Trump invokes executive privilege over Mueller report

This was yesterday lol........

“But in the latest Gallup numbers, Trump is at 46% approval -- the highest mark he has reached in more than two years as President.”

“Nine in 10 Republicans backed Trump in March, the same number who did so in April. It's among Democrats where Trump's job approval has improved the most month-to-month; just 4% approved of the job he was doing in March compared to 10% who said the same in April. Independents went from 33% job approval for Trump in March to 39% in April.”

“Obviously, Trump's gains of late come even as special counsel Robert Mueller has concluded his report into Russian interference in the 2016 election and the entire 448-page behemoth, with some redactions, has been released to the public.”

https://amp.cnn.com/cnn/2019/05/06/politics/donald-trump-approval-rating-strong-economy/index.html

 

This is a pure political stunt by Nadler. Nothing more.

 

He's become the poster boy for corrupt politicians and an obvious waste of space.
https://mail.yahoo.com/d/search/keyword=nadlet/messages/AHU8GLM5m86nXLtS0wVXMK1ItgU

 

What you do in the privacy of your own head is your business, or better said: What happens in Egoboy stays in Egoboy.

 

Russian whores peeing on Obama's bedspread?

 

Because "COMPLETE EXONERATION" is banned from the congressional table -- not anywhere in the picture -- barred by Nadler, Cummings, and Pelosi.

Executive privilege can be waived one day and exerted the next; doesn't matter that you or congress don't like it.

You are blaming Trump for keeping all this alive until 2020???? 90% of the purpose of this congressional "investigation" is congress' fervent desire to keep it alive through 2020.

It's a constitutional crises not because of Trump but because congress is trampling all over the constitution by egregiously exceeding their authority. They have no authority to conduct a criminal investigation, and they have no authority to invade the president for purely political motivations. They are simply following Alinsky's playbook: deflect by blaming the other guy of doing the bad stuff they are doing.

 

... with Clinton's explicit permission. He allowed his grand jury testimony to be televised, for God's sake!

 

Big deal, Obama used it over Fast and Furious, Clinton used it 14 times and that was for stuff which actually happened.

 

The public overwhelmingly believes that Trump has lied in regards to the Russia investigation and that he repeatedly attempted to obstruct the various investigations.

 

Is that a mouse in your pocket? The public?

 

That's not how that works at all, but do continue to be wrong as I take great amusement from it

 

Both of these statements are objectively, 100% false.

 

The Mueller report did not happen?

 

While most of the media and many Democrats are desperately trying to get us to believe (because they hope upon hope that we are all stupid) that Trump exerted executive privilege over the entire report, he didn't. He exerted executive privilege over the few redactions in the report, a whole bunch of work product that went into making Mueller's report, and a bunch of witnesses -- to save them from what amounts to double jeopardy, none of which is Nadler entitled to. Nadler is shedding elephant tears hoping to get attention. Somebody should give him a lollypop to suck on.

 

OMG... I'm no lawyer... I'm the first to admit that.

But you don't save 'witnesses' from 'what amounts to double jeopardy'.... that's for prosecutions on defendants....

Witnesses need to testify to what they witnessed. If they also have legal jeopardy as a result of their testimony, they might get immunity for their testimony. McGahn must testify, although I'd certainly have no trouble starting an impeachment hearing based on what we know now, if that makes it happen faster.

Remember that the WH Legal Counsel will testify that Trump directed him to perform an act that McGahn told Trump would be another "fact used to claim OOJ"... Under oath and on National TV..... Better than The View, huh!

 

I said it was like double jeopardy. Congressional witnesses have all the same rights under the constitution as any court witness has. Some have more if the president says they cannot testify. Congress has no legitimate purpose to call McGahn. They can issue subpoenas only to advance legislative purpose. Finding some way to overthrow a president does not have any legislative purpose.

To begin impeachment process there is a need to start with pretty clear impeachable offenses, under the reasonable suspicion category. So far there are none for Trump, the fairy dust wishful thinking of the Democrats not withstanding..

 

Sure they do... he testified for a reported 30 hours to Mueller, and there's not 30 hours worth of McGahn in the Mueller report...

"We want our.... we want our..... we want our Don McGahn" (Sung to the tune of Money For Nothing)

OOJ is a "pretty clear impeachable offense"... Ask Bill Clinton.... Ask Richard Nixon (via seance)

 

Well, all that shows is that Barr did what Trump wanted him to do. Plant a lie, and sit on the truth long enough for the lie to take hold.

 

That is post the full Mueller Report

 

McGahan want's to go Congress, I say no no no

 

Barr says it's up to the House to say if Obstruction is indictable.

 

It's more of a 'Congressional Crisis", if anything, because the Democrats have turned Congress into a political witch hunt rather than looking after America's interests. Voters must remember this.

 

Congress does not want McGahn to testify for any recognizable legislative purpose. What legislation will they work on with his testimony? They only got a few minutes of McGan's 30-hour interview??? Oh, BOO-HOO! My message to Nadler would be one, quit crying in your beer, and two, go pound sand.
Trump has committed no evident obstruction of justice. A president doing something that his opponents don't like is not covered on the OOJ statute. (As an aside the ignorance displayed of what constitutes OOJ is astounding. Not knowing is not bad in itself, but shouting like one does know it is horrible.)

Clinton was not impeached for obstruction. His impeachment was centered on his perjury with the grand jury. Though he was prima facie guilty of obstruction by lying to the judge and suborning perjury in the Paula Jones case -- it just was not used in his impeachment. Nixon was (almost) impeached -- his articles of impeachment were never approved by the House -- for OOJ with mainly the following offense. "… making or causing to be made false or misleading public statements for the purpose of deceiving the people of the United States." Trump does not come anywhere near to that. The only one of recent memory who does is Obama with his Benghazi song and dance...., and that was over a military attack against US sovereign soil.

 

You feel Mueller's investigation was inadequate, that they needed more time, money, witnesses, paperwork? Congress has become a Star Chamber.