Skip to main content

nixon's backers acted the same way... all the way up till the indictments. ha!

congress does not have the power to prosecute. a special prosecutor does. ha!

congress couldn't care less about being lied to, ask jeff sessions or flynn or any of the others that have lied since trump took office... and neither have you or any other republicons. try again, slick. your hypocrisy is still showing.

budsfarm posted:

exactly what part of 'not a prosecutable offense' is so confusing for you? the fbi, justice department and several other reputable officials said the same thing. yet, you wanna see the facts. ha!  - Crash

Let me stop you right there, Ironside.  On the local level, your District Attorney is your chief law enforcement officer.  He/she alone decides whether or not a case goes forward and with what charge.  Comey has no authority to tell his boss the AG that this case is not prosecutable.  That kind of comment is out of his pay grade but it most definitely is politically serving.  Kindly recall that the congressional hearing after hearing his evidence did not agree with him and felt like he laid out evidence that a junior prosecutor could make a slam dunk.  I would refer you to the vid I posted earlier of Gowdy grilling Comey.  Congress doesn't take kindly to being lied to, Crash.  It ain't over.

JT believes so strongly in Comeys evidence that he believes he influenced the election more than anything, anyone.  You libs are on the same track heading straight at each other.

I think this is where in your response you reply hahahahahaha

It's all you got.

Your friend,

Bud

nixon's backers acted the same way... all the way up till the indictments. ha!

congress does not have the power to prosecute. a special prosecutor does. ha!

congress couldn't care less about being lied to, ask jeff sessions or flynn or any of the others that have lied since trump took office... and neither have you or any other republicons. try again, slick. your hypocrisy is still showing.

Those were the times in US political history there wasn't a dimes
difference between Republicans and Democrats. A jump ahead to
1992 saw an old brand of liberalism/socialism take root, feeding
on the deep pockets of the one world order cult. And to this point
have succeeded in turning the minds of the weak, lazy and addicted.
 
The global failures haven't taught the propagandized mindless
spores that European worship would not work for America when
witnessing the decay of world governments surrounding us.
 
There isn't a thing normal, natural or sane driving the thinking
of  Kim Jong-un, Markel, Lofven, Rouhani/Khamenei, Trudeau
Clinton/Obama and more than a dozen of the same.
The real shame is, there's no talking to a indoctrinated mind....
Try all you can stand of it....
Last edited by Kraven
jtdavis posted:

Comey spent a small amount of time and money investigating Trump and found a lot of stuff. Y'all are steady defending him.

Gowdy and the republicans spent years and millions investigating Hillary and found nothing and y'all are still hollering lock her up. 

Don't make much sense, does it?

What makes no sense is how you can claim Comey found nothing against Hillary! He found plenty, and that's one reason you lefties wanted him removed. What makes no sense is your claim he found things against Trump.

jtdavis posted:

Comey spent a small amount of time and money investigating Trump and found a lot of stuff. Y'all are steady defending him.

Gowdy and the republicans spent years and millions investigating Hillary and found nothing and y'all are still hollering lock her up. 

Don't make much sense, does it?

JT,

The difference is Obama, Hillary and all their minions had the media in their pocket covering for them.   Speaking of why Comey did not really go after Hillary how about this? 

“Comey served as general counsel at Lockheed Martin until 2010 when he departed with over $6 million to show for it. That same year Lockheed Martin became a member of the Clinton Global Initiative and “won 17 contracts from the U.S. State Department, which was led by then-Secretary of State Hillary Clinton,” Big League Politics reports.

Comey just so happened to have joined the board of the British bank HSBC Holdings in 2013, which just so happens to be a Clinton Foundation partner.”

However, one of the most shocking (and important) conflicts of interest of note is this: Comey’s brother, Peter Comey, works for the Washington law firm DLA Piper, and serves as its “Senior Director of Real Estate Operations for the Americas.”

So, who is DLA Piper, you ask? Well, DLA Piper happens to be one of the top ten all-time career campaign donors for Hillary Clinton. On top of this, DLA Piper also happens to do the Clinton Foundation’s taxes. And if that isn’t telling enough, DLA Piper also performed the 2015 audit of the Clinton Foundation when the scandal first broke.

Per Big League Politics:
“Property records show that James Comey owns the mortgage on his brother Peter Comey’s house in Virginia. Therefore, James Comey had a direct financial relationship with a DLA Piper executive at the time he was investigating Clinton.

These relationships, though egregious, are symptomatic of the brazen culture of crony capitalism that exists in our nation’s capital. The public usually is prevented from learning these kinds of things, with the mainstream media blocking information from coming out. Sunlight is the only remedy.

When President Donald Trump finally fired James Comey as FBI director, Tucker Carlson said that everyone in Washington knows it was well past due.”

Kraven posted:
Those were the times in US political history there wasn't a dimes
difference between Republicans and Democrats. A jump ahead to
1992 saw an old brand of liberalism/socialism take root, feeding
on the deep pockets of the one world order cult. And to this point
have succeeded in turning the minds of the weak, lazy and addicted.
 
The global failures haven't taught the propagandized mindless
spores that European worship would not work for America when
witnessing the decay of world governments surrounding us.
 
There isn't a thing normal, natural or sane driving the thinking
of  Kim Jong-un, Markel, Lofven, Rouhani/Khamenei, Trudeau
Clinton/Obama and more than a dozen of the same.
The real shame is, there's no talking to a indoctrinated mind....
Try all you can stand of it....

i agree.. talking to a trumpites is like talking to a fence post.. you're gonna hear obama and hillary before they're done and they'll defend the craziest things i've ever seen

and it's hilarious to see you make all the links to clinton and their people and the fbi and all ... but, not one bit of concern for the links between trump, his people and the russians.

how many fbi directors have been fired by a president they're investigating? hint... the number just doubled. ha!

Last edited by Crash.Override
jtdavis posted:

Comey spent a small amount of time and money investigating Trump and found a lot of stuff. Y'all are steady defending him.

Gowdy and the republicans spent years and millions investigating Hillary and found nothing and y'all are still hollering lock her up. 

Don't make much sense, does it?

If that's your best understanding of the events, to you it obviously doesn't. 

You voted for a liar, right?

 

Crash.Override posted:
budsfarm posted:

exactly what part of 'not a prosecutable offense' is so confusing for you? the fbi, justice department and several other reputable officials said the same thing. yet, you wanna see the facts. ha!  - Crash

Let me stop you right there, Ironside.  On the local level, your District Attorney is your chief law enforcement officer.  He/she alone decides whether or not a case goes forward and with what charge.  Comey has no authority to tell his boss the AG that this case is not prosecutable.  That kind of comment is out of his pay grade but it most definitely is politically serving.  Kindly recall that the congressional hearing after hearing his evidence did not agree with him and felt like he laid out evidence that a junior prosecutor could make a slam dunk.  I would refer you to the vid I posted earlier of Gowdy grilling Comey.  Congress doesn't take kindly to being lied to, Crash.  It ain't over.

JT believes so strongly in Comeys evidence that he believes he influenced the election more than anything, anyone.  You libs are on the same track heading straight at each other.

I think this is where in your response you reply hahahahahaha

It's all you got.

Your friend,

Bud

nixon's backers acted the same way... all the way up till the indictments. ha!

congress does not have the power to prosecute. a special prosecutor does. ha!

congress couldn't care less about being lied to, ask jeff sessions or flynn or any of the others that have lied since trump took office... and neither have you or any other republicons. try again, slick. your hypocrisy is still showing.

Though I voted for him to do a job, no Nixon backer here.  Once there was evidence he participated in criminal activity, I would have been just as happy if he went to jail with the rest of them.

Slick.  How juvenile to call a friend.  But your denial of the Clintons' criminal activity has you, Crash, the poster boy of hypocrisy.  What did momma tell you about pointing a finger?

 

jtdavis posted:

Comey spent a small amount of time and money investigating Trump and found a lot of stuff. Y'all are steady defending him.

Gowdy and the republicans spent years and millions investigating Hillary and found nothing and y'all are still hollering lock her up. 

Don't make much sense, does it?

Really jt? What's this "stuff" that comey found on Trump? Also, how do you dismiss the things he found on hilliary, that she admitted btw, but he wouldn't/didn't prosecute her? As Gifted said, the things he found about hilliary was the reason you slops wanted him gone. When he did nothing about the things he had found against her, you slops relaxed. But after public outcries against his failure to act, he had to do something. We know the rest. ALL of this because the TRUTH about the corrupt, criminal hilliary clinton came out, and you slops couldn't stand it. But, you still voted for her jt. What does that say about you?

Watergate involved an actual crime - the break-in of the DNC offices.  Nixon's mistake was to become involved in the cover up.  He didn't order the original break-in.  What did the Russians do?  And, how was Trump involved?  I've yet to receive an answer.  Trump has called the crazed insinuations a witch hunt.  Not quite correct.  Its more Lavrentiy Beria's telling Stalin, "show me the man and I will find the crime."

direstraits posted:

Watergate involved an actual crime - the break-in of the DNC offices.  Nixon's mistake was to become involved in the cover up.  He didn't order the original break-in.  What did the Russians do?  And, how was Trump involved?  I've yet to receive an answer.  Trump has called the crazed insinuations a witch hunt.  Not quite correct.  Its more Lavrentiy Beria's telling Stalin, "show me the man and I will find the crime."

You're talking sensibly again,, not allowed...

direstraits posted:

Watergate involved an actual crime - the break-in of the DNC offices.  Nixon's mistake was to become involved in the cover up.  He didn't order the original break-in.  What did the Russians do?  And, how was Trump involved?  I've yet to receive an answer.  Trump has called the crazed insinuations a witch hunt.  Not quite correct.  Its more Lavrentiy Beria's telling Stalin, "show me the man and I will find the crime."

so, trump told the russians why he fired comey.. the truth, but he lied to the american people about the reason he fired comey... nope, no coverup here. nothing to see. move along people. hillary's emails are important...

the russians hacked the DNC and trump could possibly be connected to the crime. seems a whole lot like watergate 2.0.

the way trump intends to handle the special council is to attack his credibility... which is now evident in the republicon talking points.

Last edited by Crash.Override

President Trump is accused of collusion with the Russians during the campaign.  The only known efforts of hackers, Russian and otherwise, were exposure of Democrat campaign emails and targeted fake news towards small areas.  OK, what did Trump do to collude?  The emails were exposed by WikiLeaks.  Julian Assange, who heads WikiLeaks, stated the organization received their information from a disgruntled DNC campaign worker. Is Assange lying, or is he a Russian operative?  Did WikiLeaks receive the leaked information from the alleged campaign worker or Russian hackers?  How did Trump collude in this effort?  As to the targeted fake news?  If, Russian hackers were the operatives? How, did Trump assist? If, one can't answer these questions?  What is the case against him?

Last edited by direstraits
Kraven posted:
direstraits posted:

Watergate involved an actual crime - the break-in of the DNC offices.  Nixon's mistake was to become involved in the cover up.  He didn't order the original break-in.  What did the Russians do?  And, how was Trump involved?  I've yet to receive an answer.  Trump has called the crazed insinuations a witch hunt.  Not quite correct.  Its more Lavrentiy Beria's telling Stalin, "show me the man and I will find the crime."

You're talking sensibly again,, not allowed...

Kraven,  I've posted this and my comment above on a number of blogs.  I've yet to receive a reasonable answer.  The older lefties are flummoxed.  The younger ones seem unable to reach a conclusion.  Rational, logical argumentation is beyond them.  Just rants, raves and insults.  I expect such from the carpet critter, not supposedly educated persons.

direstraits posted:
Kraven posted:
direstraits posted:

Watergate involved an actual crime - the break-in of the DNC offices.  Nixon's mistake was to become involved in the cover up.  He didn't order the original break-in.  What did the Russians do?  And, how was Trump involved?  I've yet to receive an answer.  Trump has called the crazed insinuations a witch hunt.  Not quite correct.  Its more Lavrentiy Beria's telling Stalin, "show me the man and I will find the crime."

You're talking sensibly again,, not allowed...

Kraven,  I've posted this and my comment above on a number of blogs.  I've yet to receive a reasonable answer.  The older lefties are flummoxed.  The younger ones seem unable to reach a conclusion.  Rational, logical argumentation is beyond them.  Just rants, raves and insults.  I expect such from the carpet critter, not supposedly educated persons.

rational, logical argumentation... 'carpet critter', 'supposedly educated', 'just rants raves and insults'. similar to what you do, daily? your hypocrisy is showing, even more than before!

how many times do you need to be answered before you accept the answer? nobody is this dense... this is just like when you couldn't figure out why the russian oil fields were of any consequence... when given the answer, you sidestepped away from the argument into pure deflection. you insult, whine, declare anyone with an opposing view a lesser intelligence... basically you act like a snowflake, but i expect no less from the hypocritical extreme rt.

direstraits posted:
Kraven posted:
direstraits posted:

Watergate involved an actual crime - the break-in of the DNC offices.  Nixon's mistake was to become involved in the cover up.  He didn't order the original break-in.  What did the Russians do?  And, how was Trump involved?  I've yet to receive an answer.  Trump has called the crazed insinuations a witch hunt.  Not quite correct.  Its more Lavrentiy Beria's telling Stalin, "show me the man and I will find the crime."

You're talking sensibly again,, not allowed...

Kraven,  I've posted this and my comment above on a number of blogs.  I've yet to receive a reasonable answer.  The older lefties are flummoxed.  The younger ones seem unable to reach a conclusion.  Rational, logical argumentation is beyond them.  Just rants, raves and insults.  I expect such from the carpet critter, not supposedly educated persons.

I realized long ago if they can't answer without agreeing even in the
the most remote like manner it's considered a hostile shot, and return 
fire with hate is necessary or the surrounding thugs could sense fear
and blackball the pink hat. So when a lib is caught in an embarrassing
moment on live TV, time to talk over anyone talking or tries to talk,
doesn't matter how many, they'll scream, spit, slobber, bite, point
and cuss your family until a hard break stops the block.
And that's considered an answer.
Crash.Override posted:
direstraits posted:
Kraven posted:
direstraits posted:

Watergate involved an actual crime - the break-in of the DNC offices.  Nixon's mistake was to become involved in the cover up.  He didn't order the original break-in.  What did the Russians do?  And, how was Trump involved?  I've yet to receive an answer.  Trump has called the crazed insinuations a witch hunt.  Not quite correct.  Its more Lavrentiy Beria's telling Stalin, "show me the man and I will find the crime."

You're talking sensibly again,, not allowed...

Kraven,  I've posted this and my comment above on a number of blogs.  I've yet to receive a reasonable answer.  The older lefties are flummoxed.  The younger ones seem unable to reach a conclusion.  Rational, logical argumentation is beyond them.  Just rants, raves and insults.  I expect such from the carpet critter, not supposedly educated persons.

rational, logical argumentation... 'carpet critter', 'supposedly educated', 'just rants raves and insults'. similar to what you do, daily? your hypocrisy is showing, even more than before!

how many times do you need to be answered before you accept the answer? nobody is this dense... this is just like when you couldn't figure out why the russian oil fields were of any consequence... when given the answer, you sidestepped away from the argument into pure deflection. you insult, whine, declare anyone with an opposing view a lesser intelligence... basically you act like a snowflake, but i expect no less from the hypocritical extreme rt.

Crash, you still don't understand the question, or refuse to recognize it.  Once more, what did Trump actually do to collude with the Russians?  What physical action did he take?

As to the Russian oil fields, I didn't ignore that.  You gave the fields and Exxon's access as a reason Trump might have colluded, not what was done.

My questions were how, the modus operandi, not the reason.  One may have the motive for a crime.  However, if one doesn't commit the crime, one is not guilty of the crime.  Moreover, it's doubtful the Russians would mount such an action on the outside chance Trump would win.  If Russia was involved, more likely, they were encouraging doubt in our system, not attempting to choose a winner.  Causing chaos in nations opposing Russia has been their motive and modus for decades.

direstraits posted:
Crash.Override posted:
direstraits posted:
Kraven posted:
direstraits posted:

Watergate involved an actual crime - the break-in of the DNC offices.  Nixon's mistake was to become involved in the cover up.  He didn't order the original break-in.  What did the Russians do?  And, how was Trump involved?  I've yet to receive an answer.  Trump has called the crazed insinuations a witch hunt.  Not quite correct.  Its more Lavrentiy Beria's telling Stalin, "show me the man and I will find the crime."

You're talking sensibly again,, not allowed...

Kraven,  I've posted this and my comment above on a number of blogs.  I've yet to receive a reasonable answer.  The older lefties are flummoxed.  The younger ones seem unable to reach a conclusion.  Rational, logical argumentation is beyond them.  Just rants, raves and insults.  I expect such from the carpet critter, not supposedly educated persons.

rational, logical argumentation... 'carpet critter', 'supposedly educated', 'just rants raves and insults'. similar to what you do, daily? your hypocrisy is showing, even more than before!

how many times do you need to be answered before you accept the answer? nobody is this dense... this is just like when you couldn't figure out why the russian oil fields were of any consequence... when given the answer, you sidestepped away from the argument into pure deflection. you insult, whine, declare anyone with an opposing view a lesser intelligence... basically you act like a snowflake, but i expect no less from the hypocritical extreme rt.

Crash, you still don't understand the question, or refuse to recognize it.  Once more, what did Trump actually do to collude with the Russians?  What physical action did he take?

As to the Russian oil fields, I didn't ignore that.  You gave the fields and Exxon's access as a reason Trump might have colluded, not what was done.

