New Posts
  • Hi there guest! Welcome to PoliticalJack.com. Register for free to join our community?

Baahmshell!! Dershowtiz sez Trump firing of Comey was NOT “obstruction”

Nobody even mentioned any Jewish people, according to YOUR definition of that term. I realize that you hate people who even have Jewish-sounding names (Greenspan, Jon Stuart Leibowitz, Dershowitz, etc.), so your anti-Semitic response was immediately triggered here. But you forgot your previous claim that the term Jew could only refer to a religion, and thus that neither Greenspan nor Dershowitz could be Jewish by your definition. Heheha. Pretty dumb move on your part, don't you think? We're all having a good laugh at it.
By "we" you mean your retard squad. Laugh away. I'm sure it's even funnier for your team when you fart in the bathtub. Back in the real world, both Greenspan and Dershowitz (those are two different people, by the way) are practicing Jews.

And you're a Nazi.
 

Arkady

President
By "we" you mean your retard squad.
http://www.r-word.org/r-word-effects-of-the-word.aspx

Back in the real world, both Greenspan and Dershowitz (those are two different people, by the way) are practicing Jews.
As you're now aware, Greenspan is widely acknowledged to be an atheist and Dershowitz is a self-described agnostic leaning towards atheism. Thus, using your narrow definition of the word "Jew," neither is one, since neither believes in the religion of Judaism. I bet that right about now you wish you didn't have a long track record of insisting that was the only definition of the term. Tough luck. You painted yourself in the corner, then lit the corner on fire. Now we're all having a good laugh watching you burn.
 
http://www.r-word.org/r-word-effects-of-the-word.aspx



As you're now aware, Greenspan is widely acknowledged to be an atheist and Dershowitz is a self-described agnostic leaning towards atheism. Thus, using your narrow definition of the word "Jew," neither is one, since neither believes in the religion of Judaism. I bet that right about now you wish you didn't have a long track record of insisting that was the only definition of the term. Tough luck. You painted yourself in the corner, then lit the corner on fire. Now we're all having a good laugh watching you burn.
The "freedom from religion foundation" and your delusions are not "widely" acknowledging anything except your mental illness. But I do admire you for sticking your retard squad. It's sweet. How is Saladin, by the way?
 

Arkady

President
The "freedom from religion foundation"
As you know, I cited several sources to support my conclusions. You, by comparison, are relying on nothing but your own mystical powers to know the religions of strangers. Lacking that mystical power, myself, I go with published statements from the men to tell us what their religious beliefs are.
 

Hmmmm

Mayor



http://abcnews.go.com/Politics/president-obstruct-justice-legal-experts-cite-limits-charges/story?id=51586257

Wow – when even the left doesn’t support Mueller, isn’t the whole case built on a house of cards?

Some excerpts from Alan Dershowitz, in the link above, regarding the dismissal of Comey by Trump:

  • Firing Comey in itself cannot be obstruction of justice because the president had the power to do so, unless there are "clearly illegal acts" and a criminal intent.
  • “You cannot charge a president with obstruction of justice for exercising his constitutional power.”

  • “Professor Dershowitz is absolutely correct: In order to make a criminal case, a prosecutor has to prove beyond a reasonable doubt that the president fired Comey with the specific intent to impede a criminal investigation,” Lauro said. “Based on what we know now, any prosecutor who brought such a charge would be laughed out of court.”

  • Professor Adam Samaha of NYU School of Law also pointed out: “If the president is acting within the scope of his exclusive constitutional authority, of course, that cannot and should not be made a crime.”

If Trump had failed to name an independent prosecutor, or named an partisan/ineffective one, there might be room for discussion. But Dershowtiz seems confident that if Mueller proceeds he "will be laughed out of court".

Wait a minute - does that end up proving that Mueller is incompetent/ineffective after all?

"Mueller? Mueller? Mueller?"
How is that a bombshell? Dershowitz is from the right-wing of "liberals". What you state is his opinion. We all have them. Hooray for him.

Fox's Napolitano said that Feinstein was correct when she said Dershowitz was wrong.
 

JackDallas

Senator
Supporting Member
1. Trump pressuring Comey to let Flynn off the hook.

2. Trump’s relentless tweeting and yapping directing the FBI and DOJ to go after Hillary.

You asked for one example and I gave you two. Hope you don’t mind.

;-)
Since both of your examples are bullshit, I don't mind at all.
 

Boca

Governor
I don't think you can fire career FBI agents as part of housecleaning. .
Can you put 'em jail? Like this Strzok dude who got a FISA warrant based on a bogus dossier that Democrats paid for, which Kremlin agents assisted in preparing and he then used it to light up and spy on Trump Towers. How is it the country has to suffer this when the only crime was how it began? And how about Mueller dismissing Strzok, that he hired in the first place, and then covering that up for months. He didn't get away with it, but it exposed him for what he's up to.
Don't fire the bastards, lock 'em both up!

The go after the FISA judge or judges who allowed all this to happen.

And if Trump really wants to fire someone it should be Jeff Sessions who took the AG job and promptly stored his testicles in his desk drawer. Anybody heard from his sorry ass lately?
 
Last edited:
Can you put 'em jail? Like this Strzok dude who got a FISA warrant based on a bogus dossier that Democrats paid for, which Kremlin agents assisted in preparing and he then used to light up and spy on Trump Towers. How is it the country has to suffer this when the only crime was how it began? And how about Mueller dismissing Strzok, that he hired in the first place, and then covering that up for months. He didn't get away with it, but it exposed him for what he's up to, Don't fire the bastards, lock 'em both up!

The go after the FISA judge or judges who allowed all this to happen.

And if Trump really wants to fire someone it should be Jeff Sessions who took the AG job and promptly stored his testicles in his desk drawer. Anybody heard from his sorry ass lately?
you can put anyone in jail if you charge them with a crime, and obtain a conviction.

having a rogue FBI agent suppress evidence and change the text of interviews and charging documents sounds more like something that might happen in a backwater police force.

however, if Mueller found those accusations credible, and "disciplined" the agent, then we probably need something akin to a police "internal investigations unit" to get to the bottom of it, since the agent's own chain of command will be biased, and incented to minimize his misdeeds to make themselves look better. this is 'standard police procedure' - to have a specialized unit specific to internal misdeeds. if it was up to the local police chief, no patrolman would ever be brought up on charges for anything.
 

Boca

Governor
.....having a rogue FBI agent suppress evidence and change the text of interviews and charging documents sounds more like something that might happen in a backwater police force.

.
Ah....almost forgot ....change the text of interviews and charging documents!

We know that many have seen the original Steele fabricaions but if I'm not mistaken committee requests to see Strzok's FISA application have been denied,

A word or two here, a word or two there...?
 
Last edited:
Top