Fantasy Football - Footballguys Forums
whoknew

The Russia Investigation: Mueller - "Over the course of my career, I've seen a number of challenges to our democracy.The Russian govt's effort to interfere in our election is among the most serious."

Recommended Posts

1 hour ago, SaintsInDome2006 said:

At least this judge wasn't buying the crap DJT's lawyers were throwing around. There will be lots of bad exposure for DJT once Deutsches Bank hands over everything congress requested.

Or, does anyone think Deutsches will balk and just pay a massive fine to appease DJT and not expose him? I don't. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
8 hours ago, timschochet said:

You need to stop with the “hoax” stuff. It makes you look silly. 

That and the right wing shows tell you not to watch fake mews...as if they aren't fake themselves.  And yes the bar is set at Hannity and Trump because he is POTUS and routinely quotes things from Hannity.

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
4 hours ago, Ruffrodys05 said:

At least this judge wasn't buying the crap DJT's lawyers were throwing around. There will be lots of bad exposure for DJT once Deutsches Bank hands over everything congress requested.

Or, does anyone think Deutsches will balk and just pay a massive fine to appease DJT and not expose him? I don't. 

DB doesn’t have the money to pay a massive fine...something to do with other money laundering problems or some such thing.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
9 hours ago, timschochet said:

You need to stop with the “hoax” stuff. It makes you look silly. 

Sorry. Big giant nothingburger.  

  • Love 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
5 minutes ago, tonydead said:

Sorry. Big giant nothingburger.  

President Trump used Russian help to aid him in winning the election. Then he lied about it. Then he fired the head of the FBI because he didn’t want to be investigated. Then he attempted to fire the special investigator. Then he attempted to lie about that. 

These are bad actions, impeachable for most Presidents. Trump’s status as an outsider, combined with a corrupt attorney general, have protected him. But it’s not a hoax and it’s not a nothingburger. Congress is moving slowly (too slowly for me) but they are still moving. The most important testimony, that of Don McGann, is yet to come. 

Sorry but for you to call it a hoax and a nothingburger is quite embarrassing for you. Years from now you will either be ashamed of this stance or pretend that you never offered it. 

  • Like 6
  • Thanks 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
10 hours ago, ren hoek said:

Why do people keep calling them fake news!!!!  I just don't get it!  

I actually respect the walkback here.  At least O'Donnell has displayed more integrity than the Guardian did with their Assange/Manafort fake news piece, which by all appearances is still a total fabrication.  

This is pretty silly.  Journalists make mistakes, just like everyone else. And some of them are more careless and prone to mistakes than others, just like everyone else. There's more mistakes now because there's far more political journalism and far more access to it by the masses, but virtually everything is reported by the major news sources is accurate.

In this case the system worked perfectly. One guy who has a record of being somewhat sloppy published a thinly sourced story. VIrtually everyone, including his colleagues and even most anti-Trump people, were skeptical bceause of the guy's record and because the story was thinly sourced by its own admission. And then when nobody was able to get further confirmation, he retracted it.

Condemning the entire political news media with a moronic phrase that a mush-brained aspiring authoritarian borrowed in order to obscure a genuine and frightening problem is really silly. It undermines public trust in quality reporting and boosts dictators who can hide their corruption and cruelty by warping our shared reality. Enabling authoritarianism seems like the last thing a man who supports anarchic/libertarian principles and who has shown great compassion for the innocent victims of cruel dictators should want to do.

  • Like 4
  • Thanks 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
10 minutes ago, timschochet said:

President Trump used Russian help to aid him in winning the election. Then he lied about it. Then he fired the head of the FBI because he didn’t want to be investigated. Then he attempted to fire the special investigator. Then he attempted to lie about that. 

These are bad actions, impeachable for most Presidents. Trump’s status as an outsider, combined with a corrupt attorney general, have protected him. But it’s not a hoax and it’s not a nothingburger. Congress is moving slowly (too slowly for me) but they are still moving. The most important testimony, that of Don McGann, is yet to come. 

Sorry but for you to call it a hoax and a nothingburger is quite embarrassing for you. Years from now you will either be ashamed of this stance or pretend that you never offered it. 

2400 pages and 2 years of this thread make a whole lot of people look silly. 

