result of the unprecedented corruption in this administration.

teedubbya wrote:



I'd say it's a sucker bet that the next dem in the whitehouse that has a republican controlled House will be impeached for something.
teedubbya
6 years ago
Possibly krazyhorse. The Clinton impeachment was more of a farce than this one however. At least this time it involves work lol.

Drafter, in this case it will likely involve prosecution. Actually it already has. I wonder if once the DOJ no longer shields un indicted co conspiracor one if that dude will get prosecuted?

Iโ€™m m laying pretty good odds that the reason for this turd to need re-election is to manipulate and stop criminal charges. He is as dirty as they come. And I thought Bill Clinton was bad. This guy is filthy dirty.
delta1
6 years ago

I do agree with Opel in that this presidency is going to make it harder on future presidencies. There likely will be an over correction as a result of the unprecedented corruption in this administration.

teedubbya wrote:




don't think the GOP can treat a Dem POTUS with any more disrespect than they did Obama...McConnell made that clear from day one that he and his party had zero inclination to work across the aisle...

if a Dem POTUS crosses half as many legal, criminal and moral lines like the doofus occupying the WH now, I would want him out also...
rfenst
6 years ago

The precedent has been set.. if you're not prosecuted there was no crime... ๐Ÿ˜Ÿ

DrafterX wrote:


I think you may be off on your constitutional interpretation. Nowhere in the constitution or case law (that I know of) is there any requirement of "prosecution". It is not a condition precedent.
delta1
6 years ago
and in the case of the POTUS, it seems that an unwritten policy by the DOJ is that a sitting POTUS should not be the subject of a criminal indictment while in office...

which seems to be the basis for Mueller's decision not to recommend prosecution of Trump for at least 10 counts of obstruction of justice spelled out in detail in his report...

wise people before us believed that if the POTUS was not artificially protected in this way, there would be endless politically motivated indictments aimed at a sitting POTUS so as to prevent him from executing his official duties...that seems to be what Trump's lawyers are arguing, overlooking their client's conduct...

the Constitution provides for oversight of the POTUS by giving some power to the Congress, including the authority to impeach and remove from office...
DrafterX
6 years ago
And the DOJ also gave that protection to who they thought was going to be President... ๐Ÿ˜Ÿ
Users browsing this topic