US Erection 12 *AND* 16 *AND* 20 *AND* 22 *AND* 24

The primary goal of this site is to provide mature, meaningful discussion about the Vancouver Canucks. However, we all need a break some time so this forum is basically for anything off-topic, off the wall, or to just get something off your chest! This forum is named after poster Creeper, who passed away in July of 2011 and was a long time member of the Canucks message board community.

Moderator: Referees

User avatar
Topper
CC Legend
Posts: 18174
Joined: Wed Sep 15, 2004 8:11 pm
Location: Earth, most days.

Re: US Erection 12 *AND* 16

Post by Topper »

The questions are, why were the Soviets allowed to tamper and what was done to prevent and mitigate tampering.

End of the day, the Soviets got caught doing what most powerful nations do in other sovereign elections.
Over the Internet, you can pretend to be anyone or anything.

I'm amazed that so many people choose to be complete twats.
User avatar
ukcanuck
MVP
MVP
Posts: 4591
Joined: Sat Jul 30, 2011 3:04 am

Re: US Erection 12 *AND* 16

Post by ukcanuck »

Topper wrote: Thu Jul 25, 2019 9:54 am The questions are, why were the Soviets allowed to tamper and what was done to prevent and mitigate tampering.

End of the day, the Soviets got caught doing what most powerful nations do in other sovereign elections.
Those are valid questions and raises even more questions about how powerful the office of the president really isn’t.

But why Trump as the preferred candidate for the Russians is still a more interesting element of the whole Mueller affair.
User avatar
Strangelove
Moderator & MVP
Moderator & MVP
Posts: 42932
Joined: Sat Dec 18, 2004 12:13 pm
Location: Lake Vostok

Re: US Erection 12 *AND* 16

Post by Strangelove »

ukcanuck wrote: Wed Jul 24, 2019 9:27 pm “Could you charge trump with obstruction of justice after he leaves office? “

“Yes.”
"And could you make that charge stick?"

"No."

Obstruction of justice? :lol:

Obstruction of a witch-hunt? Image

But this time, in the end, it's the witch-hunters who'll burn...
____
Try to focus on someday.
User avatar
ukcanuck
MVP
MVP
Posts: 4591
Joined: Sat Jul 30, 2011 3:04 am

Re: US Erection 12 *AND* 16

Post by ukcanuck »

Strangelove wrote: Thu Jul 25, 2019 11:21 am
ukcanuck wrote: Wed Jul 24, 2019 9:27 pm “Could you charge trump with obstruction of justice after he leaves office? “

“Yes.”
"And could you make that charge stick?"

"No."

Obstruction of justice? :lol:

Obstruction of a witch-hunt? Image

But this time, in the end, it's the witch-hunters who'll burn...
Irrelevant conjecture designed to avoid the the uncomfortable.

Trump avoids indictment not because he is innocent of attempting obstruct justice but because of some bullshit loophole that protects a sitting president.
User avatar
Cousin Strawberry
MVP
MVP
Posts: 26171
Joined: Sat Jul 09, 2011 10:19 pm
Location: in the shed with a fresh packed bowl

Re: US Erection 12 *AND* 16

Post by Cousin Strawberry »

I take your question.

:lol: :lol: :lol:


So embarassing for delusional democrats everywhere

:lol:
If you need air...call it in
User avatar
Strangelove
Moderator & MVP
Moderator & MVP
Posts: 42932
Joined: Sat Dec 18, 2004 12:13 pm
Location: Lake Vostok

Re: US Erection 12 *AND* 16

Post by Strangelove »

UK = Unstable Kook

:lol:
____
Try to focus on someday.
User avatar
ukcanuck
MVP
MVP
Posts: 4591
Joined: Sat Jul 30, 2011 3:04 am

Re: US Erection 12 *AND* 16

Post by ukcanuck »

