President Trump & U.S Election 2016 Investigation

[Stephen]

Originally Posted by Mick

Miss the obvious as always Hugh. That Special Counsel appoints 13 Democrats donors or Democrat affiliates to assist in their efforts to find Russian collusion from Trump camp, only the Collusion was carried out by their own pathetic party and Hillary with them funding the Dossier, information obtained from Russian sources!!!

It's not always about Hilary.

Trump lies again and lives in cloud cuckooland, where he is right or it's all fake news or everyone is corrupt because they disagree with him or have a different view.

He maybe the President, but he is NOT above the law.

Originally Posted by Damien

Mueller himself is a Republican who was appointed by another Republican after the collapse of the FBI investigation heading by another Republican.

Party affiliation in the US is a lot looser than it is here too. Just because someone is a registered Democrat or Republican doesn't mean they're uncontrollably partisan. Most of the country is not like that. The paranoid mindset of Trump and his supporters, a mindset that divides the world into good (Republican) and evil (Democrat), blinds them to that fact.

Nothing sums that up more than the fact whenever he meets any opposition from the institutions that are meant to act as a check against the executive that it's construed as illegitimate and sinister. All opposition to Trump is somehow corrupt it seems, any investigation into his allies should be stopped.

It's the language of tinpot dictators: Lock up the rivals, pardon the allies.

[Stephen]

Originally Posted by Stephen

It's not always about Hilary.

Trump lies again and lives in cloud cuckooland, where he is right or it's all fake news or everyone is corrupt because they disagree with him or have a different view.

He maybe the President, but he is NOT above the law.

I never said he was FFS and neither did he, so wind your ‘For her’ neck in.

[Stephen]

I'll do nothing of the sort.

He tweeted saying he can commit a crime and then pardon himself.

If that's not saying he is above the law then I don't know what is. Even though he is wrong.

You are wrong.

Where did he specifically tweet he can commit a crime and then pardon himself?

Can’t find that tweet, so as I suggested with the neck, wind it in.

[Stephen]

So in your opinion, what did he say?

Donald J. Trump
@RealDonaldTrump

As has been stated by numerous legal scholars, I have the absolute right to PARDON myself, but why would I do that when I have done nothing wrong?

Don't tell me what to do. I have every right to post my freely and voice ny opinion.

[Mr K]

Originally Posted by Mick

You are wrong.

Where did he specifically tweet he can commit a crime and then pardon himself?

Can’t find that tweet, so as I suggested with the neck, wind it in.

I managed to find the tweet in question Mick.
https://twitter.com/realDonaldTrump/...922147841?s=20
Think you are playing with words, the meaning is clear, he thinks he is above the law.
You are rather proving Stephen's point about Trump supporters.
However I'll 'go and wind my neck in too', if you like

Originally Posted by Mr K

I managed to find the tweet in question Mick.
https://twitter.com/realDonaldTrump/...922147841?s=20
Think you are playing with words, the meaning is clear, he thinks he is above the law.
You are rather proving Stephen's point about Trump supporters.
However I'll 'go and wind my neck in too', if you like

You see this is where yet again, you see things that are not being said - it does not say "He can commit a crime and then pardon himself". He did NOT specifically say that whatsoever, typical of left leaning folk and the pathetic Anti-Trump press and haters, making shit up as usual.

---------- Post added at 13:35 ---------- Previous post was at 13:18 ----------

Originally Posted by Stephen

So in your opinion, what did he say?

Don't tell me what to do. I have every right to post my freely and voice ny opinion.

Again you're seeing things NOT there. I said "Wind your neck in", that is NOT telling you not to post your views, nor would I do that. "Wind your neck in" is a term associated with being told to calm it, "pipe down" with the "excitement" or over analysis especially when what you are expressing is most certainly incorrect and ridiculous.

Originally Posted by Mick

You see this is where yet again, you see things that are not being said - it does not say "He can commit a crime and then pardon himself". He did NOT specifically say that whatsoever, typical of left leaning folk and the pathetic Anti-Trump press and haters, making shit up as usual.

