So, you think Trump is not guilty of any crimes? I got bad news for you

Glenn Kirshner was a Washington DC federal prosecutor for 30 years.

Listen to how he simplifies a complex event.

All I can tell you is this, I sure as hell wouldn't want to be Trump, money or no money,
with prosecutors like Kirschner about

 

problem is, you all have no credibility.. how many times have we heard this story? We were promised that trump committed all sorts of crimes with Russia collusion, 2 years, millions of our tax payer dollars.. NOTHING

 

So he's had four years to get Trump......I'm sure he has charges all set to be filed right?

Does he tell us what charges he is going to prosecute for first?

 

Trump is guilty of being a Democrat operative. It's all over parlor. This is why parlor is being taken down. Trump's MO has been exposed.

 

Isn't it terrible how the criminal justice system has become politicized by the left? Decide you don't like someone and desperately try to find some evidence to make them guilty.

 

Actually, the investigation into Russian collusion pulled in a surplus, because there were many criminal charges, fines, and assets seized. It didn't cost the US tax payers a single dime

 

For every lawyer you find the other side can find one saying the opposite. In fact that is actually how our system is set up. A prosecutor lawyer, and a defense lawyer. So your "evidence" is worthless. The only reason to trot him out is because he affirms your already biased opinion. (note: "your" as in the royal use, not you personally Patricio)

 

If there was ever a prosecutor who was part of the 'swamp'?

 

Manafort aside, it didn't profit the Republic in anyway and even worse they had Manafort to rights in 2009. The Russian investigation was about big foot(collusion)
and the best the Mueller report came up with essentially was "Well we have evidence of big foot sightings(meetings and rumored reports of meetings) but no actual evidence of big foot. Hey, if it makes you feel better we have an untested theory of obstruction that we're not willing to go to the OLC about but we are willing to share with you so you can scream to the hilltops on our behalf."

Yeah, Trump's actions don't validate Crossfire Hurricane. We do infact need a higher threshold than a 'low threshold /standard' or we will continue to have political prosecution of a low hanging fruit nature. In this regard, I hold Bill Barr in high esteem for his conduct in assuring us that won't happen. And I hope Biden's AG also stays to the standards of probable cause, solid evidence and not withholding when that evidence changes or is faulty.

If Trump's guilty of a crime, successfully prosecute him like any other criminal defendant.

 

You're confused. Trjump, owing to the OLC memo, was never prosecuted. And he wasn't convicted on the impeachment because of a complicit Senate.
And,
That was before January 6, which resulted in 5 deaths, and the world witnessed Trump's hate fueled flock laying siege on the Capitol.

And, Kirschner has credibility. Moreover, after Jan 20th, we will no longer have a corrupt Senate and DOJ, dems are in control, and with Merrick Garland, he will clean up the DOJ.

Besides, I'm not talking about 'impeachment' I'm talking about prosecution.

 

Jeez, he committed sedition right in front of everyone's eyes.

 

did you watch the video? Kirschner's argument is compelling.

I'd even accept a directed verdict by a Trump appointed judge.

 

I would expect nothing less. No one is suggesting otherwise.

The Mueller report only went half the distance, and if you combine the Senate Judiciary report with the Mueller report, we have some 1500 pages of crimes, abuses of power, and slam dunk cases of obstruction of justice. On top of that, add the seige of the capitol and the potential felony murder that occurred, we have A veritable roadmap for any prosecutor to act on.

As for Crossfire Hurricane, if the Durham report finds evidence of crimes, I'll expect the DOJ to act. Frankly, I doubt there is going to be anything high level in the Durham report, only incompetence here and there.

In fact, there is this:

https://nymag.com/intelligencer/202...on-how-trumps-october-surprise-went-bust.html

According to two sources familiar with the probe, there has been no evidence found, after 18 months of investigation, to support Barr's claims that Trump was targeted by politically biased Obama officials to prevent his election. (The probe remains ongoing.) In fact, the sources said, the Durham investigation has so far uncovered no evidence of any wrongdoing by Biden or Barack Obama, or that they were even involved with the Russia investigation. There 'was no evidence … not even remotely … indicating Obama or Biden did anything wrong,' as one person put it

I mean, after 25 years of investigating the Clintons, what has been turned up?

Squat.

The truth is, all the crimes are being committed by republicans

 

If they were slam dunk cases, they would've went to the OLC and gotten a sealed indictment(Rod Rosenstein suggested as such). Instead because it was a novel theory, they chose to get our panties wadded up. That said, I don't care what happens to this idiot now that he's no longer president. A ham sandwich can be indicted, Trump's worse than a ham sandwich.

 

You don't know that. Mueller, like anyone on this, was handling a hot potato the size of Texas, which is probably why he relied on the very thin OLC memo, to kick the matter outside his office.

Many said he dropped the ball, he should have recommended indictments.

The ham sandwich metaphor aside, noting that no one as actually ever indicted a ham sandwich, or anything close to it.

ANd, refresh your browser, I added to the rebuttal to which you replied.

 

Obama and Biden didn't do anything but the investigation team misled the FISA court, and the very use of FISA(instead of a regional court ) indicates their lack of good faith, because had they gone the federal route, they would've had more power to conduct the investigation but the defense would've been made aware of the allegations in Steele's fiction and rebutted it.

As a whole while the investigation was overseen by the FBI, the lack of care for evidential procedure as well as commiting perjury in court it's still a major scandal and it shows a lack of institutional control in the FBI.

So we can go with the 'mistakes were made', 'Russian Disinformation', etc but in my view that doesn't make it any less incompetent or corrupt in fact moreso.

 

Do you, or do you not, accept the integrity of the Durham report, which is forthcoming, but we have a good idea of what will be the findings?

 

Let's put it in the context of the Mueller report wherein Mueller swore up and down that he didn't leak to the media but in fact the contents of the report were heavily leaked to the media. Famously the written questions to the dirtbag as example uno.

Given this, I'm sure we'll learn alot from the report. The real tone of your question is: Do I accept that there won't be punishment for perjury on the account of their professional status? Sadly yes I do, it's not what you do, it's who you are. In that regard both Trump(during his occupation of the WH) and the crossfire hurricane team are one and the same.

Keep this in mind: If we commit perjury and forge documents we go to jail. The Crossfire hurricane team? They just lose their jobs.