Strangelove wrote: Thu Jul 25, 2019 8:36 pm UK = Unstable Kook

:lol:
Oh come on, my name isn’t Mitch Mc Connell 😛
User avatar
Strangelove
Moderator & MVP
Moderator & MVP
Posts: 42932
Joined: Sat Dec 18, 2004 12:13 pm
Location: Lake Vostok

Re: US Erection 12 *AND* 16

Post by Strangelove »

ukcanuck wrote: Thu Jul 25, 2019 5:22 pm Trump avoids indictment not because he is innocent of attempting obstruct justice but because of some bullshit loophole that protects a sitting president.
Wrong.

https://www.foxnews.com/politics/nadler ... t-indicted
Nadler repeats faulty claim, corrected by Mueller, about why Trump was not indicted

During a Democratic press conference about Mueller’s testimony, Nadler, a New York Democrat, claimed Mueller said the only reason Trump wasn’t indicted for obstruction of justice was because of a Justice Department opinion prohibiting charging a sitting president with a crime. He cited Mueller’s response to a question from House Judiciary Committee member Rep. Ted Lieu, D-Calif.

“He told us in a remarkable exchange with Mr. Lieu that but for the Department of Justice policy prohibiting [him] from doing so, he would have indicted President Trump,” Nadler said. “Indeed it is clear that any other citizen of this country who has behaved as this president has would have been charged with multiple crimes.”

But on Wednesday, Mueller himself went out of his way to clarify that he didn’t intend to suggest that.

“I want to add one correction to my testimony this morning," Mueller told the House Intelligence Committee, after testimony before the Judiciary Committee earlier Wednesday. "I want to go back to one thing that was said this morning by Mr. Lieu, who said and I quote, ‘You didn’t charge the president because of the OLC opinion.’ That is not the correct way to say it. As we say in the report and as I said at the opening, we did not reach a determination as to whether the president committed a crime.”
____
Try to focus on someday.
User avatar
Strangelove
Moderator & MVP
Moderator & MVP
Posts: 42932
Joined: Sat Dec 18, 2004 12:13 pm
Location: Lake Vostok

Re: US Erection 12 *AND* 16

Post by Strangelove »

https://www.foxnews.com/politics/suprem ... order-wall
Supreme Court paves way for Trump administration to use military funds for border wall

The Supreme Court sided with the Trump administration on Friday in lifting a freeze backed by a lower court that had halted plans to use $2.5 billion in Pentagon funds for border wall construction.
Image

Image
____
Try to focus on someday.
User avatar
2Fingers
MVP
MVP
Posts: 7672
Joined: Wed Jan 04, 2012 7:47 am

Re: US Erection 12 *AND* 16

Post by 2Fingers »

Strangelove wrote: Fri Jul 26, 2019 5:07 pm
ukcanuck wrote: Thu Jul 25, 2019 5:22 pm Trump avoids indictment not because he is innocent of attempting obstruct justice but because of some bullshit loophole that protects a sitting president.
Wrong.

https://www.foxnews.com/politics/nadler ... t-indicted
Nadler repeats faulty claim, corrected by Mueller, about why Trump was not indicted

During a Democratic press conference about Mueller’s testimony, Nadler, a New York Democrat, claimed Mueller said the only reason Trump wasn’t indicted for obstruction of justice was because of a Justice Department opinion prohibiting charging a sitting president with a crime. He cited Mueller’s response to a question from House Judiciary Committee member Rep. Ted Lieu, D-Calif.

“He told us in a remarkable exchange with Mr. Lieu that but for the Department of Justice policy prohibiting [him] from doing so, he would have indicted President Trump,” Nadler said. “Indeed it is clear that any other citizen of this country who has behaved as this president has would have been charged with multiple crimes.”

But on Wednesday, Mueller himself went out of his way to clarify that he didn’t intend to suggest that.

“I want to add one correction to my testimony this morning," Mueller told the House Intelligence Committee, after testimony before the Judiciary Committee earlier Wednesday. "I want to go back to one thing that was said this morning by Mr. Lieu, who said and I quote, ‘You didn’t charge the president because of the OLC opinion.’ That is not the correct way to say it. As we say in the report and as I said at the opening, we did not reach a determination as to whether the president committed a crime.”
Well actually all the legal experts and every other sane person in world knows you are wrong. But I do really enjoy your trumpness comments when you cannot handle the truth.

