It is now time to bring up articles of impeachment against Trump

[Darkwind]

You haven't read the Constitution.
The election was for the states to choose their electors.

The electors elected the President.

Why would democrat conspiracies, led by Hillary make the election of Trump illegal?

Nothing in the Constitution reads that a sitting president is above the law. You definitely have not read the Constitution.

Nobody has said that he is.
But he is the POTUS and he is using the powers of his office as allowed by the Constitution and US law.

What conspiracy theory are you hanging your hat on this time?

The powers of open obstruction are not his to exercise. He is openly tampering with a witness. That is a text book case for obstruction. If you can prove that witness tampering is not obstruction, then please, the floor is yours. If however you have no defense, then shut the hell up.

When was it proven he tampered with a witness? You do realize that tweeting and calling out the media is not tampering with a witness, right?

Here comes another coward to change the subject. No one knows what you are talking about. Witness tampering involves using any method necessary to influence a person or person's testimony. Calling out the media has nothing to do with Trump's tweet. Trump was sending a message to Stone.

Let Me give you a minor education, and we'll see if you are able to retain even that much.

If you look at My reply, it has a direct quote from YOU in it. I'll grant that YOU do not know what you are talking about, but your definition of witness tampering leaves a lot to be desired.

So, give us specific actions that Trump has performed that has tampered with a witness. Keep in mind, that to tamper with a witness, you must first have a position of authority over that person and that authority must be credible to harming the witness.

 

[BWK]

Lawrence: This should be an article of impeachment

Not that we haven't seen this before, but the desperation by Trump to tamper with a witnesses testimony, must and will be addressed in Mueller's report. This latest stunt by Trump on twitter about Roger Stone, just confirms what we have known about Trump since the beginning. He is a desperate criminal who has gotten so sloppy with his obstruction activity, that there is no other option left to deal with other than impeachment.

Everything that we suspected about Trump is being revealed, and this latest desperate tweet proves it.

Of course we all know how accurate Lawrence O'Donnell has been with his predictions and opinions about Donald Trump, dating back to the time Trump announced his intention to run for president.

His splendid record will remain unblemished.

He was right. Trump's election has already been found illegal. He is not a real president, and the law will bear that truth out.

Trump was elected according to the US Constitution.
It can't be illegal. lol.

But it is. The conspiracies that have been exposed, reveals the election was illegal on many fronts.

No it is not.

You cannot provide any evidence whatsoever.

Show me where the Trump Tower meeting, or Jerome Corsi's email dump, or Cambridge Analytica were not coordinated conspiracies.

 

[Soupnazi630]

A tweet is grounds for impeachment and Trump is the one who's unhinged yeah right.

Tweet, T.V., radio, a speech, whatever! It's still obstruction. Got any evidence to the contrary hot shot? Of course not. You're just a bull shitter. Move along.

A president cannot obstruct performing his constitutional duties. Every 9th circuit injunction has been overturned by SCOTUS.

Getting caught up in a conspiracy and obstruction is no constitutional duty.

You have no evidence of either.

You have repeatedly been asked for evidence and you ran away.

The burden is on you not on others to prove your idiotic assertions

 

[Soupnazi630]

Of course we all know how accurate Lawrence O'Donnell has been with his predictions and opinions about Donald Trump, dating back to the time Trump announced his intention to run for president.

His splendid record will remain unblemished.

He was right. Trump's election has already been found illegal. He is not a real president, and the law will bear that truth out.

Trump was elected according to the US Constitution.
It can't be illegal. lol.

But it is. The conspiracies that have been exposed, reveals the election was illegal on many fronts.

No it is not.

You cannot provide any evidence whatsoever.

Show me where the Trump Tower meeting, or Jerome Corsi's email dump, or Cambridge Analytica were not coordinated conspiracies.

The burden is on you to prove that they were crimes

It is not on others to prove a negative

 

[Soupnazi630]

A tweet is grounds for impeachment and Trump is the one who's unhinged yeah right.

Tweet, T.V., radio, a speech, whatever! It's still obstruction. Got any evidence to the contrary hot shot? Of course not. You're just a bull shitter. Move along.

