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

Trump admits to obstructing justice by firing Comey

Bugsy McGurk

President
He says it not once, but twice - he fired Comey because he was investigating him, and he admits that he would have been in a lot of trouble if Comey was allowed to proceed.

BTW, there’s six months left on the statute of limitations. Wake up Merrick Garland. Indict that lying toad!

 

Dino

Russian Asset
He says it not once, but twice - he fired Comey because he was investigating him, and he admits that he would have been in a lot of trouble if Comey was allowed to proceed.

BTW, there’s six months left on the statute of limitations. Wake up Merrick Garland. Indict that lying toad!

I see no one cares anyway, but one question:

Would this have been over the Russia collusion scandal? That would have lead to Trump being outta there?
 

Bugsy McGurk

President
I see no one cares anyway, but one question:

Would this have been over the Russia collusion scandal? That would have lead to Trump being outta there?
Yup. And as Trump says, he was toast if Comey had been able to finish his investigation. But you know better, no?
 

Dino

Russian Asset
Yup. And as Trump says, he was toast if Comey had been able to finish his investigation. But you know better, no?
Of course I know better. Just like you know better. There was never going to be any charges in the very phony Russia collusion hoax. No one in any high office was “toast” because there was never proof of wrongdoing nor any crime committed.
This scandal fueled by a phony dossier was never valid and I’m sure even Comey knew it.
 

Bugsy McGurk

President
Of course I know better. Just like you know better. There was never going to be any charges in the very phony Russia collusion hoax. No one in any High office was “toast” because there was never proof of wrongdoing nor any Crime committed.
This scandal fueled by a phony dossier was never valid and I’m sure even Comey knew it.
I know that you Trump cultists think our intel/law enforcement people should have ignored the Kremlin’s criminal attack on our election. After all, their candidate was your candidate. I also know you think those same people should have ignored evidence of ties between the Kremlin and Trump’s campaign.

But, you see, your view is insane. It would have been criminal NOT to investigate those things. And it’s just not up to a president to fire his investigator because you think he was innocent. It’s textbook obstruction of justice regardless of how you think the Comey investigation would have turned out. Political leaders can’t lawfully fire their investigators even if you think they were innocent. Trump has admitted that he fired Comey to protect himself from the probe. That’s banana republic stuff.

But your view is yet another sign of how low Trump has taken this country. The Banana Republic of Trumplandia.
 

Dino

Russian Asset
I know that you Trump cultists think our intel/law enforcement people should have ignored the Kremlin’s criminal attack on our election. After all, their candidate was your candidate. I also know you think those same people should have ignored evidence of ties between the Kremlin and Trump’s campaign.

But, you see, your view is insane. It would have been criminal NOT to investigate those things. And it’s just not up to a president to fire his investigator because you think he was innocent. It’s textbook obstruction of justice regardless of how you think the Comey investigation would have turned out. Political leaders can’t lawfully fire their investigators even if you think they were innocent. Trump has admitted that he fired Comey to protect himself from the probe. That’s banana republic stuff.

But your view is yet another sign of how low Trump has taken this country. The Banana Republic of Trumplandia.
Wow, you take a skeletal base of barely pieced together facts and run with them and turn it into a scandal that wasn't. There was no "attack on the election", there were purchased ads allowed by Facebook out of their greed. They didn't choose one candidate over another either. They ran ads that opposed both major candidates as well as divisive topics to cause strife among the electorate. There are ties between candidates' offices and overseas leaders and ambassadors as well. These are common as well as legal.
The "scandal" was forced and phony, a tempest in a teapot to deceive the gullible, naive and the useful idiots who ignore the facts and buy into party propaganda.
Count yourself among them.
Trump didn't obstruct, there was no criminal case to obstruct at all. Comey won't come forward to charge him either, he's more likely to face charges.

You're hilarious though, this popcorn fart scandal could not have deflated the left any more after the revelations of the Mueller Report. But yet you, a bitter clinger, continue to hold to it. Trump's playing you for a fool here and you're falling for it again.
 

Bugsy McGurk

President
Wow, you take a skeletal base of barely pieced together facts and run with them and turn it into a scandal that wasn't. There was no "attack on the election", there were purchased ads allowed by Facebook out of their greed. They didn't choose one candidate over another either. They ran ads that opposed both major candidates as well as divisive topics to cause strife among the electorate. There are ties between candidates' offices and overseas leaders and ambassadors as well. These are common as well as legal.
The "scandal" was forced and phony, a tempest in a teapot to deceive the gullible, naive and the useful idiots who ignore the facts and buy into party propaganda.
Count yourself among them.
Trump didn't obstruct, there was no criminal case to obstruct at all. Comey won't come forward to charge him either, he's more likely to face charges.

