Willing To Violate The Constitution To Protect Mueller, Even For Misconduct / Crimes?

[easyt65]

Democrats wanting to strip the President of his authority to make decisions regarding who works in the EXECUTIVE BRANCH ('Separation If Powers') is like the President claiming the authority to dictate who will be the Speaker of the House to the in-coming Democrats.

Do you not understand that the Constitution REQUIRES that the Senate confirm the AG?

Confirm, not PICK...

OK...and where is the Senate trying to "pick" anyone?

They confirm who they think is qualified.

They have not even been asked to CONSIDER Whitaker...because he is wholly unqualified

They don't have to consider Whitaker.
He is completely qualified to be Acting US AG...and his being named Temp US AG scares the hell out of Mueller and snowflakes....which is the reason thou dost protest so loudly.

 

[12icer]

Yeah they know a REAL investigation will bring their gods to trial and conviction. Their worst fear is the people actually seeing them for what they are.

 

[Lesh]

They don't have to consider Whitaker.
He is completely qualified to be Acting US AG...and his being named Temp US AG scares the hell out of Mueller and snowflakes....which is the reason thou dost protest so loudly

A. They don't have to consider Whitaker? According to the Constitution the AG needs to be confirmed by the Senate. So yea...they do

B.He is "qualified" to be Acting AG (just barely) but then there is ONLY an acting AG because Trump created that opening by firing the CONFIRMED AG who was not "protecting him" enough.

The last Acting AG served for about 6 days...150 years ago.

Why isn't Trump nominating Whitaker or someone else?

Because he knows Whitaker would never get confirmed even in a Republican Senate because of his biased statements and lack of qualifications (not to mention his other ethical issues). And he won't find anyone else who CAN get confirmed and is willing to operate outside the rule of law.

He was given that position for one reason. To control or eliminate the Mueller investigation

 

[easyt65]

They don't have to consider Whitaker.
He is completely qualified to be Acting US AG...and his being named Temp US AG scares the hell out of Mueller and snowflakes....which is the reason thou dost protest so loudly

A. They don't have to consider Whitaker? According to the Constitution the AG needs to be confirmed by the Senate. So yea...they do

B.He is "qualified" to be Acting AG (just barely) but then there is ONLY an acting AG because Trump created that opening by firing the CONFIRMED AGO who was not "protecting him" enough.

The last Acting AG served for about 6 days...150 years ago.

Why isn't Trump nominating Whitaker or someone else?

Because he knows Whitaker would never get confirmed even in a Republican Senate because of his biased statements and lack of qualifications (not to mention his other ethical issues). And he won't find anyone else who CAN get confirmed and is willing to operate outside the rule of law.

He was given that position for one reason. To control or eliminate the Mueller investigation

1. Whitaker is not the US AG....he is the ACTING / TEMP US AG...

2. Thank you for admitting he is qualified. He is more qualified going into his new role as acting US AG than Barry was going from Community Organizer to President...

 

[MrShangles]

Excellent. The Trumpflakes wouldn't be weeping about Mueller if they weren't terrified of him revealing their corruption.

The funny thing is how they think that crying will convince us to go easy on them. Quite the opposite. Whenever we see Trumpflakes cry, that tells us to keep doing what we're doing.

We aren’t crying, but if Mueller has so much evidence then piss or get off the pot, are Democrats trying to drag this out till the 2020 elections.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

 

[Lesh]

They don't have to consider Whitaker.
He is completely qualified to be Acting US AG...and his being named Temp US AG scares the hell out of Mueller and snowflakes....which is the reason thou dost protest so loudly

A. They don't have to consider Whitaker? According to the Constitution the AG needs to be confirmed by the Senate. So yea...they do

B.He is "qualified" to be Acting AG (just barely) but then there is ONLY an acting AG because Trump created that opening by firing the CONFIRMED AGO who was not "protecting him" enough.

The last Acting AG served for about 6 days...150 years ago.

Why isn't Trump nominating Whitaker or someone else?

