|
Post by redleg on Aug 4, 2017 20:51:44 GMT -5
What is the exact statute that authorizes this special counsel? What is the exact crime he's supposedly "investigating"? Why don't we send the FBI to pry into your life from the time you were born? If you have nothing to hide, you have no objections. He hasn't done anything at all to impede this witch hunt, although he should just say "enough is enough" and fire Mueller. After all, Mueller has more reason to fear an investigation of him than Trump does with Mueller's witch hunt. Or authorize a special prosecutor to go after the traitors in the Party of the KKK. Want to hear the screeching about "special prosecutors"? After all, the Party of the KKK are the only ones that ever use special prosecutors, or counselors, and always to go after legally elected Pubs. The statute has already been posted. Look it up. And the FBI has looked into my life. Part of an employment background check. What about you? Hasn't done anything to impede? To some people, firing Comey could constitute obstruction. Whether it does or not remains to be seen. They don't do background checks for welfare. That means you've never had one. So, again you show your abysmal ignorance of the Constitution. Comey, any FBI chief, works at the pleasure of the President. Period. If the President wants to fire him, there is no one that can stop him. He had every right, and absolute grounds, for not only firing him, but prosecuting him. The obstruction came from The Felon, deleting emails, destroying harddrives, destroying Blackberries, all were obstruction of justice, and Comey simply ignored it all. As for the statute, no it hasn't. There has been zero laws that anyone in the Trump Administration has been accused of breaking. Zero. Mueller is just wasting our time, and our money, to try to invent a crime. His mission, as given by the traitors and the plotters, is to find anything they can use against Trump. If he can't find anything, he's to make something up, just like they have done in the past.
|
|
|
Post by redleg on Aug 4, 2017 20:56:01 GMT -5
What is the exact statute that authorizes this special counsel? What is the exact crime he's supposedly "investigating"? Why don't we send the FBI to pry into your life from the time you were born? If you have nothing to hide, you have no objections. He hasn't done anything at all to impede this witch hunt, although he should just say "enough is enough" and fire Mueller. After all, Mueller has more reason to fear an investigation of him than Trump does with Mueller's witch hunt. Or authorize a special prosecutor to go after the traitors in the Party of the KKK. Want to hear the screeching about "special prosecutors"? After all, the Party of the KKK are the only ones that ever use special prosecutors, or counselors, and always to go after legally elected Pubs. The statute has already been posted. Look it up. And the FBI has looked into my life. Part of an employment background check. What about you? Hasn't done anything to impede? To some people, firing Comey could constitute obstruction. Whether it does or not remains to be seen. Nope, no statute has been "posted". Neither he, nor anyone in his Administration, has been accused of breaking any laws at all. This is a witch hunt to bring down a duly elected President. It's a coup, and he needs to start rounding up those engaged in it, and charge them with sedition. That is a real crime, and one the Party of the KKK is currently breaking.
|
|
|
Post by palealeman on Aug 5, 2017 7:52:24 GMT -5
Come on, Commie, please read once in a while. We keep telling you that reading is fundamental, but you refuse to do so.
You asked what statute authorizes the special counsel. That information has already been posted on this forum -- you can look it up, or you can search the CRF and find it yourself. So to say that no statute has been posted is a bald faced lie (not unexpected from the right and from you in particular).
I wouldn't know anything about background checks for welfare recipients. I've never received welfare or any other governmental assistance. Unlike you, I don't live on some governmental check for alleged "military service."
You may want to check federal laws regarding the special counsel and the ability to terminate. There is a theory that the President has the authority to fire him. There is also a law that vests that authority solely in the Attorney General. The President may not have the ability to fire Mueller. Try to keep up with current events. I know it's hard for someone living in the 40s or 50s and who wants to take America backward, but please try to keep up.
