“He is toast”: Legal experts call out Mark Meadows’ “incriminating admission”

Geeko Sportivo said:
You must have not read the Mueller report! There was a lot of things that Mueller said that Trump was guilty of.

Mueller: I did not clear Trump of obstruction of justice.

Mueller was not even able to investigate Donald Trump, because he said he could not even subpoena or indict a sitting president.

“The president was not exculpated for the acts that he allegedly committed,” Mueller declared at the opening of congressional hearings into his investigation of Russian interference to help Trump win the 2016 election.
Click to expand...

If Mueller couldn't investigate him then why did the democrats hire him to investigate him?

Just to waste money?
 
Nordberg said:
True for just an average normal phone call. This was not that. Mueller got a lot of Trumpys people locked up. He did not have that mandate to get Trump. However, he listed Trump's crimes and said the house should take investigate them. Trump's phone call was an attempt to get the secretary of state to help him overthrow the election. That makes it a crime.
Click to expand...

Trump never asked for anything illegally to be done.

There is no case here.
 
Tinkerpeach said:
There is nothing illegal about making a phone call.

This case is going nowhere.

You folks on the left are just setting yourselves up for a huge disappointment just like you did with the Mueller case.
Click to expand...

If you call someone to ask them to kill your father


It’s an illegal call you shitty Cossack
 
Tinkerpeach said:
There is nothing illegal about making a phone call.

This case is going nowhere.

You folks on the left are just setting yourselves up for a huge disappointment just like you did with the Mueller case.
Click to expand...

Did someone say it’s illegal to make a phone call?
 
Phantasmal said:
He was still a sitting President when Mueller wrapped up his investigation and there’s a precedent that you don’t prosecute sitting Presidents.

The other charges were being investigated and now prosecuted.
Click to expand...

Mueller made no charges against Trump, he couldn't prove obstruction or collusion at all.

Trumps new charges have nothing to do with the Mueller case.
 
guno said:
Meadows testified that he recommended Trump reach out to Georgia Secretary of State Chief Investigator Frances Watson, on which Trump falsely claimed that he won the state by "hundreds of thousands of votes."

"In his own words, that is an incriminating admission that he recommended Trump make the call to Watson that is part of the alleged conspiracy," Goodman wrote on X, formerly Twitter.

Meadows also acknowledged that he had "no reason to doubt" then-Attorney General Bill Barr's conclusion that the fraud claims were meritless.


Meadows later testified that he set up Trump's infamous call to Georgia Secretary of State Brad Raffensperger to find a "less-litigious way of resolving" the fraud concerns but claimed he could not remember details for arranging for attorney Cleta Mitchell and two other Trump campaign lawyers to be on the call.


https://www.msn.com/en-us/news/poli...u?cvid=74c940ae63324bd8b87509e471d652e7&ei=12
Click to expand...

It is damming evidence, but I’d not say toast. He has some defenses.
 
Tinkerpeach said:
If Mueller couldn't investigate him then why did the democrats hire him to investigate him?

Just to waste money?
Click to expand...

There is nothing in the Constitution that says the president cannot be investigated or indicted.

There was simply no precedent one way or the other.

This was a first, and apparently Robert Mueller just made it up!
 
Tinkerpeach said:
If Mueller couldn't investigate him then why did the democrats hire him to investigate him?

Just to waste money?
Click to expand...

There is nothing in the Constitution that says the president cannot be investigated or indicted.

Apparently Robert Mueller just made it up!

They investigated Bill Clinton didn't they?
 
Geeko Sportivo said:
There is nothing in the Constitution that says the president cannot be investigated or indicted.

There was simply no precedent one way or the other.

Apparently Robert Mueller just made it up!

They investigated Bill Clinton didn't they?
Click to expand...

Sure he can be but he can't face prosecution as it would interfere with his job. He would need to be removed from office first.
 
Tinkerpeach said:
Sure he can be but he can't face prosecution as it would interfere with his job. He would need to be removed from office first.
Click to expand...

Well, no president will ever be removed from office in such an equally divided Senate, because of the Filibuster Rule.

TRUMP WAS SAVED From being removed after being impeached twice because of the Filibuster Rule!

Even though there were enough Republicans in the Senate that would have voted to remove Trump- McConnell lied, and said there weren't enough votes, and refused to bring it to the floor for a vote- TWICE! McConnell was facing an upcoming election, and didn't want to piss off the TRUMPTARDS!

Something McConnell says he now regrets!
 
guno said:
Meadows testified that he recommended Trump reach out to Georgia Secretary of State Chief Investigator Frances Watson, on which Trump falsely claimed that he won the state by "hundreds of thousands of votes."

"In his own words, that is an incriminating admission that he recommended Trump make the call to Watson that is part of the alleged conspiracy," Goodman wrote on X, formerly Twitter.

Meadows also acknowledged that he had "no reason to doubt" then-Attorney General Bill Barr's conclusion that the fraud claims were meritless.


Meadows later testified that he set up Trump's infamous call to Georgia Secretary of State Brad Raffensperger to find a "less-litigious way of resolving" the fraud concerns but claimed he could not remember details for arranging for attorney Cleta Mitchell and two other Trump campaign lawyers to be on the call.


https://www.msn.com/en-us/news/poli...u?cvid=74c940ae63324bd8b87509e471d652e7&ei=12
Click to expand...

Not a crime, you fucking morons.
 
Tinkerpeach said:
Mueller made no charges against Trump, he couldn't prove obstruction or collusion at all.

Trumps new charges have nothing to do with the Mueller case.
Click to expand...

Mueller made it clear, charging the president for collusion was not allowed in the mandate he was given for investigation. He listed 14 incidents of collusion and said it was up to congress to investigate. For some reason, the Repub congress did not. https://abcnews.go.com/Politics/breakdown-indictments-cases-muellers-probe/story?id=61219489 This is for others to read. You cannot since you are a bot.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top