Article of Impeachment

[M14 Shooter]

Trump was found to have about 10 incidents of obstruction.

You mean Mueller reported on 10 incidents - at least one of which includes his Twitter posts - that might be considered obstruction, but there isn't enough evidence to support a criminal charge to that effect.

No one can cite for me language in the laws against obstruction that allow for the criminalization of Twitter posts.

I can!
Obstruction of justice is defined by federal statute as any "interference with the orderly administration of law and justice" and governed by 18 U.S.C. §§ 1501-1521. ... Obstruction of criminal investigations (18 U.S.C. § 1510)

I suggest you quote the actual section of the law rather than an convenient interpretation, spoon fed to you by someone who knows you aren't curious enough to check it out for yourself:

Obstruction of justice
Definition
18 U.S.C. § 1503 defines "obstruction of justice" as an act that "corruptly or by threats or force, or by any threatening letter or communication, influences, obstructs, or impedes, or endeavors to influence, obstruct, or impede... the due administration of justice."

Show how the tweets in question qualify
.

 

[M14 Shooter]

So in your mind, free speech is the same as doing the deed.

It does not at all surprise me that the left seeks to criminalize free speech.

 

[Hutch Starskey]

adopted by the House Judiciary Committee on July 27, 1974.

Watergate Articles Of Impeachment

ARTICLE 1

"In his conduct of the office of President of the United States, Richard M. Nixon, in violation of his constitutional oath faithfully to execute the office of President of the United States and, to the best of his ability, preserve, protect, and defend the Constitution of the United States, and in violation of his constitutional duty to take care that the laws be faithfully executed, has prevented, obstructed, and impeded the administration of justice, in that:

"On June 17, 1972, and prior thereto, agents of the Committee for the Re-election of the President committed unlawful entry of the headquarters of the Democratic National Committee in Washington, District of Columbia, for the purpose of securing political intelligence. Subsequent thereto, Richard M. Nixon, using the powers of his high office, engaged personally and through his close subordinates and agents, in a course of conduct or plan designed to delay, impede, and obstruct the investigation of such illegal entry; to cover up, conceal and protect those responsible; and to conceal the existence and scope of other unlawful covert"

Read more in the link.

For there to be obstruction it helps to have an actual crime to hide instead of manufacturing a crime and then seeing if you can trip him up lying or obstructing justice.

Sure. Just ask Flynn!

He's going to prison.

No, hes not

Really?

 

[Hutch Starskey]

Trump was found to have about 10 incidents of obstruction.

You mean Mueller reported on 10 incidents - at least one of which includes his Twitter posts - that might be considered obstruction, but there isn't enough evidence to support a criminal charge to that effect.

No one can cite for me language in the laws against obstruction that allow for the criminalization of Twitter posts.

but there isn't enough evidence to support a criminal charge to that effect.

The report doesn't say that at all. If anything it says the opposite. Evidence of criminal obstruction was found but a sitting president cannot be indicted.

 

[Hutch Starskey]

Impeachment is a political - not legal - process.

A president can be removed from office via the impeachment process absent alleged criminal wrongdoing.

The people have the authority to determine whether a president has abused his power and obstructed justice, and remove him from office.

Trump has clearly done both.

If its so clear, then the impeachment proceedings should begin. Do it! What's the hold up!!!!!!

LOL...

WTF do you imagine the subpoenas and hearings are for?

The American people will hear directly from those involved and support for impeachment will grow. See Watergate, fool. It's not like we haven't been through this before.

 

[Hutch Starskey]

Trump was found to have about 10 incidents of obstruction.

You mean Mueller reported on 10 incidents - at least one of which includes his Twitter posts - that might be considered obstruction, but there isn't enough evidence to support a criminal charge to that effect.

No one can cite for me language in the laws against obstruction that allow for the criminalization of Twitter posts.

I can!

