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

Mueller: Investigation was “not at any time curtailed, stopped, or hin

Rate this topic

Recommended Posts

Tikk

"Priebus recalled that McGahn said that the President had asked him to do 'crazy sh!t'"

 

"Crazy sh!t" is another way of saying "conspire to obstruct justice"; and White House Counsel Don McGahn was prepared to resign instead of doing "crazy sh!t" as directed by Trump.

 

Is it? Is it really? Saying "Crazy sh!t" is another way of saying "conspire to obstruct justice"? Where is that translation? Because I must have missed that day in English class.

 

Is it like "Cookoo for Cocoa Puffs" another way of saying "conspiring to plant a bomb on a military vessel"? Or "Man, that meal was insane" like saying "Man, let's rob the local convenience store"?

 

But please continue.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
JerryL

Is it? Is it really? Saying "Crazy sh!t" is another way of saying "conspire to obstruct justice"? Where is that translation? Because I must have missed that day in English class.

 

Is it like "Cookoo for Cocoa Puffs" another way of saying "conspiring to plant a bomb on a military vessel"? Or "Man, that meal was insane" like saying "Man, let's rob the local convenience store"?

 

But please continue.

T_G has a long and pathetic history with the meanings of words. They routinely kick his butt.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
GrimV

T_G has a long and pathetic history with the meanings of words.

 

And figures of speech. Curious ailments for an alleged writer.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Moderator T

"Priebus recalled that McGahn said that the President had asked him to do 'crazy sh!t'"

 

"Crazy sh!t" is another way of saying "conspire to obstruct justice"; and White House Counsel Don McGahn was prepared to resign instead of doing "crazy sh!t" as directed by Trump.

Mueller: Investigation was “not at any time curtailed, stopped, or hindered”

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
That_Guy

ME: "Hey, Python. I'm thinking about setting fire to random pets in my neighborhood, you with me?"

 

MONTY PYTHON: "Hey man, that's some crazy sh!t, count me out."

 

ME: "On second thought, never mind."

 

More accurate (though paraphrased because I don't have time to pull the quotes):

 

TRUMP: (to McGahn) Mueller is conflicted because of a dispute over country club fees. He can't be fair to me. He has to go. Call Rod and tell him. Let me know when it's done.

 

MCGAHN: (to Reince Preibus) Trump is asking me to do crazy sh!t by directing the Deputy Attorney General to fire the Special Counsel. I'm going to resign instead.

 

TRUMP: (to McGahn) Have you done it yet?

 

 

("crazy sh!t" = "conspire to obstruct justice")

Edited by That_Guy

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
That_Guy

Saying "Crazy sh!t" is another way of saying "conspire to obstruct justice"? Where is that translation? Because I must have missed that day in English class.

 

Did you take any classes in deductive reasoning?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
GrimV

More accurate (though paraphrased because I don't have time to pull the quotes):

 

TRUMP: (to McGahn) Mueller is conflicted because of a dispute over country club fees. He can't be fair to me. He has to go. Call Rod and tell him. Let me know when it's done.

 

MCGAHN: (to Reince Preibus) Trump is asking me to do crazy sh!t by directing the Deputy Attorney General to fire the Special Counsel. I'm going to resign instead.

 

TRUMP: (to McGahn) Have you done it yet?

 

 

("crazy sh!t" = "conspire to obstruct justice")

 

ME: "Hey, Python. I'm thinking about setting fire to random pets in my neighborhood, you with me?"

 

MONTY PYTHON: "Torturing small animals to death is illegal. You do this and I'm calling the cops".

 

ME: "Fine. I won't set fire to random pets in my neighborhood."

 

<Bloody hippies, spoiling everyone's fun>

 

 

 

 

Surely I'd go to prison for that Thought Crime, right?

 

How many years, TG? How many years would I get for *thinking* about torturing small animals?

 

Not committing the act, mind you. Thinking about it.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Tikk

Did you take any classes in deductive reasoning?

 

Sir Bedevere:

...and that, my liege, is how we know the Earth to be banana shaped.

