9
   

Obstructionism: the ultimate trump card?

 
 
cicerone imposter
 
  2  
Reply Wed 26 Sep, 2018 12:04 pm
@coluber2001,
Why are the republicans afraid of the truth? An FBI investigation is warranted against Kavenaugh. This is a guy with a troubled past, and everybody needs to know what is true and what is not. We already know that Kavenaugh lied to the Senate which is an impeachable offense. That should be enough to derail his confirmation, but the republicans are trying to push him through to become a judge in the Supreme Court without an FBI investigation. There's trouble in Washington DC that's needs to be cleaned out in November, or we're partly blamed for the broken politics of this country.
KingReef
 
  0  
Reply Wed 26 Sep, 2018 12:38 pm
@cicerone imposter,
I wonder what you do to stay informed. It's hard to miss this clip these days.



The Democrats are needing you to remain uninformed, so that their talking points have a better effect on you.
Blickers
 
  1  
Reply Wed 26 Sep, 2018 12:51 pm
@KingReef,
Quote King Reef:
Quote:
I can say this because the article you showed is dated March, 16, 2018. An article I found from Friday, April 13, 2018 shows that the material from the raid on Cohen's office was still under seal.

https://www.cnbc.com/2018/04/13/trump-lawyer-michael-cohen-tries-to-suppress-information-found-in-fbi-raid.html

So it appears to me, though I could be wrong, that Rebecca Morin was projecting trouble on Cohen and Trump about the Stormy Daniels case, just as she definitely did with the Russia probe.


Wow, you are way behind on this case. Cohen's side tried to claim the seized documents were attorney-client privilege, a Special Master was appointed by the court to study which documents could be used in the case, and the results is what follows.

Special master: Fraction of all documents seized in Michael Cohen case fall under attorney-client privilege
by Kelly Cohen
June 15, 2018 06:09 PM


“Out of 291,770 total items, the Special Master agrees [with defense and with prosecutors] that 148 items are Privileged and/or Partially Privileged and that 7 items are Highly Personal,” she wrote in regard to those electronic devices.

This means a total of just 161 items are privileged or partially privileged of the more than 3.7 million items seized from Cohen. End quote.
Source.

The reason Cohen is cooperating with Mueller today is largely because of the evidence that was seized from his home and office by Mueller. If the items were ruled attorney client privilege, Cohen might have had a chance to fight the charges in court. Indeed, if not for the aspects of the case opened up by Stormy Daniels' lawsuit as filed by Michael Avenatti, such as illegal campaign contributions, wire fraud, and money from Russia possibly used to pay off Stormy Daniels, they might not have been able to hold that raid at all.

However, due to the aspects of the Stormy Daniels case and it's related matters, such as the slush fund set up by Cohen to pay off Stormy Daniels and the money from Russia coming into that slush fund, Mueller now has all kinds of evidence of Trump's dealings with Russia. Not to mention a whole host of charges not related to Russia but related to the payoff itself, such as wire fraud. Avenatti is the one who made this possible.

It's hilarious. Trump has neutered the House Oversight Committee due to the efforts of Devin Nunes and is firing people left and right in the FBI, and he thinks he's got the investigation at bay. Then the porn star he thought he could pay off cheap hires Michael Avenatti, and Avenatti has been eating Trump's case and his lawyers alive ever since. Cohen, who knows everything about Trump, is turning evidence. Manafort, who knows everything about Trump and Russia, is turning evidence. Trump's accountant, who knows everything about where Trump's money has been going since the 1980s, is turning evidence for Mueller. His accountant! You're really in trouble when your accountant is giving evidence against you.

All because of Avenatti.

cicerone imposter
 
  2  
Reply Wed 26 Sep, 2018 01:48 pm
@Blickers,
I'm not religious, but god bless Avenatti. That's rhetorical.
0 Replies
 
cicerone imposter
 
  2  
Reply Wed 26 Sep, 2018 01:52 pm
@KingReef,
The FBI does not arrive at any conclusion, but the congress can and should after the findings are shared with them. The FBI is a fact-finding organization. That's the reason why an FBI investigation is needed and warranted. Also,
Quote:
Can an FBI agent arrest someone?
In the U.S. and its territories, FBI special agents may make arrests for any federal offense committed in their presence or when they have reasonable grounds to believe that the person to be arrested has committed, or is committing, a felony violation of U.S. laws.
livinglava
 
  0  
Reply Wed 26 Sep, 2018 02:33 pm
@neptuneblue,
neptuneblue wrote:

There are reports about the incident prior to Kavanaugh's nomination. However, the claim was dismissed as irrelevent.

It's not any more.

It's still obvious that it's being used as political ammunition against pro-life currently. Is anyone really going to try to deny that these Kavanaugh accusations are being used as political ammunition and that is the only reason the media and everyone else involved with them is involved?

Face it, these women's stories are being exploited as political capital. It is not that different from an article I recently read about photography that pornographizes suffering for political and economic gain:
http://theconversation.com/images-of-suffering-can-bring-about-change-but-are-they-ethical-100809
cicerone imposter
 
  2  
Reply Wed 26 Sep, 2018 02:38 pm
@livinglava,
"Political ammunition?" ROFLMAO. Kavanaugh is his own worst enemy. He lied to the Senate, an impeachable offense. He can't be too bright as an attorney when he lied to the Senate. https://slate.com/news-and-politics/2018/09/brett-kavanaugh-lies-senate-testimony-supreme-court.html
livinglava
 
  0  
Reply Wed 26 Sep, 2018 02:42 pm
@cicerone imposter,
cicerone imposter wrote:

"Political ammunition?" ROFLMAO. Kavanaugh is his own worst enemy. He lied to the Senate, an impeachable offense. He can't be too bright as an attorney when he lied to the Senate. https://slate.com/news-and-politics/2018/09/brett-kavanaugh-lies-senate-testimony-supreme-court.html

IMHO, everything that is being said to demonize him is all just ammunition being used against him because the democratic/pro-choice movement has decided collectively to block his appointment. They would not oppose his nomination if he was a pro-choice judge nominated by a democrat president.