Truth will set you free and will one day imprison the WPE.
User avatar
Strangelove
Moderator & MVP
Moderator & MVP
Posts: 42932
Joined: Sat Dec 18, 2004 12:13 pm
Location: Lake Vostok

Re: US Erection 12 *AND* 16

Post by Strangelove »

Reefer2 wrote: Fri Jul 26, 2019 6:11 pm Well actually all the legal experts and every other sane person in world knows you are wrong. But I do really enjoy your trumpness comments when you cannot handle the truth.

Truth will set you free and will one day imprison the WPE.
Image

If it was anyone else but you Reef I'd be shocked at the amount of sheer stupidity contained in one post.

How can I be wrong, I just quoted what Robert Mueller himself said about "The Mueller Report". :lol:

Lmao, if there was ever someone who needed "the truth to set one free" it's a goosestepping goober such as yourself.

WAKE UP, I'm trying to help you and others like you... don't bite the hand that feeds you!

Hate the guy all you like, but NEVER let people brainwash you...
____
Try to focus on someday.
User avatar
ukcanuck
MVP
MVP
Posts: 4591
Joined: Sat Jul 30, 2011 3:04 am

Re: US Erection 12 *AND* 16

Post by ukcanuck »

Strangelove wrote: Fri Jul 26, 2019 5:07 pm
ukcanuck wrote: Thu Jul 25, 2019 5:22 pm Trump avoids indictment not because he is innocent of attempting obstruct justice but because of some bullshit loophole that protects a sitting president.
Wrong.

https://www.foxnews.com/politics/nadler ... t-indicted
Nadler repeats faulty claim,
But on Wednesday, Mueller himself went out of his way to clarify that he didn’t intend to suggest that.


“I want to add one correction to my testimony this morning," Mueller told the House Intelligence Committee, after testimony before the Judiciary Committee earlier Wednesday. "I want to go back to one thing that was said this morning by Mr. Lieu, who said and I quote, ‘You didn’t charge the president because of the OLC opinion.’ That is not the correct way to say it. As we say in the report and as I said at the opening, we did not reach a determination as to whether the president committed a crime.”


:mrgreen: I will see your "WRONG" and raise you one "BULLSHIT"

Fact: Under oath, Mueller answered "CORRECT" to the following question “The reason that you did not indict the president is because of the OLC opinion that you cannot indict a sitting president, correct?” This Testimony is on record and a primary source.

NOT FACT: "Nadler repeats faulty claim, But on Wednesday, Mueller himself went out of his way to clarify that he didn’t intend to suggest that." this is the OPINION of Alex Pappas | Fox News

This is putting words in Mueller's mouth and not even supported by a link or source. in fact it appears to be not Mueller's words at all but rather Attorney General Bill Barr's “Mueller stated three times to us in that meeting in response to our questioning that he emphatically was not saying that but for the OLC opinion, he would have found obstruction.”

Clearly, Fox Trump News is spinning the results of Mueller's testimony and the investigation as they have from day one.

So yeah, horse shit desperate bullshit from the right as usual.

The reality is and the correct assumption is that even a lifelong republican like Meuller who was obviously walking a tight rope to avoid damnation from his masters cant quite cover up the stench of the Trump administration. We all know Trump would have sold his soul to the devil decades ago if ever had one to sell and we know by the public record alone he has done whatever he could to avoid facing the music. Unfortunately, apparently, it is treason to accuse the president of a crime or to have been a racist in public so the cunt is safe for now.

