• This is a political forum that is non-biased/non-partisan and treats every person's position on topics equally. This debate forum is not aligned to any political party. In today's politics, many ideas are split between and even within all the political parties. Often we find ourselves agreeing on one platform but some topics break our mold. We are here to discuss them in a civil political debate. If this is your first visit to our political forums, be sure to check out the RULES. Registering for debate politics is necessary before posting. Register today to participate - it's free!

Friend says Trump is considering 'terminating' Mueller

This is how Trump floats his ideas in the media, and gauges results. He then acts upon those results.

So if there is backlash to this rumour, he won't do it. If not, he'll consider it a viable option. So we shall see.

Ordinarily Presidential actions like this would be political death - as it was for Nixon. But with party control of our government removing much of the former Constitutional checks and balances we had during Nixon, the GOP power structure will likely tolerate it and spin it to their voters. Our Republic is really in a terrible place in terms of democratic process and institutions. In his farewell address, George Washington warned of the rise political parties usurping the democratic process. He was absolutely correct.

Agreed! And what's sad is, The Donald knows that no matter how far-fetched or unlikely....even his blatant lies...the actions he takes, he makes a blanket assumption that the majority of Americans are stupid enough to swallow it whole. (And it appears he's right)

Like when he pretended to be somebody else on the phone, a campaign advisor, and it was actually him. He thought people would be stupid enough to believe it. And while some people didnt, enough had no trouble believing it or even sadder, believing it didnt matter!

Or now denying what was "recorded by the media" on the bus about how he views and physically handles women. He thinks now people are stupid enough to accept that it was just 'fake news.'

It's rather humiliating for the rest of us to be painted with that same brush. This is a stain on our nation that will be a part of our history forever :(
 
Agreed! And what's sad is, The Donald knows that no matter how far-fetched or unlikely....even his blatant lies...the actions he takes, he makes a blanket assumption that the majority of Americans are stupid enough to swallow it whole. (And it appears he's right)
fwiw, the majority of Americans disapprove of Trumpco.

https://projects.fivethirtyeight.com/trump-approval-ratings/

It's just a very vocal who minority approve.
 
It will be pretty hard to fire a guy who is getting indictments and confessions. Firing Mueller because he's getting too close to Trump is a textbook example of obstruction of justice.
 
Mueller is a liberal hack. He needs to go. get on with running the country without the distraction.
 
It will be pretty hard to fire a guy who is getting indictments and confessions. Firing Mueller because he's getting too close to Trump is a textbook example of obstruction of justice.

Agreed, but we're talking about Trump - a guy that thinks he's some kind of God.
 
Mueller is a liberal hack. He needs to go. get on with running the country without the distraction.

would you say this distraction is preventing republicans from doing their jobs?
 
It will be pretty hard to fire a guy who is getting indictments and confessions. Firing Mueller because he's getting too close to Trump is a textbook example of obstruction of justice.

Your point is correct but Trump would never refer to it as such rather, an obstruction to progress.
 
Friend says Trump is considering 'terminating' Mueller

https://www.yahoo.com/news/friend-s...-terminating-mueller-235925758--politics.html


WASHINGTON (AP) — A friend of the president says Donald Trump is considering "terminating" special counsel Robert Mueller.

Newsmax CEO Chris Ruddy tells Judy Woodruff of "PBS NewsHour": "I think he's considering perhaps terminating the special counsel. I think he's weighing that option."

The White House did not immediately respond to questions about Ruddy's claims.

Under current Justice Department regulations, such a firing would have to be done by Attorney General Jeff Sessions' deputy, Rod Rosenstein, not the president— though those regulations could theoretically be set aside.

How does this guy being Trump's supposed "friend" give any weight to his personal opinion that would merit a headline?

More ABC News-style distortion and desperation?
 
would you say this distraction is preventing republicans from doing their jobs?

Well, they did do their jobs last night.
 
Again your armchair lawyering doesn't change the FACT that even under Trump she didn't break the law because no charges were ever filed. Again she didn't break The law no matter how hard you want it to be.

Trump is more corrupt than Hillary or obama combined but you are ok with that. You are ok with republicans being secretive on their bills, you are ok with trump lying, you are ok with trump having a media blackout on press conferences and you are ok with a president with strong Russian ties in his whole administration. In other words you excuse the most corrupt president like trump so you have zero credibility.

wow. What a disconnect.
 
Mueller is a liberal hack. He needs to go. get on with running the country without the distraction.

Credible documentation? Share it with the rest of us so that we might be as enlightened as you claim to be regarding Mueller.

Or was your post a valueless unfounded brain fart.
 
I'm sorry you are unable to process your obsession with Clinton. Maybe some therapy will do you good.

I am talking purely logic here.

" she didn't break the law because no charges were ever filed".

A person can break a law and never have charges filed.
 
I am talking purely logic here.

" she didn't break the law because no charges were ever filed".

A person can break a law and never have charges filed.

She has been under the microscope of two FBI directors, numerous hearings, and now under a Trump administration who placed cabinet level positions that could go after her. Even under all those conditions NO charges have been filed. Yes, you have an obsession with her and YES she didn't break any laws because no charges were filed. Even under trump, NO charges have been filed. Face facts, you got nothing but sour grapes and an unhealthy obsession with Clinton.
 
