Posted by moy23 on 6/10/2017 9:47:00 AM (view original):

Posted by tecwrg on 6/10/2017 9:38:00 AM (view original):
Uh, credibility of witnesses is often a deciding factor in court testimony it situations where evidence can be interpreted in multiple ways, or is circumstantial at best.

Trump's demeanor, temperament and public persona, and even his own goddamned words and tweets, give him little to no credibility among people who don't have their heads shoved completely up their own *****.

There's probably a thousand soundbites of Dems and Repubs calling Comey incompetent. I'd play that in court and you don't have a credible witness.

And without evidence, a testimony is worthless. The testimony is meant to corroborate the evidence... Not be the only evidence. In criminal cases there can't be reasonable doubt.

The Dems called him incompetent when he was going after Hillary. The Repubs called him incompetent when he was going after Trump.

Reasonable people can see past biased rhetoric.

You're incapable of that.

Posted by tecwrg on 6/10/2017 12:18:00 PM (view original):

Posted by moy23 on 6/10/2017 9:47:00 AM (view original):

Posted by tecwrg on 6/10/2017 9:38:00 AM (view original):
Uh, credibility of witnesses is often a deciding factor in court testimony it situations where evidence can be interpreted in multiple ways, or is circumstantial at best.

Trump's demeanor, temperament and public persona, and even his own goddamned words and tweets, give him little to no credibility among people who don't have their heads shoved completely up their own *****.

There's probably a thousand soundbites of Dems and Repubs calling Comey incompetent. I'd play that in court and you don't have a credible witness.

And without evidence, a testimony is worthless. The testimony is meant to corroborate the evidence... Not be the only evidence. In criminal cases there can't be reasonable doubt.

The Dems called him incompetent when he was going after Hillary. The Repubs called him incompetent when he was going after Trump.

Reasonable people can see past biased rhetoric.

You're incapable of that.

Or, perhaps, the weak-willed coward is actually incompetent.

No?

The Loneliness of Donald Trump

I know: "Too long, didn't read." But if you can spare 10 minutes and don't mind references to Pushkin, F. Scott Fitzgerald and Hannah Arendt, it's worth it.

Posted by MikeT23 on 6/10/2017 12:53:00 PM (view original):

Posted by tecwrg on 6/10/2017 12:18:00 PM (view original):

Posted by moy23 on 6/10/2017 9:47:00 AM (view original):

Posted by tecwrg on 6/10/2017 9:38:00 AM (view original):
Uh, credibility of witnesses is often a deciding factor in court testimony it situations where evidence can be interpreted in multiple ways, or is circumstantial at best.

Trump's demeanor, temperament and public persona, and even his own goddamned words and tweets, give him little to no credibility among people who don't have their heads shoved completely up their own *****.

There's probably a thousand soundbites of Dems and Repubs calling Comey incompetent. I'd play that in court and you don't have a credible witness.

And without evidence, a testimony is worthless. The testimony is meant to corroborate the evidence... Not be the only evidence. In criminal cases there can't be reasonable doubt.

The Dems called him incompetent when he was going after Hillary. The Repubs called him incompetent when he was going after Trump.

Reasonable people can see past biased rhetoric.

You're incapable of that.

Or, perhaps, the weak-willed coward is actually incompetent.

No?

Could be.

We certainly know that the orange tweeter is.

Posted by moy23 on 6/9/2017 11:42:00 PM (view original):

Posted by sjpoker on 6/9/2017 9:18:00 PM (view original):
None of this matters. Even if Mueller reports that Trump tried to suppress the investigation, I do not believe he can charge Trump.

So that leaves it to Congress and they ain't gonna impeach him.

And the Democrats are gonna **** up the mid terms.

So it's a waste of time to even discuss it. It's just a soap opera.

This is probably the closest to the truth^^

It is the absolute truth. Its just a side show. Nothing will come of it.

Posted by mixtroy on 6/10/2017 5:09:00 AM (view original):

Posted by sjpoker on 6/9/2017 9:18:00 PM (view original):
None of this matters. Even if Mueller reports that Trump tried to suppress the investigation, I do not believe he can charge Trump.

So that leaves it to Congress and they ain't gonna impeach him.

And the Democrats are gonna **** up the mid terms.

So it's a waste of time to even discuss it. It's just a soap opera.

Lets see how much of a waste of time when the feds drop the hammer and nail Richey Rich for tax evasion and conspiracy to money laundering with the Russians.

Again, its not going to happen. The IRS has been on his *** for the last 20 years. You really think something is gonna suddenly pop up? Doubtful.

Posted by MikeT23 on 6/10/2017 8:58:00 AM (view original):

Posted by tecwrg on 6/10/2017 8:48:00 AM (view original):
Again, if its' a "he said / he said" situation, then it comes down to credibility.

Who is more credible . . . the guy testifying under oath before a senate subcommittee, or the orange buffoon who hides behind often misspelled paranoid-filled tweets in the middle of the night?

Did you actually see said guy testifying? It was "I felt", "I thought", "My impression", etc, etc. He said nothing but a lot of words.

I felt Comey's testimony was weak. I thought he was telling us about his feelings not what was said. My impression is he's a disgruntled ex-employee working around the facts to suit his agenda.

You're wrong here. There probably is no better individual than Comey to give that kind of testimony. He wasn't showcasing it for the American public. He carefully worded every answer so that if called up as evidence in the future, it would have the biggest impact.

That said, it doesn't matter. Like I said, even if Mueller does come up with a tight, damning report against Trump, nothing will come of it because neither the Justice Dept and Congress will act on it.

Posted by laramiebob on 6/10/2017 1:37:00 PM (view original):
Let's see. Clinton was under investigation for a land deal in Arkansas (Whitewater)............ the investigation led to a personal sexual indiscretion.
He attempted to obstruct, lied under oath, and was ultimately impeached and CONVICTED by the House. Nearly the same in the Senate except for the Democrats relative power within that body. Even then, it was close.

Nixon was an "un-indicted conspirator" in a minor break-in/burglary, which led him to conspire to cover-up and attempt to obstruct.
While you may not be able to indict a sitting president, the Congress decided (setting a precedent) that lying under oath, or being an un-indicted conspirator are high crimes!

You REALLY think that an investigation into possible collusion (and lying about it) with an adversary (at Best!) into our free election system is a small matter and the Congress won't do anything about it???

These posts by chumpie apologists reveal the posters to be Internet Trump trolls-------- nothing more......... probably Russian operatives............ or fired and disgraced Fox News host with too much time on their hands.

Yes I absolutely believe nothing will get done. Certainly not in a republican majority Congress and Senate. Mitch McConnell and Paul Ryan are not going to go out of their way to dump Trump. So they'll be a lot of discussion and arguments but nothing will ultimately get done.

Principled guys like Bob Dole and Gerald Ford are not in control of the Republican leadership.

I'm not saying that Muellers report won't show Trump as the shitstain all of us not named Moy think he is. I expect nothing less than a something that shows Trump is completely entangled with the Russians and colluded with them.

What I am saying is that even with all that, Congress will - not - act on it.

I'd say more but I'd probably get upset, say some inappropriate things, and all3 will run to support again and get me permanently banned.