Funny faces by cowards does not rebut my claim.

And nothing proves your claim

So yes they do prove you wrong because our DO NOT have any evidence

 

[BWK]

Nothing in the Constitution reads that a sitting president is above the law. You definitely have not read the Constitution.

Nobody has said that he is.
But he is the POTUS and he is using the powers of his office as allowed by the Constitution and US law.

What conspiracy theory are you hanging your hat on this time?

The powers of open obstruction are not his to exercise. He is openly tampering with a witness. That is a text book case for obstruction. If you can prove that witness tampering is not obstruction, then please, the floor is yours. If however you have no defense, then shut the hell up.

When was it proven he tampered with a witness? You do realize that tweeting and calling out the media is not tampering with a witness, right?

Here comes another coward to change the subject. No one knows what you are talking about. Witness tampering involves using any method necessary to influence a person or person's testimony. Calling out the media has nothing to do with Trump's tweet. Trump was sending a message to Stone.

Let Me give you a minor education, and we'll see if you are able to retain even that much.

If you look at My reply, it has a direct quote from YOU in it. I'll grant that YOU do not know what you are talking about, but your definition of witness tampering leaves a lot to be desired.

So, give us specific actions that Trump has performed that has tampered with a witness. Keep in mind, that to tamper with a witness, you must first have a position of authority over that person and that authority must be credible to harming the witness.

First off, what do we know of authority over who? We don't. So your premise is totally ridiculous and plays no role in a witness tampering scheme. Secondly, get a clue; In the United States, the crime of witness tampering in federal cases is defined by statute at 18 U.S.C. § 1512, which defines it as "tampering with a witness, victim, or an informant." The punishment for such an offense is up to 20 years if physical force was used, attempted, or threatened. The tampering need not have actually been successful in order for it to be criminal. Trump is using Twitter to coax Stone into not testifying. That is a clear example of trying to tamper with a witness and his or her decision making.

 

[Wyatt earp]

You haven't read the Constitution.
The election was for the states to choose their electors.

The electors elected the President.

Why would democrat conspiracies, led by Hillary make the election of Trump illegal?

Nothing in the Constitution reads that a sitting president is above the law. You definitely have not read the Constitution.

Nobody has said that he is.
But he is the POTUS and he is using the powers of his office as allowed by the Constitution and US law.

What conspiracy theory are you hanging your hat on this time?

The powers of open obstruction are not his to exercise. He is openly tampering with a witness. That is a text book case for obstruction. If you can prove that witness tampering is not obstruction, then please, the floor is yours. If however you have no defense, then shut the hell up.

When was it proven he tampered with a witness? You do realize that tweeting and calling out the media is not tampering with a witness, right?

Here comes another coward to change the subject. No one knows what you are talking about. Witness tampering involves using any method necessary to influence a person or person's testimony. Calling out the media has nothing to do with Trump's tweet. Trump was sending a message to Stone.

Think about this


We hate the left


Now add 1 plus 1 and what do you get


A civil war.


.

 

[Soupnazi630]

Nobody has said that he is.
But he is the POTUS and he is using the powers of his office as allowed by the Constitution and US law.

What conspiracy theory are you hanging your hat on this time?

The powers of open obstruction are not his to exercise. He is openly tampering with a witness. That is a text book case for obstruction. If you can prove that witness tampering is not obstruction, then please, the floor is yours. If however you have no defense, then shut the hell up.

When was it proven he tampered with a witness? You do realize that tweeting and calling out the media is not tampering with a witness, right?

Here comes another coward to change the subject. No one knows what you are talking about. Witness tampering involves using any method necessary to influence a person or person's testimony. Calling out the media has nothing to do with Trump's tweet. Trump was sending a message to Stone.

Let Me give you a minor education, and we'll see if you are able to retain even that much.

If you look at My reply, it has a direct quote from YOU in it. I'll grant that YOU do not know what you are talking about, but your definition of witness tampering leaves a lot to be desired.

