Ha! Suck on it niggers! Trump’s Invincible!

Honestly, if Trump is innocent, why do so many legal experts say there was enough evidence to convict him?

Face it, Mueller pussied out.

Isn’t he gonna testify next week?

Hail Hydra

(1) that makes Trump guilty of Obstruction of Justice, an Impeachable Offense;
(2) this makes McGahn subject to Contempt of Congress charges, which hold prison as penalty.

So much winning with these criminals. Why are you celebrating the destruction of the rule of law?

You sound like a traitor. You should kill yourself.

both are examples of people with the ability to prove their innocence but do everything in their power to fight instead of just submitting. So does Trump have something to hide? If not why be so combative?

In what way is failure to comply different from failure to comply? Is it just because Congressmen don't carry guns so they don't get to shoot criminals when they resist?

Have you been paying attention at all over the last 2 years. Nobody is going to make the republicans sit in some stupid committee called by the democrats just so they can be slandered and belittled and then have cable news do more of the same. None if these committees amount to anything other than clowning and everyone there gets a free lunch.
So if Mcgahn shows up all that will happen is he will be dogpiled on and called evil and a traitor like all the others before him. The shit gets old after awhile and its only being done to waste time on a dead issue.

>Nobody is going to make the republicans sit in some stupid committee called by the democrats just so they can be slandered and belittled and then have cable news do more of the same
Right, they just charge them with contempt for not showing up

You haven't answered my question though. Why is failure to comply acceptable here?

How come none of the "legal experts" will actually tell anyone what the evidence actually is?

"Legal experts" would know that you don't "convict" a sitting president

You're a fcking retard trumptard. Clinton was berated by a republican committee almost 11 times so stop bitching. If she can do it, you republicucks can do it too. Again, if he is innocent why are they acting guilty?

Did you take the candy?
"No."
Then empty your pockets.
"Absolutely not. And my friends won't empty theirs either. And if you try to force us to we'll sew them shut and stick our hands in them and do everything we can to keep you from getting into them. But we have nothing to hide keep in mind."

Are you fcking kidding me you absolute dumbass.. He admitted on TV that he fired James Comey because of the "Russia thing" to Lester Holt AND THAT IS ONE EXAMPLE. another example he tried to get Mueller fired which is in the report. Trumptards on suicide watch

Attached: Screenshot_20190503-115741.png (480x854, 508K)

Hi user, I like the picture you posted

Fake news asshole

>Triggered snowflake

damn dude. burned him. no coming back from that.

>Everything that I don't like is fake news!
The absolute state of the Right

jesus christ you people are fucking retaards...

one situation has (generally) two people, who are pumped up on adrenaline, and who have started to leave rational thought behind. the cop will shoot if the criminal makes any move that is 'threatening'. the criminal can only think about getting away, and/or stopping the cop. it's a situation that can (and usually is) resolved in few highly emotinally charged seconds.

the other is getting a letter in the mail with a line that says something like 'failure to comply with this notice may result in further legal action'.

the fact that neither wants to "comply" is irrelevent in these situations.

if you can conflate having a cop pointing a gun at someone to getting letter in the mail, then there's your problem.

>>implying that his refusal has significant political impact

I read politics everyday and I've never heard of him

Anyone else excited for Mueller to testify before Congress and for Mnuchin to be forced to release Trump's tax returns to Congress? Shit's gonna to be fun on a bun

>what is separation of powers
that's a coup right from the white house
and republicans are happy about it

Mueller didn't pussy out - he's part of Trump's coup. He did exactly what he was instructed to do by Trump, refused to indict.

>It's different because there's distance involved
Lol those are some impressive mental gymnastics. The police shoot unarmed people without warning or when they're attempting to comply all the time so this "hyped up on adrenaline" and "can only think of escape" nonsense is entirely irrelevant.

Fact is McGahn is a dirty nigger

He’ll still be your president and he’ll still send Comey to jail.

What the fuck are you talking about you god damn mong

Just like he sent Hillary to jail? Or replaced Obamacare? Or built a wall?