Because he knows Whitaker would never get confirmed even in a Republican Senate because of his biased statements and lack of qualifications (not to mention his other ethical issues). And he won't find anyone else who CAN get confirmed and is willing to operate outside the rule of law.

He was given that position for one reason. To control or eliminate the Mueller investigation

1. Whitaker is not the US AG....he is the ACTING / TEMP US AG...

2. Thank you for admitting he is qualified. He is more qualified going into his new role as acting US AG than Barry was going from Community Organizer to President...

Whitaker is only BARELY qualified to fill that position because Trump forced Sessions to take him on (against Session's wishes) as Chief of Staff.. He got his "90 day qualification" from THAT.

There is no need for an acting AG. Trump created that artificial vacancy by firing the CONFIRMED AG and has refused to nominate a successor or promote someone already confirmed (like Rosenstein).

Again...that last Acting AG held that position for DAYS...150 years ago

 

[easyt65]

Whitaker is only BARELY qualified ...

YOU attempting declare who is qualified for anything and who is not is hilarious.

Sessions was an idiot and a weak man:

1. He allowed treasonous conspirators to bully him into needlessly recuse himself so they could have a free hand at carrying out their coup. The same criminals who are infested with LEGITIMATE Conflicts of Interest in regards to the case insisted Sessions had to recuse HIMSELF because he met - among many world reps - Russians a few times in his role as US Senator. THAT was justification for the need for Sessions to recuse himself but evidence showing Mueller hid Russian crimes associated with their KGB Bank's effort to buy Uranium one is NOT?



2. Sessions had an obligation to tell the President before he took the job that he was thinking of recusing himself - effectively giving up control of the position he was being picked to run - as soon as he accepted the job. Had the President known this he would have chosen someone else. This was a massive FAIL on Sessions' part - demonstrating a massive flaw in his decision-making process - proving he was not the right man for the job.


Meanwhile you have Rosenstein and Mueller, both who have recorded / documented histories of prosecutorial misconduct, illegally manufacturing evidence or hiding evidence at times to knowingly, intentionally send innocent people to jail. Neither one should be allowed to continue in their current positions, both should be investigated, and there is even enough right now to perp-walk both, indict them, and charge them with crimes, the LEAST of which is the documented, reported, blatant in-public displays of Obstruction of Justice by refusing to comply with Congressional Subpoenas.

It is not just Whitaker that they - and you - are afraid of. It is anyone OBJECTIVE, anyone IMPARTIAL, anyone NOT a co-conspirator. There is enough evidence that has been uncovered - thanks to Mueller's own investigation - to put just about everyone of his criminal accomplices in jail for a long, long time...including Mueller.

Sessions was an ally of Trump, which is critical for the Conspirators to eliminate him from the equation as he allowed them to needlessly do. Whitaker is also an 'outside wild card' that is not on their 'team' and who they can not control, so he has to go. This whole 'Whitaker is not qualified' BS is nothing more than the Left's attempt 'Kavanaugh-LITE' attempt to personally and professionally attack and discredit him, and if they fail to do that they still have the 'Protect Mueller' BS Legislation still trying to make its way through Congress.

*** I would highly recommend that Republicans go through that legislation with a fine-tooth comb - every page. If it does not have it in there yet , it will - a sentence or two slipped in protecting Mueller from not only being FIRED but protecting him from prosecution for his crimes he has committed while conducting his Witch Hunt.

 

[Crepitus]

Mueller continues to face PERJURY TRAP rebellions as more information regarding his potentially criminal prosecutorial misconduct, falsely claiming his victims are / having violated their plea deal agreements because they refuse to give him what he wants, which, according to Corsi and others, is for them to lie and make false accusations about the President, is reported.

Democrats, in the meantime, continue to scramble to pass legislation that 'protects Mueller' and his witch hunt from being fired / terminated.

Gee, that sounds so justifiable, like such an easy 'call' to make - 'Protect Mueller'. Yeah, not so much when you find out the details, what that exactly means.

While telling you they are attempting to 'Protect Mueller', what the Democrats / snowflakes are NOT telling people is the WAY they are trying to do that....

