Welcome to the Hardcore Husky Forums. Folks who are well-known in Cyberland and not that dumb.
The President is above the law
insinceredawg
Member Posts: 5,117
in Tug Tavern
Comments
-
Thanks for the 2016 hot take.
-
Trump’s attorney argued this yesterday.PurpleThrobber said:Thanks for the 2016 hot take.
-
But does he have a phone and a pen and free guns for ISIS and Mexican drug cartels?
-
Slow legal system.CirrhosisDawg said:
Trump’s attorney argued this yesterday.PurpleThrobber said:Thanks for the 2016 hot take.
-
He isn't the first person to argue it. President needs to be impeached first before he can be prosecuted for violating the law. There are sound legal arguments in support of this. Of course you have O'Keefed the shittiest attorney this side of the Pecos and yourself, the dumbest mother fucker this side of Hondo confused by the argument.CirrhosisDawg said:
Trump’s attorney argued this yesterday.PurpleThrobber said:Thanks for the 2016 hot take.
-
Where does that living, breathing Constitution of ours say the POTUS cannot be prosecuted for crimes while in office?SFGbob said:
He isn't the first person to argue it. President needs to be impeached first before he can be prosecuted for violating the law. There are sound legal arguments in support of this. Of course you have O'Keefed the shittiest attorney this side of the Pecos and yourself, the dumbest mother fucker this side of Hondo confused by the argument.CirrhosisDawg said:
Trump’s attorney argued this yesterday.PurpleThrobber said:Thanks for the 2016 hot take.
-
I never said the Constitution said it my strawman ass fucking Kunt of a friend. I said there are sound legal arguments supporting that position. Of course you and sound legal arguments are unfamiliar with each other.HHusky said:
Where does that living, breathing Constitution of ours say the POTUS cannot be prosecuted for crimes while in office?SFGbob said:
He isn't the first person to argue it. President needs to be impeached first before he can be prosecuted for violating the law. There are sound legal arguments in support of this. Of course you have O'Keefed the shittiest attorney this side of the Pecos and yourself, the dumbest mother fucker this side of Hondo confused by the argument.CirrhosisDawg said:
Trump’s attorney argued this yesterday.PurpleThrobber said:Thanks for the 2016 hot take.
-
“Sound legal arguments” smack! What “law” do these fabulous arguments derive from then?SFGbob said:
I never said the Constitution said it my strawman ass fucking Kunt of a friend. I said there are sound legal arguments supporting that position. Of course you and sound legal arguments are unfamiliar with each other.HHusky said:
Where does that living, breathing Constitution of ours say the POTUS cannot be prosecuted for crimes while in office?SFGbob said:
He isn't the first person to argue it. President needs to be impeached first before he can be prosecuted for violating the law. There are sound legal arguments in support of this. Of course you have O'Keefed the shittiest attorney this side of the Pecos and yourself, the dumbest mother fucker this side of Hondo confused by the argument.CirrhosisDawg said:
Trump’s attorney argued this yesterday.PurpleThrobber said:Thanks for the 2016 hot take.
-
This should make a great article of impeachment
-
In 1973, in the midst of the Watergate scandal engulfing President Richard Nixon, the Justice Department’s Office of Legal Counsel adopted in an internal memo the position that a sitting president cannot be indicted. Nixon resigned in 1974, with the House of Representatives moving toward impeaching him.
“The spectacle of an indicted president still trying to serve as Chief Executive boggles the imagination,” the memo stated.
The department reaffirmed the policy in a 2000 memo, saying court decisions in the intervening years had not changed its conclusion that a sitting president is “constitutionally immune” from indictment and criminal prosecution. It concluded that criminal charges against a president would “violate the constitutional separation of powers” delineating the authority of the executive, legislative and judicial branches of the U.S. government.
“The indictment or criminal prosecution of a sitting President would unconstitutionally undermine the capacity of the executive branch to perform its constitutionally assigned functions,” the memo stated.
Hardly shocking the O'Keefed the worst fucking attorney around is ignorant of this. Can you imagine the poor saps who are actually dumb enough to hire this dumbfuck? O'Keefed must have his malpractice defense guys on speed dial. -
I'm sure these sound legal arguments coincidentally did not exist between 2009 and 2017 but miraculously appeared now that your boy is in office. Bitchass partisan Kunt.SFGbob said:
I never said the Constitution said it my strawman ass fucking Kunt of a friend. I said there are sound legal arguments supporting that position. Of course you and sound legal arguments are unfamiliar with each other.HHusky said:
Where does that living, breathing Constitution of ours say the POTUS cannot be prosecuted for crimes while in office?SFGbob said:
He isn't the first person to argue it. President needs to be impeached first before he can be prosecuted for violating the law. There are sound legal arguments in support of this. Of course you have O'Keefed the shittiest attorney this side of the Pecos and yourself, the dumbest mother fucker this side of Hondo confused by the argument.CirrhosisDawg said:
Trump’s attorney argued this yesterday.PurpleThrobber said:Thanks for the 2016 hot take.