Fake news

Attached: 121205-acc-maralago-10o22.jpg (371x512, 48K)

McGahn already testified to mueller

Why again?

Gr8 b8 m8 I r8 8/8

Because his betters ordered him

Lmfao wait for the Horowitz report
I am sad he didn’t lock her up, but there’s still time.

Attached: 7C950306-8930-4473-AE67-187D4B619D94.jpg (997x821, 124K)

>I am sad he didn’t lock her up, but there’s still time
Lol how can you believe this while believing that Trump is the victim of a witch hunt?

“Betters”
Nigger they’re just trying to cover their tracks and escape the fact that Loretta Lynch and Bill Clinton were recorded on the tarmac discussing her Supreme Court appointment, fbi and cia assets have been caught in the act of spying on a domestic political campaign, and the clock is ticking.

Fuckin’ Nadler isn’t better than anyone, except maybe Pelosi because he’s half as drunk.

Because she paid for the opposition research and likely had some influence in the decision to spy on him.

Also, she’s corrupt as fuck and an all around bad person. I hate corrupt politicians. No, before you say it, trump isn’t corrupt, people spinning that narrative are projecting like a drive in.

Attached: bill-cosby-performs-1000x600.jpg (1000x600, 65K)

Alright let's unpack this so you can have a real answer

1. Mueller is not Congress
2. Congress ordered him to appear
3. Having attended one court date does not exempt you from future court dates
4. Failing to appear in court is a crime that only the guilty plan to commit

Why, oh why should we be interested in making this person appear?

>No, before you say it, trump isn’t corrupt, people spinning that narrative are projecting like a drive in.
This is amazing. I can't wait to see the conspiracy you cobble together when Trump is removed from office and Hillary has more pictures taken of her walking her dog

>President appoints Attorney General

Shouldn't this be illegal, since it automatically sets up a conflict of interest?

The Attorney General should be appointed by Congress.

Trump aint going anywhere cuckfag! Keep dreaming.

The better question is, why is Trump so adamant he doesn't appear?

Trump, you've declared yourself innocent right? Then you have nothing to fear.

Unless, of course, you do have something to hide. Because you sure as hell keep acting like it Trump.

I think the idea is that AG is an Executive position rather than a Legislative one and so should be picked by the Executive Branch

He's for damn sure going back to the golf course. He's our nation's laziest president

Mnuchin is going to be forced to release Trump's tax returns soon

Bro, i was butt chugging my soy boys cock when I saw this headline. I got so hard fucking to a photo of a trump goatse. It gives me a freedom boner when i see the jews are infiltrating the repubs. Harry is alive and being held by an evil Gastly.

... It's... Afraid... IT'S AFRAID!!!

Attached: afraid.jpg (600x339, 146K)

He's been harassed, lied about, and fallaciously investigated for the last two years. Trump should simply tell the democrats to fuck off, tell his people to do the same, and pardon everyone on every contempt charge. Unless the investigators can produce any evidence thing him to anything, they can fuck off.

trumps a faggot

Difference is that the Republicans actually had evidence of her wrong doing, at least as far as the emails were concerned. She broke several laws, that is not even debatable. She only got away with it because Comfy thought she was gonna win in 2016.

Department of Justice is part of the Executive Branch. They are the one that tries to fulfill the President's legal agenda and prosecutes criminal cases at the federal level.
Congress makes laws, provides oversight, and votes on federal nominees. Nominees which are put forth by the President. So no, Congress should not be picking the AG and they should not be acting as a judicial entity.

The IRS already has them. Do people really think that if Trump was committing tax fraud, money laundering, etc. that he wouldn't have been busted for it already? I'm really starting to think that the Congressional Democrats really are trying to appear as stupid as possible because they want something to rile their voters up over.
>Give us Trump's tax returns, clearly he is hiding something! - The IRS already has them and would have pressed charges if something major stood out.
>Give us the unredacted Mueller Report! Clearly they're hiding something! - The House Oversight Committee has access to that full report if they request to see it.
They keep pretending these issues exist because there's a lot of people who will believe them and vote for them to "solve" it. In the end, it just keeps blowing up in their faces and they jump back and forth over which thing they claim Trump did now/then/will do. It's going to hand him a second term on a silver platter if they keep it up until 2020.