But yeah, I'll be very interested to see what happens IF he steps down after 2020 or 2024.
User avatar
Strangelove
Moderator & MVP
Moderator & MVP
Posts: 42932
Joined: Sat Dec 18, 2004 12:13 pm
Location: Lake Vostok

Re: US Erection 12 *AND* 16

Post by Strangelove »

ukcanuck wrote: Fri Jul 26, 2019 8:08 pm :mrgreen: I will see your "WRONG" and raise you one "BULLSHIT"

Fact: Under oath, Mueller answered "CORRECT" to the following question “The reason that you did not indict the president is because of the OLC opinion that you cannot indict a sitting president, correct?” This Testimony is on record and a primary source.
Ummmm.

Didn't I just quote Mr Mueller clarifying that very response? :crazy:

Clarifying it to mean the opposite of what you keep claiming he meant...

ukcanuck wrote: Fri Jul 26, 2019 8:08 pm NOT FACT: "Nadler repeats faulty claim, But on Wednesday, Mueller himself went out of his way to clarify that he didn’t intend to suggest that." this is the OPINION of Alex Pappas | Fox News

This is putting words in Mueller's mouth and not even supported by a link or source. in fact it appears to be not Mueller's words at all but rather Attorney General Bill Barr's “Mueller stated three times to us in that meeting in response to our questioning that he emphatically was not saying that but for the OLC opinion, he would have found obstruction.”

Clearly, Fox Trump News is spinning the results of Mueller's testimony and the investigation as they have from day one.
WOW, UR REALLY OUT THERE SOMEWHERE CIRCLING URANUS :shock:

Those ARE Mueller's words and there ARE plenty of "links and sources"...

https://www.washingtonexaminer.com/news ... ging-trump
https://www.cbsnews.com/news/mueller-co ... ng-office/
https://www.cnn.com/politics/live-news/ ... b4f149af88
https://nationalpost.com/news/world/dra ... -democrats

Etc.

See, this is what we meant by "delusional democrats".

And "goosestepping goobers".

Those links/sources are easy enough to find for everyone NOT trapped inside an echo chamber.

The fact you think a major outlet like Foxnews would/could fabricate such a thing is truly mind-boggling.

Let me guess, you're now going to fall back on your "All media is controlled by the Jews position"? :scowl:

Get some help buddy...


EDIT: Here's a video clip of Mueller saying the words I quoted: https://saraacarter.com/mueller-correct ... d-a-crime/

And here's Factcheck.org on the matter: https://www.factcheck.org/2019/07/nadle ... testimony/

(twas your man Nadler who was trying to put words in Mueller's mouth - the very words YOU have been re-spewing here)

SHEESH, loony lefties...
____
Try to focus on someday.
User avatar
ukcanuck
MVP
MVP
Posts: 4591
Joined: Sat Jul 30, 2011 3:04 am

Re: US Erection 12 *AND* 16

Post by ukcanuck »

Strangelove wrote: Fri Jul 26, 2019 9:07 pm


Those ARE (?!?!?) Mueller's words and there ARE plenty of "links and sources"...

Oh there are plenty of similar links to the FOX Trump News article, lets have a closer look shall we?
"Robert Mueller provides 'correction' to testimony about not charging Trump" https://www.washingtonexaminer.com/news ... ging-trump
"In his appearance before the House Judiciary Committee, Lieu asked him, “I’d like to ask you the reason, again, you did not indict Donald Trump is because of OLC opinion stating that you cannot indict a sitting president, correct?”

“That is correct,” Mueller said in reply saying that he would have charged Trump with a crime if not for the Office of Legal Counsel opinion.

Republican Rep. Debbie Lesko of Arizona pressed him on this after his comments to Lieu, saying “that is not what you said in the report and that is not what you told Attorney General Barr.” Lesko also pointed to the joint statement he put out earlier this year, saying there was no daylight between himself and Barr on that issue. She quoted from that statement, reading, “The attorney general has previously stated that the special counsel repeatedly affirmed that he was not saying that, but for the OLC opinion, he would have found the president obstructed justice.”

“So, Mr. Mueller, do you stand by your joint statement that you issued on May 29th as you sit here today?” Lesko asked. Mueller declined to stand by the official statement from his own office from less than two months ago.