To 'protect Mueller' the Democrats are attempting to strip both the US AG and the President of their Constitutional powers.

THE US AG:
"Currently, the US attorney general can remove the special counsel “for misconduct, dereliction of duty, incapacity, conflict of interest, or for other good cause, including violation of departmental policies.”

THE DEMOCRATS WANT TO STRIP THE US AG OF THAT CONSTITUTIONAL AUTHORITY and would instead establish some oversight with a three-judge panel (made up of two District of Columbia district court judges and one US Court of Appeals judge) that would have the power to overturn the US AG's decision to fire Mueller, even in the case of prosecutorial misconduct or violations of laws / regs / rules.

Such a ruling against a US AG would still most assuredly end up before the USSC, no matter what the legislation designed to protect Mueller says.

IS CONGRESS ATTEMPTING TO USURP RHE EXECUTIVE BRANCH'S AUTHORITY AND DICTATE TO THE EXECUTIVE BRANCH WHO CAN WORK FOR / IN THE EXECUTIVE BRANCH, WHICH IS WHAT DEMOCRATS / SUPPORTERS OF THIS BILL ARE TRYING TO PULL OFF, EVEN CONSTITUTIONAL?

"The conservative argument is that Congress can’t infringe on the executive authority; that constitutionally, the president maintains the power to control who serves in the executive branch."

"At a Senate Judiciary Committee hearing on the constitutionality of the two special counsel bills in September, which included testimony from legal scholars and experts, John Duffy of the University of Virginia School of Law said the “transfer of removal authority from the Executive to the Judicial Branch is almost certainly unconstitutional”

A Senate committee just approved a bill to protect Robert Mueller

.

Dude, it's amazing how you can spew all those lies in a row with a straight face!

 

[danielpalos]

Mueller continues to face PERJURY TRAP rebellions as more information regarding his potentially criminal prosecutorial misconduct, falsely claiming his victims are / having violated their plea deal agreements because they refuse to give him what he wants, which, according to Corsi and others, is for them to lie and make false accusations about the President, is reported.

Democrats, in the meantime, continue to scramble to pass legislation that 'protects Mueller' and his witch hunt from being fired / terminated.

Gee, that sounds so justifiable, like such an easy 'call' to make - 'Protect Mueller'. Yeah, not so much when you find out the details, what that exactly means.

While telling you they are attempting to 'Protect Mueller', what the Democrats / snowflakes are NOT telling people is the WAY they are trying to do that....

To 'protect Mueller' the Democrats are attempting to strip both the US AG and the President of their Constitutional powers.

THE US AG:
"Currently, the US attorney general can remove the special counsel “for misconduct, dereliction of duty, incapacity, conflict of interest, or for other good cause, including violation of departmental policies.”

THE DEMOCRATS WANT TO STRIP THE US AG OF THAT CONSTITUTIONAL AUTHORITY and would instead establish some oversight with a three-judge panel (made up of two District of Columbia district court judges and one US Court of Appeals judge) that would have the power to overturn the US AG's decision to fire Mueller, even in the case of prosecutorial misconduct or violations of laws / regs / rules.

Such a ruling against a US AG would still most assuredly end up before the USSC, no matter what the legislation designed to protect Mueller says.

IS CONGRESS ATTEMPTING TO USURP RHE EXECUTIVE BRANCH'S AUTHORITY AND DICTATE TO THE EXECUTIVE BRANCH WHO CAN WORK FOR / IN THE EXECUTIVE BRANCH, WHICH IS WHAT DEMOCRATS / SUPPORTERS OF THIS BILL ARE TRYING TO PULL OFF, EVEN CONSTITUTIONAL?

"The conservative argument is that Congress can’t infringe on the executive authority; that constitutionally, the president maintains the power to control who serves in the executive branch."

"At a Senate Judiciary Committee hearing on the constitutionality of the two special counsel bills in September, which included testimony from legal scholars and experts, John Duffy of the University of Virginia School of Law said the “transfer of removal authority from the Executive to the Judicial Branch is almost certainly unconstitutional”

A Senate committee just approved a bill to protect Robert Mueller

.