  • Like 1
  • Thanks 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
3 minutes ago, tonydead said:

2400 pages and 2 years of this thread make a whole lot of people look silly. 

Don’t forget the 40 indictments, the 14 ongoing investigations, and the campaign manager as well as the personal lawyer sitting in the pokey. Do they serve nothing burgers in prison?

  • Like 5
  • Thanks 1
  • Laughing 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

https://www.nationalreview.com/2019/08/andrew-mccabe-george-papadopoulos-two-tiered-justice/

I couldn’t help thinking about the hardball treatment of Papadopoulos when, yesterday, CNN announced the hiring of Andrew McCabe as a commentator. McCabe, of course, was the FBI’s deputy director before being fired after the Justice Department’s inspector general, Michael Horowitz, concluded that he made multiple false statements to the FBI — including under oath. McCabe was questioned in connection with his leak of investigative information to the media. The leak may have damaged the FBI’s investigation of the Clinton Foundation (it certainly exposed information the Bureau was trying to keep under wraps).

As I’ve previously recounted, McCabe is quite the operator: According to the IG report, to try to throw snoops off the scent, the then–deputy director indignantly reamed out subordinates in New York and Washington — as if these FBI field offices were guilty of the leak McCabe himself had orchestrated. His mendacity obviously obstructed the leak investigation, requiring additional interviews as agents ran down the misleading information.  

McCabe has never been charged.

Government officials who leak while demonstrating their contempt for Donald Trump manage to land on their feet. McCabe joins a CNN stable that includes former Obama national intelligence director James Clapper, who is best known for lying to Congress about the government’s bulk collection of telephone metadata . . . and for discussing Steele dossier information with CNN shortly before the network published a report about it . . . and not long before it hired Clapper as a commentator. CNN missed out on former Obama CIA director John Brennan, who falsely denied to the Senate that his agency spied on the chamber’s intelligence committee. Brennan, who said he was really sorry, was inked by MSNBC.

As Papadopoulos can tell you, non-government types who mislead government investigations don’t do so well.

Viewed in isolation, the Papadopoulos prosecution is not the sort of thing that tugs at my heartstrings. One of the many reasons Americans are winners of life’s lottery is that we live in a country in which no one may be forced to be a witness against himself. Refusing to speak to police is always an option, so lying should not be. If people came to think they could lie with impunity, the justice system would break down.

But it is supposed to be a justice system. One tier, not two. Everyone systematically given equal justice, which is the only justice worthy of the name.

For about ten days, I’ve had a new book out on Russiagate, called Ball of Collusion. I’ve gotten to do lots of speeches and interviews. Most interesting are the ones when members of the audience ask questions. Without fail, they home in on the thing I least like to talk about: What is going to happen to government officials who are suspected of abusing their powers and misleading such bodies as the Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Court? A name that reliably comes up is Andy McCabe. People who have followed the story know the IG referred him to the Justice Department for a possible false-statements prosecution. They know other aspects of McCabe’s conduct are still under investigation.

I hate this topic because I am not one to cheerlead for comeuppance against law-enforcement people. I know how hard their jobs are, how readily errors can be made because one often has to act on imperfect information; because there is a natural zeal to catch bad guys that can easily become overzealousness. I have no problem analyzing their judgment calls — mine got analyzed plenty, and we all make our share of mistakes. But I am hard-wired not to presume bad motive.

So I tell people what they don’t want to hear: We don’t know all the salient facts; we should wait for the imminent reports of investigations being conducted by Horowitz and John Durham (the Connecticut U.S. attorney tasked by AG Bill Barr to probe Russiagate); and we should disabuse ourselves of the notion that errors in judgment and abuses of discretion, even egregious ones, necessarily entail criminal-law violations. It is much more important to have a factual accounting of what happened, and to take whatever curative measures are apt to prevent bad things from happening again.

Suffice it to say, this does not get a warm reception.

There is a great deal of anger out there. People see the kid-gloves approach to the Clinton-emails investigation, and they can’t square it with the aggression of the Trump–Russia probe. They see the laws contorted to let Mrs. Clinton slide, while the screws get put to Michael Flynn and Paul Manafort over the Logan Act and the Foreign Agent Registration Act – statutes the Justice Department almost never invokes.