Obstruction of justice is defined by federal statute as any "interference with the orderly administration of law and justice" and governed by 18 U.S.C. §§ 1501-1521. ... Obstruction of criminal investigations (18 U.S.C. § 1510)

So in your mind, free speech is the same as doing the deed.

It is nearly impossible for me to comprehend the complete, utter panic of the far left Progressives. Just stunning.

So exercising free speech cannot also be incriminating? Who knew?

 

[Avatar4321]

If you want to do this go ahead. It will rip the country to pieces. You may not like the results.I

people won't tolerate this nonsense

 

[Hutch Starskey]

Trump was found to have about 10 incidents of obstruction.

You mean Mueller reported on 10 incidents - at least one of which includes his Twitter posts - that might be considered obstruction, but there isn't enough evidence to support a criminal charge to that effect.

No one can cite for me language in the laws against obstruction that allow for the criminalization of Twitter posts.

I can!

Obstruction of justice is defined by federal statute as any "interference with the orderly administration of law and justice" and governed by 18 U.S.C. §§ 1501-1521. ... Obstruction of criminal investigations (18 U.S.C. § 1510)

And that’s why Mueller chose not to seek charges. The nonsense did not rise to a level sufficient to present to a grand jury. Only hyperpartisan knotheads see tweets as something prosecutable.

Not true in any way.
Read the report instead of arguing from a position of ignorance.

 

[JoeMoma]

Impeachment is a political - not legal - process.

A president can be removed from office via the impeachment process absent alleged criminal wrongdoing.

The people have the authority to determine whether a president has abused his power and obstructed justice, and remove him from office.

Trump has clearly done both.

If its so clear, then the impeachment proceedings should begin. Do it! What's the hold up!!!!!!

LOL...

WTF do you imagine the subpoenas and hearings are for?

The American people will hear directly from those involved and support for impeachment will grow. See Watergate, fool. It's not like we haven't been through this before.

Apparently the grounds for impeachment are not so CLEAR if hearings are needed for support for impeachment to grow, FOOL!

 

[Hutch Starskey]

Impeachment is a political - not legal - process.

A president can be removed from office via the impeachment process absent alleged criminal wrongdoing.

The people have the authority to determine whether a president has abused his power and obstructed justice, and remove him from office.

Trump has clearly done both.

If its so clear, then the impeachment proceedings should begin. Do it! What's the hold up!!!!!!

LOL...

WTF do you imagine the subpoenas and hearings are for?

The American people will hear directly from those involved and support for impeachment will grow. See Watergate, fool. It's not like we haven't been through this before.

Apparently the grounds for impeachment are not so CLEAR if hearings are needed for support for impeachment to grow, FOOL!

This is the process used for both Watergate and clinton, dope.

Both of which were over obstruction.

 

[Wry Catcher]

If you want to do this go ahead. It will rip the country to pieces. You may not like the results.I

people won't tolerate this nonsense

Trump has already torn our country apart. We were a house divided before he took the oath of office, but since then was are more divided than when President Lincoln was first elected, and it is all about Trump's hate and fear and divisive rhetoric.

 

[Wry Catcher]

Impeachment is a political - not legal - process.

A president can be removed from office via the impeachment process absent alleged criminal wrongdoing.

The people have the authority to determine whether a president has abused his power and obstructed justice, and remove him from office.

Trump has clearly done both.

If its so clear, then the impeachment proceedings should begin. Do it! What's the hold up!!!!!!

LOL...

WTF do you imagine the subpoenas and hearings are for?

The American people will hear directly from those involved and support for impeachment will grow. See Watergate, fool. It's not like we haven't been through this before.

Apparently the grounds for impeachment are not so CLEAR if hearings are needed for support for impeachment to grow, FOOL!

Idiot-gram ^^^, which lacks thought and the only thoughtful aspect of this comment is laughter at such ignorance.

 

[CrusaderFrank]

Trump was found to have about 10 incidents of obstruction.

You mean Mueller reported on 10 incidents - at least one of which includes his Twitter posts - that might be considered obstruction, but there isn't enough evidence to support a criminal charge to that effect.

