Page 2 of 179 FirstFirst 12341252102 ... LastLast
Results 11 to 20 of 1788

Thread: Mueller Files first Charges (MUELLER CONTENT GOES HERE)

  1. #11
    Join Date
    Dec 2006
    Location
    Tennessee
    Posts
    11,762
    Feedback Score
    0
    You have to look at past legal precedence. In cases where something should never have happened (akin to "fruit of the forbidden tree" evidence), like an investigation started by created allegations and Trump's subsequent firing of Comey, is it really "obstructing justice" when there should have no need for justice to be taken in the first place?

    Scale it down a bit: a small-town mayor has enemies who don't like him and they make up some bullshit about him that is totally untrue (but that doesn't come out 'til later). The town's police chief begins an investigation of these trumped-up [pun intended] charges. The mayor fires the police chief and it subsequently comes out that all the accusations were fabricated lies. Has the mayor obstructed justice? I say no emphatically, because there never should have been an investigation in the first place. However, the law and order types will say it should have been sorted out in court.

    Another analogy: a cop is trying to arrest you for something you didn't do based on a false accusation. You resist and are charged with resisting arrest even though the original charges are proven to be false later. In that case we all know the resisting charge will stick, although I have a fundamental problem with that. Just like Trump's dossier, there should be chares and legal repercussions for the lying accusers.
    Last edited by ABNAK; 10-28-17 at 08:33.
    11C2P '83-'87
    Airborne Infantry
    F**k China!

  2. #12
    Join Date
    Jan 2012
    Location
    Bora Bora
    Posts
    6,047
    Feedback Score
    3 (100%)

    Mueller Files first Charges

    Trump has never been under investigation, so the obstruction charges are complete nonsense. It will be interesting to see how this plays out. If the deep state tries to take Trump out it may be time for serious action.
    Last edited by HKGuns; 10-28-17 at 10:57.

  3. #13
    Join Date
    Jul 2009
    Location
    North Carolina
    Posts
    5,149
    Feedback Score
    3 (100%)
    Quote Originally Posted by elephant View Post
    Your such a buzz kill! I'm going to start calling you Negative Nancy!
    Negative Natasha would be more appropriate. :-)

    Come on, as much as I would love to see them charged, you and I both know these people are untouchable. They live outside the laws that you and I have to abide by.
    I am part of that power which eternally wills evil, and eternally works good.

  4. #14
    Join Date
    Mar 2012
    Location
    Kansas
    Posts
    9,931
    Feedback Score
    1 (100%)
    Quote Originally Posted by ABNAK View Post
    You have to look at past legal precedence. In cases where something should never have happened (akin to "fruit of the forbidden tree" evidence), like an investigation started by created allegations and Trump's subsequent firing of Comey, is it really "obstructing justice" when there should have no need for justice to be taken in the first place?

    Scale it down a bit: a small-town mayor has enemies who don't like him and they make up some bullshit about him that is totally untrue (but that doesn't come out 'til later). The town's police chief begins an investigation of these trumped-up [pun intended] charges. The mayor fires the police chief and it subsequently comes out that all the accusations were fabricated lies. Has the mayor obstructed justice? I say no emphatically, because there never should have been an investigation in the first place. However, the law and order types will say it should have been sorted out in court.

    Another analogy: a cop is trying to arrest you for something you didn't do based on a false accusation. You resist and are charged with resisting arrest even though the original charges are proven to be false later. In that case we all know the resisting charge will stick, although I have a fundamental problem with that. Just like Trump's dossier, there should be chares and legal repercussions for the lying accusers.
    In the cases you use as examples in the last two paragraphs of your post there are issues beyond those on which you base your judgement. In the first instance, we cant have rule of law if elected officials can quash investigations - which is what firing someone who is investigating you accomplishes. The other variable in the first equation is, was the Chief operating in good faith? And yes, it should have been sorted out in court, that is what our system is based on, warts and all.

    In your second case, if the officer has PC to arrest, or is arresting on a warrant that the officer in good faith believes is valid, you are not justified in resisting. Doesn't mean you have to be pleased about the arrest.

    So I guess the choice we have is living in a system where we try to adhere to the rule of law, or under some tinpot dictator/emperor and hope you are always on the best side of the despot.
    Last edited by 26 Inf; 10-28-17 at 10:54.

