What's new
Fantasy Football - Footballguys Forums

Welcome to Our Forums. Once you've registered and logged in, you're primed to talk football, among other topics, with the sharpest and most experienced fantasy players on the internet.

The Russia Investigation: Trump Pardons Flynn (10 Viewers)

saintfool said:
POTUS is directing AG Barr to withhold the full Mueller report. POTUS is directing Mnuchin to withhold his tax returns. POTUS has directed members of his staff - past and present - to refuse Congressional testimony.

This WH has stonewalled this Congress time and again. These refusals at transparency, oversight, and accountability - which are within the purview of Congress - suggest the cover-up. This is not a "manufactured crisis" by Dems anymore than it is a self-inflicted wound on the part of this administration. 
Click to expand...
Federal law is directing Barr to withhold the handful of sentences from the Mueller report due to grand jury secrecy which is an important legal principle.

I am not comfortable with the idea of Congress having access to the tax records of individual citizens.  I think its a gross violation of privacy.

 
Rove! said:
Federal law is directing Barr to withhold the handful of sentences from the Mueller report due to grand jury secrecy which is an important legal principle.

I am not comfortable with the idea of Congress having access to the tax records of individual citizens.  I think its a gross violation of privacy.
Click to expand...
Um they aren't asking for tax returns from individual citizens.  They are asking for (and following law) tax records of the President of the United States.  What part of that makes you uncomfortable??

 
some guy nobody ever heard of tried to bribe a guy that Trump fired from his campaign 

Drumpf is surely finished now

.

 
Last edited by a moderator:
yak651 said:
Um they aren't asking for tax returns from individual citizens.  They are asking for (and following law) tax records of the President of the United States.  What part of that makes you uncomfortable??
Click to expand...
Where does this Legislative power stop?  If they can ask for the returns of the President, why not the Vice President?  Secretary of State?  Budget Director?  Other US Congressmen?  President of the NRA?  Talk show host?  Late night host they don't like?  

 
Last edited by a moderator:
  • Laughing
Reactions: Ned
turnerj0 said:
How about all of these things that we know are true:

1)      He hired and/or employed all of the following:

     a.      A National Security Adviser indicted and who pleaded guilty to a federal crime

     b.      A campaign chairman who was found guilty of multiple federal crimes including Conspiracy Against the United States

     c.       A deputy campaign chairman who pleaded guilty to federal crimes including Conspiracy Against the United States

     d.      A foreign policy advisor who pleaded guilty to a federal crime

     e.      A Secretary of the Interior who was forced out of office due to multiple investigations into ethics violations

     f.        An EPA administrator who was under 14 separate federal investigations during his tenure

     g.      An Acting Attorney General who brazenly ignored the advice of Department of Justice ethics officials

     h.      An Attorney General who is on video lying to Congress (he still employs him)

     i.        A press secretary who has admitted under penalty of perjury to lying to the American people (he still employs her)

2)      He has had his personal lawyer testify under oath that he directed the commission of federal crimes designed to influence the election

3)      He pardoned a political ally convicted of contempt of court without going through the usual process or providing any legitimate explanation for the pardon

4)      On multiple occasions he has attempted to put his thumb on the scales of justice by making statements about ongoing investigations and trials, and in some cases even commenting directly on witnesses and their families

5)      According to the Office of Special Counsel report, there is substantial evidence of 10 instances in which he obstructed justice

6)      He offered a pardon to a Customs and Border Protection agent if that person agreed to break the law

7)      He had his lawyer hire an IT firm to rig election polls in his favor

😎 He pressured the Justice Department to try to block an AT&T-Time Warner merger

9)      He bypassed usual process and the recommendations of intelligence officials by ordering that potentially compromised supporters, including his son-in-law, be inappropriately given security clearances

10)  He was complicit in helping to cover up the brutal murder of an American journalist by the Crown Prince of Saudi Arabia.
Click to expand...
He routinely hosts foreign entities in his hotels and resorts gaining personally from thier desire for influence.

He borrowed money from a bank in florida and promptly named their CEO to a federal reserve post. 

