TheDieselPage.com Forums  
2017 - TDP's 21st Anniversary
What's New: | Feature Articles: | Product Reviews: | Member's Area: | Subscribe:
Duramax 6600 Diesel Page | Advertiser's Section | Classified Ads | Photo Album | Diesel Books, GM Licensed T-shirts


Go Back   TheDieselPage.com Forums > The Diesel Page Member Forums > Member's Forum
Register FAQ Members List Photo Album Mark Forums Read

Member's Forum The Diesel Page Member community forum. General discussion forum for topics not necessarily focused on diesels.

Reply
 
Thread Tools Display Modes
  #411  
Old 12-07-2017, 07:01 AM
rapidoxidationman rapidoxidationman is offline
Enthusiast
 
Join Date: Dec 2002
Location: Teton Valley, Idaho
Posts: 1,351
Default

"Typical S.O.P." doesn't get investigated. Typical SOP doesn't result in charges, and guilty pleas. Typical SOP doesn't result in someone agreeing to cooperate with the investigation to lessen their consequences.

Quote:
Thus far, all the credible evidence of foreign contact indicates, in regards to Trump and those involved with him (at any time), was proper. There was no wrongdoing.
So why lie? Why continue to lie?

Regarding the cost of the investigation, I believe we'll see a much better rate of return on this 7 mil than the 7 spent on your Benghazi.
Pot
Kettle
Black.

Be careful about keeping your head in the sand. It may turn to stone on ya.

PS: do you agree that a president cannot obstruct justice?
__________________
'85 Mercedes Benz 300D, for when I want to be stately.
'05 Mercedes E320 CDI, for when I want to be even statelier.
'05 Chevy K2500 ext cab long box DMax: Everything my '03 was and so much more!

There's no point being a pessimist - it wouldn't work anyway.
Reply With Quote
  #412  
Old 12-07-2017, 08:15 AM
DmaxMaverick's Avatar
DmaxMaverick DmaxMaverick is offline
Administrator
 
Join Date: Apr 2001
Location: CA
Posts: 11,682
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by rapidoxidationman View Post
"Typical S.O.P." doesn't get investigated. Typical SOP doesn't result in charges, and guilty pleas. Typical SOP doesn't result in someone agreeing to cooperate with the investigation to lessen their consequences.

So why lie? Why continue to lie?
Talking about Flynn? He was untruthful with the VP, and was dismissed for it. Seems he repeated the same to the FBI. One lie, which was independent of the administration and campaign. He didn't fall on his sword for anyone but himself. It IS typical SOP. When these investigations begin, we only need to ask who it will be. It's like a serial drama. They are all the same, and only the names and scenery are different. The details are irrelevant, but they keep the viewers interested, and polarized. Still no there, but it's entertaining.

There won't be a Presidential pardon, but don't be surprised if any sentence gets commuted (there will likely be a stay of execution, in any case). Flynn's service to the country deserves no less, despite his poor decisions of late.

Quote:
Regarding the cost of the investigation, I believe we'll see a much better rate of return on this 7 mil than the 7 spent on your Benghazi.
Pot
Kettle
Black.
Probably, but it doesn't make any of it right. The Benghazi investigation was concluded, the internet video was investigated, and the (video) perpetrator was jailed. Case closed. BTW, it wasn't MY Benghazi, and there's no comparison between the two.

Quote:
Be careful about keeping your head in the sand. It may turn to stone on ya.

PS: do you agree that a president cannot obstruct justice?
I agree. The President cannot obstruct justice. The Justice department serves at The President's pleasure. He can (and does, historically) direct what and what not to prosecute. It's naive to believe otherwise.
__________________
1985 Blazer 6.2
2001 GMC 2500HD D/A
2014 Chevy Cruze Diesel - Fabulous car, no problems at all, but sold Nov. 2016 @ 55K miles.
dmaxmaverick@thedieselpage.com
Reply With Quote
  #413  
Old 12-07-2017, 08:56 AM
More Power's Avatar
More Power More Power is offline
Administrator
 
Join Date: Feb 2000
Location: Big Sky Country
Posts: 10,057
Arrow

Quote:
Originally Posted by rapidoxidationman View Post
So he gets a pass from you then? Playing with Russians is somehow less of a problem than getting a little action in the oval office?
While there is an avalanche of proof that Obama/Clinton colluded with the Russians before/during/about the election, there has not been so much as a whisper of collusion proven between Donald Trump and the Russians before or during the election.

