The Russia investigation is now inside the Oval Office

GazzaQueen said:
I said there is no law against obstructing an investigation into nothing, which is true.

Now you say there is something but provide no proof because there is none. Research, buddy, research.
Click to expand...

No - that isn't true. You can't obstruct ANY investigation.

Regardless, the "investigation into nothing" is just your opinion. You cannot impede any investigation. You were completely wrong.
 
Thing1 said:
No - that isn't true. You can't obstruct ANY investigation.

Regardless, the "investigation into nothing" is just your opinion. You cannot impede any investigation. You were completely wrong.
Click to expand...

Maybe I can't, but the POTUS can fire the investigators, who are investigating nothing and thus have found nothing.

Unless you have proof of something. Which you don't, because there is nothing to prove.
 
GazzaQueen said:
Maybe I can't, but the POTUS can fire the investigators, who are investigating nothing and thus have found nothing.

Unless you have proof of something. Which you don't, because there is nothing to prove.
Click to expand...

It depends on the reason he fired them.

And that's what they're looking into. Deal with it.
 
Thing1 said:
It depends on the reason he fired them.

And that's what they're looking into. Deal with it.
Click to expand...

Obstruction is obstruction... Even if the investigation obstructed turns up nothing, buddy.
The felony ticket has already been written...
There is no un-ringing that bell.
 
GazzaQueen said:
Maybe I can't, but the POTUS can fire the investigators, who are investigating nothing and thus have found nothing.

Unless you have proof of something. Which you don't, because there is nothing to prove.
Click to expand...

Your reasoning is specious and your "logic" is pretzelian.

If the investigation is impeded prior to it's conclusion, there can be no reasonable knowledge or evidence that there were or weren't misdeeds committed to begin with. If that knowledge is not allowed to be found and proven to a reasonable doubt, then justice has been obstructed by whoever impeded the investigation.

In this case, that would of course, be Trump.
 
Nomad said:
Your reasoning is specious and your "logic" is pretzelian.

If the investigation is impeded prior to it's conclusion, there can be no reasonable knowledge or evidence that there were or weren't misdeeds committed to begin with. If that knowledge is not allowed to be found and proven to a reasonable doubt, then justice has been obstructed by whoever impeded the investigation.

In this case, that would of course, be Trump.
Click to expand...

You're saying the government can investigate you for the rest of your life and the POTUS is powerless to ever put an end to it, regardless of no evidence found.

Meh. I heard it was the Macedonians, anyway.
 
Nomad said:
Your reasoning is specious and your "logic" is pretzelian.

If the investigation is impeded prior to it's conclusion, there can be no reasonable knowledge or evidence that there were or weren't misdeeds committed to begin with. If that knowledge is not allowed to be found and proven to a reasonable doubt, then justice has been obstructed by whoever impeded the investigation.

In this case, that would of course, be Trump.
Click to expand...

"Pretzelian". Like it.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top