-
If Trump murdered someone he could be impeached one day, convicted the next, and led out in chains to stand trial which is pretty much what the dem base dreams about every day
-
Well a fucking moron like you would think that.insinceredawg said:
I'm sure these sound legal arguments coincidentally did not exist between 2009 and 2017 but miraculously appeared now that your boy is in office. Bitchass partisan Kunt.SFGbob said:
I never said the Constitution said it my strawman ass fucking Kunt of a friend. I said there are sound legal arguments supporting that position. Of course you and sound legal arguments are unfamiliar with each other.HHusky said:
Where does that living, breathing Constitution of ours say the POTUS cannot be prosecuted for crimes while in office?SFGbob said:
He isn't the first person to argue it. President needs to be impeached first before he can be prosecuted for violating the law. There are sound legal arguments in support of this. Of course you have O'Keefed the shittiest attorney this side of the Pecos and yourself, the dumbest mother fucker this side of Hondo confused by the argument.CirrhosisDawg said:
Trump’s attorney argued this yesterday.PurpleThrobber said:Thanks for the 2016 hot take.
In 1973, in the midst of the Watergate scandal engulfing President Richard Nixon, the Justice Department’s Office of Legal Counsel adopted in an internal memo the position that a sitting president cannot be indicted. Nixon resigned in 1974, with the House of Representatives moving toward impeaching him.
“The spectacle of an indicted president still trying to serve as Chief Executive boggles the imagination,” the memo stated.
The department reaffirmed the policy in a 2000 memo, saying court decisions in the intervening years had not changed its conclusion that a sitting president is “constitutionally immune” from indictment and criminal prosecution. It concluded that criminal charges against a president would “violate the constitutional separation of powers” delineating the authority of the executive, legislative and judicial branches of the U.S. government.
-
I’m actually well aware of that opinion and how it came to be written with that dicta included.SFGbob said:In 1973, in the midst of the Watergate scandal engulfing President Richard Nixon, the Justice Department’s Office of Legal Counsel adopted in an internal memo the position that a sitting president cannot be indicted. Nixon resigned in 1974, with the House of Representatives moving toward impeaching him.
“The spectacle of an indicted president still trying to serve as Chief Executive boggles the imagination,” the memo stated.
The department reaffirmed the policy in a 2000 memo, saying court decisions in the intervening years had not changed its conclusion that a sitting president is “constitutionally immune” from indictment and criminal prosecution. It concluded that criminal charges against a president would “violate the constitutional separation of powers” delineating the authority of the executive, legislative and judicial branches of the U.S. government.
“The indictment or criminal prosecution of a sitting President would unconstitutionally undermine the capacity of the executive branch to perform its constitutionally assigned functions,” the memo stated.
Hardly shocking the O'Keefed the worst fucking attorney around is ignorant of this. Can you imagine the poor saps who are actually dumb enough to hire this dumbfuck? O'Keefed must have his malpractice defense guys on speed dial. -
Gosh, was 1973 prior to 2009? You're such a mouthy fucking moron IC.
-
Welcome back to the board. I noticed you ran and hid yesterday after I provided you the opening statement from Bill Taylor. You never uttered a single word on it. I wonder why.SFGbob said:Gosh, was 1973 prior to 2009? You're such a mouthy fucking moron IC.
-
Yeah, I change the topic too if I was a fucking moron like you IC.insinceredawg said:
Welcome back to the board. I noticed you ran and hid yesterday after I provided you the opening statement from Bill Taylor. You never uttered a single word on it. I wonder why.SFGbob said:Gosh, was 1973 prior to 2009? You're such a mouthy fucking moron IC.
-
Got it. You're scared to talk about it. What a pussy.SFGbob said:
Yeah, I change the topic too if I was a fucking moron like you IC.insinceredawg said:
Welcome back to the board. I noticed you ran and hid yesterday after I provided you the opening statement from Bill Taylor. You never uttered a single word on it. I wonder why.SFGbob said:Gosh, was 1973 prior to 2009? You're such a mouthy fucking moron IC.
-
Did you ever get the rest of his statement? Was it on TV? In HD?insinceredawg said:
Welcome back to the board. I noticed you ran and hid yesterday after I provided you the opening statement from Bill Taylor. You never uttered a single word on it. I wonder why.SFGbob said:Gosh, was 1973 prior to 2009? You're such a mouthy fucking moron IC.
