Posted on 08/26/2018 3:07:04 PM PDT by Hojczyk
Scott Adams, the creator of Dilbert and popular political prognosticator, floated a theory of “mutually assured destruction” on Sunday morning: if prosecutors pursue President Donald Trump, he will make sure that Hillary Clinton and her allies go to jail.
Adams said that his theory explained why Trump had retained Jeff Sessions as Attorney General, even while attacking him for failing to pursue charges against Hillary Clinton, as well as members of the “deep state” who had conspired to spy on the Trump campaign.
The goal, he said, was to make sure prosecutors understood there was a “red line” they could not cross — because doing so would trigger Sessions’s replacement with a prosecutor who would take down Trump’s enemies:
Let me ask you this — and I’ve not seen any reporting on this: what would happen if they actually got the president on something serious? Well, between the time the president knew he was going down — and this is hypothetical, let’s imagine that they found something in his business or something that was problematic — he would have a number of months of being in power before he was technically out of office. What would he do? Well, I think he would employ “mutually assured destruction” — not of the world, but of Hillary Clinton.
Adams later specified that the “red line” for Special Counsel Robert Mueller was any investigation into the broader finances of the Trump Organization, which had nothing to do with the 2016 presidential election or allegations of Russian “collusion.”
(Excerpt) Read more at breitbart.com ...
“How many more judicial pardons I mean immunity deals are the democrats going to hand out to their team?”
Regardless of immunity deals given, they require full cooperation, assistance on matters they have direct knowledge of, and HONESTY.
If you demonstrate they have acted otherwise, their immunity is NULL AND VOID!
“The problem with that theory is that, if Hillary went down then so would of the Washington crowd get brought down and there is no way Congress would not take steps to protect themselves and her.”
Yes. The scope of the problem.
“Trump cannot be stopped from appointing a special prosecutor.”
Does the president have authority to appoint a special prosecutor, or does that have to be done via the AG’s office?
That has been my theory for not a long time, but for several months, that firing sessions would be a mild form of suicide for Trump. Because he would never be able to get a successor approved in Congress.
Name me, ping me.
Baloney!
The front line DOJ prosecutors and senior civilian executives are heavily Democrat.
And 96% of the Washington D.C. jury pool voted AGAINST Donald Trump in 2016.
excuse me. He is head of the justice departmet. There is no statute governing the appointment.m He deferred to Rosenstien thinking he was in good faith and then found it was all a deep state set up-. Rosenstien was in on the Fisa scam and Trump did not know that. There is hell coming for hillary and a bunch of criminal defendants.
My guess too. If gop picks up 3-5 seats sessions is gone by January. Trump is just waiting to see if he has a little more cushion than he has now. But sesssions is on the chopping block, no doubt about it.
“The goal, he said, was to make sure prosecutors understood there was a “red line” they could not cross — because doing so would trigger Sessions’s replacement with a prosecutor who would take down Trump’s enemies”
Talk about spin. Yeah the prosecutors are really scared about Trump — someone who won’t even fire his own AG. They are shaking in their boots.
It’s just the opposite. Had these prosecutors witnessed Trump taking action against Sessions (and the dems) then maybe they would have gotten a message and noticed some red lines. Maybe.
Think about it:
1. There would be no avenue for a plea bargain. Mueller would have to go through the whole song and dance of a criminal prosecution, even while knowing full well that the defendant is going to get a presidential pardon -- probably 30 seconds after the closing arguments are made. Donald Trump is the kind of guy who would actually let the whole thing play out this way just to make a spectacle of it.
2. President Trump has the legal authority to declassify a boatload of documents related to Mueller's investigation, and then immediately hand them over to the defense attorneys in the case. Half of the FBI, CIA, NSA and Mueller's own team would be called as witnesses for the defense.
.
I used to think Scott was smarter than this nonsense.
.
“a jury has to find her guilty.
Good luck with both.”
It depends on the strength of the evidence — and I’m talking video. There are some things that would repulse even some normal stinkin’ Democrats. And you know what I’m talkin’ about.
There is no statute, It falls on the head of the Justice department. Trump is head of the Justice department with absolute power. He has signaled he is doing this.
At least John McCain won’t be blocking his nominees.
The question is:
Why isn’t she in prison already?
Which FISA scam was that?
If they force our Trump He will stand as the modern day Samson and bring the whole stinking house down.
I’ve said it before and I’ll say it again, forcing Trump out through an illegal coup will,be the most disastrous move the Dummycrats could ever make.
It would make CW 2 inevitable
There’s been a game of M.A.D. since Trump earned his election win.
I think there's a real good chance the Clinton Foundation was effectively operating as a CIA front ... and we had a U.S. Secretary of State who was a CIA asset.
Prosecuting someone like that would give her the legal right to call half of the senior officials of the Obama administration as witnesses for the defense, and compromise a huge pile of national secrets in the process. I don't see any way a prosecutor could ever allow that.
Maybe. However Roger Stone is claiming that that is the SC’s plan.
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.