Trump Wanted to Order Justice Dept. to Prosecute Comey and Clinton

[Lakhota]

An objective non-partisan person who looks at the evidence against both Trump and Hillary should conclude that the DOJ and FBI were in the tank for Hillary. H was given a pass instead of a grand jury. Trump was given a special counsel on zero evidence of collusion, which isn't even a crime.

Now Trump is pissed that he is under investigation instead of the real criminals. I'd be mad too. The DOJ and FBI must be stacked with Leftist lawyers who run interference for the dems.

Yeah, and I bet you have lots of "credible" proof. Funny...

Even when it is presented over and over, you deny, deny, deny.
View attachment 230152

Presented by whom?

 

[Correll]

Building a wall, to keep invaders out, is not what Hitler is remember for, you, godwinning fool.

You rightards thrive on ignorance.

The Atlantic Wall

That's not what he is remembered for, you pathetic fool.

 

[Faun]

Building a wall, to keep invaders out, is not what Hitler is remember for, you, godwinning fool.

You rightards thrive on ignorance.

The Atlantic Wall

That's not what he is remembered for, you pathetic fool.

There are many things that Hitler is remembered for. That’s just one of them.

 

[Correll]

Building a wall, to keep invaders out, is not what Hitler is remember for, you, godwinning fool.

You rightards thrive on ignorance.

The Atlantic Wall

That's not what he is remembered for, you pathetic fool.

There are many things that Hitler is remembered for. That’s just one of them.

No, it's not.

 

[hunarcy]

WASHINGTON — President Trump told the White House counsel in the spring that he wanted to order the Justice Department to prosecute two of his political adversaries: his 2016 challenger, Hillary Clinton, and the former F.B.I. director James B. Comey, according to two people familiar with the conversation.

The lawyer, Donald F. McGahn II, rebuffed the president, saying that he had no authority to order a prosecution. Mr. McGahn said that while he could request an investigation, that too could prompt accusations of abuse of power. To underscore his point, Mr. McGahn had White House lawyers write a memo for Mr. Trump warning that if he asked law enforcement to investigate his rivals, he could face a range of consequences, including possible impeachment.

The encounter was one of the most blatant examples yet of how Mr. Trump views the typically independent Justice Department as a tool to be wielded against his political enemies. It took on additional significance in recent weeks when Mr. McGahn left the White House and Mr. Trump appointed a relatively inexperienced political loyalist, Matthew G. Whitaker, as the acting attorney general.

More: Trump Wanted to Order Justice Dept. to Prosecute Comey and Clinton

This is what third-world dictators do. Is that where we are? What do you think?

THEY SHOULD BE PROSECUTED...
ALONG WITH HOLDER, LYNCH, CLAPPER, BRENNAN, MCCABE, STRZOK, OHER, MUELLER, & ROSENSTEIN...

Sounds like Trey Gowdy should be prosecuted for trying to frame Hillary.

In a bombshell revelation, the Central Intelligence Agency reached out to Democrats serving on the Select Committee on Benghazi on Saturday, October 17, 2015 to confirm that Chairman Trey Gowdy had altered documents provided to the committee by Hillary Clinton.

CIA: Trey Gowdy Altered Documents To Frame Hillary Clinton

Bwuhahahaha

Comey testified that Hillary Lied, that she had emailed/ received classified data, that there were official docs, etc....

...and you are still trying to spew bullshit.

Bwuhahahaha.....

Comey DID not testify that Hillary lied. Not even close. In fact, when Trey Gordy was weasel wording his questions on Hillary’s email Comey made a point of saying she DID NOT LIE. In his press conference Comey said he found her truthful throughout her interview.

Stupid Russians.

Clinton spins FBI director's comments about her email

 

[Wry Catcher]

Trump has committed all manner of impeachable offenses – offenses that warrant his removal from office consistent with Article II, Section 4 of the Constitution.

Impeachment is a political – not legal – process; a president can be removed from office via the impeachment process absent alleged criminal wrongdoing; because he's doing a poor job as president, such as Trump.

But that will never happen.

Democrats don’t want Pence as president.

A conviction in the Republican Senate would be impossible.

And the American people would never support removing a president from office absent alleged criminal wrongdoing, as most Americans incorrectly believe that a president must have committed a crime to be impeached.

Indeed, Trump benefits from Americans’ ignorance.

I have read COTUS many times, and have taken ConLaw. No where doe it state, imply or even suggest that the President cannot be served a subpoena and be forced to testify under oath.

We are a nation of laws, if the President refuses the subpoena, we would face a Constitutional crisis. If in fact the Supreme Court decides the President is above the law, for any reason, and their decision is to not force him to testify under oath we will be known as the last free generation.

SecState refused a subpoena and destroyed evidence. What say you to that?

BTW, Mr. "ConLaw"; Who does the Justice Dept serve at the whim of?

That's right! The President. Fact.

Your faggot ass is no Constitutional scholar and you're not fooling anyone with your lies.

