EPTAdding to Mueller’s obstruction case files.
US Politics Mega-thread - Page 9723
| Forum Index > Closed |
Read the rules in the OP before posting, please. In order to ensure that this thread continues to meet TL standards and follows the proper guidelines, we will be enforcing the rules in the OP more strictly. Be sure to give them a re-read to refresh your memory! The vast majority of you are contributing in a healthy way, keep it up! NOTE: When providing a source, explain why you feel it is relevant and what purpose it adds to the discussion if it's not obvious. Also take note that unsubstantiated tweets/posts meant only to rekindle old arguments can result in a mod action. | ||
|
Doodsmack
United States7224 Posts
Adding to Mueller’s obstruction case files. | ||
|
Leporello
United States2845 Posts
Further fueling the NRA story I posted. edit: this is from the 2nd Simpson-Fusion testimony, which was just released. | ||
|
Mohdoo
United States15687 Posts
On January 19 2018 06:23 Leporello wrote: https://twitter.com/kylegriffin1/status/954101297220812800 Further fueling the NRA story I posted. edit: this is from the 2nd Simpson-Fusion testimony, which was just released. NRA has always been anti-American, but this is pretty extreme. | ||
|
Plansix
United States60190 Posts
On January 19 2018 06:29 Mohdoo wrote: NRA has always been anti-American, but this is pretty extreme. They used to be about gun safety and marksmanship. Their early days were beyond tame. | ||
|
Danglars
United States12133 Posts
On January 19 2018 06:17 Doodsmack wrote: https://twitter.com/kylegriffin1/status/954062196924911616 Adding to Mueller’s obstruction case files. The House investigation is different from the Mueller investigation. House holds him in contempt if they feel like it. | ||
|
Gorsameth
Netherlands21668 Posts
On January 19 2018 06:32 Danglars wrote: The House investigation is different from the Mueller investigation. House holds him in contempt if they feel like it. Doodsmack's point (I assume) is that if there is going to be a charge for Obstruction of Justice this will be one of many examples given where Trump tried to undermine the investigations running against him. | ||
|
Danglars
United States12133 Posts
On January 19 2018 06:39 Gorsameth wrote: Doodsmack's point (I assume) is that if there is going to be a charge for Obstruction of Justice this will be one of many examples given where Trump tried to undermine the investigations running against him. That fits no legal definition of obstruction of justice. Trying to overrule a claim for executive privilege is a very different thing. | ||
|
Karis Vas Ryaar
United States4396 Posts
| ||
|
Plansix
United States60190 Posts
On January 19 2018 06:59 Danglars wrote: That fits no legal definition of obstruction of justice. Trying to overrule a claim for executive privilege is a very different thing. It would be supporting evidence to prove the president’s mind set to hinder the investigation. | ||
|
Mohdoo
United States15687 Posts
A significant portion of Portland are beyond offended at the sorts of things Portlandia makes fun of. A lot of people are somehow dumb enough to blame the show for rising housing prices. Here's the article: http://www.wweek.com/culture/2018/01/17/how-perceptions-of-portlandia-have-changed-over-the-years/ One of my favorite quotes they cite showing how some Portland residents hate the show: "The 'Women and Women First' segments that are filmed at In Other Words are trans-antagonistic and trans-misogynist and have only become more offensive as the show goes on. 'LOL Fred Armisen in a wig and a dress' is a deeply shitty joke whose sole punchline throws trans femmes under the bus by holding up their gender presentation for mockery and ridicule." — In Other Words on severing ties with Portlandia Actually this one is way better: "Fuck you, Portlandia! You are the easiest and my personal favorite scapegoat. This is ALL your fault. You are not funny. You never were funny. You've ruined our city by turning us into a fucking commercial for hipster bullshit. I've been here for 20 years. I have watched it change. Portland is now a soulless amusement park for the entitled and wealthy. I hate what this city is becoming and I blame YOU!" — The Portland Mercury | ||
|
TheTenthDoc
United States9561 Posts
