I forgot about the crimes the state AG's can prosecute at will and DOJ can't do **** about it, Mueller firewalled this baby pretty good.
Another piece of legal brilliance.
And.........here comes Steeltime.......................
![giphy.gif](https://media1.giphy.com/media/UNOEG76IqD0xq/giphy.gif)
I forgot about the crimes the state AG's can prosecute at will and DOJ can't do **** about it, Mueller firewalled this baby pretty good.
Technically he equated you to Tibs, which is far worse. That means he thinks that you are actually retarded. I do not, but I can see his point. I don’t think you have ever once said anything positive about Trump, only constant negativity. Which is surprising, given that he is so pro military and pro veteran.
Another piece of legal brilliance.
And.........here comes Steeltime.......................
![]()
You guys are something else. God forbid anyone thinks Trump isn't the living embodiment of Jesus Christ. If you read my post, it is a clear indictment of the Democrat party. But I said Trump is going down. I am obviously a hater. Good gravy.
They would look good in North Korean army uniforms wouldn't they? Praising dear leader constantly while he starves them to death and destroys the country.....yet they think they are patriots...it is so utterly laughable how gullible they are, and sad at the same time.
Meanwhile their President ignores the 517-5 vote to impose sanctions on Russia...a clear constitutional crisis. Gee.....why does he try SO HARD to never criticize Putin....and now goes 100% cuck on punishing them.....Gee I wonder why that is................................
You just don't get it do you? Obviously neither does the author of that article.
It's NOT about crimes committed by a sitting president, if that were the case the author might be right. We are talking about what went on before the election, money laundering before the election, etc. while the obstruction case may elude Mueller in some screwed up way it's still a target rich environment....as in can't miss......
Collusion, money laundering, tax evasion, RICO violations....and on and on...
Sarge gets it. The Orange POS IS going down.
You guys are something else. God forbid anyone thinks Trump isn't the living embodiment of Jesus Christ. If you read my post, it is a clear indictment of the Democrat party. But I said Trump is going down. I am obviously a hater. Good gravy.
Stupid ****. Jesus, why do I waste a millisecond arguing law with you, you stupid ****. It would be like me arguing with you about what it's like to be a miserable failure of a flatulent excuse of an infected ****, when I know you are the goddamn expert on that topic.
Take notes, you blithering imbecile. Alternatively, have your alzheimer-addled grandma explain the **** to you. The consensus of legal experts - you know, those who have actually been to law school and are not leeches admittedly stealing taxpayer money, like you - is that a sitting President cannot be indicted, i.e., that means charged with a crime by a grand jury. (More **** they teach in law school and that you don't know, you bloated, fat-assed, lying used diaper.)
But would the Constitution allow Mr. Mueller to indict Mr. Trump if he finds evidence of criminal conduct? The prevailing view among most legal experts is no. They say the president is immune from prosecution so long as he is in office.
“The framers implicitly immunized a sitting president from ordinary criminal prosecution,” said Akhil Reed Amar, a law professor at Yale. Note the word “implicitly.” Professor Amar acknowledged that the text of the Constitution did not directly answer the question. “It has to be,” he said, “a structural inference about the uniqueness of the president himself.”
The closest the Constitution comes to addressing the issue is in this passage, from Article I, Section 3: “Judgment in cases of impeachment shall not extend further than to removal from office, and disqualification to hold and enjoy any office of honor, trust or profit under the United States: but the party convicted [under a trial by impeachment ... again, law school teaches real lawyers to read and understand the law] shall nevertheless be liable and subject to indictment, trial, judgment and punishment, according to law.”
https://www.nytimes.com/2017/05/29/...nal-puzzle-can-the-president-be-indicted.html
So you diseased, cankerous, disgusting, bile-inducing wart of an excuse of a human being, why the **** would the Constitution provide that a President is subject to no criminal prosecution except impeachment, and only AFTER impeachment is the President subject to indictment or trial? Please, grace us with your legal acumen, you dimwitted, illiterate, lying thief.
Hey, you know one thing they teach us in law school, i.e., the place you are too stupid and ignorant to attend? Yeah, READ THE ******* STATUTE. Impeachment then indictment, fuckwad, NOT indictment then impeachment.
See how that works? Get it? Go ahead, give an indication you understand the basic instruction of Article I, Section 3:
![]()
Thought so.
Your hallucinations are becoming worse. Time to up your meds.This isn't a slip and fall. The ambulance chaser can't help you gerbil.
Your hallucinations are becoming worse. Time to up your meds.
You gotta love Homey the Clown though.
Sent from my [device_name] using Steeler Nation mobile app
bring it on home, knock the **** out of them
Rep. Paul Gosar calls for 'criminal prosecution' of former top FBI, DOJ officials
Rep. Paul Gosar, R-Ariz., called for the criminal prosecution of multiple former FBI and Justice Department officials after the release Friday of the Republican memo about surveillance of a Trump campaign adviser.
Gosar said in a statement that he will be co-authoring a letter to Attorney General Jeff Sessions seeking the "criminal prosecution" of former FBI Director James Comey, former Deputy FBI Director Andrew McCabe, former Deputy Attorney General Sally Yates and Deputy Attorney General Rod Rosenstein for their "illegal misconduct and abuse of FISA."
"I will be leading a letter to the Attorney General seeking criminal prosecution against these traitors to our nation," Gosar said in a statement.
http://www.washingtonexaminer.com/r...s-after-release-of-nunes-memo/article/2647991
What i don't understand about this whole thing is who cares if Russia tried to get one candidate elected? Short of hacking voting machines i don't think it matters. The US always has preference of one candidate over another on foreign elections. To me this whole thing is saying Americans are too weak to make up their own mind. If Russia learns of a secret plan by north Korea to nuke the US and we pay them for the info or ease off sanctions is that collusion?
What i don't understand about this whole thing is who cares if Russia tried to get one candidate elected? Short of hacking voting machines i don't think it matters. The US always has preference of one candidate over another on foreign elections. To me this whole thing is saying Americans are too weak to make up their own mind. If Russia learns of a secret plan by north Korea to nuke the US and we pay them for the info or ease off sanctions is that collusion?
I've said this from the very beginning as well.
It's like the MSM says "Propaganda from inside the U.S. is fine, but oh my god! Russia tries propaganda on facebook and the end of the world is right around the corner!"