My guess is you had Advanced English in high school, that's about it.

First of all, your compliment of my ability to convey to others in proper English my opinions, built on factual evidence is appreciated.

Q.: "Who does the Justice Dept serve at the whim of? "That's right! The President." "Fact."

A. There is no whim; the AG and US Attorneys follow the law and the polices of their agency.

My "faggot ass"? You're a piece of shit, foul mouthed and a coward.

I never claimed to be a Scholar, Constitutional or in any other academic discipline. Though in contrast to you, I am in every matter which requires sagacious thought.

Apparently you forget the lies you tell from one minute to the next as well.

"I have read COTUS many times, and have taken ConLaw."

I did and I have. Tissue?

 

[Wry Catcher]

Can America, and the world, survive Trump until 2020? We are living in dangerous and scary times.

Building a wall, to keep invaders out, is not what Hitler is remember for, you, godwinning fool.

Hitler took the guns, got Jesus out of the schools, and took over the healthcare system.

Whose guns

WASHINGTON — President Trump told the White House counsel in the spring that he wanted to order the Justice Department to prosecute two of his political adversaries: his 2016 challenger, Hillary Clinton, and the former F.B.I. director James B. Comey, according to two people familiar with the conversation.

The lawyer, Donald F. McGahn II, rebuffed the president, saying that he had no authority to order a prosecution. Mr. McGahn said that while he could request an investigation, that too could prompt accusations of abuse of power. To underscore his point, Mr. McGahn had White House lawyers write a memo for Mr. Trump warning that if he asked law enforcement to investigate his rivals, he could face a range of consequences, including possible impeachment.

The encounter was one of the most blatant examples yet of how Mr. Trump views the typically independent Justice Department as a tool to be wielded against his political enemies. It took on additional significance in recent weeks when Mr. McGahn left the White House and Mr. Trump appointed a relatively inexperienced political loyalist, Matthew G. Whitaker, as the acting attorney general.

More: Trump Wanted to Order Justice Dept. to Prosecute Comey and Clinton

This is what third-world dictators do. Is that where we are? What do you think?

You people will try to impeach Trump for farting in bed. Trump told the truth that he would like to grab pussy, you excoriated him over it while Clinton lied under oath - the impeachable offense - about actually grabbing pussy, and you celebrate him.

When did Hillary lie under oath? Credible proof?

“At this point, what difference does it make?”

Taking a quote out of context like this ^^^ is a damn lie of Omission.

 

[kyzr]

An objective non-partisan person who looks at the evidence against both Trump and Hillary should conclude that the DOJ and FBI were in the tank for Hillary. H was given a pass instead of a grand jury. Trump was given a special counsel on zero evidence of collusion, which isn't even a crime.

Now Trump is pissed that he is under investigation instead of the real criminals. I'd be mad too. The DOJ and FBI must be stacked with Leftist lawyers who run interference for the dems.

Yeah, and I bet you have lots of "credible" proof. Funny...

We have Huber and a few "whistle Blowers". Should be interesting

 

[Wry Catcher]

Trump has committed all manner of impeachable offenses – offenses that warrant his removal from office consistent with Article II, Section 4 of the Constitution.

Impeachment is a political – not legal – process; a president can be removed from office via the impeachment process absent alleged criminal wrongdoing; because he's doing a poor job as president, such as Trump.

But that will never happen.

Democrats don’t want Pence as president.

A conviction in the Republican Senate would be impossible.

And the American people would never support removing a president from office absent alleged criminal wrongdoing, as most Americans incorrectly believe that a president must have committed a crime to be impeached.

Indeed, Trump benefits from Americans’ ignorance.

I have read COTUS many times, and have taken ConLaw. No where doe it state, imply or even suggest that the President cannot be served a subpoena and be forced to testify under oath.

We are a nation of laws, if the President refuses the subpoena, we would face a Constitutional crisis. If in fact the Supreme Court decides the President is above the law, for any reason, and their decision is to not force him to testify under oath we will be known as the last free generation.

Says only a Progressive pretend to be. You don't know shit.

Your conclusion is correct, we have never met.

 

[K9Buck]

An objective non-partisan person who looks at the evidence against both Trump and Hillary should conclude that the DOJ and FBI were in the tank for Hillary. H was given a pass instead of a grand jury. Trump was given a special counsel on zero evidence of collusion, which isn't even a crime.

Now Trump is pissed that he is under investigation instead of the real criminals. I'd be mad too. The DOJ and FBI must be stacked with Leftist lawyers who run interference for the dems.

Truer words were never said.

 

[K9Buck]

Yeah, and I bet you have lots of "credible" proof. Funny...

FBI Director Comey testified to Congress that Hillary DID transmit and receive classified materials to and from her private server. Each transmission is at least one felony. Hillary did it over 100 times. Hillary skated, and you cheered.

 

[Marion Morrison]

There are many things that Hitler is remembered for. That’s just one of them.

One is registering and confiscating guns.