---------- Post added at 13:35 ---------- Previous post was at 13:18 ----------



Again you're seeing things NOT there. I said "Wind your neck in", that is NOT telling you not to post your views, nor would I do that. "Wind your neck in" is a term associated with being told to calm it, "pipe down" with the "excitement" or over analysis especially when what you are expressing is most certainly incorrect and ridiculous.

Trump said he could pardon himself, but a pardon can only be issued for someone who has been found guilty of something, so he is saying he is above the law.

His lawyer, Guliani, stated on a TV programme on Sunday that Trump could shoot Comey and not be indicted whilst serving as President.

Do you think any President (or anyone) should be above the law, and be allowed to pardon themselves for crimes they’ve been found guilty of?

[Chloé Palmas]

I think Rudy is losing his ability to make the case for a winning argument - he seems to be saying "no matter what the President does, he cannot be indited" but he has a terrible way of saying it.

He is correct in this.

Trump cannot then be charged with anything and the only way for him to be removed from office or be found guilty of anything, is through impeachment.

Under which grounds he cannot pardon himself:

https://www.heritage.org/constitutio...9/pardon-power

The possibility of a President pardoning himself for a crime is not precluded by the explicit language of the Constitution, and, during the summer of 1974, some of President Richard M. Nixon's lawyers argued that it was constitutionally permissible. But a broader reading of the Constitution and the general principles of the traditions of United States law might lead to the conclusion that a self-pardon is constitutionally impermissible. It would seem to violate the principles that a man should not be a judge in his own case; that the rule of law is supreme and the United States is a nation of laws, not men; and that the President is not above the law.

I don't even agree with this interpretation though, the constitution clearly states:

Article II section 2:

"shall have power to grant reprieves and pardons for offenses against the United States, except in cases of impeachment"

If the President cannot be indicted and the IC statute has expired the only way to charge / indict a sitting President is an article of Impeachment, which he cannot be involved in the pardon of.

He is simply wrong and Giuliani makes it worse for Trump, every single day by saying that the President cannot be indicted - he is slowly whittling down any other option to charge / indict him other than impeachment, which in stark black and white / no uncertain terms, removes the ability to pardon.

By Giuliani's definition Trump can neither be indicted nor pardon himself as the only proceeding that can go up against him is the process of impeachment, which Trump cannot meddle with.

I think its time everyone in this topic took a deep breath and stopped falling out with each other.

I'll be more than happy to close this if arguments persist.

Originally Posted by Hugh

Trump said he could pardon himself, but a pardon can only be issued for someone who has been found guilty of something, so he is saying he is above the law.

His lawyer, Guliani, stated on a TV programme on Sunday that Trump could shoot Comey and not be indicted whilst serving as President.

Do you think any President (or anyone) should be above the law, and be allowed to pardon themselves for crimes they’ve been found guilty of?

No he is not saying he is above the law - stop putting words in to a sentence that does NOT exist. No where in a tweet has he said, "he can commit a crime and pardon himself", he said he has the power to pardon himself, but has no intention because he's done nothing wrong, which he has not, as no evidence has been found, plenty of evidence exists regarding his opponent potentially breaking some elections laws with her and the DNC funding the Russian sourced Dossier, a fact you keep conveniently forgetting. - Trump probably does as per the Constitution, have the power to pardon himself, the text in the constitution is ambiguous, he cannot pardon himself from an impeachment, but an indictment is not the same as impeachment.

As for you asking if anyone should be above the law - think you're forgetting our Head of State, her Majesty, The Queen, in this country, is above the law.

Do you think she should be?

But to be given a Presidential Pardon, someone has to have been found guilty of a Federal crime, so the only time Trump could pardon himself would be if he had been found guilty of a Federal crime...

If Trump isn’t going to pardon himself because he won’t need to pardon himself, why say he could in the first place?