Jump to content
To change color scheme, click on themes at bottom of page ×
RightNation.US
Sign in to follow this  
Liz

Dershowitz: Mueller ‘Will Blur The Line Between Crimes And Sins And

Rate this topic

Recommended Posts

AntonToo

He hasn’t even been charged yet.

 

Here’s the mistake your side is making. You say Cohen lied before, but now (under duress and threat of jail and loss of wealth) he’s telling the truth. That’s so typical.

 

If Trump is charged with a crime, there will have to be a whole process, and that includes re-questioning of Cohen, and a whole host of other people. Trump isn’t going to be sentenced on “oh Mueller found out from Cohen that Trump told him to pay the hookers because of the election”.

 

It would be unbelievable, if it wasn’t coming from you or TG.

 

....Cool stories bro, but that’s not how any of this works.

 

DOJ guidelines are that a POTUS is to be impeached by Congress before he is charged with a crime. Mueller will deliver his report and then it will be up to Congress.

 

That’s exactly what happened to Nixon who in the end got pardoned to avoid charges.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
zurg

....Cool stories bro, but that’s not how any of this works.

 

DOJ guidelines are that a POTUS is to be impeached by Congress before he is charged with a crime. Mueller will deliver his report and then it will be up to Congress.

 

That’s exactly what happened to Nixon who in the end got pardoned to avoid charges.

Oh, that’s not how it works eh?

 

I suppose your suggestion is more realistic: Trump will be taken to jail without trial. Why? Well cause. And everyone knows cause. Right?

 

(Anton, you truly are just a joke.)

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
JerryL

....Cool stories bro, but that’s not how any of this works.

 

DOJ guidelines are that a POTUS is to be impeached by Congress before he is charged with a crime. Mueller will deliver his report and then it will be up to Congress.

 

That’s exactly what happened to Nixon who in the end got pardoned to avoid charges.

Out of curiosity, do you really see that happening?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
E Van der Vliet

....Cool stories bro, but that’s not how any of this works.

 

DOJ guidelines are that a POTUS is to be impeached by Congress before he is charged with a crime. Mueller will deliver his report and then it will be up to Congress.

 

That’s exactly what happened to Nixon who in the end got pardoned to avoid charges.

Nixon resigned before he could be impeached. Ford pardoned Nixon so the nation could heal. He knew the left would continue to go after Nixon

 

So no, Nixon was not impeached. If you want a better example, look no further than William Jefferson Clinton. He was impeached. And the Senate decided not to convict.

 

If the house tries to Impeach Trump, the same thing will happen.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
E Van der Vliet

Out of curiosity, do you really see that happening?

Aside from Anton’s ignorance of history, I can actually see the Democrats doing this. However, I’m not sure they have enough votes to pass impeachment in the house.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
RedSoloCup

....Cool stories bro, but that’s not how any of this works.

 

DOJ guidelines are that a POTUS is to be impeached by Congress before he is charged with a crime. Mueller will deliver his report and then it will be up to Congress.

 

That’s exactly what happened to Nixon who in the end got pardoned to avoid charges.

 

:rolleyes:

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
That_Guy

Nixon resigned before he could be impeached. Ford pardoned Nixon so the nation could heal. He knew the left would continue to go after Nixon

 

So no, Nixon was not impeached. If you want a better example, look no further than William Jefferson Clinton. He was impeached. And the Senate decided not to convict.

 

If the house tries to Impeach Trump, the same thing will happen.

 

Are you assuming that no additional evidence of Trump's criminal activity becomes public?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
JerryL

Aside from Anton’s ignorance of history, I can actually see the Democrats doing this. However, I’m not sure they have enough votes to pass impeachment in the house.

The House can vote all they want and they could even vote to impeach. No way in h-e-double toothpicks that the Senate gets 67 votes to convict. The Senate on Billy BJ's vote showed how "partisan" works.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Rock N' Roll Right Winger

Are you assuming that no additional evidence of Trump's criminal activity becomes public?

There is no Trump criminal activity.

 

Only in your made up deluded warped infantile mind.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
RedSoloCup

Are you assuming that no additional evidence of Trump's criminal activity becomes public?

 

:yawn:

 

There is no Trump criminal activity.

 

Only in your made up deluded warped infantile mind.