He paid off a porn start and a playmate to help win an election. 

His daughter is getting patents for voting machines and copyrights for products in China with his knowledge while serving as a senior staff member.   

Half or more of his cabinet has been embroiled in fraud or ethics issues. 

His adminsitration waived 25 security clearance denials including for his daughter and son in law. 

He self deals from his own foundation. 

He actively has ungodly amounts of conflicts of interest due to not divesting his assets or having a true blind trust. 

His son in law is making fishy deals with the Saudi's.

Jeez thats just off the top of my head. It'd be a full time job to track all the graft. 

 
Rove! said:
Where does this Legislative power stop?  If they can ask for the returns of the President, why not the Vice President?  Secretary of State?  Budget Director?  Other US Congressmen?  President of the NRA?  Talk show hist?  Late night host they don't like?  
Click to expand...
Yep. They can do that. 

 
Rove! said:
Where does this Legislative power stop?  If they can ask for the returns of the President, why not the Vice President?  Secretary of State?  Budget Director?  Other US Congressmen?  President of the NRA?  Talk show host?  Late night host they don't like?  
Click to expand...
Do they have a reason to?  

 
saintfool said:
try to keep up. many dems can accept the Mueller Report conclusions that Russian interference in the 2016 election - for the benefit of Trump - can be proven as a conspiracy but not a ""Criminal conspiracy". it's disappointing but whatever. what is clear from the Mueller Report is obstruction charges are valid and worth considering but should examined in the full context of the report itself. Trump blocking these perfectly valid efforts from Congress - as he does with every attempt at oversight, transparency and accountability from the beginning - amount to the "cover up" claims from Dems and other non-MAGA folks. let Mueller and his report speak for themselves instead of attempting to stop it. he has created this stand-off by his own irrational disposition. 
Click to expand...
Please read the Mueller report ASAP you you can have an informed opinion on this.  It is clear you are just spitting out false talking points.

 
Rove! said:
Where does this Legislative power stop?  If they can ask for the returns of the President, why not the Vice President?  Secretary of State?  Budget Director?  Other US Congressmen?  President of the NRA?  Talk show host?  Late night host they don't like?  
Click to expand...
I like how you threw in the last three to make it seem like the other requests wouldn't be perfectly appropriate. Nice work.

 
turnerj0 said:
How about all of these things that we know are true:

1)      He hired and/or employed all of the following:

     a.      A National Security Adviser indicted and who pleaded guilty to a federal crime

     b.      A campaign chairman who was found guilty of multiple federal crimes including Conspiracy Against the United States

     c.       A deputy campaign chairman who pleaded guilty to federal crimes including Conspiracy Against the United States

     d.      A foreign policy advisor who pleaded guilty to a federal crime

     e.      A Secretary of the Interior who was forced out of office due to multiple investigations into ethics violations

     f.        An EPA administrator who was under 14 separate federal investigations during his tenure

     g.      An Acting Attorney General who brazenly ignored the advice of Department of Justice ethics officials

     h.      An Attorney General who is on video lying to Congress (he still employs him)

     i.        A press secretary who has admitted under penalty of perjury to lying to the American people (he still employs her)

2)      He has had his personal lawyer testify under oath that he directed the commission of federal crimes designed to influence the election

3)      He pardoned a political ally convicted of contempt of court without going through the usual process or providing any legitimate explanation for the pardon

4)      On multiple occasions he has attempted to put his thumb on the scales of justice by making statements about ongoing investigations and trials, and in some cases even commenting directly on witnesses and their families

5)      According to the Office of Special Counsel report, there is substantial evidence of 10 instances in which he obstructed justice

6)      He offered a pardon to a Customs and Border Protection agent if that person agreed to break the law

7)      He had his lawyer hire an IT firm to rig election polls in his favor

😎 He pressured the Justice Department to try to block an AT&T-Time Warner merger

9)      He bypassed usual process and the recommendations of intelligence officials by ordering that potentially compromised supporters, including his son-in-law, be inappropriately given security clearances

10)  He was complicit in helping to cover up the brutal murder of an American journalist by the Crown Prince of Saudi Arabia.
Click to expand...
I would like to add when he was openly soliciting bribes from publicly traded companies for favorable treatment in mergers. 

