Posted on 07/03/2022 12:18:47 PM PDT by Macho MAGA Man
RINO Jan. 6 Committee vice chair Liz Cheney and serial liar Adam Schiff on Sunday said the Jan. 6 panel may make multiple criminal referrals to the Justice Department.
“What kind of man knows that a mob is armed and sends the mob to attack the Capitol and further incites that mob when his own vice president is under threat, when the Congress is under threat?” Cheney said Sunday on ABC’s “This Week” using Cassidy Hutchinson’s false testimony to attack Trump.
"I have greater concern about what it would mean if people weren’t held accountable for what’s happened here,” Cheney added. “I think it’s a much graver constitutional threat if a president can engage in these kinds of activities and the majority of the president’s party looks away or we as a country decide, you know, we’re not actually going to take our constitutional obligation seriously.”
When asked about Cheney’s comments on ABC’s “This Week” on the committee’s possible criminal referrals — and prosecution of Trump, Adam Schiff told host Margaret Brennan that he agreed with Cheney.
“You know, for four years the Justice Department took the position that you can’t indict a sitting president – uh, if the Department were now to take a position that you can’t investigate or indict a former president, then a president becomes above the law and that’s a dangerous idea that the founders would never have subscribed to – even more dangerous in the case of Donald Trump,” Schiff said.
“Donald Trump is someone who has shown when he’s not held accountable, he goes on to commit worse and worse abuses of power,” Schiff added.
Margaret Brennan pointed out to Schiff that millions of people voted for Trump so there is a “very high risk” in prosecuting Trump.
Schiff said “immunizing” Trump would
(Excerpt) Read more at thegatewaypundit.com ...
He should announce he is running. doesn’t DOJ have a long history of saying they won’t interfere in an election?
Bet they chance course with Trump.
He should announce he is running. doesn’t DOJ have a long history of saying they won’t interfere in an election?
Bet they chance course with Trump.
I’m with you! The fact that they think we’re stupid is my main gripe.
To allow the likes of McConnell and Schumer to turn the rhetorical tables so abruptly, so (seemingly) decisively, and with such impunity (with effectively no effective pushback during the past year and a half), on the citizens who converged that day on the Capitol, an astonishing set of circumstances had to come together, more or less simultaneously.
Those people, the protesters, who doubtlessly went to the Capitol with no other intent than to express themselves, yes, politically, but also, entirely legitimately, literally seeking redress for a huge collective grievance, were converted, as if by magic, within a short few minutes, seemingly no more than an hour or so, into a band of vicious guerillas with no more honor or morality than Che Guevera’s shock troops on their worst day.
If Satan isn’t hard at work pushing and pulling the levers of power and influence that allowed this to happen, and that are allowing the Jan Six Commission to continue functioning in this way against all logic and justice, I’d like to meet tge human mastermind or masterminds that cooked it all up from the available ingredients.
That is the big problem. A trial in DC is the end for DJT.
Just like Trump colluded with Russia, right, Pencil Neck?
Yeah, yeah, yeah. You’ve been telling us that for years, Schiffty. Use your bug eyes and show us some evidence. So far all you’ve put out is a large pile of buffalo chips.
“Are there any laws against an indicted individual running for elective office?”
The qualifications are established by the Constitution. Simply:
1) Natural born citizen
2) 35 years old or older
3) 14 years or longer a resident within the United States
4) No one can serve more than 2 full terms as President.
There is no provision in the Constitution to prohibit someone under indictment from running. There is no provision in the Constitution to prevent someone convicted of a felony or misdemeanor from running and serving.
The Rats/Rinos seem not to have a clue as to how deep the resentment runs as a result of the left's running over the Constitution for decades. IMO, the lust for power/wealth has long since pushed a love and concern for the country and individual freedom to the background. And we are at a crossroads...
Thank you Mister Newbie.
“I actually think they’re going to do it to prevent him from running.”
Of course that is the intent. What Prez Trump should do is announce that he is running for President right now, BEFORE they indict him. That way they lose the pretext for attempting to indict him in order to stop him from running, because he has announced that he is running. And before any report by these scumbags goes to Merritt Garland in the DOJ.
Then lets see what they would do.
Indict him after he has announced he’s running? Not as easy to do as Trump’s off to the races already. The Stalin show trial would be in a real pickle. Would show them for what they are, hanging judges bent on getting rid of Trump. The hew and cry by the public would be enormous.
My fervent hope is that Trump via some massively disseminated standalone series of events with great fanfare, states that he is running for President of the United States in the 2024 election. Put that in your pipe and smoke it, you fascist bastards.
What is the charge Shiff?
Does she think that is supposed to be the downside?
I like your idea of what Trump should do.
A mob is armed? Liz, if it was, what happened to the arms between where Trump was and the Capitol?
They’ll do it to keep him from running even if there isn’t a snowball chance of him being convicted. Just charges having over his head is enough for them. Just like the Russia Russia hoax even our party knew it was BS but they let President go through it all to be stopped only by Senate.
They can’t indict but Garland can and he has every vindictive reason to go after him.
Yes - but we've all known that for months, and it isn't news. The problem is that Gateway Pundit, yet again, puts out a false headline that needs some people to believe that the Committee can actually indict directly. You can see people in this very thread swallowing that line, and arguing that shift is going to indict even though the law doesn't let him
It's the kind of dishonesty that leads to conservatives saying stupid, ignorant things in other contexts and forums. Other people hear that, and believe that we don't know what we're talking about. The only interest that serves is that of the Left.
There's nothing wrong with demanding accuracy and truthfulness from the sources upon which we rely.
Check
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.