|
|
|
Post by Ranger John on Aug 5, 2017 8:25:10 GMT -5
Come on, Commie, please read once in a while. We keep telling you that reading is fundamental, but you refuse to do so. You asked what statute authorizes the special counsel. That information has already been posted on this forum -- you can look it up, or you can search the CRF and find it yourself. So to say that no statute has been posted is a bald faced lie (not unexpected from the right and from you in particular). I wouldn't know anything about background checks for welfare recipients. I've never received welfare or any other governmental assistance. Unlike you, I don't live on some governmental check for alleged "military service." You may want to check federal laws regarding the special counsel and the ability to terminate. There is a theory that the President has the authority to fire him. There is also a law that vests that authority solely in the Attorney General. The President may not have the ability to fire Mueller. Try to keep up with current events. I know it's hard for someone living in the 40s or 50s and who wants to take America backward, but please try to keep up. The law authorizing the special counsel limits the special counsel's authority to criminal investigations. So what's the criminal statute Trump is suspected of violating that provides the justification for the special counsel? The "Russia Investigation" is a counter-intelligence investigation, not a criminal investigation and therefore a special counsel is not appropriate.
|
|
|
Post by redleg on Aug 5, 2017 9:40:05 GMT -5
Come on, Commie, please read once in a while. We keep telling you that reading is fundamental, but you refuse to do so. You asked what statute authorizes the special counsel. That information has already been posted on this forum -- you can look it up, or you can search the CRF and find it yourself. So to say that no statute has been posted is a bald faced lie (not unexpected from the right and from you in particular). I wouldn't know anything about background checks for welfare recipients. I've never received welfare or any other governmental assistance. Unlike you, I don't live on some governmental check for alleged "military service." You may want to check federal laws regarding the special counsel and the ability to terminate. There is a theory that the President has the authority to fire him. There is also a law that vests that authority solely in the Attorney General. The President may not have the ability to fire Mueller. Try to keep up with current events. I know it's hard for someone living in the 40s or 50s and who wants to take America backward, but please try to keep up. No, your government check is because you can't hold a job, and need the government to babysit you. There is no Constitutional authority for a "special counsel" or a "special prosecutor". Those were both made up from whole cloth when the Dems decided they wanted to impeach Nixon, and had no way to do so. The "special counsel's" current mandate gives him no authority to delve into Trump's financial dealings from 2008, or to delve into his family's financial dealings going back to their first lemonade stand. This is not an "investigation", it's a witch hunt. He's hired all "Progressive" criminals to dig into everything Trump has ever done or said, and every person he has ever said "hi" to in his life. The Party of the KKK can't win elections, so they decided on a coup, which is why they have been so adamant that they have their witch hunt. They know that, since the LR media owns them, that the LR media will cover anything they do, like hiring a spy to work as their IT guy, and refusing to fire him until he's arrested for bank fraud. Even though they knew months ago that he was under investigation, and that he had been blocked from access to any government computer systems. I didn't ask what statute authorized the special counsel. I asked what statute anyone in the Trump Administration is accused of violating. Reading is fundamental, and your keeper should learn how.
|
|
|
Post by bobloblaw on Aug 5, 2017 10:02:51 GMT -5
We keep telling you that reading is fundamental, but you refuse to do so. LMAO. Who is this "we" you keep talking about? Do you have a mouse in your pocket or are you referring to that remedial stool sample named bobo that has a daily appointment with the headshrinker?
|
|
|
Post by bobloblaw on Aug 6, 2017 13:44:21 GMT -5
|
|
|
Post by Ranger John on Aug 6, 2017 13:48:22 GMT -5
So in other words, they still can't find any evidence of collusion, and the Mueller investigation is the huge fishing expedition the right says it is.
|
|
|
Post by Ranger John on Aug 6, 2017 14:05:36 GMT -5
Mueller needs to be careful this doesn't turn into a tax evasion or insider trading case based on something that happened 10 years ago. He's dangerously close to undermining whatever credibility the Russia investigation might have had. If this comes down to Trump plays fast and loose with his taxes and engaged in shady real estate deals people aren't going to care. Just like they didn't with the Clintons shady real estate deals.
If that happens, the collusion story is going to look completely fabricated and an effort to "get Trump" rather than right a wrong.
|
|
|
Post by bobloblaw on Aug 6, 2017 14:11:52 GMT -5
Maybe he can get a cell next to his buddy Bernie Madoff.
|
|
|
Post by Ranger John on Aug 6, 2017 14:20:35 GMT -5
Maybe he can get a cell next to his buddy Bernie Madoff. Unlikely. The Clintons normalized this stuff for Presidents 20 years ago. Moveon.org exists because of it.