So, give us specific actions that Trump has performed that has tampered with a witness. Keep in mind, that to tamper with a witness, you must first have a position of authority over that person and that authority must be credible to harming the witness.

First off, what do we know of authority over who? We don't. So your premise is totally ridiculous and plays no role in a witness tampering scheme. Secondly, get a clue; In the United States, the crime of witness tampering in federal cases is defined by statute at 18 U.S.C. § 1512, which defines it as "tampering with a witness, victim, or an informant." The punishment for such an offense is up to 20 years if physical force was used, attempted, or threatened. The tampering need not have actually been successful in order for it to be criminal. Trump is using Twitter to coax Stone into not testifying. That is a clear example of trying to tamper with a witness and his or her decision making.

No it is not clearly tampering no matter how much you scream it is.

You have yet to offer any evidence therefore your claim is uneducated bullshit from a worthless brain

 

[BWK]

A tweet is grounds for impeachment and Trump is the one who's unhinged yeah right.

Tweet, T.V., radio, a speech, whatever! It's still obstruction. Got any evidence to the contrary hot shot? Of course not. You're just a bull shitter. Move along.

Funny faces by cowards does not rebut my claim.

And nothing proves your claim

So yes they do prove you wrong because our DO NOT have any evidence

Who is "you"? I haven't seen any "yous" on here proving anything. And I certainly haven't seen any '"yous" proving me wrong; Analysis | Trump’s latest tweets cross clear lines, experts say: Obstruction of justice and witness tampering.

 

[BWK]

Nothing in the Constitution reads that a sitting president is above the law. You definitely have not read the Constitution.

Nobody has said that he is.
But he is the POTUS and he is using the powers of his office as allowed by the Constitution and US law.

What conspiracy theory are you hanging your hat on this time?

The powers of open obstruction are not his to exercise. He is openly tampering with a witness. That is a text book case for obstruction. If you can prove that witness tampering is not obstruction, then please, the floor is yours. If however you have no defense, then shut the hell up.

When was it proven he tampered with a witness? You do realize that tweeting and calling out the media is not tampering with a witness, right?

Here comes another coward to change the subject. No one knows what you are talking about. Witness tampering involves using any method necessary to influence a person or person's testimony. Calling out the media has nothing to do with Trump's tweet. Trump was sending a message to Stone.

Think about this


We hate the left


Now add 1 plus 1 and what do you get


A civil war.


.

Nice! So, because the truth hits you all in the face like a ton of bricks, you can't deal with it, so you want Civil war. Knock yourself out.

 

[Darkwind]

Nobody has said that he is.
But he is the POTUS and he is using the powers of his office as allowed by the Constitution and US law.

What conspiracy theory are you hanging your hat on this time?

The powers of open obstruction are not his to exercise. He is openly tampering with a witness. That is a text book case for obstruction. If you can prove that witness tampering is not obstruction, then please, the floor is yours. If however you have no defense, then shut the hell up.

When was it proven he tampered with a witness? You do realize that tweeting and calling out the media is not tampering with a witness, right?

Here comes another coward to change the subject. No one knows what you are talking about. Witness tampering involves using any method necessary to influence a person or person's testimony. Calling out the media has nothing to do with Trump's tweet. Trump was sending a message to Stone.

Let Me give you a minor education, and we'll see if you are able to retain even that much.

If you look at My reply, it has a direct quote from YOU in it. I'll grant that YOU do not know what you are talking about, but your definition of witness tampering leaves a lot to be desired.

So, give us specific actions that Trump has performed that has tampered with a witness. Keep in mind, that to tamper with a witness, you must first have a position of authority over that person and that authority must be credible to harming the witness.

First off, what do we know of authority over who? We don't. So your premise is totally ridiculous and plays no role in a witness tampering scheme. Secondly, get a clue; In the United States, the crime of witness tampering in federal cases is defined by statute at 18 U.S.C. § 1512, which defines it as "tampering with a witness, victim, or an informant." The punishment for such an offense is up to 20 years if physical force was used, attempted, or threatened. The tampering need not have actually been successful in order for it to be criminal. Trump is using Twitter to coax Stone into not testifying. That is a clear example of trying to tamper with a witness and his or her decision making.