Hide some more you corrupt little righties. Go run and hide.

But then most of Trump's staff including his daughter and son in law went on to do the exact same thing they went after her for. Why are they allowed private email servers but Hilary is a criminal for having one?

There's been 2 years of Trump complying. The report was released and Democrats weren't satisfied with the results so now they're doing this stupid shit to try and own the cons. You said you have a problem with black people being shot, well it starts with our justice system breaking the laws they are supposed to uphold because they don't like an individual.

>not cooperating with subpoenas

>guys he's totally innocent

Democracy at its finest.

>following up on an investigation is illegal

Okay.

all the things republicans accused obama of doing, trump is actually doing, and republicans are applauding it.

rip america

Ok, but as the head of the executive branch he has the right to fire him. Comey even said there was no proof he colluded or was being investigated at the time. Trump told Comey to tell that to the media and he refused, so Trump fired him. Seeing how Comey said there was no investigation I don't understand what law was broken by the President, especially not a flimsy one like obstruction.

I'm good, but you can suck trumps cheese covered cock

Fantasy world you are living in.

He didn't comply at all though. Have you looked at this report at all? He fought tooth and nail to prevent every single finding he could. Why?

Hillary's emails were specifically involving her duties as Secretary of State. Classified information including things that possibly led to Americans being killed. She not only refused to hand them over when asked, her staff physically destroyed devices and tried to wipe their memory when they were requested to show them. That goes a little beyond just using an insecure email server. That goes into destruction of evidence.
Furthermore, if Hillary was able to get away using those unsecure servers as Secretary of State then clearly it's not a big issue if some relatively low level advisers to the President have done the same. Either way, as much as I dislike admitting it, Hillary won't be spending time in prison because time has passed and no one seems interested in prosecuting (but her losing the election and still trying to find excuses is good enough for me.)

The broken law came during the closed door meeting where Trump asked him to drop the investigation.

Find classified documents on their servers and we'll talk. Find evidence that they destroyed evidence, or had people destroy evidence, and you would have a case. Find these things and I'll call for them to go to jail too. Until then, I don't care about the personal email servers. Nobody else did either. The issue was the fact, yes fact, that they had classified data on them. And were not secured. And the emails and devices were later destroyed after being subpeonaed.

>Legal experts
You mean those clowns the media gets on to make their delusions seem credible? The only crime you can charge Trump with is obstruction of justice. No crime was committed. How do you obstruct a non-crime?

>REEEEEEE IT'S NOT THE SAME

Tldr

>REEEEEEEEEEE CNN IS CUCK NEWS

This is the first time someone has given an actual answer. Thanks for knowing what you're talking about friend.

Zero.

>Do people really think that if Trump was committing tax fraud, money laundering, etc. that he wouldn't have been busted for it already?
The IRS does not disclose your crimes to other sections of government unless you fail to pay your taxes

>wont comply with subpoena
juj, time to jail

Have you read the report? Nothing happened. Fought tooth and nail so his personal business and things like Stormy Daniel wouldn't get exposed. Face it, there's no collusion. Try and live in reality like every other sane individual.

imagine being so retarded you actually think corporate media tells the truth about politics

Attached: operationmockingbird.jpg (480x360, 46K)

Oh, you mean the closed door meeting that only Comey had recollection of and no one else can verify?

Well after Hillary's boy Comey declared that "no reasonable prosecutor would bring a case" over having a private email servers or deleting emails to avoid complying with a congressional subpoena, you've lost the ability to complain when the other party does the same.

Now, if you are ready to admit Comey abused his post to protect Hillary, we can start talking.

the absolute state of modern journalism

Attached: 1532116483957.jpg (465x551, 34K)

We aren't discussing collusion you dolt. They're looking into obstruction.

How about reading the second half of my statement and stop trying to dismiss what I'm saying because you know you're wrong and feel stupid for crying Russia for 2 years.