A Congress of a previous generation, had more moral fortitude.

 

[Crepitus]

Mueller continues to face PERJURY TRAP rebellions as more information regarding his potentially criminal prosecutorial misconduct, falsely claiming his victims are / having violated their plea deal agreements because they refuse to give him what he wants, which, according to Corsi and others, is for them to lie and make false accusations about the President, is reported.

Democrats, in the meantime, continue to scramble to pass legislation that 'protects Mueller' and his witch hunt from being fired / terminated.

Gee, that sounds so justifiable, like such an easy 'call' to make - 'Protect Mueller'. Yeah, not so much when you find out the details, what that exactly means.

While telling you they are attempting to 'Protect Mueller', what the Democrats / snowflakes are NOT telling people is the WAY they are trying to do that....

To 'protect Mueller' the Democrats are attempting to strip both the US AG and the President of their Constitutional powers.

THE US AG:
"Currently, the US attorney general can remove the special counsel “for misconduct, dereliction of duty, incapacity, conflict of interest, or for other good cause, including violation of departmental policies.”

THE DEMOCRATS WANT TO STRIP THE US AG OF THAT CONSTITUTIONAL AUTHORITY and would instead establish some oversight with a three-judge panel (made up of two District of Columbia district court judges and one US Court of Appeals judge) that would have the power to overturn the US AG's decision to fire Mueller, even in the case of prosecutorial misconduct or violations of laws / regs / rules.

Such a ruling against a US AG would still most assuredly end up before the USSC, no matter what the legislation designed to protect Mueller says.

IS CONGRESS ATTEMPTING TO USURP RHE EXECUTIVE BRANCH'S AUTHORITY AND DICTATE TO THE EXECUTIVE BRANCH WHO CAN WORK FOR / IN THE EXECUTIVE BRANCH, WHICH IS WHAT DEMOCRATS / SUPPORTERS OF THIS BILL ARE TRYING TO PULL OFF, EVEN CONSTITUTIONAL?

"The conservative argument is that Congress can’t infringe on the executive authority; that constitutionally, the president maintains the power to control who serves in the executive branch."

"At a Senate Judiciary Committee hearing on the constitutionality of the two special counsel bills in September, which included testimony from legal scholars and experts, John Duffy of the University of Virginia School of Law said the “transfer of removal authority from the Executive to the Judicial Branch is almost certainly unconstitutional”

A Senate committee just approved a bill to protect Robert Mueller

.

Commiecrats don't GAF about the Constitution.

No such thing as a "commicrat" kid.

 

[easyt65]

Dude, it's amazing how you can spew all those lies in a row with a straight face!

What is amazing is how you can continue to deny so much documented, reported, confirmed events / information day after day after day.....You, Nat, Lesh....you are the snowflakes Gruber bragged about.....you know, the ones stupid enough to believe anything you are told by your liberal handlers, the ones they COUNT on to get away with the crap they get away with......

 

[bodecea]

Mueller continues to face PERJURY TRAP rebellions as more information regarding his potentially criminal prosecutorial misconduct, falsely claiming his victims are / having violated their plea deal agreements because they refuse to give him what he wants, which, according to Corsi and others, is for them to lie and make false accusations about the President, is reported.

Democrats, in the meantime, continue to scramble to pass legislation that 'protects Mueller' and his witch hunt from being fired / terminated.

Gee, that sounds so justifiable, like such an easy 'call' to make - 'Protect Mueller'. Yeah, not so much when you find out the details, what that exactly means.

While telling you they are attempting to 'Protect Mueller', what the Democrats / snowflakes are NOT telling people is the WAY they are trying to do that....

To 'protect Mueller' the Democrats are attempting to strip both the US AG and the President of their Constitutional powers.

THE US AG:
"Currently, the US attorney general can remove the special counsel “for misconduct, dereliction of duty, incapacity, conflict of interest, or for other good cause, including violation of departmental policies.”