The expression of an opinion is NOT witness tampering as there is no implied threat. So, it defines it as tampering with a witness, victim or an informant. Wow, you're fuckin brilliant. Now, specifically, HOW did he tamper with, threaten a witness. You have a tape that had direct language that says if you say this, I'll do X? A handwritten threat? A phone call? Anything that would be considered 'tangible' proof in a court of law? Anything other than your drug induced hallucinations?

 

[BWK]

The powers of open obstruction are not his to exercise. He is openly tampering with a witness. That is a text book case for obstruction. If you can prove that witness tampering is not obstruction, then please, the floor is yours. If however you have no defense, then shut the hell up.

When was it proven he tampered with a witness? You do realize that tweeting and calling out the media is not tampering with a witness, right?

Here comes another coward to change the subject. No one knows what you are talking about. Witness tampering involves using any method necessary to influence a person or person's testimony. Calling out the media has nothing to do with Trump's tweet. Trump was sending a message to Stone.

Let Me give you a minor education, and we'll see if you are able to retain even that much.

If you look at My reply, it has a direct quote from YOU in it. I'll grant that YOU do not know what you are talking about, but your definition of witness tampering leaves a lot to be desired.

So, give us specific actions that Trump has performed that has tampered with a witness. Keep in mind, that to tamper with a witness, you must first have a position of authority over that person and that authority must be credible to harming the witness.

First off, what do we know of authority over who? We don't. So your premise is totally ridiculous and plays no role in a witness tampering scheme. Secondly, get a clue; In the United States, the crime of witness tampering in federal cases is defined by statute at 18 U.S.C. § 1512, which defines it as "tampering with a witness, victim, or an informant." The punishment for such an offense is up to 20 years if physical force was used, attempted, or threatened. The tampering need not have actually been successful in order for it to be criminal. Trump is using Twitter to coax Stone into not testifying. That is a clear example of trying to tamper with a witness and his or her decision making.

No it is not clearly tampering no matter how much you scream it is.

You have yet to offer any evidence therefore your claim is uneducated bullshit from a worthless brain

s the group wrote then, Trump’s tweet about Cohen and Manafort raised serious questions under 18 U.S.C. § 1512(b)—better known as the statute criminalizing witness tampering. Under § 1512(b), it is illegal to “knowingly … corruptly persuade[] another person”—or to attempt to do so—“with intent to … influence, delay, or prevent the testimony of any person in an official proceeding” or “cause or induce any person to withhold testimony . . . from an official proceeding.” The authors concluded then that, while the specific Manafort tweet in question might not in and of itself constitute witness tampering, the tweet fit into a larger pattern of obstructive conduct by the president that could well fit that bill.

 

[Wyatt earp]

Nobody has said that he is.
But he is the POTUS and he is using the powers of his office as allowed by the Constitution and US law.

What conspiracy theory are you hanging your hat on this time?

The powers of open obstruction are not his to exercise. He is openly tampering with a witness. That is a text book case for obstruction. If you can prove that witness tampering is not obstruction, then please, the floor is yours. If however you have no defense, then shut the hell up.

When was it proven he tampered with a witness? You do realize that tweeting and calling out the media is not tampering with a witness, right?

Here comes another coward to change the subject. No one knows what you are talking about. Witness tampering involves using any method necessary to influence a person or person's testimony. Calling out the media has nothing to do with Trump's tweet. Trump was sending a message to Stone.

Think about this


We hate the left


Now add 1 plus 1 and what do you get


A civil war.


.

Nice! So, because the truth hits you all in the face like a ton of bricks, you can't deal with it, so you want Civil war. Knock yourself out.

It will be and you can't handle it..



That's why nothing will happen sweetie.


.

 

[Wyatt earp]

The powers of open obstruction are not his to exercise. He is openly tampering with a witness. That is a text book case for obstruction. If you can prove that witness tampering is not obstruction, then please, the floor is yours. If however you have no defense, then shut the hell up.

When was it proven he tampered with a witness? You do realize that tweeting and calling out the media is not tampering with a witness, right?