On January 19 2018 06:59 Danglars wrote: That fits no legal definition of obstruction of justice. Trying to overrule a claim for executive privilege is a very different thing. If Trump were invoking executive privilege in an area where it didn't exist, knowing it didn't exist, then I think it would fit as obstruction. Right? | ||
|
Mohdoo
United States15687 Posts
On January 19 2018 08:02 TheTenthDoc wrote: If Trump were invoking executive privilege in an area where it didn't exist, knowing it didn't exist, then I think it would fit as obstruction. Right? Good luck proving Trump's brain contains knowledge | ||
|
Karis Vas Ryaar
United States4396 Posts
| ||
|
Danglars
United States12133 Posts
On January 19 2018 07:13 Plansix wrote: It would be supporting evidence to prove the president’s mind set to hinder the investigation. The Mueller investigation is not being run through Congress. He has not done so (to my knowledge) in the Mueller investigation, and its reported that Bannon will freely answer Mueller’s deputies. He can assert it freely to protect executive branch rights, under separation of powers, without worry. It’s up to Congress to prove that it doesn’t apply. | ||
|
Danglars
United States12133 Posts
On January 19 2018 08:02 TheTenthDoc wrote: If Trump were invoking executive privilege in an area where it didn't exist, knowing it didn't exist, then I think it would fit as obstruction. Right? Nope. They can move to compel testimony (chances might be good for conversations during a presidential transition), but no Supreme Court precedent exists to say he had no right to assert it. It’s untested. | ||
|
zlefin
United States7689 Posts
On January 19 2018 08:02 TheTenthDoc wrote: If Trump were invoking executive privilege in an area where it didn't exist, knowing it didn't exist, then I think it would fit as obstruction. Right? I doubt it; it might constitute evidence of a mindset at best, but I don't see how it could rise to the level of obstruction. making frivolous claims generally falls in the area of contempt iirc, though our resident lawyers would know more. | ||
|
pmh
1352 Posts
https://gop.com/the-highly-anticipated-2017-fake-news-awards/ Not saying its good or whatever (though the examples seem to be somewhat correct) but this is just to funny. Gop has humor,"highly anticipated" The winner is wrong though,its not fake news its just a wrong prediction but o well. Verry funny. The one sided reporting is working against the media,i cant understand how they can not see this. Like this fake news award is perfect reaction,its funny and the examples he gives are actually correct. It is kinda smart,listing 10 decent examples (with the exception of the winner) and then at 11 rusian collusion. | ||
|
Doodsmack
United States7224 Posts
On January 19 2018 08:09 Danglars wrote: The Mueller investigation is not being run through Congress. He has not done so (to my knowledge) in the Mueller investigation, and its reported that Bannon will freely answer Mueller’s deputies. He can assert it freely to protect executive branch rights, under separation of powers, without worry. It’s up to Congress to prove that it doesn’t apply. Considering that Mueller requested documents on Trump’s efforts to blunt the media stories on Don Jr’s meeting it seems that he might be interested in anything related to blocking information regarding the issue. Certainly not proof of obstruction in itself. But I’ll bet it will be collected by Mueller. | ||
|
Danglars
United States12133 Posts
On January 19 2018 08:25 Doodsmack wrote: Considering that Mueller requested documents on Trump’s efforts to blunt the media stories on Don Jr’s meeting it seems that he might be interested in anything related to blocking information regarding the issue. Certainly not proof of obstruction in itself. But I’ll bet it will be collected by Mueller. The key phrase is “Mueller requested documents,” which is different than “Congress subpoenaed testimony.” The second one has no bearing on obstruction of justice. We have a great deal more precedent on justice department/independent counsel vs executive privilege, even if obstruction of justice is still a high bar to clear in that case (look at statute to see). | ||
|
Introvert
United States4748 Posts
Earlier tweet, but I like the honesty here: | ||
| ||