No one can cite for me language in the laws against obstruction that allow for the criminalization of Twitter posts.

I can!

Obstruction of justice is defined by federal statute as any "interference with the orderly administration of law and justice" and governed by 18 U.S.C. §§ 1501-1521. ... Obstruction of criminal investigations (18 U.S.C. § 1510)

Thought Crimes don't count

 

[Markle]

Trump was found to have about 10 incidents of obstruction.

You mean Mueller reported on 10 incidents - at least one of which includes his Twitter posts - that might be considered obstruction, but there isn't enough evidence to support a criminal charge to that effect.

No one can cite for me language in the laws against obstruction that allow for the criminalization of Twitter posts.

but there isn't enough evidence to support a criminal charge to that effect.

The report doesn't say that at all. If anything it says the opposite. Evidence of criminal obstruction was found but a sitting president cannot be indicted.

Twisting facts is part and parcel of being a Progressive. Your desperation is duly noted!

 

[Markle]

So exercising free speech cannot also be incriminating? Who knew?

How?

If I say, "I want to fire Hutch Starskey". But I never fire Hutch Starskey, how is that obstruction of justice?

Progressives are in such a panic that our country is going so well they'll do anything to disrupt the momentum. Their criminal activities are beginning to come to light, and they are desperate to keep the eye of the media on anything but themselves.

 

[Meister]

If you want to do this go ahead. It will rip the country to pieces. You may not like the results.I

people won't tolerate this nonsense

Trump has already torn our country apart. We were a house divided before he took the oath of office, but since then was are more divided than when President Lincoln was first elected, and it is all about Trump's hate and fear and divisive rhetoric.

Trump's hate? Really?

 

[Markle]

This is the process used for both Watergate and clinton, dope.

Both of which were over obstruction.

Both of which had underlying felonies. That does not exist today. As you well know.

 

[Wry Catcher]

Impeachment is a political - not legal - process.

A president can be removed from office via the impeachment process absent alleged criminal wrongdoing.

The people have the authority to determine whether a president has abused his power and obstructed justice, and remove him from office.

Trump has clearly done both.

If its so clear, then the impeachment proceedings should begin. Do it! What's the hold up!!!!!!

Q. What's the hold up

A. American Jurisprudence.

Unlike Trump, and his fellow travelers, chanting "lock her up" isn't necessary or sufficient to being HRC to trial. Especially sense she has been investigated to no avail ad nausea.

Trump's investigation by Mueller was limited in scope, but provided sufficient evidence making further investigation necessary.

HRC testified for hours before the Congress committee which exonerated her; Trump won't testify before a committee of the Congress [and yet even today claimed he has been the most transparent president ever).

 

[JoeMoma]

Impeachment is a political - not legal - process.

A president can be removed from office via the impeachment process absent alleged criminal wrongdoing.

The people have the authority to determine whether a president has abused his power and obstructed justice, and remove him from office.

Trump has clearly done both.

If its so clear, then the impeachment proceedings should begin. Do it! What's the hold up!!!!!!

Q. What's the hold up

A. American Jurisprudence.

Unlike Trump, and his fellow travelers, chanting "lock her up" isn't necessary or sufficient to being HRC to trial. Especially sense she has been investigated to no avail ad nausea.

Trump's investigation by Mueller was limited in scope, but provided sufficient evidence making further investigation necessary.

HRC testified for hours before the Congress committee which exonerated her; Trump won't testify before a committee of the Congress [and yet even today claimed he has been the most transparent president ever).

Then it must not be Clear enough yet!

 

[Markle]

Trump has already torn our country apart. We were a house divided before he took the oath of office, but since then was are more divided than when President Lincoln was first elected, and it is all about Trump's hate and fear and divisive rhetoric.

The only ones torn apart are the far left Progressives. They see the great results we are enjoying as a result of President Trump's brilliant leadership and policies and they are in panic mode!