Here comes another coward to change the subject. No one knows what you are talking about. Witness tampering involves using any method necessary to influence a person or person's testimony. Calling out the media has nothing to do with Trump's tweet. Trump was sending a message to Stone.

Think about this


We hate the left


Now add 1 plus 1 and what do you get


A civil war.


.

Nice! So, because the truth hits you all in the face like a ton of bricks, you can't deal with it, so you want Civil war. Knock yourself out.

It will be and you can't handle it..



That's why nothing will happen sweetie.


.

Remember what you seen in France?

.

 

[Darkwind]

When was it proven he tampered with a witness? You do realize that tweeting and calling out the media is not tampering with a witness, right?

Here comes another coward to change the subject. No one knows what you are talking about. Witness tampering involves using any method necessary to influence a person or person's testimony. Calling out the media has nothing to do with Trump's tweet. Trump was sending a message to Stone.

Let Me give you a minor education, and we'll see if you are able to retain even that much.

If you look at My reply, it has a direct quote from YOU in it. I'll grant that YOU do not know what you are talking about, but your definition of witness tampering leaves a lot to be desired.

So, give us specific actions that Trump has performed that has tampered with a witness. Keep in mind, that to tamper with a witness, you must first have a position of authority over that person and that authority must be credible to harming the witness.

First off, what do we know of authority over who? We don't. So your premise is totally ridiculous and plays no role in a witness tampering scheme. Secondly, get a clue; In the United States, the crime of witness tampering in federal cases is defined by statute at 18 U.S.C. § 1512, which defines it as "tampering with a witness, victim, or an informant." The punishment for such an offense is up to 20 years if physical force was used, attempted, or threatened. The tampering need not have actually been successful in order for it to be criminal. Trump is using Twitter to coax Stone into not testifying. That is a clear example of trying to tamper with a witness and his or her decision making.

No it is not clearly tampering no matter how much you scream it is.

You have yet to offer any evidence therefore your claim is uneducated bullshit from a worthless brain

s the group wrote then, Trump’s tweet about Cohen and Manafort raised serious questions under 18 U.S.C. § 1512(b)—better known as the statute criminalizing witness tampering. Under § 1512(b), it is illegal to “knowingly … corruptly persuade[] another person”—or to attempt to do so—“with intent to … influence, delay, or prevent the testimony of any person in an official proceeding” or “cause or induce any person to withhold testimony . . . from an official proceeding.” The authors concluded then that, while the specific Manafort tweet in question might not in and of itself constitute witness tampering, the tweet fit into a larger pattern of obstructive conduct by the president that could well fit that bill.

There is no larger pattern of obstructive conduct.

So, I'll tell you what. Go take a seditive and get a lawyer and file a criminal complaint against Trump. I'll be waiting at home enjoying a beer or two.

 

[Uncensored2008]

Lawrence: This should be an article of impeachment

Not that we haven't seen this before, but the desperation by Trump to tamper with a witnesses testimony, must and will be addressed in Mueller's report. This latest stunt by Trump on twitter about Roger Stone, just confirms what we have known about Trump since the beginning. He is a desperate criminal who has gotten so sloppy with his obstruction activity, that there is no other option left to deal with other than impeachment.

Everything that we suspected about Trump is being revealed, and this latest desperate tweet proves it.

The Marxist democrats are traitors who are waging civil war. Is it time to start treating them as what they are, enemy combatants?

You filthy fucks want civil war to weaken the nation on behalf of your Masters, the Communist Chinese. We Americas will easily defeat you piles of shit, but you figure it will weaken us enough that China can waltz right in. That is the end game of you traitors.

 

[BWK]

The powers of open obstruction are not his to exercise. He is openly tampering with a witness. That is a text book case for obstruction. If you can prove that witness tampering is not obstruction, then please, the floor is yours. If however you have no defense, then shut the hell up.

When was it proven he tampered with a witness? You do realize that tweeting and calling out the media is not tampering with a witness, right?

