LOL Your best counter-point is "He lied" ??? BWAHAHAHAHAH Fucking weak and pathetic.
You forgot to adddress:
H. The President's Further Efforts to Have the Attorney General Take Over the Investigation
I. The President Orders McGahn to Deny that the President Tried to Fire the Special Counsel
J. The President's Conduct Towards Flynn, Manafort, **REDACTED**
K. The President's Conduct Involving Michael Cohen
L. Overarching Factual Issues
Actually you CAN obstruct an investigation into whether a crime was committed. They are OBSTRUCTING THE PROCESS. Whether that process delivers a conviction or not, the process must not be impeded or tampered with.
For the record, I am so glad that the 'genetically superior' gambling degens on this site are able to offer their expert legal-mansplaining services.
You guys are a bunch of twats and your opinion thankfully means SHIT because in the real world of LAW and ORDER there are consequences for obstruction and contempt.
You think this shit is going away any time soon? The impeachment train is just getting started and I'm loving every minute of you Forever-Trumpers losing your mind over it.
And there you go bringing it up again. What is this the 5th or 6th time you have gone there? Almost like it's all you think about.
You're a sick fuck-O.
Ding-donger claims he's all for due process. Well, these bogus charges would be laughed out of every court. That's why Mueller punted, but the fringe conspiracy nutters are too ding-dong to figure that out.
And there you go bringing it up again. What is this the 5th or 6th time you have gone there? Almost like it's all you think about.
You're a sick fuck-O.
I am all for due process. That's what impeachment hearings are for -- to consider the evidence of obstruction provided by Mueller.
I know this stuff is hard to grasp with all the inbreeding and subpar education.
LOL Your best counter-point is "He lied" ??? BWAHAHAHAHAH Fucking weak and pathetic.
You forgot to adddress:
H. The President's Further Efforts to Have the Attorney General Take Over the Investigation
I. The President Orders McGahn to Deny that the President Tried to Fire the Special Counsel
J. The President's Conduct Towards Flynn, Manafort, **REDACTED**
K. The President's Conduct Involving Michael Cohen
L. Overarching Factual Issues
Actually you CAN obstruct an investigation into whether a crime was committed. They are OBSTRUCTING THE PROCESS. Whether that process delivers a conviction or not, the process must not be impeded or tampered with.
For the record, I am so glad that the 'genetically superior' gambling degens on this site are able to offer their expert legal-mansplaining services.
You guys are a bunch of twats and your opinion thankfully means SHIT because in the real world of LAW and ORDER there are consequences for obstruction and contempt.
You think this shit is going away any time soon? The impeachment train is just getting started and I'm loving every minute of you Forever-Trumpers losing your mind over it.
You mean like deleting subpoenaed emails and destroying cell phones with hammers?
[FONT=Verdana,Tahoma,Arial,Calibri,Geneva,sans-serif]And the Democrats want to impeach Trump. It doesn't get any better than that. [/FONT]Isn't it sad how quickly the shitheel hypocrite liberals change the definition of "obstruction of justice"?
GOWDY: Secretary Clinton said she never sent or received any classified information over her classified email, was that true?
COMEY: Our investigation found that there was classified information sent.
GOWDY: ...Secretary Clinton said there was nothing marked classified on her emails either sent or received, was that true?
COMEY: That's not true.
GOWDY: Secretary Clinton said "I did not email any classified material to anyone on my email, there is no classified material," was that true?
COMEY: There was classified material emailed.
GOWDY: Secretary Clinton said she used just one device, was that true?
COMEY: She used multiple devices during the four years of her term as secretary of state.
GOWDY: Secretary Clinton said all work-related emails were returned to the State Department, was that true?
COMEY: No, we found work-related emails--thousands--that were not returned.
GOWDY: Secretary Clinton said neither she nor anyone else deleted work-related emails from her personal account, was that true?
COMEY: ...There's no doubt there were work-related emails that were removed electronically from the email system.
GOWDY: Secretary Clinton said her lawyers read every one of the emails and were overly inclusive, did her lawyers read the email content individually?
COMEY: No.
GOWDY: …I’m going to ask you to put on your old hat. False exculpatory statements — they are used for what?
COMEY: Well, either for a substantive prosecution, or for evidence of intent in a criminal prosecution.
GOWDY: Exactly. Intent, and consciousness of guilt, right? Is that right?
COMEY: Right.
[FONT=Verdana,Tahoma,Arial,Calibri,Geneva,sans-serif]Communism is all but dead and so is the Democratic party.So we know who controls the narrative in this country & its the communist democrats .....
For the record, I am so glad that the 'genetically superior' gambling degens on this site are able to offer their expert legal-mansplaining services.
You guys are a bunch of twats and your opinion thankfully means SHIT because in the real world of LAW and ORDER there are consequences for obstruction and contempt.
.
You sound like the shithead at some other site that was trying to convince me that there CAN be obstruction with no crime because someone could purposefully trip a cop who was chasing a suspect that is later found innocent. You literally sound *that* stupid. But that's also what makes you who are, too dumb to know how dumb you truly are! I'm for impeaching Trump more than you are because it will go through the House on a party line vote, fail in the Senate, will absolutely hand Trump the 2020 election on a silver platter, and will also put Rebeplicans back in the majority in the House. That is how impeaching Trump will turn out for the Dummycrats and I will bump this thread when it does.
Isn't it sad how quickly the shitheel hypocrite liberals change the definition of "obstruction of justice"?
GOWDY: Secretary Clinton said she never sent or received any classified information over her classified email, was that true?
COMEY: Our investigation found that there was classified information sent.
GOWDY: ...Secretary Clinton said there was nothing marked classified on her emails either sent or received, was that true?
COMEY: That's not true.
GOWDY: Secretary Clinton said "I did not email any classified material to anyone on my email, there is no classified material," was that true?
COMEY: There was classified material emailed.
GOWDY: Secretary Clinton said she used just one device, was that true?
COMEY: She used multiple devices during the four years of her term as secretary of state.
GOWDY: Secretary Clinton said all work-related emails were returned to the State Department, was that true?
COMEY: No, we found work-related emails--thousands--that were not returned.
GOWDY: Secretary Clinton said neither she nor anyone else deleted work-related emails from her personal account, was that true?
COMEY: ...There's no doubt there were work-related emails that were removed electronically from the email system.
GOWDY: Secretary Clinton said her lawyers read every one of the emails and were overly inclusive, did her lawyers read the email content individually?
COMEY: No.
GOWDY: …I’m going to ask you to put on your old hat. False exculpatory statements — they are used for what?
COMEY: Well, either for a substantive prosecution, or for evidence of intent in a criminal prosecution.
GOWDY: Exactly. Intent, and consciousness of guilt, right? Is that right?
COMEY: Right.