Trump now calling McGahn a liar for spilling the beans on Trump's obstruction

[LV426]

Just so we’re clear on this.

The President directly accused his former White House Counsel, Don McGahn, of lying under oath in his testimony to the Mueller investigators.

His alleged lie was telling them about Drumpf’s demands to fire Robert Mueller. Why did he lie? “Because he wanted to make himself look like a good lawyer,” during his interview with Stephanapolous yesterday.


https://support.twitter.com/articles/20175256

[Gonzomin]

Just so we’re clear on this.

The President directly accused his former White House Counsel, Don McGahn, of lying under oath in his testimony to the Mueller investigators.

His alleged lie was telling them about Drumpf’s demands to fire Robert Mueller. Why did he lie? “Because he wanted to make himself look like a good lawyer,” during his interview with Stephanapolous yesterday.


https://support.twitter.com/articles/20175256

How does lying make him look like a good lawyer.? Can Trump ever make sense? He blew his reputation when he agreed to work for Trump.

[Truth Detector]

Don McGahn “may have been confused” the president told ABC News’ George Stephanopoulos.

"The story on that very simply, No. 1, I was never going to fire Mueller,”

“I never suggested firing Mueller," he added.

NO ONE got fired. NO ONE destroyed evidence. NO ONE refused to cooperate. NO ONE shut down the investigation NO ONE chose not to release the entire report. NO ONE exercised executive privilege.

Page 173 V I: Ultimately, the investigation did not establish that the Campaign coordinated or conspired with the Russian government in its election-interference activities.

Barr: Deputy Attorney General Rod Rosenstein and I have concluded that the evidence developed during the Special Counsel's investigation is not sufficient to establish that the President committed an obstruction-of-justice offense.

[Gonzomin]

Don McGahn “may have been confused” the president told ABC News’ George Stephanopoulos.

"The story on that very simply, No. 1, I was never going to fire Mueller,”

“I never suggested firing Mueller," he added.

NO ONE got fired. NO ONE destroyed evidence. NO ONE refused to cooperate. NO ONE shut down the investigation NO ONE chose not to release the entire report. NO ONE exercised executive privilege.

Page 173 V I: Ultimately, the investigation did not establish that the Campaign coordinated or conspired with the Russian government in its election-interference activities.

Barr: Deputy Attorney General Rod Rosenstein and I have concluded that the evidence developed during the Special Counsel's investigation is not sufficient to establish that the President committed an obstruction-of-justice offense.

BECAUSE MCGAHN REFUSED TO DO IT.You say the dumbest shit. Check McGahn's reputation and compare it to Trump's. Who is most likely telling the truth?

[Joe Capitalist]

BECAUSE MCGAHN REFUSED TO DO IT.You say the dumbest shit. Check McGahn's reputation and compare it to Trump's. Who is most likely telling the truth?

Turd Digester is the biggest Trump Dick Sucker on this forum. Of course he's going to defend Trump (i.e. suck Trump's dick) every chance he gets.

[Truth Detector]

Turd Digester is the biggest Trump Dick Sucker on this forum. Of course he's going to defend Trump (i.e. suck Trump's dick) every chance he gets.

Wrong again you repugnant asshole with severe TDS. I am a defender of the Truth; something you avoid with every damned post. I know, facts make you lie and cry. You have nothing left to cling to be delusions, strawmen and lies.

I am never wrong; you, never right. Cry harder now snowflake. Go back to that padded cell you call your safe space.

[Truth Detector]

BECAUSE MCGAHN REFUSED TO DO IT.You say the dumbest shit. Check McGahn's reputation and compare it to Trump's. Who is most likely telling the truth?

It's hearsay moron; in a court of law it would get laughed out of the courtroom. I wish you had a brain. But alas, then you wouldn't be the clueless dumbfuck you are. The Party of the Jackass like gullible dumb fucks like you as their constituents.

Once again: NO ONE got fired. NO ONE destroyed evidence. NO ONE refused to cooperate. NO ONE shut down the investigation NO ONE chose not to release the entire report. NO ONE exercised executive privilege.

Page 173 V I: Ultimately, the investigation did not establish that the Campaign coordinated or conspired with the Russian government in its election-interference activities.

Barr: Deputy Attorney General Rod Rosenstein and I have concluded that the evidence developed during the Special Counsel's investigation is not sufficient to establish that the President committed an obstruction-of-justice offense.

[Darth Omar]

Don McGahn “may have been confused” the president told ABC News’ George Stephanopoulos.