They see the false-statements investigations of Andy McCabe and George Papadopoulos and think, “Hey, wait a second . . .”

“Equal justice under the law” is not supposed to be an aspiration or a quaint slogan. It is supposed to be a guarantee.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Just stop. You're not impressing anyone but yourself.

Enjoy week 4 of the pre-season, relax.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Posted (edited)
48 minutes ago, ren hoek said:

https://www.nationalreview.com/2019/08/andrew-mccabe-george-papadopoulos-two-tiered-justice/

I couldn’t help thinking about the hardball treatment of Papadopoulos when, yesterday, CNN announced the hiring of Andrew McCabe as a commentator. McCabe, of course, was the FBI’s deputy director before being fired after the Justice Department’s inspector general, Michael Horowitz, concluded that he made multiple false statements to the FBI — including under oath. McCabe was questioned in connection with his leak of investigative information to the media. The leak may have damaged the FBI’s investigation of the Clinton Foundation (it certainly exposed information the Bureau was trying to keep under wraps).

As I’ve previously recounted, McCabe is quite the operator: According to the IG report, to try to throw snoops off the scent, the then–deputy director indignantly reamed out subordinates in New York and Washington — as if these FBI field offices were guilty of the leak McCabe himself had orchestrated. His mendacity obviously obstructed the leak investigation, requiring additional interviews as agents ran down the misleading information.  

McCabe has never been charged.

Government officials who leak while demonstrating their contempt for Donald Trump manage to land on their feet. McCabe joins a CNN stable that includes former Obama national intelligence director James Clapper, who is best known for lying to Congress about the government’s bulk collection of telephone metadata . . . and for discussing Steele dossier information with CNN shortly before the network published a report about it . . . and not long before it hired Clapper as a commentator. CNN missed out on former Obama CIA director John Brennan, who falsely denied to the Senate that his agency spied on the chamber’s intelligence committee. Brennan, who said he was really sorry, was inked by MSNBC.

As Papadopoulos can tell you, non-government types who mislead government investigations don’t do so well.

Viewed in isolation, the Papadopoulos prosecution is not the sort of thing that tugs at my heartstrings. One of the many reasons Americans are winners of life’s lottery is that we live in a country in which no one may be forced to be a witness against himself. Refusing to speak to police is always an option, so lying should not be. If people came to think they could lie with impunity, the justice system would break down.

But it is supposed to be a justice system. One tier, not two. Everyone systematically given equal justice, which is the only justice worthy of the name.

For about ten days, I’ve had a new book out on Russiagate, called Ball of Collusion. I’ve gotten to do lots of speeches and interviews. Most interesting are the ones when members of the audience ask questions. Without fail, they home in on the thing I least like to talk about: What is going to happen to government officials who are suspected of abusing their powers and misleading such bodies as the Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Court? A name that reliably comes up is Andy McCabe. People who have followed the story know the IG referred him to the Justice Department for a possible false-statements prosecution. They know other aspects of McCabe’s conduct are still under investigation.

I hate this topic because I am not one to cheerlead for comeuppance against law-enforcement people. I know how hard their jobs are, how readily errors can be made because one often has to act on imperfect information; because there is a natural zeal to catch bad guys that can easily become overzealousness. I have no problem analyzing their judgment calls — mine got analyzed plenty, and we all make our share of mistakes. But I am hard-wired not to presume bad motive.

So I tell people what they don’t want to hear: We don’t know all the salient facts; we should wait for the imminent reports of investigations being conducted by Horowitz and John Durham (the Connecticut U.S. attorney tasked by AG Bill Barr to probe Russiagate); and we should disabuse ourselves of the notion that errors in judgment and abuses of discretion, even egregious ones, necessarily entail criminal-law violations. It is much more important to have a factual accounting of what happened, and to take whatever curative measures are apt to prevent bad things from happening again.

Suffice it to say, this does not get a warm reception.

There is a great deal of anger out there. People see the kid-gloves approach to the Clinton-emails investigation, and they can’t square it with the aggression of the Trump–Russia probe. They see the laws contorted to let Mrs. Clinton slide, while the screws get put to Michael Flynn and Paul Manafort over the Logan Act and the Foreign Agent Registration Act – statutes the Justice Department almost never invokes.