|
|
|
Post by redleg on Aug 6, 2017 22:08:08 GMT -5
They are also well outside the authority given to the special counsel. That means he was sent there to "find" a crime, whether there was one or not. The Party of the KKK is more than willing to fake a crime against him, if it means they can get him out of there. They can't stand the fact that they ran a felonious traitor, and we the people didn't vote for her. And that she was dumb as a box of rocks.
|
|
|
Post by winston on Aug 7, 2017 1:50:14 GMT -5
They are also well outside the authority given to the special counsel. That means he was sent there to "find" a crime, whether there was one or not. The Party of the KKK is more than willing to fake a crime against him, if it means they can get him out of there. They can't stand the fact that they ran a felonious traitor, and we the people didn't vote for her. And that she was dumb as a box of rocks. LOL@U
|
|
|
Post by bobloblaw on Aug 14, 2017 15:15:55 GMT -5
Drumpf is down to 34% approval rating in the latest Gallop Poll and that was before he chose to side with the Alt-Right Nazi rioters.
|
|
|
Post by palealeman on Aug 14, 2017 22:07:54 GMT -5
They are also well outside the authority given to the special counsel. That means he was sent there to "find" a crime, whether there was one or not. The Party of the KKK is more than willing to fake a crime against him, if it means they can get him out of there. They can't stand the fact that they ran a felonious traitor, and we the people didn't vote for her. And that she was dumb as a box of rocks. So let's get this straight, Commie. A Republican Attorney General appointed by a Republican President recuses himself. The Deputy Attorney General, a life-long Republican appointed by a Republican President, appoints a Special Counsel to investigate Russian interference in the 2016 presidential election. How does this become a Democratic investigation? Looks like the only one as dumb as a box of rocks is you, and that's probably defaming to the box of rocks.
|
|
|
Post by redleg on Aug 15, 2017 10:23:27 GMT -5
They are also well outside the authority given to the special counsel. That means he was sent there to "find" a crime, whether there was one or not. The Party of the KKK is more than willing to fake a crime against him, if it means they can get him out of there. They can't stand the fact that they ran a felonious traitor, and we the people didn't vote for her. And that she was dumb as a box of rocks. So let's get this straight, Commie. A Republican Attorney General appointed by a Republican President recuses himself. The Deputy Attorney General, a life-long Republican appointed by a Republican President, appoints a Special Counsel to investigate Russian interference in the 2016 presidential election. How does this become a Democratic investigation? Looks like the only one as dumb as a box of rocks is you, and that's probably defaming to the box of rocks. It wasn't a "Republican Attorney General", it was a deputy attorney general. And Mueller is a Party of the KKK dupe, who is doing nothing but fishing for something, anything at all, to pin on Trump or one of his people. Even one that is just tangentially related to him. Just like they went after Libbey, because they couldn't find anything at all on Cheney. It's a scam, designed to take out a legally elected President just because he's not a Party of the KKK member, and a Communist. Just because he was appointed by Trump, and was the one who told Trump to fire Comey, doesn't mean he's on the side of the law. This is an illegal witch hunt, created by the Party of the KKK, to cover up the fact that they were never hacked, that those emails were downloaded and released by one of their own, probably a BernieBro, and they were shown to have rigged their own primaries. There was never any evidence of Russian interference, much less "collusion", except by the Party of the KKK.
|
|
|
Post by palealeman on Aug 15, 2017 13:47:50 GMT -5
As has been said several times, Commie, reading is fundamental. If you need to, you can still get copies of the old "Dick and Jane" primers at Barnes and Noble or other bookstores.
I stated rather clearly (for most people) that a Deputy Attorney General, a life-long Republican, appointed the Special Counsel. It's there in black and white. Maybe I should have highlighted it in red for you.
No evidence of Russian interference? How do you know? Do you have an inside person at the FBI? I don't believe many, if any, of the details of the investigation have been revealed.