She has been under the microscope of two FBI directors, numerous hearings, and now under a Trump administration who placed cabinet level positions that could go after her. Even under all those conditions NO charges have been filed. Yes, you have an obsession with her and YES she didn't break any laws because no charges were filed. Even under trump, NO charges have been filed. Face facts, you got nothing but sour grapes and an unhealthy obsession with Clinton.

Are you actually unable to follow the logic? :roll:

Take Clinton out of the scenario and insert Susy.

" she didn't break the law because no charges were ever filed".

A person can break a law and never have charges filed.

Susy murders Steve. Susy broke the law.

Steves body is never found. No evidence Susy murdered Steve.

Susy is not charged with a crime.

Can you follow?
 
Credible documentation? Share it with the rest of us so that we might be as enlightened as you claim to be regarding Mueller.

Or was your post a valueless unfounded brain fart.

Follow the money, or at least the political contributions. Most of the "team" he assembled are Democrat donors, including Mueller.
 
This is how Trump floats his ideas in the media, and gauges results. He then acts upon those results.

So if there is backlash to this rumour, he won't do it. If not, he'll consider it a viable option. So we shall see.

Ordinarily Presidential actions like this would be political death - as it was for Nixon. But with party control of our government removing much of the former Constitutional checks and balances we had during Nixon, the GOP power structure will likely tolerate it and spin it to their voters. Our Republic is really in a terrible place in terms of democratic process and institutions. In his farewell address, George Washington warned of the rise political parties usurping the democratic process. He was absolutely correct.

News, every administration throws out trial balloons. Nothing new there
 
Yes, yes she did break the law and yes we were hard on her and Obama. They were exceedingly corrupt and deserved it

FBI: Yes, Queen Hillary Broke The Law. No, She Won't Be Prosecuted. | Daily Wire

18 USC §793. This statute explicitly states that whoever, “entrusted with or having lawful possession or control of any document…through gross negligence permits the same to removed from its proper place of custody…or having knowledge that the same has been illegally removed from its proper place of custody….shall be fined under this title or imprisoned not more than ten years, or both.” Comey called her “extremely careless.” That was highly charitable. But even by that standard, Hillary was grossly negligent with classified material. Comey says Hillary had no intent to transmit information to foreign powers. But that’s not what the statute requires.

18 USC §1924. This statute states that any employee of the United States who “knowingly removes [classified] documents or materials without authority and with the intent to retain such documents or materials at an unauthorized location shall be fined under this title or imprisoned for not more than one year, or both.” Hillary set up a private server explicitly to do this.


18 USC §798. This statute states that anyone who “uses in any manner prejudicial to the safety or interest of the United States…any classified information…shall be fined under this title or imprisoned not more than ten years, or both.” Hillary transmitted classified information in a manner that harmed the United States; Comey says she may have been hacked.


18 USC §2071. This statute says that anyone who has custody of classified material and “willfully and unlawfully conceals, removes, mutilates, obliterates, falsifies, or destroys the same, shall be fined under this title or imprisoned not more than three years.” Clearly, Hillary meant to remove classified materials from government control.

But there was so much corruption under Obama, I understand its easy to get mixed up....

Like when Susan Rice said the unmaskings were legal....she lied...again

Here's FISA's own opinion on the widespread illegal unmasking that happened under the Obama administration that started in 2010 and went on to 2016.
https://www.scribd.com/document/349261099/2016-Cert-FISC-Memo-Opin-Order-Apr-2017-4#from_embed

But why am I posting that link, you people never read it. You see, thats ACTUAL evidence of multiple crimes committed under the Obama administration, its not some tin hattery russian collusion lunacy or obstruction charges that are only backed by the cumalitive butthurt of the entire Democrat party and their supporters and nothing else
What a load of garbage - one foreign click bait site.
What a worthless post.
 
Follow the money, or at least the political contributions. Most of the "team" he assembled are Democrat donors, including Mueller.

Ayup. Worthless post.
 
Vern View said:
would you say this distraction is preventing republicans from doing their jobs?
Well, they did do their jobs last night.
That's the problem, they think they work for the rich.
 
A friend of the president says so? Well hey might as well hear what gossip Jan the secretary has to say too! I mean, everyone knows gossip is the new standard for front page news.
 
Are you actually unable to follow the logic? :roll:

Take Clinton out of the scenario and insert Susy.

" she didn't break the law because no charges were ever filed".

A person can break a law and never have charges filed.

Susy murders Steve. Susy broke the law.

Steves body is never found. No evidence Susy murdered Steve.

Susy is not charged with a crime.

Can you follow?

And I’m talking clinton here so you’re wrong again, you’re dismissed. Get some help for your Clinton Obesession Syndrome.
 
And I’m talking clinton here so you’re wrong again, you’re dismissed. Get some help for your Clinton Obesession Syndrome.

Wow. I'm not even being political and you can't just address logic.

If an animal bites a person but the person doesn't call animal control was the person bitten?? Of****ing course... :lol:
 
Back
Top Bottom