Here comes another coward to change the subject. No one knows what you are talking about. Witness tampering involves using any method necessary to influence a person or person's testimony. Calling out the media has nothing to do with Trump's tweet. Trump was sending a message to Stone.

Let Me give you a minor education, and we'll see if you are able to retain even that much.

If you look at My reply, it has a direct quote from YOU in it. I'll grant that YOU do not know what you are talking about, but your definition of witness tampering leaves a lot to be desired.

So, give us specific actions that Trump has performed that has tampered with a witness. Keep in mind, that to tamper with a witness, you must first have a position of authority over that person and that authority must be credible to harming the witness.

First off, what do we know of authority over who? We don't. So your premise is totally ridiculous and plays no role in a witness tampering scheme. Secondly, get a clue; In the United States, the crime of witness tampering in federal cases is defined by statute at 18 U.S.C. § 1512, which defines it as "tampering with a witness, victim, or an informant." The punishment for such an offense is up to 20 years if physical force was used, attempted, or threatened. The tampering need not have actually been successful in order for it to be criminal. Trump is using Twitter to coax Stone into not testifying. That is a clear example of trying to tamper with a witness and his or her decision making.

The expression of an opinion is NOT witness tampering as there is no implied threat. So, it defines it as tampering with a witness, victim or an informant. Wow, you're fuckin brilliant. Now, specifically, HOW did he tamper with, threaten a witness. You have a tape that had direct language that says if you say this, I'll do X? A handwritten threat? A phone call? Anything that would be considered 'tangible' proof in a court of law? Anything other than your drug induced hallucinations?

OMG! You can't be that stupid. Can you read? It doesn't involve just a threat dumb ass;
s the group wrote then, Trump’s tweet about Cohen and Manafort raised serious questions under 18 U.S.C. § 1512(b)—better known as the statute criminalizing witness tampering. Under § 1512(b), it is illegal to “knowingly … corruptly persuade[] another person”—or to attempt to do so—“with intent to … influence, delay, or prevent the testimony of any person in an official proceeding” or “cause or induce any person to withhold testimony . . . from an official proceeding.” The authors concluded then that, while the specific Manafort tweet in question might not in and of itself constitute witness tampering, the tweet fit into a larger pattern of obstructive conduct by the president that could well fit that bill. If you can't interpret simple words, get lost.

 

[BWK]

Lawrence: This should be an article of impeachment

Not that we haven't seen this before, but the desperation by Trump to tamper with a witnesses testimony, must and will be addressed in Mueller's report. This latest stunt by Trump on twitter about Roger Stone, just confirms what we have known about Trump since the beginning. He is a desperate criminal who has gotten so sloppy with his obstruction activity, that there is no other option left to deal with other than impeachment.

Everything that we suspected about Trump is being revealed, and this latest desperate tweet proves it.

The Marxist democrats are traitors who are waging civil war. Is it time to start treating them as what they are, enemy combatants?

You filthy fucks want civil war to weaken the nation on behalf of your Masters, the Communist Chinese. We Americas will easily defeat you piles of shit, but you figure it will weaken us enough that China can waltz right in. That is the end game of you traitors.

What does any of that garbage have to do with the rule of law? By the way Sling blade, threaten away. The country is not about to give up the rule of law, the Constitution, or justice, so we can feed to you your new corrupt way of life.

 

[Darkwind]

When was it proven he tampered with a witness? You do realize that tweeting and calling out the media is not tampering with a witness, right?

Here comes another coward to change the subject. No one knows what you are talking about. Witness tampering involves using any method necessary to influence a person or person's testimony. Calling out the media has nothing to do with Trump's tweet. Trump was sending a message to Stone.

Let Me give you a minor education, and we'll see if you are able to retain even that much.

If you look at My reply, it has a direct quote from YOU in it. I'll grant that YOU do not know what you are talking about, but your definition of witness tampering leaves a lot to be desired.

So, give us specific actions that Trump has performed that has tampered with a witness. Keep in mind, that to tamper with a witness, you must first have a position of authority over that person and that authority must be credible to harming the witness.

