(05-18-2017 01:46 PM)Redwingtom Wrote:  

(05-18-2017 01:16 PM)UofMstateU Wrote:  

(05-18-2017 11:31 AM)Fitbud Wrote:  

(05-18-2017 11:24 AM)UTSAMarineVet09 Wrote:  

(05-18-2017 11:21 AM)Fitbud Wrote:  That's right i said Unmasking is not illegal.

I stand by that statement and even provided a link from Fox News that proves I'm right.

Care to bet on that?

Naw... I dont do bets with fit floppers.

My position on this subject has never changed. I said from the beginning that unmasking is not illegal.

I never said anything about leaking.

Still waiting for someone to answer the question. When was Flynn's name leaked?

are your arms sore from moving the goalposts around and dancing around the bet?

For the love of God dude. He's not going to bet against the sun rising in the East. That's basically what you keep wanting him to do.

He agrees with you that leaking is a crime.

So ******* drop it. Good grief!

Drop what? The fact that what I stated was true, and the fact that FitFail tried to rebut what I stated by not stating what I stated?

Let me know if you, Fit, or Mork want to take me up on that lifetime ban. Or do you guys just want to keep moving the goalposts and dancing?

(05-18-2017 01:53 PM)UofMstateU Wrote:  

(05-18-2017 01:46 PM)Redwingtom Wrote:  

(05-18-2017 01:16 PM)UofMstateU Wrote:  

(05-18-2017 11:31 AM)Fitbud Wrote:  

(05-18-2017 11:24 AM)UTSAMarineVet09 Wrote:  Naw... I dont do bets with fit floppers.

My position on this subject has never changed. I said from the beginning that unmasking is not illegal.

I never said anything about leaking.

Still waiting for someone to answer the question. When was Flynn's name leaked?

are your arms sore from moving the goalposts around and dancing around the bet?

For the love of God dude. He's not going to bet against the sun rising in the East. That's basically what you keep wanting him to do.

He agrees with you that leaking is a crime.

So ******* drop it. Good grief!

Drop what? The fact that what I stated was true, and the fact that FitFail tried to rebut what I stated by not stating what I stated?

Let me know if you, Fit, or Mork want to take me up on that lifetime ban. Or do you guys just want to keep moving the goalposts and dancing?

The fact that NO ONE is denying what you said is true!

Again, leaking is a crime. We've told you this time and time again but all you want to do is troll for more replies.

And you moved the goal posts, not anyone else. He said "unmasking is not illegal "and you came back with "unmasking and leaking a private citizens name is illegal."

It's right here in Post #24 from this thread.

THEY'RE TWO DIFFERENT THINGS! He and everyone else agrees that leaking the name is a crime, so why would anyone bet you on something that contains that fact?

You're the only one dancing here. So again, would you kindly knock it off please?

Well, this thread has gone to hell.

Funny how you guys are digging so deep to find a counter argument. Don't remember you giving much of a damn when sessions neglected to mention his meeting with the Russians. Just a bunch of excuses.

(05-18-2017 10:02 AM)UofMstateU Wrote:  

(05-18-2017 09:59 AM)Fitbud Wrote:  

(05-18-2017 09:54 AM)UofMstateU Wrote:  

(05-18-2017 09:47 AM)Fitbud Wrote:  

(05-18-2017 09:41 AM)VA49er Wrote:  So, that negates the whole "obstruction of justice" thing. Works both ways I guess.

No one in their right mind is saying this is Obstruction of Justice.

Correct. Which is why the stinky pants libturds need to learn something, and fast. The ONLY crime we know committed is the illegal unmasking and leaking of Flynn's name to the media. And that was on the Obama administration.

We also know that Rosenstein wanted Comey fired immediately. He likely determined several things:

1. Comey had screwed up the prosecution of Hillary's email server, and it needs to be fixed

2. Comey refused to investigate Hillary's false statements to congress, requiring Chaffetz to file a request to do so.

3. Comey failed to investigate the Lynch/Clinton tarmac meeting as required by law to do.

4. Comey failed to investigate the Obama administration official who unmasked and leaked Flynn's name, as required by law to do.

5. Leaks were coming out of the FBI in which Comey was not investigating or stopping

Let's see what kind of leaks of fake news happens now that there is a special counsel snooping around.