Republicans in all the key positions -- President, appointer, appointee -- but it's a Democratic plot. Maybe they really are out to get you, Commie. Your paranoia is showing. Maybe that's why you hate America so much.
|
|
|
Post by redleg on Aug 15, 2017 22:23:09 GMT -5
As has been said several times, Commie, reading is fundamental. If you need to, you can still get copies of the old "Dick and Jane" primers at Barnes and Noble or other bookstores. I stated rather clearly (for most people) that a Deputy Attorney General, a life-long Republican, appointed the Special Counsel. It's there in black and white. Maybe I should have highlighted it in red for you. No evidence of Russian interference? How do you know? Do you have an inside person at the FBI? I don't believe many, if any, of the details of the investigation have been revealed. Republicans in all the key positions -- President, appointer, appointee -- but it's a Democratic plot. Maybe they really are out to get you, Commie. Your paranoia is showing. Maybe that's why you hate America so much. First, if there were any evidence at all, it would have been splashed across the fake news 24/7 for months. Second, if he had any evidence, he wouldn't have raided the house of the only cooperating witness he has. Manafort has given them everything they asked for, so they staged a predawn, no knock raid to intimidate him into lying for them. As for Pubs in "key positions", it's the RINOs that are fighting Trump even harder than the Party of the KKK, because they don't want to see their gravy train upset. The only evidence of Russian collusion is on the Party of the KKK. They hired one of Putin's disinformation groups to smear Trump, and they sent their people to Ukraine to dig up dirt on Manafort. They were the only ones colluding with Russia. Especially since The Felon was already paid to do whatever Putin wanted. She even sold 1/5th of our uranium to Putin.
|
|
|
Post by palealeman on Aug 15, 2017 22:27:12 GMT -5
Russian interference doesn't necessarily mean collusion. Try to think for a change. I know it's hard for you, but give it a try. You might not sound so stupid.
|
|
|
Post by redleg on Aug 15, 2017 22:48:02 GMT -5
Russian interference doesn't necessarily mean collusion. Try to think for a change. I know it's hard for you, but give it a try. You might not sound so stupid. I've been thinking all along. I said a long time ago that there was no hacking of the DNC, which is what started the whole "Russian collusion" lie. It never happened, they are simply lying again, to cover up the fact that it was an inside job. Can't have the vegetables and the inbreds realizing that not everyone in the Communist Party walks in exact lockstep. Of course the Russians tried to influence our elections. The Puppet knew about it in 2012, and did nothing. He knew about it in 2008, and did nothing about it. We try to influence elections in other countries all the time. Like The Puppet spending $400,000 in taxpayer money to defeat Netanyahu. Or him sticking his Dumbo ears into the French election. Grow up. The Russians did nothing to really influence anything, other than giving The Felon bad advice.
|
|
|
Post by palealeman on Aug 16, 2017 9:24:17 GMT -5
No hacking? It never happened? The sorry part is that you believe that. You simply have little connection with reality.
Saw that the acting Health Secretary was in court yesterday. He's trying to speed up the process to get people out of jails and into mental health facilities. Hopefully your bed comes available soon -- you need the help, your current meds aren't working.
|
|
|
Post by winston on Aug 16, 2017 10:29:23 GMT -5
No hacking? It never happened? The sorry part is that you believe that. You simply have little connection with reality. Saw that the acting Health Secretary was in court yesterday. He's trying to speed up the process to get people out of jails and into mental health facilities. Hopefully your bed comes available soon -- you need the help, your current meds aren't working. Bigots like you find it easy to lie.
|
|
|
Post by palealeman on Aug 16, 2017 15:59:54 GMT -5
Who you talking about, Winston?
|
|
|
Post by redleg on Aug 16, 2017 19:43:10 GMT -5
Drumpf is down to 34% approval rating in the latest Gallop Poll and that was before he chose to side with the Alt-Right Nazi rioters. He didn't. That is your heros in the Party of the KKK. They are their creation, their babies, along with the Communist antifa. They are more than willing, they are anxious to have as much violence as possible. That's why they didn't condemn the shooter at the Pub baseball practice, or the shooter in Dallas, that shot 5 police. They are all for violent racism, as long as it's their racists.
|
|
|
Post by redleg on Aug 16, 2017 19:51:16 GMT -5
No hacking? It never happened? The sorry part is that you believe that. You simply have little connection with reality. Saw that the acting Health Secretary was in court yesterday. He's trying to speed up the process to get people out of jails and into mental health facilities. Hopefully your bed comes available soon -- you need the help, your current meds aren't working. Show me the evidence. The DNC refused to allow the FBI to examine their server, DWS kept a foreign spy on staff as an IT guy long after he was banned from government computer sessions, and they were in collusion with both Putin and the Ukraine. Show me the evidence of any hacking, at all. You can't because there wasn't any. It was all a lie. And you buy it hook, line and sinker.
|
|