They see the false-statements investigations of Andy McCabe and George Papadopoulos and think, “Hey, wait a second . . .”

“Equal justice under the law” is not supposed to be an aspiration or a quaint slogan. It is supposed to be a guarantee.

And this is from the guy who wrote a book entitled How Obama Embraces Islam's Sharia Agenda, so you know he's a straight shooter with an impeccable  background and no credibility issues.

Well done, ren. Thanks for sharing the work of this insightful genius with us. Perhaps a video from leading intellectual Sean Hannity can supplement it?

Edited by TobiasFunke
  • Like 2
  • Laughing 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
6 minutes ago, Ruffrodys05 said:

Just stop. You're not impressing anyone but yourself.

Enjoy week 4 of the pre-season, relax.

This may be the worst advice offered in this thread, which is saying something.

  • Like 1
  • Laughing 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2 minutes ago, TobiasFunke said:

This may be the worst advice offered in this thread, which is saying something.

I'm allowed to offer crappy advice, I'm not on staff. Just like MOP.

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Posted (edited)
18 minutes ago, Ruffrodys05 said:

Enjoy week 4 of the pre-season, relax.

For you will know a real NFL fan by this sign, forthwith he shall resign himself to attending Preseason Game 4 and he shall seem to care.

Edited by SaintsInDome2006
  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 minute ago, SaintsInDome2006 said:

For you will know a real NFL fan by this sign, forthwith he shall resign himself to attending Preseason Game 4 and he shall seem to care.

I do care. It's why I continually win each and every year. Spanx❣🏈🤟

  • Laughing 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
29 minutes ago, Ruffrodys05 said:

Just stop. You're not impressing anyone but yourself.

Enjoy week 4 of the pre-season, relax.

Nope, he is owning this thread right now as he has been correct all along.  Feel free to eat some crow.

  • Laughing 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 minute ago, Don't Noonan said:

Nope, he is owning this thread right now as he has been correct all along.  Feel free to eat some crow.

Whatever FOX tells ya, huh?

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
3 minutes ago, Ruffrodys05 said:

Whatever FOX tells ya, huh?

You should really read the Mueller report as you would be much better versed to talk about the subject.

  • Laughing 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
3 minutes ago, Don't Noonan said:

You should really read the Mueller report as you would be much better versed to talk about the subject.

I have read all 480+ pages. Have you? If you have, your reading comprehension is extremely low. But, I dont believe you have read it as objectively as I have. Otherwise you wouldn't make uninformed statements regarding the investigation every time you claim nuttinburger.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
6 minutes ago, Ruffrodys05 said:

I have read all 480+ pages. Have you? If you have, your reading comprehension is extremely low. But, I dont believe you have read it as objectively as I have. Otherwise you wouldn't make uninformed statements regarding the investigation every time you claim nuttinburger.

Of course I read it all.  When considering what Trump was being accused of it was a giant nothingburger, to say otherwise your reading comprehension is pretty bad.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
5 minutes ago, TobiasFunke said:

Well done, ren. Thanks for sharing the work of this insightful genius with us. Perhaps a video from leading intellectual Sean Hannity can supplement it?

Andrew McCarthy is definitely insane.  But he's always fun to read, and he's gotten this issue right.  It's a fair point- McCabe lied during his investigation, wasn't charged.  Clapper perjured himself in front of the whole world about mass surveillance, wasn't charged.  Brennan wiretapped the Senate and lied about it, wasn't charged.  It seems the sky's the limit for anti-Trump spooks and their cable news careers.  

Meanwhile George P lies about the timing of a meet- not the meeting itself but the specific date in which it occurred, several months after it happened, then gets painted as a conspirator/traitor, then gets charged.  Clearly there's a different legal system for feds than there is for the rest of us.  Why, it's almost as if the institutions people just spent the past 2 years jerking off as noble pursuers of justice don't hold themselves accountable when the shoe is on the other foot.  

But sure Tobias, obfuscate this substantive critique with this other, admittedly bizarre literature he has written.  