-
Who said anything about 1973? I'm just implying that you didn't agree with the "sound legal arguments" during Obama's tenure cause you're a bitchass partisan Kunt.SFGbob said:
Yeah, I change the topic too if I was a fucking moron like you IC.insinceredawg said:
Welcome back to the board. I noticed you ran and hid yesterday after I provided you the opening statement from Bill Taylor. You never uttered a single word on it. I wonder why.SFGbob said:Gosh, was 1973 prior to 2009? You're such a mouthy fucking moron IC.
-
Yeah, the scary intellect of a fucking moron like you scares me. Have you figured out if 1973 comes before 2009 yet dumbfuck?insinceredawg said:
Got it. You're scared to talk about it. What a pussy.SFGbob said:
Yeah, I change the topic too if I was a fucking moron like you IC.insinceredawg said:
Welcome back to the board. I noticed you ran and hid yesterday after I provided you the opening statement from Bill Taylor. You never uttered a single word on it. I wonder why.SFGbob said:Gosh, was 1973 prior to 2009? You're such a mouthy fucking moron IC.
-
Still scared to talk about it. Does it hurt your snatch that your dear leader is a criminal that you can no longer make excuses for?SFGbob said:
Yeah, the scary intellect of a fucking moron like you scares me. Have you figured out if 1973 comes before 2009 yet dumbfuck?insinceredawg said:
Got it. You're scared to talk about it. What a pussy.SFGbob said:
Yeah, I change the topic too if I was a fucking moron like you IC.insinceredawg said:
Welcome back to the board. I noticed you ran and hid yesterday after I provided you the opening statement from Bill Taylor. You never uttered a single word on it. I wonder why.SFGbob said:Gosh, was 1973 prior to 2009? You're such a mouthy fucking moron IC.
-
So have we established that murder is a high crime and misdemeanor?RaceBannon said:If Trump murdered someone he could be impeached one day, convicted the next, and led out in chains to stand trial which is pretty much what the dem base dreams about every day
As baseline for what we should be expecting to see come down the pike any second now.
-
Don’t underestimate these guys. They can and will continue to excuse Daddy.insinceredawg said:
Still scared to talk about it. Does it hurt your snatch that your dear leader is a criminal that you can no longer make excuses for?SFGbob said:
Yeah, the scary intellect of a fucking moron like you scares me. Have you figured out if 1973 comes before 2009 yet dumbfuck?insinceredawg said:
Got it. You're scared to talk about it. What a pussy.SFGbob said:
Yeah, I change the topic too if I was a fucking moron like you IC.insinceredawg said:
Welcome back to the board. I noticed you ran and hid yesterday after I provided you the opening statement from Bill Taylor. You never uttered a single word on it. I wonder why.SFGbob said:Gosh, was 1973 prior to 2009? You're such a mouthy fucking moron IC.
-
Look at the fucking Kunt dance!!!!insinceredawg said:
Still scared to talk about it. Does it hurt your snatch that your dear leader is a criminal that you can no longer make excuses for?SFGbob said:
Yeah, the scary intellect of a fucking moron like you scares me. Have you figured out if 1973 comes before 2009 yet dumbfuck?insinceredawg said:
Got it. You're scared to talk about it. What a pussy.SFGbob said:
Yeah, I change the topic too if I was a fucking moron like you IC.insinceredawg said:
Welcome back to the board. I noticed you ran and hid yesterday after I provided you the opening statement from Bill Taylor. You never uttered a single word on it. I wonder why.SFGbob said:Gosh, was 1973 prior to 2009? You're such a mouthy fucking moron IC.
I'm sure these sound legal arguments coincidentally did not exist between 2009 and 2017 but miraculously appeared now that your boy is in office. Bitchass partisan Kunt.
Come on IC, you can shove that head even further up your ass, I know you can.
-
Sounds like you really got me this timeSFGbob said:
Look at the fucking Kunt dance!!!!insinceredawg said:
Still scared to talk about it. Does it hurt your snatch that your dear leader is a criminal that you can no longer make excuses for?SFGbob said:
Yeah, the scary intellect of a fucking moron like you scares me. Have you figured out if 1973 comes before 2009 yet dumbfuck?insinceredawg said:
Got it. You're scared to talk about it. What a pussy.SFGbob said:
Yeah, I change the topic too if I was a fucking moron like you IC.insinceredawg said:
Welcome back to the board. I noticed you ran and hid yesterday after I provided you the opening statement from Bill Taylor. You never uttered a single word on it. I wonder why.SFGbob said:Gosh, was 1973 prior to 2009? You're such a mouthy fucking moron IC.
I'm sure these sound legal arguments coincidentally did not exist between 2009 and 2017 but miraculously appeared now that your boy is in office. Bitchass partisan Kunt.