You're hilarious though, this popcorn fart scandal could not have deflated the left any more after the revelations of the Mueller Report. But yet you, a bitter clinger, continue to hold to it. Trump's playing you for a fool here and you're falling for it again.
As is always the case with wingers, you need to resort to absurd lies to try to make your baseless case. For example, you say that the Kremlin’s fake news ad campaign was the only thing they did, that they didn’t favor Trump, and that it was legal. It was not legal, it obviously favored Trump, and it was not the only election crime the Kremlin committed - they also engaged in the theft and distribution of Dem emails, at Trump’s urging no less.

But your lying is besides the point. Again, our political leaders cannot freely fire their investigators because you claim they are innocent. It’s still obstruction of justice. Trump should be indicted by Garland. STAT.
 

Dino

Russian Asset
As is always the case with wingers, you need to resort to absurd lies to try to make your baseless case. For example, you say that the Kremlin’s fake news ad campaign was the only thing they did, that they didn’t favor Trump, and that it was legal. It was not legal, it obviously favored Trump, and it was not the only election Crime the Kremlin committed - they also engaged in the theft and distribution of Dem emails, at Trump’s urging no less.

But your lying is besides the point. Again, our political leaders cannot freely fire their investigators because you claim they are innocent. It’s still obstruction of justice. Trump should be indicted by Garland. STAT.
Well at least you're consistent. 100% wrong and going strong. And you don't read well either, I'm guessing you didn't at all. I didn't say the ads were legal. I said to the ties to overseas leaders by campaigns was.
But what's the difference? You've never addressed or cared for the truth, so why would you start now? Even after the dud that was dropped by Mueller.
 

Bugsy McGurk

President
Well at least you're consistent. 100% wrong and going strong. And you don't read well either, I'm guessing you didn't at all. I didn't say the ads were legal. I said to the ties to overseas leaders by campaigns was.
But what's the difference? You've never addressed or cared for the truth, so why would you start now? Even after the dud that was dropped by Mueller.
Looks like you’re running out of gas with your lies, and still evading the actual issue, which is…

Do you think it’s obstruction of justice when a political leader fires an investigator because he is investigating that leader?
 

Dino

Russian Asset
Looks like you’re running out of gas with your lies, and still evading the actual issue, which is…

Do you think it’s obstruction of justice when a political leader fires an investigator because he is investigating that leader?
Comey wasn't an "investigator" at all. He was a Director of the FBI, and a quite incompetent one at that. Trump was well within his rights to terminate him, as head of the Executive Branch. He mishandled several sensitive election related situations and did nothing to address the cabal that was uncovered with agents plotting against Trump prior to his election. There was no evidence of collusion with Russia but Comey did nothing to clarify this as it seems he was politically involved with undermining Trump. There was no reason to keep such a lackluster incompetent in the role.
The Mueller Report proved Trump was not guilty of any conspiracy to rig the election and did the right thing by firing Comey.
 

Bugsy McGurk

President
Comey wasn't an "investigator" at all. He was a Director of the FBI, and a quite incompetent one at that. Trump was well within his rights to terminate him, as head of the Executive Branch. He mishandled several sensitive election related situations and did nothing to address the cabal that was uncovered with agents plotting against Trump prior to his election. There was no evidence of collusion with Russia but Comey did nothing to clarify this as it seems he was politically involved with undermining Trump. There was no reason to keep such a lackluster incompetent in the role.
The Mueller Report proved Trump was not guilty of any conspiracy to rig the election and did the right thing by firing Comey.
Your dodge is noted. Quite telling.

And your lying is again noted. Claiming that Comey was not an investigator may be your most absurd lie yet.

Bottom line - you refuse to acknowledge the actual obstruction issue. The issue is not whether Trump could have lawfully fired Comey for other reasons. By Trump’s own account, he didn’t fire Comey for other reasons - he fired Comey because he was investigating the Kremlin’s election crimes and the evidence of complicity of Trump’s campaign team.

Is it obstruction of justice if a political leader fires an investigator because he is investigating him?

Try not to lie and dodge this time and just answer the question.
 

Dino

Russian Asset
Your dodge is noted. Quite telling.

And your lying is again noted. Claiming that Comey was not an investigator may be your most absurd lie yet.

Bottom line - you refuse to acknowledge the actual obstruction issue. The issue is not whether Trump could have lawfully fired Comey for other reasons. By Trump’s own account, he didn’t fire Comey for other reasons - he fired Comey because he was investigating the Kremlin’s election crimes and the evidence of complicity of Trump’s campaign team.

Is it obstruction of justice if a political leader fires an investigator because he is investigating him?

Try not to lie and dodge this time and just answer the question.
Asked and answered.

Bye now
 

Spamature

President
He says it not once, but twice - he fired Comey because he was investigating him, and he admits that he would have been in a lot of trouble if Comey was allowed to proceed.

BTW, there’s six months left on the statute of limitations. Wake up Merrick Garland. Indict that lying toad!

They should prosecute him on this statement alone.

It was a confession plain and simple.
 
Top