"The story on that very simply, No. 1, I was never going to fire Mueller,”

“I never suggested firing Mueller," he added.

NO ONE got fired. NO ONE destroyed evidence. NO ONE refused to cooperate. NO ONE shut down the investigation NO ONE chose not to release the entire report. NO ONE exercised executive privilege.

Page 173 V I: Ultimately, the investigation did not establish that the Campaign coordinated or conspired with the Russian government in its election-interference activities.

Barr: Deputy Attorney General Rod Rosenstein and I have concluded that the evidence developed during the Special Counsel's investigation is not sufficient to establish that the President committed an obstruction-of-justice offense.

Even if McGhan had to lock Trump in a closet to keep him from firing Mullet—it would still be a weak obstruction case—because Mullet was never fired and the investigation was never obstructed by Trump. Just the opposite it in fact. Trump waived executive privilege; allowed WH counsel to be interviewed [that took balls, btw] *when he didn’t have to* and etc. A jury would get to hear every bit of that, including whatever exculpatory evidence that would be revealed in discovery.

Prosecutors don’t pad their stats by trotting off to court with weak obstruction cases. Federal prosecutors have nearly a 90% conviction rate *precisely because they don’t* march off to court, half-cocked, just because they really-really bad want to convict a person of a crime. Which is the Democrats problem: they really-really bad want to indict Trump to the extent they’re absolutely unable to think clearly about it. That kind of visceral emotion clouds ones thinking.

Always lol. It’s pointless trying to explain that to these nitwits.

Mullet didn’t have that problem. Mullet may be a weasel but he’s a professional weasel. The ‘not not guilty’ bit was done solely for the benefit of House Democrats and their dreams of impeaching the Bad Orange Man, finally. Mullet knew there was no there-there, but he refused to concede that; and in so doing, proving once and for all that the whole point to the Russian investigation was to get rid of Trump.

And they think we’re too stupid to see that.

[Bill]

Even if McGhan had to lock Trump in a closet to keep him from firing Mullet—it would still be a weak obstruction case—because Mullet was never fired and the investigation was never obstructed by Trump. Just the opposite it in fact. Trump waived executive privilege; allowed WH counsel to be interviewed [that took balls, btw] *when he didn’t have to* and etc. A jury would get to hear every bit of that, including whatever exculpatory evidence that would be revealed in discovery.

Prosecutors don’t pad their stats by trotting off to court with weak obstruction cases. Federal prosecutors have nearly a 90% conviction rate *precisely because they don’t* march off to court, half-cocked, just because they really-really bad want to convict a person of a crime. Which is the Democrats problem: they really-really bad want to indict Trump to the extent they’re absolutely unable to think clearly about it. That kind of visceral emotion clouds ones thinking.

Always lol. It’s pointless trying to explain that to these nitwits.

Mullet didn’t have that problem. Mullet may be a weasel but he’s a professional weasel. The ‘not not guilty’ bit was done solely for the benefit of House Democrats and their dreams of impeaching the Bad Orange Man, finally. Mullet knew there was no there-there, but he refused to concede that; and in so doing, proving once and for all that the whole point to the Russian investigation was to get rid of Trump.

And they think we’re too stupid to see that.

IMHO that is a weakness but there is a lot more investigating, & investigating the investigations so we will be @ this while the bridges crumble..

[Truth Detector]

Even if McGhan had to lock Trump in a closet to keep him from firing Mullet—it would still be a weak obstruction case—because Mullet was never fired and the investigation was never obstructed by Trump. Just the opposite it in fact. Trump waived executive privilege; allowed WH counsel to be interviewed [that took balls, btw] *when he didn’t have to* and etc. A jury would get to hear every bit of that, including whatever exculpatory evidence that would be revealed in discovery.

Prosecutors don’t pad their stats by trotting off to court with weak obstruction cases. Federal prosecutors have nearly a 90% conviction rate *precisely because they don’t* march off to court, half-cocked, just because they really-really bad want to convict a person of a crime. Which is the Democrats problem: they really-really bad want to indict Trump to the extent they’re absolutely unable to think clearly about it. That kind of visceral emotion clouds ones thinking.

Always lol. It’s pointless trying to explain that to these nitwits.

Mullet didn’t have that problem. Mullet may be a weasel but he’s a professional weasel. The ‘not not guilty’ bit was done solely for the benefit of House Democrats and their dreams of impeaching the Bad Orange Man, finally. Mullet knew there was no there-there, but he refused to concede that; and in so doing, proving once and for all that the whole point to the Russian investigation was to get rid of Trump.