It is like when your colleagues dislike you so they look for reasons to fire you, but if one of their friends was guilty of the same thing, they would ignore/forgive/deny/hide it. This is just political bias because the left is terrified of losing Roe v. Wade.
cicerone imposter
 
  1  
Reply Wed 26 Sep, 2018 02:46 pm
@livinglava,
Being fired from a job happens often, but there are limits. One reason, that they don't like you, is not legal.
0 Replies
 
neptuneblue
 
  1  
Reply Wed 26 Sep, 2018 03:02 pm
@livinglava,
Or, she wants her story to be told in her own words. Therapy in confronting her abuser. But go ahead and think grandeous hidden meanings....

livinglava
 
  0  
Reply Wed 26 Sep, 2018 03:05 pm
@neptuneblue,
neptuneblue wrote:

Or, she wants her story to be told in her own words. Therapy in confronting her abuser. But go ahead and think grandeous hidden meanings....

It's not 'hidden meanings.' It is a political tactic because the dems want to block Trump from appointing justices who could threaten abortion rights.

Why can't you admit that? It discredits the democratic party so badly that they deploy things like accusations and lawsuits in strategic ways and then pretend like that's not the reason.

If you're going to use victims to pursue political goals, at least be honest about it.
Blickers
 
  2  
Reply Wed 26 Sep, 2018 03:09 pm
@livinglava,
Quote livinglava:
Quote:
IMHO, everything that is being said to demonize him is all just ammunition being used against him because the democratic/pro-choice movement has decided collectively to block his appointment.
More and more evidence is appearing that the incident actually occurred. And the FBI hasn't even begun to investigate yet. Do you agree that if it appears likely that Kavanaugh actually did this, he should not be on the Supreme Court?
cicerone imposter
 
  2  
Reply Wed 26 Sep, 2018 03:11 pm
@Blickers,
Good q.
0 Replies
 
cicerone imposter
 
  2  
Reply Wed 26 Sep, 2018 03:13 pm
@Blickers,
Don't forget the IRS interest in that money.
0 Replies
 
livinglava
 
  0  
Reply Wed 26 Sep, 2018 03:15 pm
@Blickers,
Blickers wrote:

Quote livinglava:
Quote:
IMHO, everything that is being said to demonize him is all just ammunition being used against him because the democratic/pro-choice movement has decided collectively to block his appointment.
More and more evidence is appearing that the incident actually occurred. And the FBI hasn't even begun to investigate yet. Do you agree that if it appears likely that Kavanaugh actually did this, he should not be on the Supreme Court?

I'm too offended about the dems/pro-choice abusing politics to suppress the participation of pro-life in democracy to answer that.

If the dems really want to block Kavanaugh because of these accusations, why don't they put forth another person who Trump would nominate so that he can do so?

Choose your battle: either ruin Kavanaugh's career (if you think that's what he deserves) and support Trump in nominating another pro-life justice or admit they are are only focusing on Kavanaugh in this way because of him being pro-life and if he was a dem-appointed candidate with the same history, it would be kept hidden from view, even if dems knew about it, because they would not want to lose the opportunity to get their justice into the court.
cicerone imposter
 
  1  
Reply Wed 26 Sep, 2018 03:15 pm
@livinglava,
It's not about "dems." It's about the person's legal and ethical background.
livinglava
 
  0  
Reply Wed 26 Sep, 2018 03:18 pm
@cicerone imposter,
cicerone imposter wrote:

It's not about "dems." It's about the person's legal and ethical background.

I don't believe the dems would react the same way if it was a dem nominee they really wanted to support. They would just ignore the person's history then and hope the GOP didn't uncover it either.
cicerone imposter
 
  1  
Reply Wed 26 Sep, 2018 03:23 pm
@livinglava,
Quote:
I don't believe the dems would react the same way if it was a dem nominee they really wanted to support. They would just ignore the person's history then and hope the GOP didn't uncover it either.

Your opinion is noted. I never said otherwise.
livinglava
 
  0  
Reply Wed 26 Sep, 2018 03:28 pm
@cicerone imposter,
cicerone imposter wrote:

Quote:
I don't believe the dems would react the same way if it was a dem nominee they really wanted to support. They would just ignore the person's history then and hope the GOP didn't uncover it either.

Your opinion is noted. I never said otherwise.

I hope Kavanaugh sticks it out as long as possible. I want the public to see what dems are capable of in defense of abortion.
neptuneblue
 
  1  
Reply Wed 26 Sep, 2018 03:29 pm
@livinglava,
There's the other issue of not prosecuting a sitting president....
0 Replies
 
 

Related Topics

Obama '08? - Discussion by sozobe
Let's get rid of the Electoral College - Discussion by Robert Gentel
McCain's VP: - Discussion by Cycloptichorn
Food Stamp Turkeys - Discussion by H2O MAN
The 2008 Democrat Convention - Discussion by Lash
McCain is blowing his election chances. - Discussion by McGentrix
Snowdon is a dummy - Discussion by cicerone imposter
TEA PARTY TO AMERICA: NOW WHAT?! - Discussion by farmerman
 
Copyright © 2024 MadLab, LLC :: Terms of Service :: Privacy Policy :: Page generated in 0.03 seconds on 12/28/2024 at 08:12:36