Of course all of this is a wasted effort because Noonan won't bother to read or reply. His mind is made up if or is only here to report people. Which, IMO, there should be a spreadsheet mods can refer to that shows which posters are banned and why. If a large % of posters are given teh TO because of a particular poster reporting them, perhaps they're not the problem

 
So weird that not one of you know what Pelosi is talking about.  What is Trump trying to cover up?

Mueller Investigation = 🍔

But, but, but, I know he is guilty.  Let's get his tax returns and subpoena folks already interviewed by Mueller so we can finally hope to find something!

Such an embarrassment.   

 
Don't Noonan said:
So weird that not one of you know what Pelosi is talking about.  What is Trump trying to cover up?

Mueller Investigation = 🍔

But, but, but, I know he is guilty.  Let's get his tax returns and subpoena folks already interviewed by Mueller so we can finally hope to find something!

Such an embarrassment.   
Click to expand...
I’m glad you’re embarrassed anyway.  That’s a step. 

 
turnerj0 said:
How about all of these things that we know are true:

1)      He hired and/or employed all of the following:

     a.      A National Security Adviser indicted and who pleaded guilty to a federal crime

     b.      A campaign chairman who was found guilty of multiple federal crimes including Conspiracy Against the United States

     c.       A deputy campaign chairman who pleaded guilty to federal crimes including Conspiracy Against the United States

     d.      A foreign policy advisor who pleaded guilty to a federal crime

     e.      A Secretary of the Interior who was forced out of office due to multiple investigations into ethics violations

     f.        An EPA administrator who was under 14 separate federal investigations during his tenure

     g.      An Acting Attorney General who brazenly ignored the advice of Department of Justice ethics officials

     h.      An Attorney General who is on video lying to Congress (he still employs him)

     i.        A press secretary who has admitted under penalty of perjury to lying to the American people (he still employs her)

2)      He has had his personal lawyer testify under oath that he directed the commission of federal crimes designed to influence the election

3)      He pardoned a political ally convicted of contempt of court without going through the usual process or providing any legitimate explanation for the pardon

4)      On multiple occasions he has attempted to put his thumb on the scales of justice by making statements about ongoing investigations and trials, and in some cases even commenting directly on witnesses and their families

5)      According to the Office of Special Counsel report, there is substantial evidence of 10 instances in which he obstructed justice

6)      He offered a pardon to a Customs and Border Protection agent if that person agreed to break the law

7)      He had his lawyer hire an IT firm to rig election polls in his favor

😎 He pressured the Justice Department to try to block an AT&T-Time Warner merger

9)      He bypassed usual process and the recommendations of intelligence officials by ordering that potentially compromised supporters, including his son-in-law, be inappropriately given security clearances

10)  He was complicit in helping to cover up the brutal murder of an American journalist by the Crown Prince of Saudi Arabia.
Click to expand...
This will be ignored.  He does this in the FFA too.

Oh, and :lmao:  at the 8 turning into the sunglass smiley.  

 
boots11234 said:
timschochet said:
1. I’m not. These poor people don’t threaten it, and never have. 

2. None. I try to help when I can though. 
Click to expand...
Say that to the victims who’ve been killed by illegals. Just save one life right?  
Click to expand...
Our society accepts certain risks in exchange for certain benefits. We accept the risk of death by gun in exchange for the freedom to own a gun. We accept the risk of death by car in exchange for the freedom to drive. We accept the risk of alcoholism in exchange for the freedom to drink.

And we accept the risk of getting killed by an illegal in exchange for cheaper products.

This is why Republicans have refused to close the loopholes on illegal immigration for the past 165 years. And it's why Trump wants a wall but doesn't want to shut down the airports. It's why Reagan gave amnesty to illegals. And it's why the wall won't be built.

 
Don't Noonan said:
So weird that not one of you know what Pelosi is talking about.  What is Trump trying to cover up?

