THE REPORT, buttoned up (SCO Thread v. 33)

[vengeful]

Remember when liberals pretended Jeff Sessions was a secret Russian?

I remember.

Huh? I remember when liberals claimed that Jeff Sessions committed perjury when he lied under oath about not having any contacts with Russians.

 

[SBJJ]

A D.A. is an elected official, bruh. You can't get a politician to fire an elected official, sounds like some dumb fantasy you're coming up with.

Doesn't matter using your sides logic. Just merely asking is obstruction.

 

[glenwo2]

I'm shocked that honest and open Barr is balking at being open and honest.

Your definition of "Open and Honest" differs from most, I see.
Don't step too closely to Hillary's brown-eye...you might fall in.

 

[glenwo2]

You don't have to quote or link to anything pro Trump from Dershowitz. Anytime someone in the legal arena says anything negative towards Trump you can simply say "I can quote Dershowitz defending him' and even if you have never heard it you are safe. He has spun something.

And even Dershowitz generally admits when defending everything Trump that his opinion is in the minority if not the extreme minority within legal circles but he says he does not care,he is right.

You cannot say the same about Napolitano. He has not been an consistent anti Trump voice. He will defend when he thinks its appropriate. BUt I know that with Trumpsters if you are not 100% on the side of Dear Leader then you are the enemy. LOL.

Napolitano was correct in his assessment.

No he wasn't. You see, like Dershowitz, according to you, "admits" it's his opinion, what Napolitano says is his *opinion*, too.

Both are opinions and people are free (like you and me) to either agree with them or disagree with them.

Just like you are agreeing with Napolitano 'cause it fits your Anti-Trump narrative, and I'm agreeing with Dershowitz 'cause it defends against it (and makes absolute sense).

Neither of us are going to change each other's minds so let's give it a rest 'cause all we're doing is wasting both our time typing all this shit out.

 

[glenwo2]

Look at all these legal experts arguing what their favorite tv Persona tweeted

It's amazing how they cling to the one TV person on FOX who spouts CNN-style bullshit and passes it off as Truth.

BTW, did you read that interesting tidbit regarding him, the POTUS, and Kavanaugh?

Napolitano told friends in 2017 that President Donald Trump has told him he was considering Napolitano for a United States Supreme Court appointment should there be a second vacancy.[4] Ultimately, Judge Brett Kavanaugh was chosen instead.

Nice, huh?






Here's something else I found in relation :

Judge Napolitano: Kavanaugh is an Enemy of the 4th Amendment

Axe to grind, cincy. Never heard of Nap so much prior to the Kavanaugh hearings. Trump passed over him and now he's bitter, and he's using his air-time to "get back" at Trump for the snub. I doubt he even believes the shit he's spewing but he's doing it 'cause "Fuck you, Trump, for picking Kavanaugh over me!".

 

[glenwo2]

Remember when Judge Napolitano said he had multiple sources that stated Obama used the Brits to spy on Trump......




I remember

"But.....but...but..... Napolitano was correct in his assessment." - MikeMcMann

 

[glenwo2]

And he could be charged with obstruction or Impeached for doing so in terms of Rosenstein and Mueller.

I know you guys now must treat McGhan like he is a discredited enemy since he was not willing to risk jail for Daddy Trump but he was the lawyer for the Office of the POTUS and not Trump, and he knew that Trump was directing him to commit obstruction of justice.

 

[OverCoronavirus Pressure]

Your definition of "Open and Honest" differs from most, I see.
Don't step too closely to Hillary's brown-eye...you might fall in.

Barr is pretty brazen in his ball-suckingly bullshit characterization of the report, and he should be ashamed, if he can feel shame

 

[glenwo2]

Barr is pretty brazen in his ball-suckingly bullshit characterization of the report, and he should be ashamed, if he can feel shame

Feel shame? For what? For doing his job as AG and following the LAW?

Besides, since when do Attorney Generals feel shame?

It's either their way or the highway.

Eric Holder certainly never felt any shame when he said he was Obama's "Wingman" (remember that?).

 

[MikeMcMann]

No he wasn't. You see, like Dershowitz, according to you, "admits" it's his opinion, what Napolitano says is his *opinion*, too.