How can you obstruct if theres not a crime?

>bruh he just wants his privacy
>he just like you and me

Fucking. Kek.

Has to be an underlying crime to obstruct. Duh.

Yup. To this day, Eric Holder sits in a jail cell because he refused to comply with a congressional subpoena.
Democrats have really, really, lost the plot these past few years. These coming primaries are going to be such a disaster that they will tear each other down before even getting to face Trump.

Imagine being stuck in a echo chamber where everyone is telling you corporate media is wrong and you just believe them.

weird how Hillary winning vs Trump winning changes shit huh

>Oh Putin-senpai your penis is so stinky but I love it

This whole investigation started as a Russian Collusion theory. Now Democrats are changing the goalpost because they're emotional and can't control their hate boners for Trump. Pathetic.

shouldnt u be taught creationism and die of aids, cuz u dont know how biology works?

Obstruction of an investigation which was allowed to finish.
The entire "case" for obstruction rests on tweets and comments of the President saying "I don't like the investigation and I think it should end, I could end it if I wanted to." but he didn't. It's trying to make thought crime a real thing.

This isn't an arguement. Man also has a wife and young son who he didn't want to know about it. You're not very bright are you? Explains why you're a Democrat

trying to stop an investigation is a crime. Jesus Christ. It doesn't matter that there was no underlying crime. Trying to interfere is the crime.

"We pulled him over for matching a description and he tried to bribe us to let him go. Turns out we had the wrong guy so the attempted bribe is no longer a crime."

Not an argument. You know you're wrong so you're thrashing about like a fish taken from the water.

>ur just a Democrat

Nah dude. It's fine. You can totally relate to the multimillionaire. He's a little guy, just like us. His father only have him a cold million for a startup. Hes just like us. We all have those pornstar infidelity scandals.

Fucking keeeeeeeek

>REEEEEEEEEE DEBATE ME
>I'M AN INTELLECTUAL AND I DEMAND IT
>REEEEEEEEEEEEE

Where did he obstruct justice? Give me one example. Saying things on Twitter doesn't count.

Manchild is a Democrat.
Who woulda thunk?

im not wrong
i have to go - ive got all the kinder surprise eggs i want to eat

Ok? Obama isn't like the normal man. Any politician you like isn't like the normal man. That's not an argument. Try again brainlet.

>PLEASE GIVE ME THE ATTENTION I CRAVE
>I CAN'T CUM TILL I WIN A Yea Forums ARGUMENT

Ready to start a civil war?

>not an argument
>I win

You're so easy m8

>Trying to stop an investigation
>All he did was rage tweet because he was wrongly accused
Is your name Strech Armstrong? Because you're reaching.

Says the guy trolling on Yea Forums

Watching how this whole thing started and where it's ended up is hilariously pathetic:
>Russia literally hacked the election and changed the results to put their puppet into power
>Trump and his campaign staff met with Russian officials during the campaign to give him an edge
>Russian agents released damaging material about Hillary before the election so people wouldn't like her
>The Russians have compromising images and information about Trump, their making him do what they want
>Trump sold an apartment to a Russian and wanted to build a Trump Tower in Moscow
>Trump's taxes will show he had business dealing in Russia and with the Russian government
>The Russians bought some ads on Facebook
>"We never claimed collusion! The real crime is obstruction!"
How anticlimactic.

>In the summer of 2017, the President learned that media outlets were asking questions about the June 9, 2016 meeting at Trump Tower between senior campaign officials, including Donald Trump Jr., and a Russian lawyer who was said to be offering damaging information about Hillary Clinton as “part of Russia and its government’s support for Mr. Trump.” On several occasions, the President directed aides not to publicly disclose the emails setting up the June 9 meeting, suggesting that the email would not leak and that the number of lawyers with access to them should be limited. Before the emails became public, the President edited a press statement from Trump Jr. by deleting a line that acknowledged that the meeting was with “an individual who [Trump Jr.] was told might have information helpful to the campaign” and instead said only that the meeting was about adoptions of Russian children. When the press asked questions about the President’s involvement in Trump Jr.’s statement, the President's personal lawyer repeatedly denied the President had played any role.