Mueller Investigation = 🍔

But, but, but, I know he is guilty.  Let's get his tax returns and subpoena folks already interviewed by Mueller so we can finally hope to find something!

Such an embarrassment.   
Click to expand...
Everyone knows what he is trying to cover up.  More digging into the multiple times he tried to obstruct justice.  For example, he doesn't want McGhan testifying because it will expose how he asked him to lie and fabricate evidence to fire Mueller.  Most of his supporters have no idea, because they have not and will not read the report, which is terrible for Trump.  He continues to tell his sycophants that there was "No Obstruction!"  Which is a lie.  There is tonnes of it and it is all set out in the report.  

But if McGhan (and others) give evidence in congress, it will be all over tv and social media.  Soundbite after soundbite.  Which is how his supporters consume information.  Trump knows this and is trying to stop it all from happening.

 
It might worth considering some of the strategy behind Pelosi's stance. For instance how can you believe that a president has violated his constitutional oath, that he has committed crimes, and may even not be of sound mind, and not be for impeachment?

I think one possibility is that the Senate GOP may be lying in wait to issue an acquittal even before the House charges Trump. Huey Long did this and it was remarkably effective. I know, another planet and age ago,  but Long did effectively take over control of the state after that happened. He went on to have unlimited power. I'm not suggesting that exact thing would happen here, but what it would do, if the Dems move too fast, is limit the political impact of investigations and also nullify the very act of impeaching, even before it happens. The GOP could do this with a simple public letter saying they will not convict under any circumstances. This may be what Pelosi is concerned about. As it is now, the Dems can move forward with the HIC investigation and ultimately a final report, the joint investigation with the SIC and a final report there, the HJC, and the other committees (Oversight, Tax), and continue to gather evidence, especially the full Mueller report, and hold hearings.

 - eta - Otoh, impeachment would vastly expand Congress' power to obtain evidence and then would also offer the opportunity to present it to the public, which is what happened with Nixon.

 
Last edited by a moderator:
zoonation said:
Everyone knows what he is trying to cover up.  More digging into the multiple times he tried to obstruct justice.  For example, he doesn't want McGhan testifying because it will expose how he asked him to lie and fabricate evidence to fire Mueller.  Most of his supporters have no idea, because they have not and will not read the report, which is terrible for Trump.  He continues to tell his sycophants that there was "No Obstruction!"  Which is a lie.  There is tonnes of it and it is all set out in the report.  

But if McGhan (and others) give evidence in congress, it will be all over tv and social media.  Soundbite after soundbite.  Which is how his supporters consume information.  Trump knows this and is trying to stop it all from happening.
Click to expand...
No, you aren't answering the question.  

 
SaintsInDome2006 said:
It might worth considering some of the strategy behind Pelosi's stance. For instance how can you believe that a president has violated his constitutional oath, that he has committed crimes, and may even not be of sound mind, and not be for impeachment?

I think one possibility is that the Senate GOP may be lying in wait to issue an acquittal even before the House charges Trump. Huey Long did this and it was remarkably effective. I know, another planet and age ago,  but Long did effectively take over control of the state after that happened. He went on to have unlimited power. I'm not suggesting that exact thing would happen here, but what it would do, if the Dems move too fast, is limit the political impact of investigations and also nullify the very act of impeaching, even before it happens. The GOP could do this with a simple public letter saying they will not convict under any circumstances. This may be what Pelosi is concerned about. As it is now, the Dems can move forward with the HIC investigation and ultimately a final report, the joint investigation with the SIC and a final report there, the HJC, and the other committees (Oversight, Tax), and continue to gather evidence, especially the full Mueller report, and hold hearings.
Click to expand...
Damn. I'd never heard about this Long stuff.  If this is indeed Pelosi's rationale for not bringing the hammer down, then I will retract my statements calling her a coward in violation of her oath of office.

Also, SiD, since my last post regarding this was deleted, well done posting this without responding to certain posters who are only here to stir the pot, be jerks, report people, and waste you and others' time. You are a credit to this forum.