Does anyone remember the $150M Obama spent trying to defeat Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu (meddling in a foreign election).
Reply With Quote
  #414  
Old 12-07-2017, 11:17 AM
More Power's Avatar
More Power More Power is offline
Administrator
 
Join Date: Feb 2000
Location: Big Sky Country
Posts: 10,057
Arrow

Quote:
Originally Posted by rapidoxidationman View Post
John Dowd, one of Trump's lawyers
Agree or disagree?
Questions:

1- Is the Justice Department controlled by Executive Branch?

2- Who is the top executive within the Executive Branch?

3- How can the top executive obstruct justice (legal definition)?
Reply With Quote
  #415  
Old 12-07-2017, 12:01 PM
rapidoxidationman rapidoxidationman is offline
Enthusiast
 
Join Date: Dec 2002
Location: Teton Valley, Idaho
Posts: 1,351
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by More Power View Post
Quote:
While there is an avalanche of proof that Obama/Clinton colluded with the Russians before/during/about the election, there has not been so much as a whisper of collusion proven between Donald Trump and the Russians before or during the election.
Does anyone remember the $150M Obama spent trying to defeat Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu (meddling in a foreign election).
If that's the case, and given who is presently in the White House along with who currently controls congress, then can you explain why the current investigation is focused on Trump instead of Obama/Clinton?
__________________
'85 Mercedes Benz 300D, for when I want to be stately.
'05 Mercedes E320 CDI, for when I want to be even statelier.
'05 Chevy K2500 ext cab long box DMax: Everything my '03 was and so much more!

There's no point being a pessimist - it wouldn't work anyway.
Reply With Quote
  #416  
Old 12-07-2017, 12:06 PM
rapidoxidationman rapidoxidationman is offline
Enthusiast
 
Join Date: Dec 2002
Location: Teton Valley, Idaho
Posts: 1,351
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by More Power View Post
Questions:

1- Is the Justice Department controlled by Executive Branch?

2- Who is the top executive within the Executive Branch?

3- How can the top executive obstruct justice (legal definition)?
We both know the answers to 1 & 2. Number three? Do you remember why Nixon was impeached? Article 1 ring a bell?

http://www.presidency.ucsb.edu/ws/?pid=76082
From the link:
Quote:
ARTICLE I

In his conduct of the office of President of the United States, Richard M. Nixon, in violation of his constitutional oath faithfully to execute the office of President of the United States and, to the best of his ability, preserve, protect, and defend the Constitution of the United States, and in violation of his consitutional duty to take care that the laws be faithfully executed, has prevented, obstructed, and impeded the administration of justice, in that:

On June 17, 1972, and prior thereto, agents of the Committee for the Re-election of the President committed unlawful entry of the headquarters of the Democratic National Committee in Washington, District of Columbia, for the purpose of securing political intelligence. Subsequent thereto, Richard M. Nixon, using the powers of his high office, engaged personally and through his close subordinates and agents, in a course of conduct or plan designed to delay, impede, and obstruct the investigation of such illegal entry; to cover up, conceal and protect those responsible; and to conceal the existence and scope of other unlawful covert activities.

The means used to implement this course of conduct or plan included one or more of the following:

Making false or misleading statements to lawfully authorized investigative officers and employees of the United States;
Withholding relevant and material evidence or information from lawfully authorized investigative officers and employees of the United States;
Approving, condoning, acquiescing in, and counselling witnesses with respect to the giving of false or misleading statements to lawfully authorized investigative officers and employees of the United States and false or misleading testimony in duly instituted judicial and congressional proceedings;
Interfering or endeavouring to interfere with the conduct of investigations by the Department of Justice of the United States, the Federal Bureau of Investigation, the office of Watergate Special Prosecution Force, and Congressional Committees;
Approving, condoning, and acquiescing in, the surreptitious payment of substantial sums of money for the purpose of obtaining the silence or influencing the testimony of witnesses, potential witnesses or individuals who participated in such unlawful entry and other illegal activities;
Endeavouring to misuse the Central Intelligence Agency, an agency of the United States;
Disseminating information received from officers of the Department of Justice of the United States to subjects of investigations conducted by lawfully authorized investigative officers and employees of the United States, for the purpose of aiding and assisting such subjects in their attempts to avoid criminal liability;
Making or causing to be made false or misleading public statements for the purpose of deceiving the people of the United States into believing that a thorough and complete investigation had been conducted with respect to allegations of misconduct on the part of personnel of the executive branch of the United States and personnel of the Committee for the Re-election of the President, and that there was no involvement of such personnel in such misconduct: or
Endeavouring to cause prospective defendants, and individuals duly tried and convicted, to expect favoured treatment and consideration in return for their silence or false testimony, or rewarding individuals for their silence or false testimony.
In all of this, Richard M. Nixon has acted in a manner contrary to his trust as President and subversive of constitutional government, to the great prejudice of the cause of law and justice and to the manifest injury of the people of the United States.
Wherefore Richard M. Nixon, by such conduct, warrants impeachment and trial, and removal from office.
__________________
'85 Mercedes Benz 300D, for when I want to be stately.
'05 Mercedes E320 CDI, for when I want to be even statelier.
'05 Chevy K2500 ext cab long box DMax: Everything my '03 was and so much more!

