Posted on 01/18/2019 6:34:25 AM PST by yesthatjallen
BUZZFEED released the phony dossier too.
The Buzzfeed journalists haven’t seen any evidence, and one of them got canned for lying before.
“You don’t want to go there buddy”. Contempt of Congress is perfectly fine though. What a disgrace. And he is thinking about running for President.
A liar says he was told to lie? Really? That is the basis to impeach anyone? I don’t thinh so.
McConnell won't allow this to happen. A conservative judiciary will be his legacy.
Another big fat nothing burger.
There are exceptions. If an attorney and their client hatch a plan to do something illegal, as has been alleged here, that’s not covered under attorney-client privilege.
Can you site some cases? A client telling his lawyer to lie is not a plan. That happens daily in the courts.
Just border patrol agent Brian Terry
Suborning of perjury is a felony. Does not matter if one is President or Pope or a private businessman. It is a felony. Now, it may be another matter of whether a President can be indicted. But if this is true (responding to the question above), it is serious...
The Benghazi lies were directed.
The Democrats are accustomed to not being held to account on anything, most especially their naked hypocrisy.
This is how the media treats them.
But everyone isn’t the media, Eric.
Problem is, impeachment IS a political tool, not a legal one.
I suppose the opposition democRATS could bring articles of impeachment against Trump for spitting on the sidewalk.
Doesn't sound like high crimes and misdemeanors?
Well, the founders original intent of "high crimes" was referring to wrong doing by officials in "high" places or office, not that they necessarily committed major crimes or misdemeanors.
But it's wrongly misinterpreted today as meaning the latter.
So look for the democRATS to attempt to impeach Trump on anything they can make sound good.
Remember, Republicans impeached BJ Clinton for lying about getting a Lewinsky in the Oval Office.
But just as in Clinton's case, this won't go anywhere though. They still need 67 votes in the Senate to convict. They don't have anywhere near that total.
The threats of impeachment by Holder, other democRATS (Tom Steyer) and the media (Atlantic magazine) are flights of fantasy political theater not based in reality.
Their goal is to get rid of Trump via impeachment. Ain't goin' to happen.
The Democrats and media wag the tongue without evidence.
Then we have to impeach Nanzi Peolosi for lying to the President (American people) about a security concern making the time and place of the State of the Union unsafe.
The doctor's ethical -- and legal -- responsibility is to tell you: "You don't need a lobotomy, you moron. Take two aspirins and go home."
The lawyer's ethical -- and legal -- responsibility is to tell you: "That's against the law, you moron. Of course I can't do that."
The question is whether there’s other proof besides Cohen’s word. Don’t forget that Cohen had been taping all his phone calls with Trump and that all that info was seized with legally approved warrants.
I don’t know if “buzzfeed” (sheesh) is right or not, but if they are, it’s more than just Cohen’s word against Trump’s.
At least Trump didn’t have sex with an intern, but he may have suborned perjury to obstruct justice.
So what, even if its true?
Suborning of perjury is a felony. Does not matter if one is President or Pope or a private businessman. It is a felony. Now, it may be another matter of whether a President can be indicted. But if this is true (responding to the question above), it is serious...
One can say anything to their lawyer without that being used against you in court including perjury.
I agree with you. As long as Trump’s popularity with Republicans is so high, the Senate will not flip on him.
Nixon was in the low 20s nationally when Goldwater and Co went in and told him that they couldn’t save him any longer.
“US Courts have not yet conclusively ruled how little knowledge an attorney can have of the underlying crime or fraud before the privilege detaches and the attorney’s communications or requisite testimony become admissible”
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.