.

>Hurr durr I wuz unly pretendin 2 b retard

>In early 2018, the press reported that the President had directed MCGahn to have the Special Counsel removed in June 2017 and that McGahn had threatened to resign rather than carry out the order. The President reacted to the news stories by directed WHite House officials to tell McGahn to dispute the story and create a record stating he had not been ordered to have the Special Counsel removed. McGahn told those officials that the media reports were accurate in stating that the President had directed McGahn to have the Special Counsel removed. The President then met with McGahn in the Oval Office and again pressured him to deny the reports. In The same meeting, the President also asked McGahn why he had told the Special Counsel about the President’s efforts to remove the Special Counsel and why McGahn took notes of his conversations with the President. McGahn refused to back away from what he remembered happening and perceived the President to be testing his mettle.

I'm having fun. Can you say the same? Kek

I don't even have to pretend. I just say something against your God Emperor and you leap at it like the cake your mom hides in the pantries. It's very amusing.

Where are you guys getting this twitter shit? who gives a fuck about what he said on twitter? Read the fucking report for fucks sake.

I see somebody slipped their tard wrangler.

>Trump told people to be quiet to the media
>SEE! THE MEDIA IS TOTALLY THE SAME THING AS INVESTIGATORS! OBSTRUCTION!
Feeble.

Obstruction is obstruction you clown. There aren't levels. It's breaking the law. Why are Republicans all for rule of law until one of their own breaks it?

I don't really care. This is Yea Forums. You're not the only troll here.

Democrats are nothing but faggots and niggers at this point. I can't wait for the Trump Slam Dunk in 2020.

Attached: trump2020.jpg (1088x960, 62K)

No, lying to the media isn't the same as lying to investiagators. You're shifting the goalpost and it's pretty pathetic.

Libcucks aren't ready

Do you STILL BELIEVE THE FAKE NEWS media?

Holyshit son. Has this not taught you ANY FUCKING THING?

No obstruction there.

The same McGahn who is mentioned in the OP. If he believed he was being made to commit a crime at the President's order, why would he refuse to comply with a subpoena? The President can order pretty much anything he wants or suggest it, the reason he has advisers and counsel is to keep him in check. Trump got scared about the Special Counsel and it becoming the only thing that would be talked about or focused on, so initially he wanted to end it, cooler heads prevailed and the investigation was seen through to its end.
Tell me how there can be an obstruction when the actual investigation was allowed to be conducted, completed, and delivered?

Before you bring it up; firing Comey doesn't count towards then when Democrats were screaming for him to be fired for speaking about Hillary before the election. Comey was getting too political for being the FBI director and he pissed off his boss (the President). Had Hillary won, I suspect Comey would have been ousted as well because he made too many enemies on both sides for flip-flopping.

> Before the emails became public, the President edited a press statement from Trump Jr. by deleting a line that acknowledged that the meeting was with “an individual who [Trump Jr.] was told might have information helpful to the campaign”

> by deleting a line that acknowledged

this is obstruction.

you libtards are so desperate

Directing PR efforts is now Obstruction of CNN, fetch muh peach mints!

>Trump told McGhan to do something he has constitutional power to do
>McGhan doesn't do it
>Nothing happens
>HURR DURR OBSTRUCTION!

Trump will never be forced out of office you black cock loving disgrace

Attached: libtardation.jpg (960x960, 151K)

the things presented to the media become evidence in investigations. By editing them to deny things before presenting them you also alter evidence. You're not real smart are you?

>A press line
>Not an investigative report
So lying to the media is a crime now? Kek. Y'all are reaching so hard.

Then you "read politics" the same way that a paraplegic goes jogging

I really don't understand why repubs are cheering for this shit when we all know that when a dem gets in there and if they pull this shit it'll be the biggest political scandal ever.

We need political consistency, not this "haha my side is in, so we can do whatever we want". This pendulum always swings, it's so shortsighted.

