If the President does it, it's not Illegal

[Rematch]

Is this a can or has type question?

 

[MiniCraque]

Mueller will subpoena tRUmp
TRUmp takes the 5th every question
Mueller submits to Congress his report
House brings articles of impeachment on obstruction and we see how many bridges tRUmp burned in Senate

I do think tRUmp engaged in quid pro quo behavior with Russia amounting to conspiracy against the US but Mueller won't risk a SCOTUS battle also tRUmp may have had enough cushion between him and actors for plausible deniability, however, Jr sure seems to have made some solid fuck ups for a guy who wasn't on the campaign.

The House is fucked up beyond any hope. If you think online Trump bots are bad you should take a close look at some of those representatives.

Trump can't get whatever he wants through the Senate because it's not overrun by loyalists (close call though), but the House?

 

[Pupi]

Like it or not, it's true.

"The President is not above the law!" is a nice saying and all, but it's simply false. He is the law.

No he's not. Theres a separation of power specifically to avoid that.

 

[Rematch]

Very dishonest question, TS.

 

[woodguyatl]

I believe they're saying it's the president's right to fire the FBI director therefore that act is not obstruction of justice. They're not saying the president can obstruct.

I think they are making a broader argument. They are saying that Trump can terminate any investigation into himself. He is, in effect, above the law because he can terminate any investigation into himself and, ultimately, pardon himself. He is quite literally unable to obstruct justice.

"President Donald Trump's lawyers argued in a confidential January letter to special counsel Robert Mueller that the President cannot illegally obstruct the Russia probe because he, as the top law enforcement officer, has authority over all federal investigations, The New York Timesreported Saturday.

The 20-page letter from Trump attorney Jay Sekulow and then-Trump lawyer John Dowd, which CNN reported on last week and the Times has obtained, says that Trump could not possibly have committed obstruction in the Russia investigation because the Constitution empowers him to "terminate the inquiry, or even exercise his power to pardon if he so desired."
Trump's "actions here, by virtue of his position as the chief law enforcement officer, could neither constitutionally nor legally constitute obstruction because that would amount to him obstructing himself," Dowd and Sekulow wrote.
The two argued that "no President has ever faced charges of obstruction merely for exercising his constitutional authority" and that a President can "order the termination" of a Justice Department or FBI investigation "at any time and for any reason." "

 

[OverCoronavirus Pressure]

Is this a can or has type question?

It's rapidly evolving; the next question will follow an assertion:
The president obstructed Justice. Will he pay a price for it?

 

[ChainFlow]

Very dishonest question, TS.

What is dishonest about it? It’s a simple question related to legal assertions made by Trump’s own lawyers.

 

[Bobby 3 Sticks]

The House is fucked up beyond any hope. If you think online Trump bots are bad you should take a close look at some of those representatives.

Trump can't get whatever he wants through the Senate because it's not overrun by loyalists (close call though), but the House?

Im operating under asumption there's enough damming in Mueller report plus a substantial dem gain in house

 

[OverCoronavirus Pressure]

What is dishonest about it? It’s a simple question related to legal assertions made by Trump’s own lawyers.

I think by dishonest he meant confusingly worded.

 

[Rematch]

What is dishonest about it? It’s a simple question related to legal assertions made by Trump’s own lawyers.

And what was asserted aside from a president having the LEGAL right to fire the lead investigator and pardon anyone convicted? Where is the obstruction? There is none. The assertion of being "obstruction" made by our left leaning denizens is about as solid as the "collusion" assertion.

Never stop grasping at straws.

 

[HomerThompson]

I’d like to use this in life. “Sorry, my recollection keeps changing.”

Sounds like a winning argument to try with your wife, or significant other.

 

[Rematch]

I think by dishonest he meant confusingly worded.

That to.

 

[FinalFight]

No. Wait, did you think I was defending Trump?

Oh my bad.

<{ByeHomer}>

 

[HomerThompson]

And what was asserted aside from a president having the LEGAL right to fire the lead investigator and pardon anyone convicted? Where is the obstruction? There is none. The assertion of being "obstruction" made by our left leaning denizens is about as solid as the "collusion" assertion.

Never stop grasping at straws.

So, you think it's impossible for the President to commit a crime then? Because that's what you're saying.

 

[Rematch]

So, you think it's impossible for the President to commit a crime then? Because that's what you're saying.

What crime would that be in regards to the assertion made by The President's legal team?

 

[mixmastermo]

And what was asserted aside from a president having the LEGAL right to fire the lead investigator and pardon anyone convicted? Where is the obstruction? There is none. The assertion of being "obstruction" made by our left leaning denizens is about as solid as the "collusion" assertion.

Never stop grasping at straws.

Bro, he asked a simple question. Do you think the POTUS can obstruct justice or not?

You either misunderstood the question or don't feel comfortable answering it because you don't want to betray your principles or make your guy look bad.

All the other stuff you are talking about are opinions and not necessarily invalid, but it doesn't answer the very simple question Homer asked.

The only one being dishonest here is you with these debate techniques.

 

[HomerThompson]

What crime would that be in regards the assertion made by The President's legal team?

Please answer my question first. Also, read the article, or the actual letter Trump's team sent to Mueller. Their position is clear, as is mine.

 

[Rematch]

Please answer my question first. Also, read the article, or the actual letter Trump's team sent to Mueller. Their position is clear, as is mine.

Is there a crime?

 

[Bobby 3 Sticks]

TFW a poster doesn't know obstruction of justice is a crime

 

[OverCoronavirus Pressure]

Trump "probably does" have the power to pardon himself.

This is insane.

This is the United States.
There's no defending this line of reasoning.

Smearing law enforcement and agencies. Floating power tests. Obvious corruption and efforts to hide and obscure the truth.

He's guilty of something and anxious about it.