 

:exactly:

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
That_Guy

There is no Trump criminal activity.

 

FYI - Directing his personal attorney to violate campaign finance laws for the purpose of influencing an election is a crime.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
E Van der Vliet

Are you assuming that no additional evidence of Trump's criminal activity becomes public?

<censored> up.

 

The House can vote all they want and they could even vote to impeach. No way in h-e-double toothpicks that the Senate gets 67 votes to convict. The Senate on Billy BJ's vote showed how "partisan" works.

Ayup.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
E Van der Vliet

<censored> up.

 

 

Ayup.

Hmm. Who know “shut” would be filtered out.

 

Let me try this again.

 

TG, shut up.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
mjperry51

FYI - Directing his personal attorney to violate campaign finance laws for the purpose of influencing an election is a crime.

 

Allegation --- not proven. . .

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
E Van der Vliet

Hmm. Who know “shut” would be filtered out.

 

Let me try this again.

 

TG, shut up.

Hmm, guess I slipped up and said <censored>. I like

That better, anyway. ;)

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
zurg

Hmm. Who know “shut” would be filtered out.

 

Let me try this again.

 

TG, shut up.

Maybe you had an AOC misspelling and put an “i” in place of the “u”?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
That_Guy

The House can vote all they want and they could even vote to impeach. No way in h-e-double toothpicks that the Senate gets 67 votes to convict. The Senate on Billy BJ's vote showed how "partisan" works.

 

Nixon is a better comparison than Clinton, who lied and suborned perjury to cover up an affair.

 

Nixon's and Trump's lies and witness tampering were for the purpose of obstructing an ongoing federal investigation -- in Trump's case, a counter-intelligence investigation -- which is much more serious.

 

Allegation --- not proven. . .

 

Not yet -- don't forget that David Pecker from the National Enquirer (who helped "catch-and-kill" the Karen Mcdougal story) was given limited immunity for his testimony in this case.

Edited by That_Guy

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
mjperry51

Nixon is a better comparison than Clinton, who lied and suborned perjury to cover up an affair.

 

Nixon's and Trump's lies and witness tampering were for the purpose of obstructing an ongoing federal investigation -- in Trump's case, a counter-intelligence investigation -- which is much more serious.

 

 

 

Not yet -- don't forget that David Pecker from the National Enquirer (who helped "catch-and-kill" the Karen Mcdougal story) was given limited immunity for his testimony in this case.

Doesn't change the facts. .

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
That_Guy

Doesn't change the facts. .

 

Fair enough.

 

Knowing these allegations would have to be proven in court beyond a reasonable doubt, are you saying you think DoJ is bluffing?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
mjperry51

Fair enough.

 

Knowing these allegations would have to be proven in court beyond a reasonable doubt, are you saying you think DoJ is bluffing?

 

I said what I said -- I don't speculate.

I'll wait for the facts. . .

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
RedSoloCup

I said what I said -- I don't speculate.

I'll wait for the facts. . .

 

Good luck.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
AntonToo

Oh, that’s not how it works eh?

 

Thats right. Your proposition that Trump was supposed to have been charged by DOJ before impeachment proceedings means that you don't understand the process.

 

I suppose your suggestion is more realistic: Trump will be taken to jail without trial. Why? Well cause. And everyone knows cause. Right?

 

(Anton, you truly are just a joke.)

 

 

NEVER have I suggested any such thing.

 

If you would have any intelectual integrity you would retract this rediculous lie and quit constantly posting baseless fabrications.

Edited by AntonToo

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
mjperry51

If you would have any intelectual integrity you would retract this rediculous lie and quit constantly posting baseless fabrications.

 

Oh the irony. . .

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
MontyPython

Are you assuming that no additional evidence of Trump's criminal activity becomes public?

 

Ahem - There would have to already be some sort of evidence thereto before any "additional" evidence could apply. And despite your unicorn-fart delusions, there just ain't no such thing.

 

 

FYI - Directing his personal attorney to violate campaign finance laws for the purpose of influencing an election is a crime.

 

LOLOLOLOLOLOL! Gnat-Attention-Span-Man strikes again!

 

Sorry, that nonsense has already been shredded. More than once.

 

:rolleyes:

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now
Sign in to follow this  

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    No registered users viewing this page.

×
×
  • Create New...