And they think we’re too stupid to see that.

CORRECT!

[domer76]

Even if McGhan had to lock Trump in a closet to keep him from firing Mullet—it would still be a weak obstruction case—because Mullet was never fired and the investigation was never obstructed by Trump. Just the opposite it in fact. Trump waived executive privilege; allowed WH counsel to be interviewed [that took balls, btw] *when he didn’t have to* and etc. A jury would get to hear every bit of that, including whatever exculpatory evidence that would be revealed in discovery.

Prosecutors don’t pad their stats by trotting off to court with weak obstruction cases. Federal prosecutors have nearly a 90% conviction rate *precisely because they don’t* march off to court, half-cocked, just because they really-really bad want to convict a person of a crime. Which is the Democrats problem: they really-really bad want to indict Trump to the extent they’re absolutely unable to think clearly about it. That kind of visceral emotion clouds ones thinking.

Always lol. It’s pointless trying to explain that to these nitwits.

Mullet didn’t have that problem. Mullet may be a weasel but he’s a professional weasel. The ‘not not guilty’ bit was done solely for the benefit of House Democrats and their dreams of impeaching the Bad Orange Man, finally. Mullet knew there was no there-there, but he refused to concede that; and in so doing, proving once and for all that the whole point to the Russian investigation was to get rid of Trump.

And they think we’re too stupid to see that.

FACTUAL RESULTS OF THE OBSTRUCTION INVESTIGATION”


A. The Campaign's Response to Reports About Russian Support for Trump
B. The President's Conduct Concerning the Investigation of Michael Flynn
C. The President's Reaction to Public Confirmation of the FBl's Russia Investigation
D. Events Leading Up To and Surrounding the Termination of FBI Director Corney
E. The President's Efforts to Remove the Special Counsel
F. The President's Efforts to Curtail the Special Counsel Investigation
H. The President's Further Efforts to Have the Attorney General Take Over the Investigation
I. The President Orders McGahn to Deny that the President Tried to Fire the Special Counsel
J. The President's Conduct Towards Flynn, Manafort,
K. The President's Conduct Involving Michael Cohen

Refer to E, F and I. The details are in Volume II.

Try something different for once, ignoramus. Try to read it and actually educate yourself.

[LV426]

How does lying make him look like a good lawyer.? Can Trump ever make sense? He blew his reputation when he agreed to work for Trump.

I'd argue his reputation was blown long before he worked for Trump.

The Conservative movement's reputation has been blown for 40 years. It's just been running on bad faith this whole time.

[Truth Detector]

Just so we’re clear on this.

The President directly accused his former White House Counsel, Don McGahn, of lying under oath in his testimony to the Mueller investigators.

His alleged lie was telling them about Drumpf’s demands to fire Robert Mueller. Why did he lie? “Because he wanted to make himself look like a good lawyer,” during his interview with Stephanapolous yesterday.

https://support.twitter.com/articles/20175256

Your link leads nowhere you repugnant dunce. It's Trumps word against McGahns. The documentation within the Mueller report is hearsay. We don't prosecute people over hearsay you willful idiot. We are still not a lawless, third world shit hole Democrats want to turn us into.

[Centerleftfl]

Your link leads nowhere you repugnant dunce. It's Trumps word against McGahns. The documentation within the Mueller report is hearsay. We don't prosecute people over hearsay you willful idiot. We are still not a lawless, third world shit hole Democrats want to turn us into.

TOO CHICKENSHIT to dare to look it up yourself? Of course you won't. L i s t e n!

https://www.cnn.com/videos/politics/...k-in-politics/

[Truth Detector]

TOO CHICKENSHIT to dare to look it up yourself? Of course you won't. L i s t e n!

What part of It's Trumps word against McGahns. The documentation within the Mueller report is hearsay are you having so much difficulty comprehending snowflake?

Trumps exact words: “I don't care what he says, It doesn't matter.” "Because he wanted to make himself look like a good lawyer,"

Again for the whiny loonies still claiming the Mueller Hoax wasn't a hoax:

NO ONE got fired. NO ONE destroyed evidence. NO ONE refused to cooperate. NO ONE shut down the investigation NO ONE chose not to release the entire report. NO ONE exercised executive privilege.

Page 173 V I: Ultimately, the investigation did not establish that the Campaign coordinated or conspired with the Russian government in its election-interference activities.

Barr: Deputy Attorney General Rod Rosenstein and I have concluded that the evidence developed during the Special Counsel's investigation is not sufficient to establish that the President committed an obstruction-of-justice offense.