Midnightrider
Well-Known Member
If trump can't get his AG to appoint a SC to look into Comey then Trump isn't a very good leader.
Trump appears to have committedTax Fraud
- Thread starter Sapidus
- Start date
If trump can't get his AG to appoint a SC to look into Comey then Trump isn't a very good leader.
hotbikermama40
New Member
Just have to remind myself that he's that stupid. Ignorant would be one thing; but he refuses to be wrong...ever, and willful ignorance is flat out stupid.
PsyOps
Pixelated
WTF is taking Mueller so long to indict Trump for collusion?
PsyOps
Pixelated
None of it being a crime... NONE OF IT.
Midnightrider
Well-Known Member
Then why did they lie about it?
Seriously. Why aren't they investigating Comey? I agree that he appears to have mishandled sensitive information at the very least and most likely taken federal property when he was fired. Why isn't trump pressuring the acting AG to appoint a SC to look into that leak?
Midnightrider
Well-Known Member
So trump can't get his justice department to work for him? Whose fault is that? Obama had no problem getting holder and lynch to do his bidding. GW had the full backing of justice. Justice is part if the executive branch, so trump s their boss.
PsyOps
Pixelated
If the lie is absolute evidence there was collusion, why hasn't anyone - ANYONE - been arrested and indicted yet?
People lie for a plethora of reasons. Why did Trump lie about Obamacre?
Hijinx
Well-Known Member
LMAO---this is funny.IF Trump could or should appoint a Special Counsel to investigate Comey. You and Dipstick sap would be screaming like raped apes.
PsyOps
Pixelated
Dude, you're asking the wrong guy. I don't work there. Maybe they haven't gotten to it. Maybe their initial inquiries are done yet. Maybe they have no intention of further dragging Comey through the mud. Maybe Trump isn't the vindictive type. Maybe Trump is just as corrupt as the rest of them, and folks at Comey's level are too big to prosecute. Maybe for the same reason he decided not to go after Hillary - which he should have. Maybe they have bigger fish to fry like north Korea, Iran, ISIS, the economy, jobs, taxes, repeal and replace...
Regardless... it is an establish fact that Comey illegally leak his memos to the press.
If Sessions did decide to investigate Comey, would you support it?
Last edited:
Hijinx
Well-Known Member
Lynch,Obama ,and Holder were brothers and Sisters of the Negroid persuasion. One would lie and the others swear to it.
Whites don't stick together like that.
That one should draw fire LMAO.
hotbikermama40
New Member
The AG isn't the president's lawyer. He, or she, is the lawyer for the US government. Obama having 'no problem' getting Holder or Lynch to do his bidding is not a good thing, necessarily. You really want to know what kinds of problems can come of the AG thinking that serving "at the President's pleasure" means serving as the President's lawyer?
Ever heard of the Palmer Raids?
PsyOps
Pixelated
The president can, at a minimum encourage the AG to launch an investigation. Now Trump, being about a ignorant as they come (in my estimation; and that's not a criticism, just an observation) about the law, he would have his legal team advise him on these things. Why he won't demand an investigation into Comey's actions is really beyond me. He should demand an investigation into the Clinton/Lynch tarmac meeting. And he should have reopened the Hillary email investigation and had it done right.
One of the primary jobs of all of these guys is to uphold our laws. Comey violated the law. Trump seems to play the same game as the rest of them - some people are just allowed to get away with breaking the law.
hotbikermama40
New Member
I hear you. I certainly thought by now, we'd have celebrated Hillary's Incarceration Day. It would make sense that Pres. Trump would be ignorant of the law, unless it is corporate law - and maybe even then. So I hear you, and I'm with you. The president can suggest/encourage an investigation into someone or something. It makes me wonder if, with all the Russia kerfuffle, if he himself has been advised to hold off so as not to appear that he's casting shade to detract attention from himself?
And also, aren't Comey, and now Lynch, too still under the microscope, so to speak?
No, only Democrats control their Attorney General. In the real world the AG is supposed to be independent from the President.
Hijinx
Well-Known Member
Well I suppose a President can ask that a guilty person be ignored, that her criminal acts be forgiven because she had no intent (in Comey mind) and that Lynch met with the husband of a former president and made a deal to not prosecute his wife.
I suppose this because we all saw it. A very few believe it is all coincidence, but those people aren't wrapped real tight.
This_person
Well-Known Member
You mean when he said, "I'm sure - I'm sure I did [meet with Russians!"
THAT lie?
Well, you know, that happens all the time. Just sitting there in your private plane, waiting to take off, when you see a friend's plane. "Oh, hey, it's my friend! Hi, Friend!" So everybody changes their flight plan and stops to have a chat about grandkids.
I swear the progs will believe anything that's fed to them.
Midnightrider
Well-Known Member
They lie for a plethora of reasons for sure, but usually to conceal something they have done wrong.
I would support it 100%. Prosecute all the leakers. That doesn't take away the info. It's like eating the apple, once you know you can't go back.
I think your established fact is probably not so established. Comey claimed the memos were his personal property. That doesn't jibe with my understanding, but it would explain why he didn't even get accused of doing anything illegal.
The president appoints, fires, and acts as the boss to the AG. They are part if the executive branch and thereby directly under the presidents control. If he says go investigate that's what they should do, unless that order was illegal/unconstitutional.
Republican presidents have firmly controlled their AGs in recent years.
Last edited:
PsyOps
Pixelated
And you are convinced he lied to cover up collusion. The ONLY way you can possibly come to this conclusion is that you WANT it to be this. There is no evidence to show Jr lied to cover up collusion. And if he is concealing something he did wrong; what was the wrong and why hasn't he been charged with a crime? I mean if I lie about something like this, and I did something illegal, you think the government would muck around with charging me?