  5. #15
    Join Date
    Mar 2017
    Location
    SeattHELL, Soviet Socialist S***hole of Washington
    Posts
    8,404
    Feedback Score
    5 (100%)
    Quote Originally Posted by ABNAK View Post
    Another analogy: a cop is trying to arrest you for something you didn't do based on a false accusation. You resist and are charged with resisting arrest even though the original charges are proven to be false later. In that case we all know the resisting charge will stick, although I have a fundamental problem with that. Just like Trump's dossier, there should be chares and legal repercussions for the lying accusers.
    Well, there are Filing False Police Report, False Arrest and Malicious Prosecution statutes on the books, but the problem is that like so many laws they go unenforced...
    <><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><>
    Ye best start believin' in Orwellian Dystopias, mateys... yer LIVIN' in one!--after Capt. Hector Barbossa
    Psalms 109:8, 43:1
    LIFE MEMBER - NRA & SAF; FPC MEMBER Not employed or sponsored by any manufacturer, distributor or retailer.

  6. #16
    Join Date
    Dec 2006
    Location
    Tennessee
    Posts
    11,762
    Feedback Score
    0
    Quote Originally Posted by Diamondback View Post
    Well, there are Filing False Police Report, False Arrest and Malicious Prosecution statutes on the books, but the problem is that like so many laws they go unenforced...
    Exactly.
    11C2P '83-'87
    Airborne Infantry
    F**k China!

  7. #17
    Join Date
    Dec 2006
    Location
    Tennessee
    Posts
    11,762
    Feedback Score
    0
    Quote Originally Posted by 26 Inf View Post
    In the cases you use as examples in the last two paragraphs of your post there are issues beyond those on which you base your judgement. In the first instance, we cant have rule of law if elected officials can quash investigations - which is what firing someone who is investigating you accomplishes. The other variable in the first equation is, was the Chief operating in good faith? And yes, it should have been sorted out in court, that is what our system is based on, warts and all.

    In your second case, if the officer has PC to arrest, or is arresting on a warrant that the officer in good faith believes is valid, you are not justified in resisting. Doesn't mean you have to be pleased about the arrest.

    So I guess the choice we have is living in a system where we try to adhere to the rule of law, or under some tinpot dictator/emperor and hope you are always on the best side of the despot.
    BUT, like the "fruit of the forbidden tree" any potential wrongdoing should be thrown out for an obstruction/resisting charge in the aftermath then. There HAS to be recourse. If they try to charge Trump with obstruction and the dossier proves to make the accusations which prompted the investigation false then no obstruction charges should be filed, period.

    Think about it: you could set up a hundred different scenarios where you maliciously and falsely accuse someone of something in the hopes that they'll f**k up in the ensuing process and have a resultant charge of some sort levied against them, when because of your lies there should NEVER HAVE BEEN ANY CHARGES IN THE FIRST PLACE! Certainly you see my point. Sure, law and order, yada yada. But if I was a judge I'd throw out ALL charges that resulted from the actions of the falsely accused (short of murder or such).
    11C2P '83-'87
    Airborne Infantry
    F**k China!

  8. #18
    Join Date
    Aug 2015
    Location
    Dallas
    Posts
    1,571
    Feedback Score
    12 (93%)
    Quote Originally Posted by HKGuns View Post
    If the deep state tries to take Trump out it may be time for serious action.
    where's the "like" button!!
    Last edited by elephant; 10-28-17 at 12:43.

  9. #19
    Join Date
    Jul 2006
    Location
    Texas
    Posts
    3,234
    Feedback Score
    1 (100%)
    Quote Originally Posted by elephant View Post
    Trump most likely had dealings with Russia at some time, but as the CEO of the Trump Organization, not Donald J. Trump, candidate for President of the United States.
    AFAIK, all real estate dealings fell through. It is common knowledge he tried.

  10. #20
    Join Date
    Jan 2013
    Location
    Black Hills, South Dakota
    Posts
    4,658
    Feedback Score
    0
    Trump should just preemptively pardon whoever Mueller charges, and make it well known that he will going forward. At this point this investigation is clearly a political witch hunt and nothing more. Screw Mueller, he’s a crooked ****, make all his efforts all for naught.

Page 2 of 179 FirstFirst 12341252102 ... LastLast

Bookmarks

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •