Oh Newt you silly Newt

[fskimospy]

Witness tampering, bribes, suborning perjury are crimes. Firing an FBI director isn't a crime.

Obstruction of justice is a crime though, and firing the FBI director can easily be that.

I like how when cornered in your own bad logic you just ignore it and start over. It's incredibly juvenile.

 

[buckshot24]

Obstruction of justice is a crime though, and firing the FBI director can easily be that.

I like how when cornered in your own bad logic you just ignore it and start over. It's incredibly juvenile.

I ignored nothing. You think you've proven your point and I don't. A president doing a perfectly legal and constitutional thing cannot be obstruction of justice.

 

[soundforbjt]

I ignored nothing. You think you've proven your point and I don't. A president doing a perfectly legal and constitutional thing cannot be obstruction of justice.

It can become a crime depending on the reason, which you are conveniently ignoring or claiming it doesn't matter.

 

[buckshot24]

It can become a crime depending on the reason, which you are conveniently ignoring or claiming it doesn't matter.

Sorry, no it can't.

 

[Younigue]

Firing him in "hopes" of impeding an investigation is a crime.

Like right now, if I fired you @buckshot24 for not allowing enough oxygen to get to your brain. It would be wrong, especially since you're the Director of your body and possibly have all the tools within your rights to pursue this lack of oxygen thing. Ya know, you just get to be you man. With enough oxygen, do you think you'd become a whole other person that some people might even like? Never mind, you're fired.

Yeah yeah, this analogy only partially works but funny none the less.

The clue you seem to have none of is right there if only you'd take a deep breath and wake up that sorely underused gray mass floundering around in your head. Feed it!

*whispering creepily to you* it's sooo hungry.

 

[fskimospy]

I ignored nothing. You think you've proven your point and I don't. A president doing a perfectly legal and constitutional thing cannot be obstruction of justice.

Of course it can be. Are you arguing that Richard Nixon did nothing wrong?

As I told you before and you conveniently ignored, company officials shredding documents is totally legal. If they are doing that to obstruct an investigation that legal action becomes a crime.

What part of this don't you understand?

 

[zinfamous]

Sorry, no it can't.

it can. of course it can

 

[buckshot24]

it can. of course it can

No it can't.

 

[buckshot24]

Of course it can be. Are you arguing that Richard Nixon did nothing wrong?

As I told you before and you conveniently ignored, company officials shredding documents is totally legal. If they are doing that to obstruct an investigation that legal action becomes a crime.

What part of this don't you understand?

Destroying evidence is a crime in itself. Firing an FBI director is just a constitutionally provided power of the executive. He's the boss of the entire executive where the FBI resides.

 

[jackstar7]

Destroying evidence is a crime in itself. Firing an FBI director is just a constitutionally provided power of the executive. He's the boss of the entire executive where the FBI resides.

It's not evidence until it is, is his point. Prior to an investigation, they are just documents. When a subpoena calls for them, then we have ourselves a potential crime.

Are you as confused by time as you are by the shape of the planet?

EDIT: This is unfair. I just realized that this hinges on an understanding of context -- something you've repeatedly shown an inability to grasp.

 

[Younigue]

Coo-coo, Whackadoo, loon!
Your man's a dumb buffoon!

Comey's not his homey!
Trump asked 'won't you blow me?'
The man said no.
'THEN YOU MUST GO!"

'I'll getchu my pretty'
'I'll fire you, I'm witty'

Now he has Meuller.
He's a real cull(er).

He's doomed the damned buffoon!
Coo-coo, whackadoo, loon! <--- that's you! And all Cult45's.

I wrote this special for you @buckshot24

 

[buckshot24]

It's not evidence until it is, is his point. Prior to an investigation, they are just documents. When a subpoena calls for them, then we have ourselves a potential crime.

Ok, that's why I said destroying evidence is a crime, not documents.

Are you as confused by time as you are by the shape of the planet?

Not confused at all, this poisoning the well with lies is simply another example of your dishonesty.