There's no point being a pessimist - it wouldn't work anyway.
Reply With Quote
  #417  
Old 12-07-2017, 12:31 PM
rapidoxidationman rapidoxidationman is offline
Enthusiast
 
Join Date: Dec 2002
Location: Teton Valley, Idaho
Posts: 1,351
Default

If Nixon is too far in the past for you, there's always Clinton...
https://www.congress.gov/bill/105th-...resolution/611
Article 3:
Quote:
Article III: States that in his conduct while President of the United States, William Jefferson Clinton, in violation of his constitutional oath faithfully to execute the office of President of the United States and, to the best of his ability, preserve, protect, and defend the Constitution of the United States, and in violation of his constitutional duty to take care that the laws be faithfully executed, has prevented, obstructed, and impeded the administration of justice, and has to that end engaged personally, and through his subordinates and agents, in a course of conduct or scheme designed to delay, impede, cover up, and conceal the existence of evidence and testimony related to a Federal civil rights action brought against him in a duly instituted judicial proceeding.
Turns out there's at least two clear examples of where a president has been impeached in part for obstruction of justice.
__________________
'85 Mercedes Benz 300D, for when I want to be stately.
'05 Mercedes E320 CDI, for when I want to be even statelier.
'05 Chevy K2500 ext cab long box DMax: Everything my '03 was and so much more!

There's no point being a pessimist - it wouldn't work anyway.
Reply With Quote
  #418  
Old 12-07-2017, 12:49 PM
DmaxMaverick's Avatar
DmaxMaverick DmaxMaverick is offline
Administrator
 
Join Date: Apr 2001
Location: CA
Posts: 11,682
Default

Charging documents (what you referenced) are not conclusive, nor were any of them adjudicated. In one case, the resignation was submitted prior, halting the adjudication. In the other, the conclusion did not, remotely, reference the charging language. Claiming (charging) obstruction by a sitting President is far from convicting it, as evidenced in every case brought. Ever. A ham sandwich can be indicted for obstruction. The language may sound good, from a political viewpoint, but rarely ever pans out in practice. The sheep will ignorantly follow the narrative.
__________________
1985 Blazer 6.2
2001 GMC 2500HD D/A
2014 Chevy Cruze Diesel - Fabulous car, no problems at all, but sold Nov. 2016 @ 55K miles.
dmaxmaverick@thedieselpage.com
Reply With Quote
  #419  
Old 12-07-2017, 02:22 PM
rapidoxidationman rapidoxidationman is offline
Enthusiast
 
Join Date: Dec 2002
Location: Teton Valley, Idaho
Posts: 1,351
Thumbs up

Keep sticking to your guns.
__________________
'85 Mercedes Benz 300D, for when I want to be stately.
'05 Mercedes E320 CDI, for when I want to be even statelier.
'05 Chevy K2500 ext cab long box DMax: Everything my '03 was and so much more!

There's no point being a pessimist - it wouldn't work anyway.
Reply With Quote
  #420  
Old 12-07-2017, 03:00 PM
JohnC's Avatar
JohnC JohnC is offline
Enemy of the State
 
Join Date: Jan 2001
Location: New Hampshire - Live Free or Die
Posts: 5,090
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by rapidoxidationman View Post
Keep sticking to your guns.
Well, at least you're setting a good example.
__________________
"Need" - Wanting to get someone else's money.
"Greed" (formerly meant what "need" means today) - wanting to keep your own.
"Compassion" - a politician's willingness to arrange the transfer.
-Joseph Sobran

Current oil burners: MB 350SDL, Kubota 7510
Gone but not forgotten: '87 F350 7.3, '91 C2500 6.5, '95 K2500 6.5, '06 K2500HD 6.6
Reply With Quote
Reply

Thread Tools
Display Modes

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off

Forum Jump


All times are GMT -7. The time now is 11:13 PM.


Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.2
Copyright ©2000 - 2017, vBulletin Solutions, Inc.
Copyright 1996-2017 by TheDieselPage.com - All Rights Reserved