Wrong again. Unmasking is not illegal.

Next topic

I will bet you a lifetime ban from this site that unmasking and leaking a private citizens name is illegal. Are you ready to man up and take that bet?

Damnit, beat me to it.

(05-18-2017 03:15 PM)TigerBlue4Ever Wrote:  

(05-18-2017 10:02 AM)UofMstateU Wrote:  

(05-18-2017 09:59 AM)Fitbud Wrote:  

(05-18-2017 09:54 AM)UofMstateU Wrote:  

(05-18-2017 09:47 AM)Fitbud Wrote:  No one in their right mind is saying this is Obstruction of Justice.

Correct. Which is why the stinky pants libturds need to learn something, and fast. The ONLY crime we know committed is the illegal unmasking and leaking of Flynn's name to the media. And that was on the Obama administration.

We also know that Rosenstein wanted Comey fired immediately. He likely determined several things:

1. Comey had screwed up the prosecution of Hillary's email server, and it needs to be fixed

2. Comey refused to investigate Hillary's false statements to congress, requiring Chaffetz to file a request to do so.

3. Comey failed to investigate the Lynch/Clinton tarmac meeting as required by law to do.

4. Comey failed to investigate the Obama administration official who unmasked and leaked Flynn's name, as required by law to do.

5. Leaks were coming out of the FBI in which Comey was not investigating or stopping

Let's see what kind of leaks of fake news happens now that there is a special counsel snooping around.

Wrong again. Unmasking is not illegal.

Next topic

I will bet you a lifetime ban from this site that unmasking and leaking a private citizens name is illegal. Are you ready to man up and take that bet?

Damnit, beat me to it.

and getting them to take that bet is like herding cats.

Wasn't the question posed to Comey about whether the AG or senior DoJ officials have asked to stop an investigation?

If that's the case, then isn't the whole premise of this thread flawed?

(05-18-2017 04:13 PM)ARandomHerdFan Wrote:  Wasn't the question posed to Comey about whether the AG or senior DoJ officials have asked to stop an investigation?

If that's the case, then isn't the whole premise of this thread flawed?

I understood it to mean they were asked, by someone else, to stop an investigation. Not, did they themselves ask to stop an investigation.

(05-18-2017 10:01 AM)UTSAMarineVet09 Wrote:  

(05-18-2017 09:47 AM)Fitbud Wrote:  

(05-18-2017 09:41 AM)VA49er Wrote:  

(05-18-2017 09:26 AM)Redwingtom Wrote:  

(05-18-2017 08:55 AM)Paul M Wrote:  I wouldn't call asking pressuring.

Ding...ding...ding. We have a winner.

Comey likely laughed off the suggestion knowing that trump's question was meaningless to him.

So, that negates the whole "obstruction of justice" thing. Works both ways I guess.

No one in their right mind is saying this is Obstruction of Justice.

yeah... except for you.

(05-17-2017 09:30 AM)Fitbud Wrote:  And there is still a possibility that a lot of that happened. Remember, Trump didn't just ask Comey to let Flynn go, he also fired him and admitted he did it because of the "Russia thing". All of that taken in context begins to build a case for someone if they wanted to pursue impeachment for obstruction of justice.

http://csnbbs.com/thread-817960.html

(05-17-2017 09:28 AM)Fitbud Wrote:  I agree. This conversation by itself is not enough to prove obstruction of justice. However, taken in context with everything else that has happened like the firing of Comey soon after begins to make a case to that end.

If someone wanted to actually impeach the President for Obstruction of Justice, there are beginning to make a case now.

http://csnbbs.com/thread-817944-post-143...id14341896

(05-12-2017 09:59 AM)Fitbud Wrote:  Trump’s tweet seems to stem from his frustration over the fallout from his firing of FBI Director James Comey earlier this week. Trump told NBC on Thursday that he was looking for an excuse to fire Comey, who was leading an investigation into the Trump campaign’s ties to Russia.

Comey could testify during an investigation into the Trump campaign’s ties to Russia, meaning the president’s tweet could be seen as witness intimidation.

Linky



Obstruction of Justice?
Witness intimidation?

http://csnbbs.com/thread-817645-post-143...id14331377

lmao

Sent from my SM-J700T using CSNbbs mobile app