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
9 hours ago, dozer said:

Don’t forget the 40 indictments, the 14 ongoing investigations, and the campaign manager as well as the personal lawyer sitting in the pokey. Do they serve nothing burgers in prison?

Trump is in jail?

46 minutes ago, Don't Noonan said:

Of course I read it all.  When considering what Trump was being accused of it was a giant nothingburger, to say otherwise your reading comprehension is pretty bad.

:goodposting:

  • Like 1
  • Laughing 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2 minutes ago, tonydead said:

Trump is in jail?

How can he be in jail when he can not be charged with a crime?

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

The worst part was rolling out Bobby "wet blanket" Mueller.  He was propped up as some sort of authoritarian and when he finally opened his mouth it was clear he didn't know/couldn't remember what was in the report.  That put the smolder fire for this one completely out.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
9 hours ago, dozer said:

Don’t forget the 40 indictments, the 14 ongoing investigations, and the campaign manager as well as the personal lawyer sitting in the pokey. Do they serve nothing burgers in prison?

lolololol

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
49 minutes ago, tonydead said:

The worst part was rolling out Bobby "wet blanket" Mueller.  He was propped up as some sort of authoritarian and when he finally opened his mouth it was clear he didn't know/couldn't remember what was in the report.  That put the smolder fire for this one completely out.

You are the opposite of correct.

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, Don't Noonan said:

Of course I read it all.  When considering what Trump was being accused of it was a giant nothingburger, to say otherwise your reading comprehension is pretty bad.

I’m sorry man, but I don’t believe you read the report. At the very least you’d have to be concerned about one or two of the eleven instances of obstruction CLEARLY laid out in volume 2.

  • Like 3
  • Laughing 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
36 minutes ago, dozer said:

You are the opposite of correct.

This thread crawled to a halt after the Mueller testimony fiasco.  Then was bumped because everyone got excited by some fake news. 

:lol:  You can't make this stuff up.

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Posted (edited)
18 minutes ago, tonydead said:

This thread crawled to a halt after the Mueller testimony fiasco.  Then was bumped because everyone got excited by some fake news. 

:lol:  You can't make this stuff up.

I still think Trumps campaign colluded with the Russians, and Trump himself obstructed the case. I guess we can talk about it if you’d like.

Edited by dozer

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Posted (edited)
1 hour ago, tonydead said:

This thread crawled to a halt after the Mueller testimony fiasco.  Then was bumped because everyone got excited by some fake news. 

:lol:  You can't make this stuff up.

Yet, you just did make it up.  It crawled to a halt because there is no news.  It gets bumped when there is news...thats how this works.

Edited by sho nuff

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2 hours ago, dozer said:

I’m sorry man, but I don’t believe you read the report. At the very least you’d have to be concerned about one or two of the eleven instances of obstruction CLEARLY laid out in volume 2.

Mueller clearly says no collusion, the basis of the whole investigation.  Case closed.  The obstruction nonsense was thrown in there by the anti-Trump people on Mueller's team as they wanted to keep fish like you hooked on a conspiracy.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
10 minutes ago, Don't Noonan said:

Mueller clearly says no collusion, the basis of the whole investigation.  Case closed.  The obstruction nonsense was thrown in there by the anti-Trump people on Mueller's team as they wanted to keep fish like you hooked on a conspiracy.

What?  You cant be serious with this.

Also, if you had read the report, you would know Mueller never clearly says no collusion.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 minute ago, sho nuff said:

What?  You cant be serious with this.

Also, if you had read the report, you would know Mueller never clearly says no collusion.

I have quoted him saying no proven conspiracy/collusion in this thread.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
16 minutes ago, Don't Noonan said:

I have quoted him saying no proven conspiracy/collusion in this thread.

How about if I said there was..... a little collusion. Not much, but a little bit of collusion.

 

Would you agree? Or is flat out no collusion. Not even a tiny little bit...

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 minute ago, dozer said:

How about if I said there was..... a little collusion. Not much, but a little bit of collusion.

 

Would you agree? Or is flat out no collusion. Not even a tiny little bit...

If this was a trial it is a slam dunk Not Guilty.  :shrug:

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
19 minutes ago, Don't Noonan said:

If this was a trial it is a slam dunk Not Guilty.  :shrug:

Far from a slam dunk ‘not guilty’. There’s plenty of evidence in the report that points to conspiracy but not enough to be a slam drunk ‘guilty’ and that’s why Mueller made the conclusion that he did. But I shouldn’t have to tell that to someone who clearly has read the report...

