Keenan Loc: Central Coast California

You keep repeating this false assertion "In order for trump to obstruct justice there first must be a crime," over and over again, no matter how many times I've proven it false. I sometime wonder if it just goes in one ear and out the other. I've explained to you several times how Clinton was impeached for obstruction of justice, even though the underlying issue - a consensual sexual affair - was not a crime. So, as I asked you previously in this thread, how is it that you can continue to believe that "In order for trump to obstruct justice there first must be a crime," even though I pointed out to you about 5 times so far, the fact that Clinton was impeached for obstruction of justice when there was NOT a crime of the sexual affair which they were investigating. Please explain to me why it is you can't seem to retain this information, no matter how many times I remind you? Do you honesty not remember any of the discussions/debates we've had about this false claim of yours? Or, are you just not capable of changing your beliefs when they are proven wrong?

boberic Loc: Quiet Corner, Connecticut. Ex long Islander

Clinton was impeached for perjury and obstruction. The last time I looked perjury is a crime. Just look up the definition of obstruction of justice. A crime by somebody is necessary. The attempt to hide that crime is obstruction. No crime, no obstruction

Keenan Loc: Central Coast California

Wow. You really know how to spin things and invent new definitions in order to fit your false narratives. I'm impressed!

The obstruction of justice charge was completely independent of the perjury charge. One was not dependent on the other. Clinton could have been charged with one or the other, or both.

Both perjury and obstruction of justice are crimes that are committed during the course of investigating and prosecuting other possible crimes. In that way, perjury and obstruction of justice are in a very similar category, in that, both relate to the way a defendant behaves during the course of investigating other possible crimes, but are not dependent on charging the defendant with the other possible crimes.

You are now pulling a bait and switch maneuver, in which you are using a slight of hand to infer that the perjury charge was part of the other possible crimes being investigated, rather than an independent crime relating to the way Clinton behaved while being investigated for other possible crimes. The unspoken but false assumption you are using to spin it this way, is to pretend that Clinton first had to be charged with perjury before he could be charged with obstruction, and that if there were no perjury charge, he wouldn't have been charged with obstruction. Sorry Bob, nice try. But NOPE.

DaveO Loc: Northeast CT

I prefer to say that sometimes I am not terribly fast.

Texcaster Loc: Queensland

It's called a "closed information system'. "La la la la we can't hear you! Losers!"

https://www.theatlantic.com/politics/archive/2018/04/comey-memo-conservatives/558521/

"It’s another familiar story that conservatives have built themselves a closed information system. The system generates and repeats agreed fictions, and people are rewarded according to their ability to internalize, repeat, and embellish these fictions.

The system has revved itself into hyper-activity in the Trump years. And no Trump-era fiction has been more profoundly internalized and repeated within the closed conservative information system than the fiction that Trump is the victim of a plot by the FBI. This particular fiction is exceedingly complicated. Its details shift from day to day. It is most often repeated not as a coherent statement of checkable facts, but as an outraged sequence of bullet points: Fusion GPS! Deep State! The Democrats are the real colluders!" Atlantic

https://www.theatlantic.com/politics/archive/2018/04/comey-memo-conservatives/558521/

Bazbo Loc: Lisboa, Portugal

Probably nothing. Indicting a sitting President is of some questionable legality. Unless the dems had 67 votes in the Senate impeachment is a bag of hot air.

The only consequence for Trump are a crippled Presidency and an electoral reckoning in 2020.

Like most of the country, I was stunned to see Trump elected in the first place. I am trying to stay out of the prediction business.

Bazbo Loc: Lisboa, Portugal

Not necessarily true. Justice does not mean guilt. One can obstruct justice even if the accused is acquitted.

wilpharm Loc: Oklahoma

you expected the fat lying whore to be elected...so much for turdlo's expectations!!!!

Twardlow Loc: Arkansas

Hillary just owns you, does’t she?

Do you dream about her at night, perhaps erotic dreams?

Good luck with that.

boberic Loc: Quiet Corner, Connecticut. Ex long Islander

There have at least 2 reports by the justice department stating the a sitting president CANNOT be indicted. And any president can be impeached by a majority vote in the house. IE: Clinton. But it takes a 2/3 vote in the Senate to convict and remove a president from office

John_F Loc: Minneapolis, MN

Article II, Section 4 provides for Impeachment "convction of treason, bribery, or other high crimes and misdemeanors." I do not like Trump but have yet to see any "conviction." Before conviction charges must be laid and a judicial trial be held. It is true that he has had a shady past of various kinds, but do any rise to Art II, Sec 4.

wilpharm Loc: Oklahoma

hahahahahaha!!! you are the disgruntled lib that made a million posts about your fat lying whore!!! HAHAHAHAHAHa....

Bazbo Loc: Lisboa, Portugal

Isn't that I just said?

Twardlow Loc: Arkansas

Yes, of course. But remember, the investigatin is still in progress and nothing has been announced.

Such announcement will not be speculation by pundits or reporters, but charges filed by Mueller or a formal report to Congress by Mueller.

thom w Loc: San Jose, CA

I'm pretty impressed if you are right 100% of the time. Most of us mortals don't do quite that well.