Jump to content
Washington Football Team Logo
Extremeskins
Forum Rules and Guidelines

Moose & Squirrel v Boris & Natasha: what's the deal with the rooskies and trumpland?

Jumbo

By Jumbo
in The Tailgate

 Share

Recommended Posts

LadySkinsFan

LadySkinsFan

Posted
Posted
1 hour ago, Bang said:

 

i think trump has done some pretty bad stuff, but it's not at THAT level.

 

~Bang

 

Trump had Flynn working with the Russians to build nuclear reactors in the Arab Middle East right on inauguration day.

 

Do you want the Arab Middle East to have nuclear capabilities? Don't you think that's as dangerous as NK having it?

  • Thanks 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites
LD0506

LD0506

Posted
Posted

Ok, I'm sure a lot of the lawyerly members here could explain it to me, but a friend and I were discussing current events and the question arose: if Deutsche Bank has been a conduit for dirty Russian money into the international banking system and major amounts have been funneled into *s real estate scammery, why wouldn't Merkel & Co. in Germany act? They could move to freeze and seize DB pretty much unilaterally and ferret out exactly what has been going on? Germany and France have been pretty chummy (common enemies and all/ as chummy as they ever get anyway), mightn't Macron see some value in participating, sticking it to * and the London banking establishment which has apparently helped DB for a piece of the action as a response to the whole lingering Brexit FU. Seemed to us that this could happen beyond the reach of our infection and without anything from Session and the Dept of Just Us, while at the same time unearthing a LOT of fascinating stuff that would add fuel to the fire and hurry the inevitable denouement.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
Corcaigh

Corcaigh

Posted
Posted
3 hours ago, Jumbo said:

All this restraint is unhealthy.

 

With a little time and effort you can chew through the restraints.

4 hours ago, Bang said:

.

i think trump has done some pretty bad stuff, but it's not at THAT level.

 

~Bang

 

The Rosenbergs received the harshest penalty of the nuclear spies because they refused to cooperate with investigators. :rofl89:

  • Like 1
  • Haha 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites
DogofWar1

DogofWar1

Posted
Posted
1 hour ago, LadySkinsFan said:

Junior stalling. Attorney/client only attaches when it's just the attorney and their client in the room. When a third party is present, that privilege is not invoked.

All their privilege crap is utter nonsense.  Atty client can't apply because neither of them are attorneys.  Executive can't apply if its before he's Pres AND Pres has to invoke it, which he hasn't.

 

It's political privilege, pure and simple.  It'll be funny when a judge explains how privilege works though, and throws him in jail for contempt.

  • Like 2
  • Thanks 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites
twa

twa

Posted
Posted (edited)

I'd bet you can get a good argument that executive privilege exists during the transition period.

and that it can be used by their confidants(at least temporarily to allow privilege rights to be asserted)

 

add

 last I heard there are no judges in congressional hearings and they only get involved after a long process outside congress.

Edited by twa
Link to comment
Share on other sites
AsburySkinsFan

AsburySkinsFan

Posted
Posted
6 minutes ago, DogofWar1 said:

All their privilege crap is utter nonsense.  Atty client can't apply because neither of them are attorneys.  Executive can't apply if its before he's Pres AND Pres has to invoke it, which he hasn't.

 

It's political privilege, pure and simple.  It'll be funny when a judge explains how privilege works though, and throws him in jail for contempt.

And the plethora of lawyers who were in that chamber when Jr said it tells you all that you need to know about the GOP led House investigation. 

 

In no uncertain terms the GOP is complicit. They know there was collusion with Russia and they just don’t give a damn, which allows their supporters to not give a damn. 

Thankfully, there are enough combo-breakers within the GOP who are speaking out. Sadly, they are all either retiring or dying.

 

I just wish more of our esteemed membership here would realize that they can still be a loyal Republican and oppose Trump. I dare say that would make them MORE loyal than those who like dead fish are flowing with the stream.

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites
Bang

Bang

Posted
Posted (edited)

Remember how these same ****wads would get all pissed off that there were controversies about the Pledge of Allegiance?

**** these traitors. No allegiance to this country at all. None.

All of them. The rabble have had plenty of time to figure it out.

 

~Bang

Edited by Bang
  • Like 1
  • Thanks 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites
DogofWar1

DogofWar1

Posted
Posted
6 minutes ago, twa said:

I'd bet you can get a good argument that executive privilege exists during the transition period.

and that it can be used by their confidants(at least temporarily to allow privilege rights to be asserted)

What about on June 10 of 2016?

 

And also, doesn't change the fact that the executive holds the executive privilege.  Trump has to say he's invoking it.  He hasn't probably because he has just enough self awareness to know how bad it'd look to privilege conversations with people when they get asked about Russia.

  • Thanks 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites
twa

twa

Posted
Posted
1 minute ago, DogofWar1 said:

What about on June 10 of 2016?

 

And also, doesn't change the fact that the executive holds the executive privilege.  Trump has to say he's invoking it.  He hasn't probably because he has just enough self awareness to know how bad it'd look to privilege conversations with people when they get asked about Russia.

 

No it wouldn't apply on June 10 of 2016 imo

 

invoking it sometimes requires a time frame between a question and invoking....and is not unusual.

 

Nor does invoking it formally mean it is ultimately binding...as has been shown repeatedly by the courts.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
twa

twa

Posted
Posted
2 minutes ago, AsburySkinsFan said:

I think it’s funny how twa keeps trying to pretend that all of this happened AFTER the election and after that low life scumbag lied as he defiled the Bible his hand was resting on.

 

Good, you seem like you could use a laugh.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
RedskinsFan44

RedskinsFan44

Posted
Posted
20 minutes ago, twa said:

I'd bet you can get a good argument that executive privilege exists during the transition period.

and that it can be used by their confidants(at least temporarily to allow privilege rights to be asserted)

 

add

 last I heard there are no judges in congressional hearings and they only get involved after a long process outside congress.

So why didn't he invoke executive privilege? Give him a call, because I have a feeling Mueller is going to ask the same questions. Regardless, I'm sure if this was Chelsea you would be making the same argument.

Link to comment
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
 Share
Go to topic listing

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    • No registered users viewing this page.
×
×
  • Create New...