THE DEMOCRATS WANT TO STRIP THE US AG OF THAT CONSTITUTIONAL AUTHORITY and would instead establish some oversight with a three-judge panel (made up of two District of Columbia district court judges and one US Court of Appeals judge) that would have the power to overturn the US AG's decision to fire Mueller, even in the case of prosecutorial misconduct or violations of laws / regs / rules.

Such a ruling against a US AG would still most assuredly end up before the USSC, no matter what the legislation designed to protect Mueller says.

IS CONGRESS ATTEMPTING TO USURP RHE EXECUTIVE BRANCH'S AUTHORITY AND DICTATE TO THE EXECUTIVE BRANCH WHO CAN WORK FOR / IN THE EXECUTIVE BRANCH, WHICH IS WHAT DEMOCRATS / SUPPORTERS OF THIS BILL ARE TRYING TO PULL OFF, EVEN CONSTITUTIONAL?

"The conservative argument is that Congress can’t infringe on the executive authority; that constitutionally, the president maintains the power to control who serves in the executive branch."

"At a Senate Judiciary Committee hearing on the constitutionality of the two special counsel bills in September, which included testimony from legal scholars and experts, John Duffy of the University of Virginia School of Law said the “transfer of removal authority from the Executive to the Judicial Branch is almost certainly unconstitutional”

A Senate committee just approved a bill to protect Robert Mueller

.

What perjury trap? Is this the new thing for trumpanzees to repeat without even knowing what it is or if it even exists?

 

[bodecea]

Frankly I don’t see why we don’t just do away with the Senate and let Trump do whatever he wants

That's the trumpanzees' dream scenerio.

 

[easyt65]

A Congress of a previous generation, had more moral fortitude.

What would a snowflake / liberal know about 'moral fortitude'? Seriously...

Herman Cain...

Brett Kavanaugh...

Calling for the President's son to be ripped from his mother's arms and raped by pedophiles...

Calling for women associated with Trump to be kidnapped, caged, beaten, and raped...

Posing with faux bloody head of the President in 1 hand and a bloody knife in the other....

Paying thugs to beat and bloody Trump supporters AT Trump Rallies...

Inciting assassination attempts against GOP politicians with violent rhetoric...

An Ex-1st Lady/Senator/SoS/DNC Presidential Candidate calling for increased violence and violent intolerance, declaring there will be no civility until the Democrats take back power....

 

[dudmuck]

Mueller continues to face PERJURY TRAP rebellions as more information regarding his potentially criminal prosecutorial misconduct, falsely claiming his victims are / having violated their plea deal agreements because they refuse to give him what he wants, which, according to Corsi and others, is for them to lie and make false accusations about the President, is reported.

Democrats, in the meantime, continue to scramble to pass legislation that 'protects Mueller' and his witch hunt from being fired / terminated.

Gee, that sounds so justifiable, like such an easy 'call' to make - 'Protect Mueller'. Yeah, not so much when you find out the details, what that exactly means.

While telling you they are attempting to 'Protect Mueller', what the Democrats / snowflakes are NOT telling people is the WAY they are trying to do that....

To 'protect Mueller' the Democrats are attempting to strip both the US AG and the President of their Constitutional powers.

THE US AG:
"Currently, the US attorney general can remove the special counsel “for misconduct, dereliction of duty, incapacity, conflict of interest, or for other good cause, including violation of departmental policies.”

THE DEMOCRATS WANT TO STRIP THE US AG OF THAT CONSTITUTIONAL AUTHORITY and would instead establish some oversight with a three-judge panel (made up of two District of Columbia district court judges and one US Court of Appeals judge) that would have the power to overturn the US AG's decision to fire Mueller, even in the case of prosecutorial misconduct or violations of laws / regs / rules.

Such a ruling against a US AG would still most assuredly end up before the USSC, no matter what the legislation designed to protect Mueller says.

IS CONGRESS ATTEMPTING TO USURP RHE EXECUTIVE BRANCH'S AUTHORITY AND DICTATE TO THE EXECUTIVE BRANCH WHO CAN WORK FOR / IN THE EXECUTIVE BRANCH, WHICH IS WHAT DEMOCRATS / SUPPORTERS OF THIS BILL ARE TRYING TO PULL OFF, EVEN CONSTITUTIONAL?