>Emails became public
>TRUMP IS HIDING THE EMAILS! OBSTRUCTION!

I'm convinced this is a child

Attached: 1434505500471.png (800x800, 465K)

No they don't. Investigators don't use CNN clips as evidence you fucking brainlet.

So when will various media personalities be charged with obstruction because they lied or hid things? Clearly those things, and perjury, are no longer applicable only in legal setting and in fact apply 24/7.
Lie to the media? Perjury! Impeach!
Hide things from the media? Obstruction! Impeach!
Until you get Trump under oath, he can lie and hide all he wants. I don't blame him for doing so when the scumbags at various outlets have tried to center their careers specifically on ruining him. Fuck modern mainstream "journalists". They peddle more conspiracies than Alex Jones at this point.

Really? By that logic OJ Simpson really killed his wife because the media said so.

So all false rape allegations aren't actually false because the media reported on them?

Has to be. No adult can be this dumb.

>Saying things on Twitter doesn't count.

Federal law courts, presided by Justice N. Buchwald, however, have ruled that in the 2018 "Knight First Amendment Institute vs Donald J Trump" court case, that Twitter DOES count - specifically bringing the Supreme Court's rulings on freedom of speech in public forums to the digital format of twittert.

By that judges' legal definitions, Trump's twitter is legally bound to not block users, as he is a public servant, and therefore, their first amendment right to read/hear statements made by the president prevent him from barring their access to his comment. The twitter account, likewise, is also legally recognised as a medium for communication by the President, to the public.

In other words. it counts.

"beat up the hells angels" loooooooool

I agree that consistency should be applied and that simply supporting something because you're party does it (and then crying foul when the other does it) is moronic. It's done serious damage to this country. But so to has this entire obsession with kicking Trump out of office for the past two years. I don't consider myself a member of either party, but the Democrats have really annoyed me the past few years and it all comes across as they have 0 confidence in winning on their own merits; they only think they can win if they remove any competition to them. That's why there's calls for impeachment, arrests, and even dismantling the Electoral College. They are so ignorant that they think the only way they can lose if if their opponents cheated. They will call the system "unfair", "antiquated", and "racist" until it gives them victory 100% of the time.

>Weak, federal court case says Trump can't block people and that his Twitter is a medium for communication
>"This means everything Trump says on Twitter he means!"
Weak. This defense wouldn't hold up in court.

>4. Failing to appear in court is a crime that only the guilty plan to commit

[citation needed]
Not an argument chump

Was there any distinction between Trump's personal account (held for years before ever running in 2016) and the official POTUS account? Because they are two separate things and I fail to see how a personal account can be ordered to live up to that kind of standard.
So then every other elected official better remove their blocks on Twitter. I guess that means I'm constitutionally allowed to insult any politician I want and spam their DMs.Them using the block feature on the site is a violation of my first Amendment rights. I hope Senator Feinstein likes goatse...

Who else intends to break the law rather then stand trial?

People who think the government can suck shit from a straw?
People who get caught up in the crosshairs of a glorified extortion racket?

You can take your self-righteous faggotry and use it to kill yourself fam.

>Stand trial
Except Barr went "on trial" and all that was just a chance for Dems to virtue signal and talk shit to Trump's office so they don't look crazy after shouting collusion for 2 years and coming back empty handed.

When do I look forward to you saying "I was only pretending to be retarded"?
Because your comment is one of the most idiotic things I've ever seen on Yea Forums. Congratulations. you've managed to go below a bar which was already on the ground.

(obviously, i'm not a lawyer, nevermind the judge on the case) but the introductory text of the legal ruling ( whole thing is 75 pages of text) states:

>"UNITED STATES DISTRICT JUDGE
>MEMORANDUM AND ORDER
>17 Civ. 5205 (NRB)
>This case requires us to consider whether a public official may, consistent with the First Amendment, “block” a person from his Twitter account in response to the political views that person has expressed, and whether the analysis differs because that public official is the President of the United States. The answer to both questions is no.