 

King Arthur:

This new learning amazes me, Sir Bedevere. Explain again how sheep's bladders may be employed to prevent earthquakes.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
That_Guy

<Bloody hippies, spoiling everyone's fun>

 

:drinkers:

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
GrimV

:drinkers:

 

In other words, you can't answer. Gee, what a shock.

 

So you not only believe anyone accused of a crime should be forced to prove their innocence, you also believe we should prosecute people for Thought Crimes.

 

 

A nightmarish mix of Orwell *AND* Kafka.

 

I pray to God Democrats never return to real power if this is an example of how they wield it.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
MontyPython

ME: "Hey, Python. I'm thinking about setting fire to random pets in my neighborhood, you with me?"

 

MONTY PYTHON: "Hey man, that's some crazy sh!t, count me out."

 

ME: "On second thought, never mind."

 

:2up:

 

 

Since you're the legal expert, how many years would I spend in prison for that Thought Crime?

 

Ooh! Ooh! I know! I know!

 

:wave:

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Howsithangin

More accurate (though paraphrased because I don't have time to pull the quotes):

 

TRUMP: (to McGahn) Mueller is conflicted because of a dispute over country club fees. He can't be fair to me. He has to go. Call Rod and tell him. Let me know when it's done.

 

MCGAHN: (to Reince Preibus) Trump is asking me to do crazy sh!t by directing the Deputy Attorney General to fire the Special Counsel. I'm going to resign instead.

 

TRUMP: (to McGahn) Have you done it yet?

 

 

("crazy sh!t" = "conspire to obstruct justice")

 

Thankfully, the people running the investigation weren't quite as delusional or want to flights of fancy as you. As a result, Trump's in the clear, the democrats and the media (but I repeat myself) are besmirched, and Trumps laughing his way to a re-election. :)

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Squirrel

:drinkers:

Anouther hard core answer with facts showing your ability to use words , defend your position and use logic. Well that one will swing everyone to your side. I mean how can we argue hard facts with someone of your intelligence and facts. But by all means keep talking shine more light on your iq. I’m waiting on pins and needles for the next one , will this one be we are all racist or retarded? Don’t tell me just surprise us

Edited by Squirrel

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
AntonToo

Mueller apparently disagrees with you. But what does he know.

 

Mueller does not “apparently disagree” with me.

 

You apparently do not understand a difference between successfully thwarting an investigation and taking not-successful actions to thwart and investigation.

 

From Obstruction of Justice perspective success of the Obstructive acts does not matter.

 

 

And Grim...what the f are you smoking?

 

President’s orders to his subordinates ARE NOT IN HIS THOUGHTS. What you are saying is just stupid nonsense.

Edited by AntonToo

Share this post


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

Mueller does not “apparently disagree” with me.

 

You apparently do not understand a difference between successfully thwarting an investigation and taking not-successful actions to thwart and investigation.

 

From Obstruction of Justice perspective success of the Obstructive acts does not matter.

 

 

And Grim...what the f are you smoking?

 

President’s orders to his subordinates ARE NOT IN HIS THOUGHTS. What you are saying is just stupid nonsense.

So says our resident village idiot? :biglaugh:

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Tikk

Mueller does not “apparently disagree” with me.

 

You apparently do not understand a difference between successfully thwarting an investigation and taking not-successful actions to thwart and investigation.

 

From Obstruction of Justice perspective success of the Obstructive acts does not matter.

 

 

And Grim...what the f are you smoking?

 

President’s orders to his subordinates ARE NOT IN HIS THOUGHTS. What you are saying is just stupid nonsense.

 

Bwahahahaha! "From Obstruction of Justice perspective success of the Obstructive acts does not matter."

 

Are you high right now? If so, you may want to wait til tomorrow to make any other posts.

 

ETA: AND you edited it with the same mistakes. Take a break dude. Seriously. Walk away.

Edited by Tikk

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Ticked@TinselTown

The level of idiocy on display by the leftards posting here as well as spinning in the media and on Capitol Hill is astonishing.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
zurg

Mueller does not “apparently disagree” with me.

