Jump to content
Washington Football Team Logo
Extremeskins

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


Jumbo

Recommended Posts

Well, I called my congressman to weigh in on the need to impeach even if not convicted in the Senate. I always say, take care of what you can control. Don't leave some good undone because your actions or lack of action made it undoable. Put pressure on the Senate to say what he did was good or even not that bad. Give them the chance to do right even if they are saying now they won't. If Congress can not even DO that, they are as bad as the senate SAYS they will be. 

 

  • Like 3
  • Thanks 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 hours ago, Larry said:

 

The constitution says that the House has that authority  It does not in any way imply that they are obligated to do so in this case. 

 

Any more than it said that Skippy had the duty to hold a SC spot open, in case a Republican got elected. 

 

I somewhat disagree.

 

Their oath is:

“I, AB, do solemnly swear (or affirm) that I will support and defend the Constitution of the United States against all enemies, foreign and domestic; that I will bear true faith and allegiance to the same; that I take this obligation freely, without any mental reservation or purpose of evasion, and that I will well and faithfully discharge the duties of the office on which I am about to enter. So help me God.”

 

I think given the circumstances, it's not particularly unreasonable to say that impeaching a President like Trump, where his conduct was referred to Congress for impeachment, it is within the realm of "duty" compared to within the realm of "power."

 

Certainly there's a strong argument for it.

 

Nixon was going to be impeached for less than Trump did here.  Clinton was impeached for far less.

 

Also, there's the point to be made that DOJ, in giving up prosecuting sitting Presidents, has increased the necessity of Congressional action.  Indeed a President committing criminal acts surely must be stopped, right?  And if DOJ won't, then how else can we support and defend the country and Constitution?

  • Thanks 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Was it specifically referred to congress for impeachment?.....That's not how I read the section some seem to take that from.

 

Or simply pointed out that Congress may do so if it sees a crime?

 

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, justice98 said:

Im trying to figure out what Rosenstein's angle is I'm all this.  He definitely knows Trump is dirty as hell, and he already announced he was leaving the DOJ.  So why is he seemingly just playing along with Barr's shadiness?

 

He wants his pension 

  • Thanks 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Oh, I certainly think trying Trump is a moral imperative. 

 

Anything less creates the precedent that if a Prez has a majority of one house on Congress, then not only is he guaranteed to not be convicted, he won't even be prosecuted. 

Edited by Larry
  • Like 3
Link to comment
Share on other sites

14 minutes ago, twa said:

Was it specifically referred to congress for impeachment?.....That's not how I read the section some seem to take that from.

 

Or simply pointed out that Congress may do so if it sees a crime?

 

 

 

Mueller layed out the case for obstruction of justice and left it up to congress to decide criminal intent. 

 

Obstructing justice is a crime, and the evidence seems pretty clear.

 

 

Which is worse? Lying to investigators because you aren’t sure all the shady **** you were doing was legal or not, or failing to act despite knowing Russia was actively interfering in our elections?

 

https://www-m.cnn.com/2019/04/19/opinions/mueller-report-obama-jennings/index.html?r=https%3A%2F%2Fwww.cnn.com%2F

I guess if I had failed to stop Russia from marching into Crimea, making a mess in Syria, and hacking our democracy I'd be looking to blame someone else, too.
 
But the Mueller report makes it clear that the Russian interference failure was Obama's alone. He was the commander-in-chief when all of this happened. In 2010, he and Eric Holder, his Attorney General, declined to prosecute Julian Assange, who then went on to help Russia hack the Democratic National Committee's emails in 2016. He arguably chose to prioritize his relationship with Putin vis-à-vis Iran over pushing back against Russian election interference that had been going on for at least two years.

 

indeed.