“I would have to look at it more closely before I said I agree with it,” Mueller said.


"In dramatic testimony, Robert Mueller says he did not exonerate Trump: 'It is not a witch hunt' https://nationalpost.com/news/world/dra ... -democrats
The White House painted Mueller’s testimony.
"But hours later at the outset of the second hearing, Mueller corrected himself.
“As we say in the report and as I said at the opening, we did not reach a determination as to whether the president committed a crime,” Mueller said."
Additionally, Trump has said the Mueller inquiry resulted in the president’s “complete and total exoneration. But Meuller testified:
“Did you actually totally exonerate the president?” Nadler asked Mueller during the first hearing.
No,” Mueller replied.
Seems pretty clear, Mueller wanted to clarify that although he could not exonerate the cunt he couldn't indict the cunt anyway because that was not in the scope of his mission
"Did Mueller change his statement that Trump could be indicted after he leaves office?" https://www.cbsnews.com/news/mueller-co ... ng-office/

Trump (foxtrump news and Doc) claim Mueller corrected his statement on whether he could face charges after he has left office
But when he was asked by CBS News White House correspondent Paula Reid about Mueller's testimony that the president could face charges once he leaves office, the president denied Mueller had said this. After Reid pointed out that "yes, he did,..." She pointed out that Mueller had in fact corrected his answer on clearing Mr. Trump, which the president answered with more insults.

"Reid: That was not his correction. His correction was about exonerating you.
THE PRESIDENT: Read his correction.
Reid: It was about exonerating you (the cunt). That was not about if you(the cunt) could be charged after you leave office.
Mueller corrects an exchange from the first hearinghttps://www.cnn.com/politics/live-news/ ... b4f149af88
"I want to go back to one thing that was said this morning by Mr. Lieu who said, and I quote, you didn't charge the President because of the OLC opinion. "As we say in the report, and as I said at the opening, we did not reach a determination as to whether the President committed a crime. With that, Mr. Chairman, I'm ready to answer questions."

What you need to know about the OLC opinion: Internal Justice Department policies say that a sitting president cannot be indicted. The policy comes from the OLC — the Office of Legal Counsel — and it dates back to the Nixon administration. It is binding on all Justice Department employees, including Mueller and his team of prosecutors.

In his report, Mueller directly explained how this had a major impact on his internal deliberations. Mueller framed his entire obstruction investigation around the notion that he couldn't bring any charges against Trump, even if he found ironclad evidence against him, because of the OLC opinion.

CLEARLY, TRUMP FOX TRUMP NEWS, and any other right wing bullshit rag and you Doc are trying to twist the narrative to suit your political ends. Not unlike trying to characterize any criticism of a right wing Israeli government's persecution of Palestinian women and children as somehow antisemitic.
User avatar
2Fingers
MVP
MVP
Posts: 7672
Joined: Wed Jan 04, 2012 7:47 am

Re: US Erection 12 *AND* 16

Post by 2Fingers »

Strangelove wrote: Fri Jul 26, 2019 6:37 pm
Reefer2 wrote: Fri Jul 26, 2019 6:11 pm Well actually all the legal experts and every other sane person in world knows you are wrong. But I do really enjoy your trumpness comments when you cannot handle the truth.

Truth will set you free and will one day imprison the WPE.
Image

If it was anyone else but you Reef I'd be shocked at the amount of sheer stupidity contained in one post.

How can I be wrong, I just quoted what Robert Mueller himself said about "The Mueller Report". :lol:

Lmao, if there was ever someone who needed "the truth to set one free" it's a goosestepping goober such as yourself.

WAKE UP, I'm trying to help you and others like you... don't bite the hand that feeds you!

Hate the guy all you like, but NEVER let people brainwash you...
If it was anyone but you I would be surprised you resorted to name calling when you cannot win an argument. I guess it is true when they say people are gullible, right buddy? :thumbs: :thumbs:
Post Reply