pikachuriu
Well-Known Member
LOL. Hi sock.MMG sock
LOL. Hi sock.MMG sock
DITTO LOLLOL. Hi sock.
Is it having a productive conversation with you? Sure doesn't look like it.DITTO LOL
PENISLooking forward to the 1st ever indictment by Congress. Historical times we live in. Crazy Americans.
370 former federal prosecutors also mistakenly believe that Trump could've been indicted. I hope you'll contact them and tell them federal prosecutors impeach, not indict. Let us know their response.No wonder pikyernose and bugs want to talk about anything other than the crimes that Trump committed as detailed in Mueller's report.
Trump would have been charged with obstruction were he not president, hundreds of former federal prosecutors assert
link to article
More than 370 former federal prosecutors who worked in Republican and Democratic administrations have signed on to a statement asserting special counsel Robert S. Mueller III’s findings would have produced obstruction charges against President Trump — if not for the office he held.
The statement — signed by myriad former career government employees as well as high-profile political appointees — offers a rebuttal to Attorney General William P. Barr’s determination that the evidence Mueller uncovered was “not sufficient” to establish that Trump committed a crime.
“We emphasize that these are not matters of close professional judgment,” they added. “Of course, there are potential defenses or arguments that could be raised in response to an indictment of the nature we describe here. . . . But, to look at these facts and say that a prosecutor could not probably sustain a conviction for obstruction of justice — the standard set out in Principles of Federal Prosecution — runs counter to logic and our experience.”
You’re boring, sock370 former federal prosecutors also mistakenly believe that Trump could've been indicted. I hope you'll contact them and tell them federal prosecutors impeach, not indict. Let us know their response.
Show me proof federal prosecutors "impeach" moron ?370 former federal prosecutors also mistakenly believe that Trump could've been indicted. I hope you'll contact them and tell them federal prosecutors impeach, not indict. Let us know their response.
I am convinced it is the old Buddah so no LOLIs it having a productive conversation with you? Sure doesn't look like it.
He'd rather talk about anything than have a productive discussion.You’re boring, sock
So much better when it is kept on ignore. I don't put people on ignore often. Boring is the main reason. pikurnose and Rob Roy, for example. Boring.I am convinced it is the old Buddah so no LOL
@DonJr.TheMoron called him out as yknee. He spotted nearly identical wording that yknee repeated often.I am convinced it is the old Buddah so no LOL
LOL. Ask Foggy.Show me proof federal prosecutors "impeach" moron ?
Tell us the story about how mueller said no collusion again. That was a funny one and not as boringLOL. Ask Foggy.
*collisionTell us the story about how mueller said no collusion again. That was a funny one and not as boring
“You missed a key on your phone by one space!” says the sock puppet who is too weak to accept reality*collision
That was a mistake by you? I thought you really meant a collision. My bad.“You missed a key on your phone by one space!” says the sock puppet who is too weak to accept reality
This is a great article, thank you for postingNo wonder pikyernose and bugs want to talk about anything other than the crimes that Trump committed as detailed in Mueller's report.
Trump would have been charged with obstruction were he not president, hundreds of former federal prosecutors assert
link to article
More than 370 former federal prosecutors who worked in Republican and Democratic administrations have signed on to a statement asserting special counsel Robert S. Mueller III’s findings would have produced obstruction charges against President Trump — if not for the office he held.
The statement — signed by myriad former career government employees as well as high-profile political appointees — offers a rebuttal to Attorney General William P. Barr’s determination that the evidence Mueller uncovered was “not sufficient” to establish that Trump committed a crime.
“We emphasize that these are not matters of close professional judgment,” they added. “Of course, there are potential defenses or arguments that could be raised in response to an indictment of the nature we describe here. . . . But, to look at these facts and say that a prosecutor could not probably sustain a conviction for obstruction of justice — the standard set out in Principles of Federal Prosecution — runs counter to logic and our experience.”