>Our analysis proceeds as follows. We first set forth the background facts regarding Twitter as a platform, the (at)realDonaldTrump account that is the center of this dispute, the plaintiffs, and this case’s procedural history. Because defendants object to our adjudication of this case based on plaintiffs’ lack of standing, we then turn -- as we must -- to the consideration of those jurisdictional arguments."

So it certainly appears that this ruling is regarding his personal account being that of a public servant while he serves as POTUS.

lmao imagine being told you aren't legally allowed to block someone on Twitter

>even their bumper stickers read like a 300 page dissertation
oh well you’ll get ‘em next time champ

It's amazing how retarded some of these people are.
Trying to throw a man in jail because he didn't come to a VOLUNTARY hearing. Barr was never ordered to report before the committee, he was asked, said he would come, and changed his mind because he didn't like the arrangements that were being proposed. The AG felt he had better things to do than be questioned by staff of Representatives (many of which were lawyers and even DAs at one point.)

*many of those Reps. were lawyers and even DAs at one point.
They were more than qualified to ask questions they had, but they obviously don't want questions. They want retribution because the Mueller Report didn't support the outrageous claims they've been making for the past two years.

Executive privileges.
So none.
Checks and balances

Uh... were we reading the same report?

If you wanna start going after politicians for misleading the media, we're going to have to recruit both RWDS and LWDS to deal with the backlog.

Attached: 132a0e97fdec320f35c79a4287374b996708c974d2524d3f145e0ff24dc787f1.jpg (900x849, 72K)

Clearly not if you're still insisting on the "Trump colluded and the Russians helped him cheat to win the 2016 election" narrative.

They all colluded with Russia though. Left and Right.
Our government is in bed with Putin at all levels.

Well that would explain why one house of Congress is continuously trying to overthrow the President and destroy the institutions that built this country.

And the citizenry is too busy insulting each other over petty bullshit to do a thing about it.

Attached: lets-get-nazis-guys-those-politics-paris-anti-fascist-clement-meric-14751645[1].png (500x635, 163K)

>Just like he sent Hillary to jail? Or replaced Obamacare? Or built a wall?

Hillary is protected by the deep state
Obama care is dead in the water without the mandate which Trump ended. The wall is being built. If you'd read up some you'd know that already.

h

Obamacare isn't dead in the water and no money for the wall has been allocated so...?

Attached: trump_supporter1490724686047.jpg (448x336, 16K)

Attached: trump_wrong.jpg (250x250, 38K)

I love how you idiots can't decide if the "deep state" is omnipotent and capable of mass manipulation and command, or incompetent and feeble in the face of your favorite retard. If they were able to protect hillary against all threats, why didn't they use that same influence to cheat her into the WH with >300 electoral votes?

>the deep state

Attached: Alex_Jones-tinfoil-jewhat.jpg (700x457, 107K)

It's a little more nuanced than that but you have the right points.

McGahn isn't simply "not comply"ing with Congress because the White House told him not to. His reason is that he's being directed to do two opposite things by two co-equal branches of government. Congress is (legally) subpoenaing him, and the executive branch is formally instructing him not to comply.

So until they can reach an accommodation, he's refusing to take a side. Quite frankly (and I find most everyone attached to the Trump campaign to be repulsive retards), I don't blame him. He would have gotten shit on by one side or the other if he didn't pass the ball back to them. You can argue that he might have a moral obligation to testify, but he's refusing to be a political pawn. Just because he walked away from Trump, doesn't mean he loves Democrats any more. And at least he's demonstrated a willingness to not commit crimes on Trump's behalf just because he's asked to.

So it'll play out like this:

1) The "accommodation" that Congress and the White House need to reach is going to be determined in the Supreme Court

2) White House will say they can use executive privilege to keep his mouth shut, plus the usual "waaa Trump can never get a fair break at being President cause the left just smear him all the time".

3) Congress will say that not only is McGahn now a private citizen, (weak point because you can argue that even former executive branch employees can compelled to silence via executive privilege, much like an NDA) but executive privilege was already waived when he testified for 30 hours with Mueller's team. They'll argue that this is ongoing investigations about the same matter that he was already granted permission to talk about, and therefore can't be protected by executive privilege. This is the strongest point.