 
Don't Noonan said:
Trump is playing chess and Pelosi is playing checkers.
Click to expand...
Its particularly unfortunate that you chose to post this today of all days. 

Pelosi is absolutely running rings around Trump, doubling down today by publicly questioning his competence. I can’t recall when anyone was played on a national stage the way that she is playing him. 

 
timschochet said:
Its particularly unfortunate that you chose to post this today of all days. 

Pelosi is absolutely running rings around Trump, doubling down today by publicly questioning his competence. I can’t recall when anyone was played on a national stage the way that she is playing him. 
Click to expand...
:yes:

She has him jumping through hoops.

Awaiting the Twitter storm and meltdown over her suggestion that he needs an intervention.

 
SaintsInDome2006 said:
Yes.

I guess what gets me is that this is Manafort trading money for policy influence. Calk was under consideration for Under Secretary of the Army.
Click to expand...
Kushner Replied ‘On It!' After Manafort Sought Post for Banker

The Calk indictment lays out how Manafort, a former Trump campaign chairman, faced mounting financial pressure and turned to Calk’s Federal Savings Bank for a series of loans.

Seeking $6.5 million, Manafort emailed a loan officer and Calk on Nov. 30, 2016, saying the “clock is ticking,” according to the indictment. That same day, Manafort recommended Calk to the unidentified senior member of the presidential transition team’s executive committee.

“The next day, Transition Official-1 forwarded this recommendation to three other representatives” of the transition team, recommending Calk, prosecutors wrote. The Chicago banker’s name was entered into a tracking spreadsheet maintained by the transition team.
Click to expand...

 
Justin Amash‏Verified account @justinamash

Some examples in Mueller’s report of the president’s obstructing and impeding the investigation include:

Justin Amash‏Verified account @justinamash 31m31 minutes ago

1. Trump asked the FBI director to stop investigating Michael Flynn, who had been his campaign adviser and national security adviser, and who had already committed a crime by lying to the FBI.

2. After AG Sessions recused himself from the Russian investigation on the advice of DoJ ethics lawyers, Trump directly asked Sessions to reverse his recusal so that he could retain control over the investigation and help the president.

3. Trump directed the White House counsel, Don McGahn, to have Special Counsel Mueller removed on the basis of pretextual conflicts of interest that Trump’s advisers had already told him were “ridiculous” and could not justify removing the special counsel.

4. When that event was publicly reported, Trump asked that McGahn make a public statement and create a false internal record stating that Trump had not asked him to fire the special counsel, and suggested that McGahn would be fired if he did not comply.

5. Trump asked Corey Lewandowski, his former campaign manager, to tell AG Sessions to limit the special counsel’s investigation only to future election interference. Trump said Lewandowski should tell Sessions he was fired if he would not meet with him.

6. Trump used his pardon power to influence his associates, including Paul Manafort and Michael Cohen, not to fully cooperate with the investigation.

Trump, through his own statements—such as complaining about people who "flip" and talk to investigators—and through communications between his personal counsel and Manafort/Cohen, gave the impression that they would be pardoned if they did not fully cooperate with investigators.

Manafort ultimately breached an agreement to cooperate with investigators, and Cohen offered false testimony to Congress, including denying that the Trump Tower Moscow project had extended to June 2016 and that he and Trump had discussed traveling to Russia during the campaign.

Both men have been convicted for offering false information, and Manafort’s lack of cooperation left open some significant questions, such as why exactly he provided an associate in Ukraine with campaign polling data, which he expected to be shared with a Russian oligarch.

Some of the president’s actions were inherently corrupt. Other actions were corrupt—and therefore impeachable—because the president took them to serve his own interests.

The president has authority to fire federal officials, direct his subordinates, and grant pardons, but he cannot do so for corrupt purposes; otherwise, he would always be allowed to shut down any investigation into himself or his associates, which would put him above the law.

 
zoonation said:
Everyone knows what he is trying to cover up.  More digging into the multiple times he tried to obstruct justice.  For example, he doesn't want McGhan testifying because it will expose how he asked him to lie and fabricate evidence to fire Mueller.  Most of his supporters have no idea, because they have not and will not read the report, which is terrible for Trump.  He continues to tell his sycophants that there was "No Obstruction!"  Which is a lie.  There is tonnes of it and it is all set out in the report.  

