I only speak for myself. Do you think I wouldn’t want to see justice done no matter what party a person identifies with?
Justice - just. Justice is for the innocent as well as the guilty.
the problem comes in where you believe all the illicit actions of your boyfriend are warranted and justified, because liberals.
LOL, pure delusion.
You realize that doesn’t matter, right?
LOL
Senate Judiciary Committee Chairman Chuck Grassley, R-Iowa, drew particular attention to one text that suggested the Obama “White House is running this,” in reference to an unspecified investigation.
I know…a puddle is too deep after a sprinkle
Of course I realize the letter doesn’t matter, Trump said himself he intended on firing Comey regardless of the letter. So why did you post it?
He said that. He intended to fire Comey, but Rosenstein’s letter is the only thing that matters.
No actually according to the president’s legal team none of it matters, he can start/stop DOJ investigations at whim and anything he does is legal by virtue of being president.
They have all but conceded obstruction of justice and instead are legally arguing that obstructing justice is within his power. Let that sink in
1 Like
Think about how cornered Trump is, that his legal teams defense is not about disputing the facts or the actions of himself or others in his administration.
It is literally the Nixon defense of “if the president does it that means it is not illegal”
That’s some crazy shiz
1 Like
Nixon tried the same type of legal maneuvers as well. They didn’t work. And I agree with the second link from the Brookings Institute that we are seeing the same thing again with Trump. Sad but true.
1 Like
Obstruction of justice is what some misguided lefties think will bring down the President. It’s good to see them put in their place.
I think your first paragraph is an overstatement.
There are many questions yet unsettled about the Trump investigation. It ain’t over till it’s over.
I agree with that.
Please show me where President Trump said this? …
“trump has declared that ending the russia investigation was his motive for firing comey many times. your delusional denial of this inarguable fact is your problem.”
You think that’s the first time a President made that argument? Bill Clinton argued the same thing regarding his civil case. It didn’t work there but I probably would for a criminal case.
okay. Then his lawyers should argue that, instead of the argument they used in the memo.
“your honor, everything is to be ignored except for Rosenstein’s letter may it please the court CASE DISMISSED”
Your bat ■■■■ crazy legal strategy that the courts should be compelled to ignore everything except for Rosenstein’s letter is not what the Memo argues, and is actually quite retarded. Try again.
He declared his motivation in the lester holt interview. He bragged to russians in a meeting that he ended the russia investigation when he fired comey. stop pretending to be stupid.
Not at all, I just think it’s even more ridiculous when Donald makes it.
He allegedly bragged about, but he didtn say it was because of phony Russia invetsigation. And until we have no evidence that he really said that, because it was a leak, it isnt certain waht he really said. Why should we trust to 100% what that leakers claim? Maybe they fabricate the content of the leaks, according to the effect they intend to cause …