 

You apparently do not understand a difference between successfully thwarting an investigation and taking not-successful actions to thwart and investigation.

 

From Obstruction of Justice perspective success of the Obstructive acts does not matter.

 

 

And Grim...what the f are you smoking?

 

President’s orders to his subordinates ARE NOT IN HIS THOUGHTS. What you are saying is just stupid nonsense.

I’ve read this a few times. What the hell is anton trying to say? Forget the fact that he’s still probably wrong, but can anyone translate accurately? It makes no sense (and then he asks Grim what he’s smoking...classic).

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
LeansToTheRight

I’ve read this a few times. What the hell is anton trying to say? Forget the fact that he’s still probably wrong, but can anyone translate accurately? It makes no sense (and then he asks Grim what he’s smoking...classic).

He’s saying you don’t have to successfully obstruct justice in order to be charged/convicted of obstructing justice. The outcome of the attempt to obstruct does not matter to the crime of the obstruction.

 

I’m not taking a non-lawyers word for granted on this. I’d prefer a lawyer to advise if this is a) accurate, and b ) common practice to charge even though no actual obstruction took place, and c ) how likely a conviction would be on a charge of obstruction when nothing was actually obstructed.

Edited by LeansToTheRight

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
JerryL

He’s saying you don’t have to successfully obstruct justice in order to be charged/convicted of obstructing justice. The outcome of the attempt to obstruct does not matter to the crime of the obstruction.

 

I’m not taking a non-lawyers word for granted on this. I’d prefer a lawyer to advise if this is a) accurate, and b ) common practice to charge even though no actual obstruction took place, and c ) how likely a conviction would be on a charge of obstruction when nothing was actually obstructed.

I want to know how an investigation into collusion could be "obstructed" if the lead investigator says his investigation was “not at any time curtailed, stopped, or hindered?”

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
JerryL

As an aside, but not really off-topic, I want to congratulate That_Guy on maintaining his absolutely perfect record of being 100% wrong on his legal predictions and analysis 100% of the time. That is quite the accomplishment because even the least astute person would, over time, get at least one thing right. But not our T_G!! A perfect record of being the least astute analyst and worst predictor in RN history.

 

Here's to you, That_Guy! :drinkers:

 

:high5: :salute: :bowdown: :thumbsup: :welldone: :2up: :clap: :cheer:

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Howsithangin

I want to know how an investigation into collusion could be "obstructed" if the lead investigator says his investigation was “not at any time curtailed, stopped, or hindered?”

cuz the Soviet says so? :shrug:

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
JerryL

cuz the Soviet says so? :shrug:

And That_Guy! Don't forget him and his stellar legal predictions.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
GrimV

Mueller does not “apparently disagree” with me.

 

You apparently do not understand a difference between successfully thwarting an investigation and taking not-successful actions to thwart and investigation.

 

From Obstruction of Justice perspective success of the Obstructive acts does not matter.

 

 

And Grim...what the f are you smoking?

 

President’s orders to his subordinates ARE NOT IN HIS THOUGHTS. What you are saying is just stupid nonsense.

 

How is this...

 

ME: "Hey, Python. I'm thinking about setting fire to random pets in my neighborhood, you with me?"

 

MONTY PYTHON: "Torturing small animals to death is illegal. You do this and I'm calling the cops".

 

ME: "Fine. I won't set fire to random pets in my neighborhood."

 

 

Different from this...

 

TRUMP: “Tell Rosenstein to fire Mueller.”

 

MCGAHN: “No. And if you try to force me I’ll resign.”

 

TRUMP: “Fine. I won’t fire Meuller.”

 

 

 

If Trump committed a crime so did I. And since TG is too cowardly to answer, maybe you will: How much prison time should I serve for my Thought Crime?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
DJGoody

I want to know how an investigation into collusion could be "obstructed" if the lead investigator says his investigation was “not at any time curtailed, stopped, or hindered?”

 

 

..because TRUMP!!!! ...and Hillary was ROBBED!

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...