But if McGhan (and others) give evidence in congress, it will be all over tv and social media.  Soundbite after soundbite.  Which is how his supporters consume information.  Trump knows this and is trying to stop it all from happening.
Click to expand...
Sorry, I was busy and unable to answer more clearly earlier.  Your argument so I understand is that Trump is trying to cover up the publically available Mueller report?  Do you not believe Mueller did a good job and somehow Congress is going to unearth some wrongdoing?

 
timschochet said:
Its particularly unfortunate that you chose to post this today of all days. 

Pelosi is absolutely running rings around Trump, doubling down today by publicly questioning his competence. I can’t recall when anyone was played on a national stage the way that she is playing him. 
Click to expand...
She clearly got influenced by the extreme left and made a fool of herself yesterday.  Up until then she was holding her own.  Cover up,  :lmao:

 
Don't Noonan said:
So weird that not one of you know what Pelosi is talking about.  What is Trump trying to cover up?

Mueller Investigation = 🍔

But, but, but, I know he is guilty.  Let's get his tax returns and subpoena folks already interviewed by Mueller so we can finally hope to find something!

Such an embarrassment.   
Click to expand...
I haven't posted in here much recently but i'll take a crack.

There's a large number of crimes under investigation.  

First the Mueller report investigated Russian "collusion" or whatever you want to call it.  Mueller was unable to conclusively show coordination between the activities, but did show activities between Russia and the trump campaign that appear to have been timed to benefit both parties.  

This is relevant because the Mueller report clearly shows evidence of obstruction of justice.  Whether that's enough to convict is a separate conversation - there's no question that there's substantial evidence.  If that obstruction prevented Mueller from getting evidence of coordination, that's a really big deal.  I understand that you give Trump the benefit of the doubt, but there is a good reason that "obstruction" is being taken so seriously in this case. At minimum there were attempts to delay or disrupt the investigation.  That's a big deal in and of itself.  But if it was done to prevent discovery of underlying crimes, that may be the biggest cover up in US history.  

As for financial records, a number of crimes have been alleged and/or charged related to his finances.  I'm sure you're familiar with the stormy daniels campaign finance allegations.  You're also aware that Cohen provided information about other possible crimes such as fraudulently reporting the value of assets when paying taxes and acquiring loans using those assets.  His tax returns and financial records provide evidence of possible crimes before and after he was in office.  They may also provide evidence of inappropriate payments - from foreign governments, or campaign finance violations, or for pay to play politics, or emoluments.  

And emoluments are constitutionally prohibited.  That's absolutely something Congress should be looking at.  We're already seeing examples of inappropriate relationships including a bank CEO who gave Manafort huge loans to get political access. We've also seen millions and millions of dollars spent at mar a lago and the trump hotels, some of which may not be legally appropriate.  

Considering that trump just implied that a meeting on infrastructure would be canceled until the cancellation of a congressional investigation into himself, there's a clear pattern of him using his political power for personal gain.  

And at least one of is attempts to tie up investigative requests in the courts have been dismissed as frivolous - not illegal, but an attempt to make it more difficult to investigate.  

So I think it's reasonable to say that continued investigation is warranted, and that trump continues to attempt to make it difficult to do so.  That is literally the definition of a cover up.  

I don't expect a response, but thought your question deserved an answer. 

 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Similar threads

dozer
****Official DOJ Investigation into Trump, Fake Electors, Fraud, Etc.****
5 6 7
Replies
348
Views
11K
Sabertooth
Sabertooth
dozer
Ret. Lt. Gen Mike Flynn
2 3
Replies
104
Views
3K
Genxersrule
G
G
Mueller Investigation - Common Misconceptions (1-10)
Replies
0
Views
196
Guest
G

Users who are viewing this thread

Total: 10 (members: 0, guests: 10)
Top