 

#thanksobama

Edited by CousinsCowgirl84
Link to comment
Share on other sites

@PleaseBlitz the Democrat leadership reaction is what you disagreed with regarding this dude. You called it a bad take by Matt Stoller. They are afraid to wield power:

 

 

 

They don’t want to govern. That’s why younger people are turning to Bernie while older Dems are favoring the familiarity of Buttigeg and Beto and Biden. (Why are they all Bs?)

 

You can’t do this ****footing thing. You have to exert power and Dems leadership don’t do that. It’s cowardice.

  • Like 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

40 minutes ago, CousinsCowgirl84 said:

Which is worse? Lying to investigators because you aren’t sure all the shady **** you were doing was legal or not, or failing to act despite knowing Russia was actively interfering in our elections?

 

https://www-m.cnn.com/2019/04/19/opinions/mueller-report-obama-jennings/index.html?r=https%3A%2F%2Fwww.cnn.com%2F

#thanksthebossoftheguywhowrotethearticle

 

 

Edited by visionary
Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, CousinsCowgirl84 said:

 

Mueller layed out the case for obstruction of justice and left it up to congress to decide criminal intent. 

 

Obstructing justice is a crime, and the evidence seems pretty clear.

 

 

Which is worse? Lying to investigators because you aren’t sure all the shady **** you were doing was legal or not, or failing to act despite knowing Russia was actively interfering in our elections?

 

https://www-m.cnn.com/2019/04/19/opinions/mueller-report-obama-jennings/index.html?r=https%3A%2F%2Fwww.cnn.com%2F

 

 

I saw this making the rounds. First off, Obama did more than "nothing". He got no bipartisan support to act. Trump Jr and friends failed to report firsthand knowledge of Russian meddling. And finally take a swing at why Trump keeps having doubts Russia did it in light of what we know now. Feels good to pretend Obama is dirty and Trump is clean. I do wish Obama had done more, but pretending the Republicans are vindicated is ridiculous.

  • Like 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

6 minutes ago, RedskinsFan44 said:

I saw this making the rounds. First off, Obama did more than "nothing". He got no bipartisan support to act. Trump Jr and friends failed to report firsthand knowledge of Russian meddling. And finally take a swing at why Trump keeps having doubts Russia did it in light of what we know now. Feels good to pretend Obama is dirty and Trump is clean. I do wish Obama had done more, but pretending the Republicans are vindicated is ridiculous.

 

 

 

What sort of things did he need bipartisan support for in tackling the Russian interference, the annexation of Crimea, and Russians support of a dictator in syria, that he did not get? I don't think he brought anything to the table till after the election. Trump JR didn't report it, but the Mueller report makes it very clear that Obama knew about it.  Obama is dirty. Or at least, to quote @BenningRoadSkin "****footing around.. you have to exert power.. democratic leadership didn't do it. Its cowardice"..

 

That doesn't at all make Trump "clean". He is a liar.  And he should be impeached for it.

Edited by CousinsCowgirl84
Link to comment
Share on other sites

I’ll have a large Blame Obama with a double side of Bothsidesism, please!

 

Question for Cowgirl....What should Obama have done about Fox News implicating the DNC and Hillary Clinton in the murder of Seth Rich on 36 different occasions leading up the election?  And what should Obama have done about you absolutely watching that and absolutely absorbing that into your political outlook?

 

What could he have done to save you?

 

  • Haha 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

26 minutes ago, TryTheBeal! said:

I’ll have a large Blame Obama with a double side of Bothsidesism, please!

 

Question for Cowgirl....What should Obama have done about Fox News implicating the DNC and Hillary Clinton in the murder of Seth Rich on 36 different occasions leading up the election?  And what should Obama have done about you absolutely watching that and absolutely absorbing that into your political outlook?

 

What could he have done to save you?

 

 

 

I honestly don't watch fox news so i have no idea what your referring to. Well, I'm lying. The last time i watched fox news they had two fat black chicks on talking about how Trump was the best president ever. So... IDK what you want me to say? 

 

Edited by CousinsCowgirl84
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
  • Recently Browsing   0 members

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