Current Events > Trump officially named for the first time in directing criminal activity

(+) Yeah! (+)

https://cnn.it/2Uwb8X5

Friday was a very, very bad day for Donald Trump

Summary of most of the massive bombshells yesterday
---

shockthemonkey posted...

Womp womp

---

Fox starting to admit "there might be something to this Trump being a criminal thing, after all"

https://www.alternet.org/there-might-be-something-there-fox-news-hosts-admit-things-are-starting-seem-little-weird-trump-and
---

I wonder if the Dems are now going to switch to Impeachment as the first thing they advance once they take over in January.

Can't help but figure even more shit is going to come out by then.
---

Ambience posted...

Fox starting to admit "there might be something to this Trump being a criminal thing, after all"

https://www.alternet.org/there-might-be-something-there-fox-news-hosts-admit-things-are-starting-seem-little-weird-trump-and

Lol
---

Ambience posted...

Fox starting to admit "there might be something to this Trump being a criminal thing, after all"

https://www.alternet.org/there-might-be-something-there-fox-news-hosts-admit-things-are-starting-seem-little-weird-trump-and

Someone should go check the temperature in Hell.
---

https://www.salon.com/2018/12/08/robert-mueller-should-charge-trump-with-committing-a-crime-only-a-president-can-commit/

But I dont think Mueller should bother with these crimes he committed in conspiracies with others. Rather, he should indict Trump for committing a crime only Trump, as President of the United States, can commit. He should indict Trump for violating the Faithful Execution Clause of the United States Constitution, which states in Article II, Section Three, that he shall take Care that the Laws be faithfully executed.

Printz v. United States, decided in 1997 in a challenge to the Brady Handgun Violence Protection Act, left little doubt as to who has the authority and responsibility to execute the laws of the United States: The Constitution does not leave to speculation who is to administer the laws enacted by Congress; the President, it says, "shall take Care that the Laws be faithfully executed," Art. II, 3, personally and through officers whom he appoints (save for such inferior officers as Congress may authorize to be appointed by the "Courts of Law" or by "the Heads of Departments" who with other presidential appointees), Art. II, 2.

In Humphreys Executor v. United States, the Supreme Court went all the way back to Marbury v. Madison in finding that the Take Care Clause requires that the president obey the law. In that case, the court found that President Franklin D. Roosevelt could not arbitrarily remove a member of the Federal Trade Commission without the consent of congress and for purely political reasons.

Suffice to say, there is ample law to back up the notion that the Constitution requires the president to not only execute the laws, but to follow them as well. In taking numerous acts to break the law, whether by tampering with witnesses, or overtly obstructing justice, or conspiring with a foreign power to steal the election of 2016, Trump has demonstrably not taken care that the laws be faithfully executed.

Its a crime only Trump, as president of the United States, can commit, because it involves a legal requirement on the president set forth not in U.S. Codes, but in the Constitution itself.

If Mueller were to indict Trump for violating this clause of the Constitution, he would not only be forcing the issue of whether a president is above the law as written for everyone else in the U.S. Code, but whether the president is subject to the law of the land as set forth in the Constitution itself. It would be an indictment for violating a law specifically written to apply to the president and no one else.

Such an indictment by Mueller would be throwing the entire matter into the lap of the Supreme Court without delay. It would be an unavoidable constitutional question, because it is a uniquely constitutional crime. It forces the issue of whether or not the laws apply to the president by making the law in question the constitution itself.

---

That Salon article is interesting. I think Mueller needs to push this farther before he does something like that, though, it needs to be irrefutable.
---

Mr_Biscuit posted...

That Salon article is interesting. I think Mueller needs to push this farther before he does something like that, though, it needs to be irrefutable.

I dont believe Mueller would bother to release this information if he wasn't 100% sure about what he has and has not. Up until now Mueller has played his cards close to the chest, by revealing this information only when sure he can back it up.

This isn't your average Republican that just spews and see what sticks. There is evidence.
---

Ambience posted...

Fox starting to admit "there might be something to this Trump being a criminal thing, after all"

https://www.alternet.org/there-might-be-something-there-fox-news-hosts-admit-things-are-starting-seem-little-weird-trump-and

Hahahaha
---

Dampproof posted...

Mr_Biscuit posted...

That Salon article is interesting. I think Mueller needs to push this farther before he does something like that, though, it needs to be irrefutable.

I dont believe Mueller would bother to release this information if he wasn't 100% sure about what he has and has not. Up until now Mueller has played his cards close to the chest, by revealing this information only when sure he can back it up.

This isn't your average Republican that just spews and see what sticks. There is evidence.

Oh I agree, I just mean I think hed lay it all out there before just trying a failure to enforce the constitution thing.
---

SuperShake666 posted...

Ambience posted...

Fox starting to admit "there might be something to this Trump being a criminal thing, after all"

https://www.alternet.org/there-might-be-something-there-fox-news-hosts-admit-things-are-starting-seem-little-weird-trump-and

Someone should go check the temperature in Hell.

---

Bio1590 posted...

I wonder if the Dems are now going to switch to Impeachment as the first thing they advance once they take over in January.

Can't help but figure even more shit is going to come out by then.

You can bet that'll happen.

I also think that Mueller is waiting for Democrats to officially take over the House of Representatives on January 3rd so that he can start doing more damage to Trump.

Ambience posted...

https://cnn.it/2Uwb8X5

Friday was a very, very bad day for Donald Trump

Summary of most of the massive bombshells yesterday

New York Times: "Yeah, but this is all the democrats fault and they will pay for it!"
---

Shinobi120 posted...

Bio1590 posted...

I wonder if the Dems are now going to switch to Impeachment as the first thing they advance once they take over in January.

Can't help but figure even more shit is going to come out by then.

You can bet that'll happen.

I also think that Mueller is waiting for Democrats to officially take over the House of Representatives on January 3rd so that he can start doing more damage to Trump.

They'll definitely do it, they just had that whole anti-corruption/campaign funding stuff they were working on that they were going to advance when they took over (which of course was going to be shot down by the Sensate/vetoed by Trump).

I just wonder if they'll still do that first to give them more time to work on the Impeachment stuff and let more info come out.
---

Man, the mid-season sweeps of the Trump Presidency have been amazing to watch. I can't wait until the next season starts in January.
---

A_Good_Boy posted...

I can't wait until the next season starts in January.

This x1000. Buckle up folks! It's about to get crazy
---

Bishop9800 posted...

Buckle up buckaroos!

---

TrevorBlack79 posted...

Bishop9800 posted...

Buckle up buckaroos!

---

Trump is so fucked
---

tag
---