"The conservative argument is that Congress can’t infringe on the executive authority; that constitutionally, the president maintains the power to control who serves in the executive branch."

"At a Senate Judiciary Committee hearing on the constitutionality of the two special counsel bills in September, which included testimony from legal scholars and experts, John Duffy of the University of Virginia School of Law said the “transfer of removal authority from the Executive to the Judicial Branch is almost certainly unconstitutional”

A Senate committee just approved a bill to protect Robert Mueller

.

The executive branch nominates appointees, and the senate confirms these appointees. Its the way its always worked. USA values are about checks and balances; we dont have a king. Dont you remember when Paul Ryan wanted to end executive overreach?

 

[easyt65]

Frankly I don’t see why we don’t just do away with the Senate and let Trump do whatever he wants

That's the trumpanzees' dream scenerio.

A 'Dream Scenario' manufactured by 1 snowflake and agreed on by another......

'Nuff Said.

Bwuhahahaha.....


ONCE AGAIN we see desperate snowflakes accusing others of doing what Democrats have done / do and of being who Democrats are. BARRY was the one who violated the Constitution on several occasions, who openly declared he did not have the Constitutional Authority to do what he was about to do - and did it anyway, who by-passed Congress on numerous occasions to do the 'Dictator' bit in order to ram his own Socialist agenda into 'law' by himself with his Socialist-appointed flunky Judges somehow preventing Un-Constitutional EDICTS from being overturned, running his own Drone Assassination program with which he violated American citizen's right to due process and just simply killed them, cut his own deal with enemies of this nation, etc.....

 

[easyt65]

The executive branch nominates appointees, and the senate confirms these appointees. Its the way its always worked. USA values are about checks and balances; we dont have a king. Dont you remember when Paul Ryan wanted to end executive overreach?

How long has Congress had the authority to overturn the US AG's or President's decision to FIRE someone working in the Executive Branch for prosecutorial mis-conduct or other crimes?

And you are right - we don't have a king...not any more. His ass is GONE...yet we still can't erase ALL of his stench / Un-Constitutional edicts / acts because of his Socialist appointed flunkies.

 

[Dragonlady]

Trump can fire Mueller. It's not like he has produced anything worth a fuck within 2 years. So yeah, he is in firing territory.

23 people charged, 7 of them convicted, $38 million dollars in seizures, and keeping Trump damn near incoherent with worry. Mueller has more than paid his own way.

Just because YOU don't like the results in no way diminishes this work of this Special Counsel. I mean look how hard you and the other Russian trolls have to work to counter the Mueller Effect.

 

[Dragonlady]

Trump is the victim of Obama's abuse of power.
Obama illegally used the FBI to spy upon Trump.
Obama illegally used the DOJ to start a fraudulent investigation.
Democrats = Banana Republic Cretins

View attachment 231488

Trump is the victim of his own running mouth. Republicans illegally used the House and Senate to run a disinformation campaign called "Benghazi, Benghazi Benghazi" for 5 fucking years, which didn't result in a single charge, a single piece of evidence of wrong doing, or uncovered any lies. You're just going to have to put up with this investigation which has resulted in numerous charges, guilty pleas, cooperating witnesses, and a lot of really good outcomes.

And here's a clue. Every time Trump screams NO COLLUSION, we know he's lying because Trump is always lying. If his mouth is moving, he's lying.

 

[Crepitus]

Dude, it's amazing how you can spew all those lies in a row with a straight face!

What is amazing is how you can continue to deny so much documented, reported, confirmed events / information day after day after day.....You, Nat, Lesh....you are the snowflakes Gruber bragged about.....you know, the ones stupid enough to believe anything you are told by your liberal handlers, the ones they COUNT on to get away with the crap they get away with......

I don't have to deny it, it doesn't really exist.

But you go ahead and fill the emptiness between your ears with it if it makes you feel any better.