First off, what do we know of authority over who? We don't. So your premise is totally ridiculous and plays no role in a witness tampering scheme. Secondly, get a clue; In the United States, the crime of witness tampering in federal cases is defined by statute at 18 U.S.C. § 1512, which defines it as "tampering with a witness, victim, or an informant." The punishment for such an offense is up to 20 years if physical force was used, attempted, or threatened. The tampering need not have actually been successful in order for it to be criminal. Trump is using Twitter to coax Stone into not testifying. That is a clear example of trying to tamper with a witness and his or her decision making.

The expression of an opinion is NOT witness tampering as there is no implied threat. So, it defines it as tampering with a witness, victim or an informant. Wow, you're fuckin brilliant. Now, specifically, HOW did he tamper with, threaten a witness. You have a tape that had direct language that says if you say this, I'll do X? A handwritten threat? A phone call? Anything that would be considered 'tangible' proof in a court of law? Anything other than your drug induced hallucinations?

OMG! You can't be that stupid. Can you read? It doesn't involve just a threat dumb ass;
s the group wrote then, Trump’s tweet about Cohen and Manafort raised serious questions under 18 U.S.C. § 1512(b)—better known as the statute criminalizing witness tampering. Under § 1512(b), it is illegal to “knowingly … corruptly persuade[] another person”—or to attempt to do so—“with intent to … influence, delay, or prevent the testimony of any person in an official proceeding” or “cause or induce any person to withhold testimony . . . from an official proceeding.” The authors concluded then that, while the specific Manafort tweet in question might not in and of itself constitute witness tampering, the tweet fit into a larger pattern of obstructive conduct by the president that could well fit that bill. If you can't interpret simple words, get lost.

You probably should learn to comprehend the language before you try to berate your betters. Go soak your head in the toilet for a few dozen flushes.

 

[BWK]

Here comes another coward to change the subject. No one knows what you are talking about. Witness tampering involves using any method necessary to influence a person or person's testimony. Calling out the media has nothing to do with Trump's tweet. Trump was sending a message to Stone.

Let Me give you a minor education, and we'll see if you are able to retain even that much.

If you look at My reply, it has a direct quote from YOU in it. I'll grant that YOU do not know what you are talking about, but your definition of witness tampering leaves a lot to be desired.

So, give us specific actions that Trump has performed that has tampered with a witness. Keep in mind, that to tamper with a witness, you must first have a position of authority over that person and that authority must be credible to harming the witness.

First off, what do we know of authority over who? We don't. So your premise is totally ridiculous and plays no role in a witness tampering scheme. Secondly, get a clue; In the United States, the crime of witness tampering in federal cases is defined by statute at 18 U.S.C. § 1512, which defines it as "tampering with a witness, victim, or an informant." The punishment for such an offense is up to 20 years if physical force was used, attempted, or threatened. The tampering need not have actually been successful in order for it to be criminal. Trump is using Twitter to coax Stone into not testifying. That is a clear example of trying to tamper with a witness and his or her decision making.

No it is not clearly tampering no matter how much you scream it is.

You have yet to offer any evidence therefore your claim is uneducated bullshit from a worthless brain

s the group wrote then, Trump’s tweet about Cohen and Manafort raised serious questions under 18 U.S.C. § 1512(b)—better known as the statute criminalizing witness tampering. Under § 1512(b), it is illegal to “knowingly … corruptly persuade[] another person”—or to attempt to do so—“with intent to … influence, delay, or prevent the testimony of any person in an official proceeding” or “cause or induce any person to withhold testimony . . . from an official proceeding.” The authors concluded then that, while the specific Manafort tweet in question might not in and of itself constitute witness tampering, the tweet fit into a larger pattern of obstructive conduct by the president that could well fit that bill.

There is no larger pattern of obstructive conduct.

So, I'll tell you what. Go take a seditive and get a lawyer and file a criminal complaint against Trump. I'll be waiting at home enjoying a beer or two.

The law as written has already filed the complaint. And it will obviously be used against him in the future. Which is why you have no counter argument to deal with. The only one's who are going to need a sedative are the Trump apologists who carry his water for him. The law speaks on my side of the fence, not the corrupt Right.