Come on IC, you can shove that head even further up your ass, I know you can. -
No, you can never "get" shameless dumbfucks.insinceredawg said:
Sounds like you really got me this timeSFGbob said:
Look at the fucking Kunt dance!!!!insinceredawg said:
Still scared to talk about it. Does it hurt your snatch that your dear leader is a criminal that you can no longer make excuses for?SFGbob said:
Yeah, the scary intellect of a fucking moron like you scares me. Have you figured out if 1973 comes before 2009 yet dumbfuck?insinceredawg said:
Got it. You're scared to talk about it. What a pussy.SFGbob said:
Yeah, I change the topic too if I was a fucking moron like you IC.insinceredawg said:
Welcome back to the board. I noticed you ran and hid yesterday after I provided you the opening statement from Bill Taylor. You never uttered a single word on it. I wonder why.SFGbob said:Gosh, was 1973 prior to 2009? You're such a mouthy fucking moron IC.
I'm sure these sound legal arguments coincidentally did not exist between 2009 and 2017 but miraculously appeared now that your boy is in office. Bitchass partisan Kunt.
Come on IC, you can shove that head even further up your ass, I know you can. -
With all the stupid shit you say, you still amaze me with your lack of reading comprehension. This is another example of how you are clueless about his point. And he's twisting you in the wind all the while you don't get it.SFGbob said:
Look at the fucking Kunt dance!!!!insinceredawg said:
Still scared to talk about it. Does it hurt your snatch that your dear leader is a criminal that you can no longer make excuses for?SFGbob said:
Yeah, the scary intellect of a fucking moron like you scares me. Have you figured out if 1973 comes before 2009 yet dumbfuck?insinceredawg said:
Got it. You're scared to talk about it. What a pussy.SFGbob said:
Yeah, I change the topic too if I was a fucking moron like you IC.insinceredawg said:
Welcome back to the board. I noticed you ran and hid yesterday after I provided you the opening statement from Bill Taylor. You never uttered a single word on it. I wonder why.SFGbob said:Gosh, was 1973 prior to 2009? You're such a mouthy fucking moron IC.
I'm sure these sound legal arguments coincidentally did not exist between 2009 and 2017 but miraculously appeared now that your boy is in office. Bitchass partisan Kunt.
Come on IC, you can shove that head even further up your ass, I know you can. -
2001400ex said:
With all the stupid shit you say, you still amaze me with your lack of reading comprehension. This is another example of how you are clueless about his point. And he's twisting you in the wind all the while you don't get it.SFGbob said:
Look at the fucking Kunt dance!!!!insinceredawg said:
Still scared to talk about it. Does it hurt your snatch that your dear leader is a criminal that you can no longer make excuses for?SFGbob said:
Yeah, the scary intellect of a fucking moron like you scares me. Have you figured out if 1973 comes before 2009 yet dumbfuck?insinceredawg said:
Got it. You're scared to talk about it. What a pussy.SFGbob said:
Yeah, I change the topic too if I was a fucking moron like you IC.insinceredawg said:
Welcome back to the board. I noticed you ran and hid yesterday after I provided you the opening statement from Bill Taylor. You never uttered a single word on it. I wonder why.SFGbob said:Gosh, was 1973 prior to 2009? You're such a mouthy fucking moron IC.
I'm sure these sound legal arguments coincidentally did not exist between 2009 and 2017 but miraculously appeared now that your boy is in office. Bitchass partisan Kunt.
Come on IC, you can shove that head even further up your ass, I know you can.
-
Notice how Hondo can never state just how exactly the other person has poor reading comprehension. Hey Hondo, you might want to check with your ass munching pal IC, even he ran away from that steaming pile of stupidity and bullshit he posted.2001400ex said:
With all the stupid shit you say, you still amaze me with your lack of reading comprehension. This is another example of how you are clueless about his point. And he's twisting you in the wind all the while you don't get it.SFGbob said:
Look at the fucking Kunt dance!!!!insinceredawg said:
Still scared to talk about it. Does it hurt your snatch that your dear leader is a criminal that you can no longer make excuses for?SFGbob said:
Yeah, the scary intellect of a fucking moron like you scares me. Have you figured out if 1973 comes before 2009 yet dumbfuck?insinceredawg said:
Got it. You're scared to talk about it. What a pussy.SFGbob said:
Yeah, I change the topic too if I was a fucking moron like you IC.insinceredawg said:
Welcome back to the board. I noticed you ran and hid yesterday after I provided you the opening statement from Bill Taylor. You never uttered a single word on it. I wonder why.SFGbob said:Gosh, was 1973 prior to 2009? You're such a mouthy fucking moron IC.
I'm sure these sound legal arguments coincidentally did not exist between 2009 and 2017 but miraculously appeared now that your boy is in office. Bitchass partisan Kunt.
Come on IC, you can shove that head even further up your ass, I know you can.