 

[BluesLegend]

WASHINGTON — President Trump told the White House counsel in the spring that he wanted to order the Justice Department to prosecute two of his political adversaries: his 2016 challenger, Hillary Clinton, and the former F.B.I. director James B. Comey, according to two people familiar with the conversation.

The lawyer, Donald F. McGahn II, rebuffed the president, saying that he had no authority to order a prosecution. Mr. McGahn said that while he could request an investigation, that too could prompt accusations of abuse of power. To underscore his point, Mr. McGahn had White House lawyers write a memo for Mr. Trump warning that if he asked law enforcement to investigate his rivals, he could face a range of consequences, including possible impeachment.

The encounter was one of the most blatant examples yet of how Mr. Trump views the typically independent Justice Department as a tool to be wielded against his political enemies. It took on additional significance in recent weeks when Mr. McGahn left the White House and Mr. Trump appointed a relatively inexperienced political loyalist, Matthew G. Whitaker, as the acting attorney general.

More: Trump Wanted to Order Justice Dept. to Prosecute Comey and Clinton

This is what third-world dictators do. Is that where we are? What do you think?

THEY SHOULD BE PROSECUTED...
ALONG WITH HOLDER, LYNCH, CLAPPER, BRENNAN, MCCABE, STRZOK, OHER, MUELLER, & ROSENSTEIN...

Sounds like Trey Gowdy should be prosecuted for trying to frame Hillary.

In a bombshell revelation, the Central Intelligence Agency reached out to Democrats serving on the Select Committee on Benghazi on Saturday, October 17, 2015 to confirm that Chairman Trey Gowdy had altered documents provided to the committee by Hillary Clinton.

CIA: Trey Gowdy Altered Documents To Frame Hillary Clinton

Bwuhahahaha

Comey testified that Hillary Lied, that she had emailed/ received classified data, that there were official docs, etc....

...and you are still trying to spew bullshit.

Bwuhahahaha.....

Comey DID not testify that Hillary lied. Not even close. In fact, when Trey Gordy was weasel wording his questions on Hillary’s email Comey made a point of saying she DID NOT LIE. In his press conference Comey said he found her truthful throughout her interview.

Stupid Russians.

Lib please Hillary is a big fat liar and everyone knows it. So is Bill. So is Obama. Its hilarious watching you people try defending them.

 

[K9Buck]

Hillary could be found to have committed countless felonies and nothing will be done. Laws don't apply to Democratic elites like Hillary. They only apply to regular people and to Republicans.

 

[K9Buck]

Yeah, and I bet you have lots of "credible" proof. Funny...

FBI Director Comey testified to Congress that Hillary DID transmit and receive classified materials to and from her private server. Each transmission is at least one felony. Hillary did it over 100 times. Hillary skated, and you cheered.

Lakhota Why did you mark this as "funny"? Is that your way of saying that my statement is incorrect? Or do you know that it is correct and that's just your way of arguing?

 

[Lakhota]

Yeah, and I bet you have lots of "credible" proof. Funny...

FBI Director Comey testified to Congress that Hillary DID transmit and receive classified materials to and from her private server. Each transmission is at least one felony. Hillary did it over 100 times. Hillary skated, and you cheered.

You mean the ones that were unlabeled and "retroactively" classified after the fact? Funny...

"The fact that no emails on her personal server were marked as classified suggests that she generally was doing her classified business on the secure government servers dedicated to that purpose," said Liza Goitein, co-director of the Brennan Center for Justice’s Liberty and National Security Program, in a prior interview with PolitiFact.

Archived fact-check: Clinton's claim she never received nor sent material marked classified | PolitiFact

 

[Fort Fun Indiana]

An objective non-partisan person who looks at the evidence against both Trump and Hillary should conclude that the DOJ and FBI were in the tank for Hillary.

And yet not one such person who investigated or reviewed the investigation agrees. A rational person would, at this point, question his own reason, which is what you should do.

 

[Fort Fun Indiana]

FBI Director Comey testified to Congress that Hillary DID transmit and receive classified materials to and from her private server. Each transmission is at least one felony.

Wrong. 100% wrong. Intent or criminal negligence must be proven in a court. Comey specifically said no evidence of either was found. How can you not be in possession of the most basic of facts regarding this?

 

[Faun]

Hillary could be found to have committed countless felonies and nothing will be done. Laws don't apply to Democratic elites like Hillary. They only apply to regular people and to Republicans.

”They only apply to regular people and to Republicans.”

Well, at least you get that Republicans are irregular.

 

[K9Buck]

FBI Director Comey testified to Congress that Hillary DID transmit and receive classified materials to and from her private server. Each transmission is at least one felony.

Wrong. 100% wrong. Intent or criminal negligence must be proven in a court. Comey specifically said no evidence of either was found. How can you not be in possession of the most basic of facts regarding this?

The statute says nothing about intent. Intent does not have to be proven. After all, a navy sailor was prosecuted and served prison time for taking photos inside a submarine that he claimed he wanted to share with his future grandchildren.