  • Like 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, Don't Noonan said:

I have quoted him saying no proven conspiracy/collusion in this thread.

Thats not exactly what he said and you know it.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
8 minutes ago, sho nuff said:

Thats not exactly what he said and you know it.

It is exactly what he says...read the report

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
11 minutes ago, Don't Noonan said:

It is exactly what he says...read the report

I did...please quote the actual report, link it and cite where he says what you claimed tonight in either post.  I won’t hold my breath.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
10 minutes ago, sho nuff said:

I did...please quote the actual report, link it and cite where he says what you claimed tonight in either post.  I won’t hold my breath.

Already done so, not going to waste my time on your fishing trip.  Just google it.

  • Thanks 1
  • Laughing 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
26 minutes ago, sho nuff said:

I did...please quote the actual report, link it and cite where he says what you claimed tonight in either post.  I won’t hold my breath.

You don't actually expect these trolls to back up their claims right?  

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
11 minutes ago, Don't Noonan said:

Already done so, not going to waste my time on your fishing trip.  Just google it.

Its not a fishing trip, its calling out a falsehood because the report doesn't claim what you say it does.  It does not say no collusion ...as you claim he clearly says here...  Nor does it say no proven collusion as you just claimed.  So it would be impossible for you to already have quoted it...and you have never cited or quoted the actual report here.

I have googled it and read it...it does not say as you claim.  So why are you posting things that “simply are not true”?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 minute ago, Slapdash said:

You don't actually expect these trolls to back up their claims right?  

No...because I know the truth of what was said and all i can do is keep exposing dishonesty in hopes that someone else doesn't fall for it.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
9 minutes ago, sho nuff said:
26 minutes ago, Don't Noonan said:

Already done so, not going to waste my time on your fishing trip.  Just google it.

Its not a fishing trip, its calling out a falsehood because the report doesn't claim what you say it does.  It does not say no collusion ...as you claim he clearly says here...  Nor does it say no proven collusion as you just claimed.  So it would be impossible for you to already have quoted it...and you have never cited or quoted the actual report here.

I have googled it and read it...it does not say as you claim.  So why are you posting things that “simply are not true”?

I don't understand how you two can go back and forth on this for so long with neither of you quoting the report.

sho nuff, just quote the part that says that Mueller is explicitly not saying that there was no collusion. (It's around page 1, maybe page 2.)

Don't Noonan, I'm unaware of any part of the report you can quote to support your claim, but if you find something, post it.

  • Like 1
  • Thanks 2
  • Love 1
  • Laughing 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
12 minutes ago, Maurile Tremblay said:

I don't understand how you two can go back and forth on this for so long with neither of you quoting the report.

sho nuff, just quote the part that says that Mueller is explicitly not saying that there was no collusion. (It's around page 1, maybe page 2.)

Don't Noonan, I'm unaware of any part of the report you can quote to support your claim, but if you find something, post it.

Well...because proving a negative os a bot different and I wasn't making the original claim.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2 hours ago, Don't Noonan said:

If this was a trial it is a slam dunk Not Guilty.  :shrug:

If this was a trial, should Trump testify?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Is this the November December January February March April May June July August surprise?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I guess I’m going to have to log into my SaintsInDome2006 alias and explain this all again....

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
36 minutes ago, Maurile Tremblay said:

I don't understand how you two can go back and forth on this for so long with neither of you quoting the report.

sho nuff, just quote the part that says that Mueller is explicitly not saying that there was no collusion. (It's around page 1, maybe page 2.)

Don't Noonan, I'm unaware of any part of the report you can quote to support your claim, but if you find something, post it.

I have posted it in this thread.  This isn't hard.  NO CONSPIRACY ( SAME AS COLLUSION)  :coffee:

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
44 minutes ago, sho nuff said:

No...because I know the truth of what was said and all i can do is keep exposing dishonesty in hopes that someone else doesn't fall for it.

Falsehood.  Read the report.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Restore formatting

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.


  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    No registered users viewing this page.