Both are opinions and people are free (like you and me) to either agree with them or disagree with them.

Just like you are agreeing with Napolitano 'cause it fits your Anti-Trump narrative, and I'm agreeing with Dershowitz 'cause it defends against it (and makes absolute sense).

Neither of us are going to change each other's minds so let's give it a rest 'cause all we're doing is wasting both our time typing all this shit out.

but Dershowitz admits time and again that like Barr's opinions on Presidential powers being expansive and a very tiny minority opinion in legal circles, that so to is Dershowitz, view on obstruction.

And its fine to have a minority that no one or few other legal experts agree with but claim you are right anyway. You just have to accept though that if you sat on a Appeals Court or the Supreme court you would always be 'wrong', or in the losing minority dissent position on most issues. that is Dershowitz.

 

[MikeMcMann]

"But.....but...but..... Napolitano was correct in his assessment." - MikeMcMann

he was.

 

[glenwo2]

but Dershowitz admits time and again that like Barr's opinions on Presidential powers being expansive and a very tiny minority opinion in legal circles, that so to is Dershowitz, view on obstruction.

And its fine to have a minority that no one or few other legal experts agree with but claim you are right anyway. You just have to accept though that if you sat on a Appeals Court or the Supreme court you would always be 'wrong', or in the losing minority dissent position on most issues. that is Dershowitz.

But I'm not sitting on an Appeals Court or the Supreme Court.

And last I checked, neither is "Judge" Napolitano.

So guess what? His opinion remains just that : an opinion.

 

[glenwo2]

he was, in his own opinion.

Fixed for accuracy.

 

[MikeMcMann]

But I'm not sitting on an Appeals Court or the Supreme Court.

And last I checked, neither is "Judge" Napolitano.

So guess what? His opinion remains just that : an opinion.

No one is suggesting these are not opinions.

The question is are they supported opinions or not. You can have an opinion that the world is flat. You are entitled. You just cannot support it and others can rightly call it dumb.

Dershowitz admits time and again his opinion is in the minority of legal experts if supported at all. Much like Barr's view that you cannot have obstruction of justice if ultimately the crime is not convicted on. An opinion that is generally ridiculed by legal experts as it should be as its stupid. It just means that all you have to do is be successful in your obstruction and then there was no obstruction. Dumb.

 

[glenwo2]

No one is suggesting these are not opinions.

The question is are they supported opinions or not. You can have an opinion that the world is flat. You are entitled. You just cannot support it and others can rightly call it dumb.

Dershowitz admits time and again his opinion is in the minority of legal experts if supported at all. Much like Barr's view that you cannot have obstruction of justice if ultimately the crime is not convicted on. An opinion that is generally ridiculed by legal experts as it should be as its stupid. It just means that all you have to do is be successful in your obstruction and then there was no obstruction. Dumb.

You keep saying this but I have yet to find any proof that he actually said this.

There must be an article or evidence to back that up if you're continuously thumping your chest about it.

 

[KONG-D'SNT-TAP]

MAGAs still belive there is a law that says a President can’t be indicted.

 

[MikeMcMann]

You keep saying this but I have yet to find any proof that he actually said this.

There must be an article or evidence to back that up if you're continuously thumping your chest about it.

Does it matter if he says that? Or if I get proof do you then just ignore it and move on?

Do you agree in advance that if he admits that, then using him as a counter has little to no value?

 

[KONG-D'SNT-TAP]

@MikeMcMann

Why do you even waste your time. You’re arguing with bots and paid trolls. These “people” don’t even live in the same reality as the rest Of the world.

They lie and just make stuff up as they go

 

[hillelslovak87]

It's funny how you righties ball lick Barr, seemingly, or hopefully knowing he already helped a cover up with the HW administration. Drain the swamp is a laughable refrain from you dipshits at this point.

 

[KONG-D'SNT-TAP]

The report clearly says trump broke laws and obstructed justice.

It clearly stated they won’t indict because of some email or post it note (no law, nothing in constitution) that says the JD won’t indict a sitting president.

The report clearly stated it would be handed to congress for those types of actions moving forward.

But the report clears trump?

Fn lulz MAGAs