And again, Trump took NO ACTION. There was NO ACTION taken - nothing was done. He asked him to do it, he explained that if he would be ordered to do it he would resign, and Trump decided not to give that order. Hence no action was taken. — Agustino
Yeah, disobeying the President of the United States, as someone under him, does give comfort to the Enemies of the country. — Agustino
Instead of holding Trump to account, Republicans are joining him in a cynical attempt to tarnish the FBI and undermine the criminal investigation into Russian election meddling.
Aided by the conspiracy mongers at Fox News, they have promoted a crackpot theory that there was a “secret society” within the FBI trying to bring down Trump. The zany conspiracy story involves two FBI officials, Peter Strzok and Lisa Page, and text messages they exchanged during the 2016 campaign. These were leaked to the press after the justice department turned them over to Congress.
Some of the messages can be read as mocking Trump – in one, he is called an “idiot”. Mueller demoted Strzok, who had been one of his top counterintelligence experts, from his Trump-Russia investigation as a result. Strzok had led the FBI’s Hillary Clinton email investigation so the notion of him being a pro-Democratic mole is, simply, ludicrous.
The Republicans want to destroy the public’s faith in the impartiality of the FBI, in order to undermine Mueller. Their aim is to insulate Trump against the obstruction of justice charges the special counsel is said to be contemplating.
This is political poison. It is toxic to democracy. It goes beyond anything contemplated by Richard Nixon and his supporters during Watergate. What can prevent the poison from infecting the country’s lifeblood?
Why? They are purposefully trying to lynch Trump in order to promote their left-wing bias, because they cannot get over the fact that the Democrats lost the election. There's nothing true in these accusations, all lies.Now you need to put down the Crack pipe... — Posty McPostface
No, that's not an action, that's a discussion that was moving towards taking a certain action.The action taken was telling McGahn to have Mueller fired. — Michael
What you are doing is spin, since you don't take the events as they happened, instead you twist them so that you can say Trump "ORDERED" Mueller to be fired and actually tried to obstruct justice. No he did not - he contemplated it, but at no time did he take or attempt to take an action that obstructed justice.This is all just nonsense spin. — Michael
I don't see how the document linked disproves what I said. Can you give a citation please that you think disproves it?No it doesn't. Again, you seem to just be fabricating legal knowledge apropos of nothing. Try actually doing some research, as I have been doing. Here's a good place to start. — Michael
What you are doing is spin, since you don't take the events as they happened, instead you twist them so that you can say Trump "ORDERED" Mueller to be fired and actually tried to obstruct justice. No he did not - he contemplated it, but at no time did he take or attempt to take an action that obstructed justice. — Agustino
Nope, those aren't facts. It's not a fact that Trump tried to obstruct justice. That is your silly spin. What is factual is that some people from the White House have declared that Trump initially told them to fire Mueller, or expressed his desire to do so. That's all.The news that reports the facts. — Michael
No, not in all contexts. Some discussions are facultative, merely done for the purpose of seeing what other people's positions are for example. Trump did not order Mueller to be fired, if he had done that, then McGahn would have resigned. He did not resign, hence Trump did not order it. He wanted to order it, and when he saw that McGahn and others don't support it, he didn't.Telling someone to do something isn't an action? — ProbablyTrue
No, it's not attempted obstruction. He considered taking a certain course of action, and was persuaded differently. Considering a course of action is different from actually embarking upon it.That may not count as obstruction of justice per se, but it clearly shows that he attempted it. — ProbablyTrue
It still remains a fact that he did not embark upon the process of firing Mueller. He chose not to at the end of the discussion with McGahn.Backing off under threat of great consequences is different than a casual discussion about whether he should or not. — ProbablyTrue
No, he was considering it, but he didn't actually try to do it. If he orders Mattis, and Mattis starts initiating the procedures, and then something goes wrong and they don't do it anymore, then he did order him.Trump orders Mattis to nuke NK. Mattis refuses. Trump didn't try to nuke NK? — ProbablyTrue
And by the way, if Mattis refuses in such a hypothetical case, that is unconstitutional. The generals CANNOT refuse the President in such a circumstance. They can try to convince him otherwise, but if it's an order, it cannot be refused - that would be treason.Trump orders Mattis to nuke NK. Mattis refuses. Trump didn't try to nuke NK? — ProbablyTrue
Get involved in philosophical discussions about knowledge, truth, language, consciousness, science, politics, religion, logic and mathematics, art, history, and lots more. No ads, no clutter, and very little agreement — just fascinating conversations.