EDIT: This is unfair. I just realized that this hinges on an understanding of context -- something you've repeatedly shown an inability to grasp.

You're the one who stupidly suggests that taking something out of context is the same thing as not providing the context.

 

[fskimospy]

Destroying evidence is a crime in itself. Firing an FBI director is just a constitutionally provided power of the executive. He's the boss of the entire executive where the FBI resides.

No, shredding documents is totally legal unless it obstructs an investigation. Similarly firing the FBI director is totally legal unless it obstructs an investigation. Whether he is the boss is irrelevant, only the obstruction matters.

Do you understand better now?

 

[jackstar7]

Ok, that's why I said destroying evidence is a crime, not documents.
Not confused at all, this poisoning the well with lies is simply another example of your dishonesty.
You're the one who stupidly suggests that taking something out of context is the same thing as not providing the context.

Right, but you get how the analogy to Comey works, right? Like maybe Trump didn't know it was a crime, but it still was? You're already doing a hefty amount of suppositions based on your feelings, (he's surrounded by people who wouldn't let him do X.) so I don't want to drag this down any further.

Which lies are those?

Taking something out of context and not providing the context of something... explain how they are different. In detail. Or accept that you're all bluster and no brains.

 

[buckshot24]

No, shredding documents is totally legal unless it obstructs an investigation. Similarly firing the FBI director is totally legal unless it obstructs an investigation. Whether he is the boss is irrelevant, only the obstruction matters.

Do you understand better now?

I totally understand your point. It's crap.

 

[fskimospy]

Destroying evidence is a crime in itself. Firing an FBI director is just a constitutionally provided power of the executive. He's the boss of the entire executive where the FBI resides.

Also can you confirm you think Nixon did nothing wrong? If you think he did, can you explain the difference?

 

[jackstar7]

It's crap.

Your posting? Indeed it is.

Bonus! I left out context and did not provide the context... almost like those were linked somehow.

 

[buckshot24]

Your posting? Indeed it is.

Bonus! I left out context and did not provide the context... almost like those were linked somehow.

You have become a complete moron and a complete waste of time.

 

[jackstar7]

You have become a complete moron and a complete waste of time.

Can you pinpoint when that happened?

Can you compare it to your own changes or lack thereof?

I'll accept this as your admission of being all bluster and no brains. Carry on you cowardly pedant!

 

[buckshot24]

Also can you confirm you think Nixon did nothing wrong? If you think he did, can you explain the difference?

I said Nixon did things wrong on that Saturday night. He just didn't do anything illegal.

He paid hush money, he suborned perjury, destroyed subpoenaed evidence which are all illegal.

 

[fskimospy]

I said Nixon did things wrong on that Saturday night. He just didn't do anything illegal.

He paid hush money, he suborned perjury, destroyed subpoenaed evidence which are all illegal.

The Saturday Night Massacre was about him firing people investigating him. Can I confirm you think he did nothing illegal there?

Just trying to nail you down on an endorsement of almost unlimited criminal activity.

 

[fskimospy]

I totally understand your point. It's crap.

It's very telling that you can't offer a counterpoint other than name calling.

 

[jackstar7]

It's very telling that you can't offer a counterpoint other than name calling.

But he will let you know he didn't call you a name, he just insulted your point rather than answer it.

Same stuff he was doing when people showed the physics that lead to a spherical planet.

 

[Jhhnn]

Witness tampering, bribes, suborning perjury are crimes. Firing an FBI director isn't a crime.

Firing Cox wasn't a crime, either, until we look at the context. Nixon fired Cox to stymie the Watergate investigation. Trump fired Comey to stymie the Russian investigation. He as much as said so himself, remember?

Now that it has completely backfired Trump becomes the victim of his own arrogance. Like Comey told him, he wasn't a target in the investigation. Now he is.

Ooops.

 

[buckshot24]

The Saturday Night Massacre was about him firing people investigating him. Can I confirm you think he did nothing illegal there?

Just trying to nail you down on an endorsement of almost unlimited criminal activity.

I already told you that it wasn't illegal.