4) Supreme court will be split (thanks to Gorsuch and Kavanaugh) and Justice Roberts will break the tie. I'm guessing he'll side with Congress.

Problem is, then you get into another conflict of interest if the party in control of Congress is led by the offending President.

They have every incentive not to practice oversight on a successful President, even if he breaks the law.

And to be blunt, the executive branch has far too much power. How many times have we gotten into armed conflict without ever declaring war now?

At the very least, we need to organize Legislative oversight of the Executive Branch a lot better than we do now.

The same one that instructed the DoJ not to prosecute Hillary, and practiced Enhanced Surveillance Techniques (read: spied) on Trump's campaign.

>Well if he didn't do anything wrong and just complied he wouldn't have been shot
When someone is pointing a gun at you, fucking comply. Sort out the legal issues later. Sue the police dept., etc. You have to be a special kind of retarded to not understand this. And I mean this literally: only a small percentage of actually retarded people don't comply with police when force is imminent.

>President claims to be innocent
He claims he's innocent, and over two years of investigation has not produced even a shred of evidence to prove any wrongdoing. Give it the fuck up, this is only hurting the Dems at this point. impeachment will not happen, and people will drop the whole Dem party over this.

>instructs everyone around him
At this point, I'd do the same. The Democrats are simply obstructing the process at every turn. Don't get me wrong, I'm not a Republican, and I know they did the same to Obama. But not anything near this level. The Dems had that shitshow of a hearing for Kavanaugh, they block every bit of Trump's agenda, they had a two year investigation that was based on false premises and completely non-credible intel, they are now trying and succeeding in blocking Trump from appearing on the ballots in many states.

They are blocking legitimate legislation, they are corrupting political the process, and they are blocking democracy. All while shrieking about Nazis and other nonsense, becoming an actual socialist party, proposing no actual legislation, and solving absolutely zero issues. I didn't vote for Trump before, and I do not like him. But if this is what the Dems are now, I'm voting Trump in 2020.

>why didn't they use that same influence to cheat her into the WH
Hahaha, they tried, but the shill still lost.

It can't pay for itself and without the illegal taxation, i mean fine, no I mean mandate it is collapsing and with be done away with. Sorry if the truth hurts your feelings.

Yeap, that debunks everything. Typical libtard.

Maybe the job should be split into two roles. White House/DOJ elect the "Prosecuting Attorney General" of the U.S. and he's in charge any time the U.S. wants to press charges against whoever, and the people vote for the "Defense Attorney General" of the U.S. which would handle all charges brought against the U.S.by whoever. I think it should be a straight popular vote (no electoral college) and I think they should be part of the judicial branch. My logic starts to fall apart here because as far as I know, no member of the judicial branch is appointed by popular vote, and if cyber terrorism continues, that could be a vulnerability like any political position. Butis it any more vulnerable than a President who benefited/was supported via cyber interference that goes on to nominate judicial appointees? Not really..

At least we'd have someone that wasn't under the executive branch/DoJ arm of the government and could act with autonomy and as representation of the (majority) will of the people.

Attached: alex_jones.jpg (1024x576, 42K)

see

Thats great but no govt. agency works on autonomy anymore. The FBI is currently shacked up with the Dems. and the CIA are back and forth whenever it suits them for just 2 examples. The days of non partisanship are over. We would be better off just getting rid of the party system and everyone working together or youre booted out of govt. but thats never going to happen and unrealistic.

Attached: 1553302131455.jpg (1024x977, 137K)

You just described a one-party system, which, believe me, you don't want.

25% tariffs on friday! have fun paying those cuck americans. China #1, Hillarys gash 2020, 9/11 was a republican job

Russia has been, and always will be a country of absolute faggots.

Attached: proofster.jpg (800x450, 41K)

Attached: 1555347204435.jpg (450x418, 44K)

Attached: 1441080414126_u18chan.jpg (1024x745, 133K)

Attached: 09Trumpo-583f27ae1f489__700.jpg (700x546, 106K)