• We’re currently investigating an issue related to the forum theme and styling that is impacting page layout and visual formatting. The problem has been identified, and we are actively working on a resolution. There is no impact to user data or functionality, this is strictly a front-end display issue. We’ll post an update once the fix has been deployed. Thanks for your patience while we get this sorted.

Soooo... When will McMaster resign? Trump has intelligence of "kindergartner".

Page 3 - Seeking answers? Join the AnandTech community: where nearly half-a-million members share solutions and discuss the latest tech.
alien42 said:
seriously, you aren't that simple minded. you know full well that Mueller is investigating far more than just obstruction and that he still hasn't interviewed several important people. do you really think Mueller would issue an indictment for trump before he is done investigating everything?
Click to expand...

I'm only making the point that if it was as much a sure thing that he obstructed justice then the charges should be brought.

But as you say ( and I say also ) it isn't a clear cut crime. He could and did fire Comey at his discretion which is perfectly legal. Nothing was obstructed in my opinion. And that is why nothing has been charged. Mueller is focusing on the Russia Crap and following the money.
 
pcgeek11 said:
I'm only making the point that if it was as much a sure thing that he obstructed justice then the charges should be brought.

But as you say ( and I say also ) it isn't a clear cut crime. He could and did fire Comey at his discretion which is perfectly legal. Nothing was obstructed in my opinion. And that is why nothing has been charged. Mueller is focusing on the Russia Crap and following the money.
Click to expand...

you seem to be ignoring the fact that Mueller is investigating even bigger crimes than obstruction of justice and it isn't Russian "crap", it's very real.
 
pcgeek11 said:
But you seem so sure that a crime was committed why hasn't he been indicted for obstruction yet?
Click to expand...

Because good investigators take time to build cases. Even if it looks like an open-and-shut case, they have to collect every piece of evidence possible to make sure their argument is airtight (such as motives or others who may have been involved).

Think of it the way you would a good college paper. You don't just want to touch on the bare minimum of evidence you need to make your point; you want to make sure your argument as nuanced as possible, and that it's so airtight that it covers the "but what about..." questions that come up. That way, it's harder for the opposition, whether it's a skeptical professor or a defense attorney, to shoot you down. Remember, Mueller would be indicting the President, and a petty, vindictive one at that -- he can't afford to lose if he goes forward.
 
Well we do agree. Trump isn't guilty of obstruction of justice, yet in any case.
The investigation is proceeding normally. Time will tell.

Your assumption that he obstructed justice is just wishful thinking. Innocent until proven guilty, regardless of what you think of him personally.

We are way off topic and have stated our beliefs... Meh.
 
pcgeek11 said:
Well we do agree. Trump isn't guilty of obstruction of justice, yet in any case.
The investigation is proceeding normally. Time will tell.

Your assumption that he obstructed justice is just wishful thinking. Innocent until proven guilty, regardless of what you think of him personally.

We are way off topic and have stated our beliefs... Meh.
Click to expand...

The mechanism for charging a president with a crime is impeachment and subsequent vote for removal of office. This is a political process that has no resemblance to a judicial one, and neither does an impeachable offense require adherence to meeting a specific statue (such as obstruction). It is entirely at the whim of Congress. A Republican Congress.

The lack of his impeachment to this date bears no information on whether he has met the statutory definition of obstruction.
 
interchange said:
The mechanism for charging a president with a crime is impeachment and subsequent vote for removal of office. This is a political process that has no resemblance to a judicial one, and neither does an impeachable offense require adherence to meeting a specific statue (such as obstruction). It is entirely at the whim of Congress. A Republican Congress.

The lack of his impeachment to this date bears no information on whether he has met the statutory definition of obstruction.
Click to expand...

I agree with that also. I understand how the system works or should work.
 
pcgeek11 said:
I'm only making the point that if it was as much a sure thing that he obstructed justice then the charges should be brought.

But as you say ( and I say also ) it isn't a clear cut crime. He could and did fire Comey at his discretion which is perfectly legal. Nothing was obstructed in my opinion. And that is why nothing has been charged. Mueller is focusing on the Russia Crap and following the money.
Click to expand...

This is what Trump said about firing Comey-

“Regardless of the recommendation, I was going to fire Comey,” Trump later told NBC News anchor Lester Holt. “And in fact when I decided to just do it, I said to myself, I said you know, this Russia thing with Trump and Russia is a made-up story.”
Click to expand...

http://fortune.com/2017/10/31/donald-trump-investigation-timeline/

Trump fired Comey for doing his job, for investigating what the DoJ told him to investigate. Given that the assignment included the Trump campaign it was way out of bounds for Trump to go anywhere near that.
 
pcgeek11 said:
“Regardless of the recommendation, I was going to fire Comey,” Trump later told NBC News anchor Lester Holt.
Click to expand...

You really don't get it, huh? It's willful blindness on your part. Trump said he fired Comey because of the Russia investigation, not because of Hillary's emails or any of that. Except the White House already claimed it was about the Hillary investigation.

Stupidest. fucking. thing. he. ever. did. Not to mention astoundingly arrogant & ignorant at the same time. It's a rerun of Nixon's Saturday night massacre. So now he has Mueller & an expanded investigation. I doubt that Donald will like that any better.
 
pcgeek11 said:
No, it isn't.
Click to expand...

It's a bit rich to claim it wasn't the stupidest thing he ever did when it helped prompt the latest phase of Mueller's investigation. If this leads to an indictment of Trump himself or one of his closest confidants, I'm pretty sure he'll regret the day he fired Comey.
 
Commodus said:
It's a bit rich to claim it wasn't the stupidest thing he ever did when it helped prompt the latest phase of Mueller's investigation. If this leads to an indictment of Trump himself or one of his closest confidants, I'm pretty sure he'll regret the day he fired Comey.
Click to expand...

I think Comey should have been fired the day Trump took office.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

TRENDING THREADS

Back
Top