My questions were how, the modus operandi, not the reason.  One may have the motive for a crime.  However, if one doesn't commit the crime, one is not guilty of the crime.  Moreover, it's doubtful the Russians would mount such an action on the outside chance Trump would win.  If Russia was involved, more likely, they were encouraging doubt in our system, not attempting to choose a winner.  Causing chaos in nations opposing Russia has been their motive and modus for decades.

you do understand exactly what you're asking is exactly what the special council's job is? don't you? find out exactly what part team trump played , if any, right? the entire scandal would be over if trump wasn't trying to cover something up. and now, the circle is complete. you've just argued a complete circle, right back to your own question.

Crash.Override posted:
direstraits posted:
Crash.Override posted:
direstraits posted:
Kraven posted:
direstraits posted:

Watergate involved an actual crime - the break-in of the DNC offices.  Nixon's mistake was to become involved in the cover up.  He didn't order the original break-in.  What did the Russians do?  And, how was Trump involved?  I've yet to receive an answer.  Trump has called the crazed insinuations a witch hunt.  Not quite correct.  Its more Lavrentiy Beria's telling Stalin, "show me the man and I will find the crime."

You're talking sensibly again,, not allowed...

Kraven,  I've posted this and my comment above on a number of blogs.  I've yet to receive a reasonable answer.  The older lefties are flummoxed.  The younger ones seem unable to reach a conclusion.  Rational, logical argumentation is beyond them.  Just rants, raves and insults.  I expect such from the carpet critter, not supposedly educated persons.

rational, logical argumentation... 'carpet critter', 'supposedly educated', 'just rants raves and insults'. similar to what you do, daily? your hypocrisy is showing, even more than before!

how many times do you need to be answered before you accept the answer? nobody is this dense... this is just like when you couldn't figure out why the russian oil fields were of any consequence... when given the answer, you sidestepped away from the argument into pure deflection. you insult, whine, declare anyone with an opposing view a lesser intelligence... basically you act like a snowflake, but i expect no less from the hypocritical extreme rt.

Crash, you still don't understand the question, or refuse to recognize it.  Once more, what did Trump actually do to collude with the Russians?  What physical action did he take?

As to the Russian oil fields, I didn't ignore that.  You gave the fields and Exxon's access as a reason Trump might have colluded, not what was done.

My questions were how, the modus operandi, not the reason.  One may have the motive for a crime.  However, if one doesn't commit the crime, one is not guilty of the crime.  Moreover, it's doubtful the Russians would mount such an action on the outside chance Trump would win.  If Russia was involved, more likely, they were encouraging doubt in our system, not attempting to choose a winner.  Causing chaos in nations opposing Russia has been their motive and modus for decades.

you do understand exactly what you're asking is exactly what the special council's job is? don't you? find out exactly what part team trump played , if any, right? the entire scandal would be over if trump wasn't trying to cover something up. and now, the circle is complete. you've just argued a complete circle, right back to your own question.

Even Diane Feinstein stated there was no evidence of collusion.   "The entire scandal would be over if Trump wasn't trying to cover something up..."  Do you even hear what you are saying?  You sound exactly like your ancestors as they planned the assassinations of over 1500 Republican.   No evidence of any wrong doing!  Yet, keep the investigation going, Inspector Clueless!

just this week there were 18 new meeting/contacts discovered between team trump and the russians. putin's PERSONAL 'fixer' was in contact with team trump.  trump even admitted, on national television, that he was trying to derail the investigation... and i'm 'inspector clueless'.... "do you even hear what you are saying?' so much for the 'world class forensic accountant'.... you're either willfully ignoring the facts... or just really dense, squirrel.

Crash.Override posted:

just this week there were 18 new meeting/contacts discovered between team trump and the russians. putin's PERSONAL 'fixer' was in contact with team trump.  trump even admitted, on national television, that he was trying to derail the investigation... and i'm 'inspector clueless'.... "do you even hear what you are saying?' so much for the 'world class forensic accountant'.... you're either willfully ignoring the facts... or just really dense, squirrel.

If, one were to look further, one could certainly find they had meetings/contacts with the government officials from the UK, France, Germany, China, etc.  The team was settling in to become the new administration.  No, Trump did not admit he was attempting to derail the investigation.  Firing Comey would not do that.  You have no idea how a federal investigation is performed.  

To this day, the only federal official who ever requested the Russians to interfere with a US election was Ted Kennedy in 1984.

http://thefederalist.com/2015/...-the-1984-elections/

jtdavis posted:

To this day, the only federal official who ever requested the Russians to interfere with a US election was Ted Kennedy in 1984.

What did Trump tell the Russians to do concerning Hillary's Emails during this last campaign?

If, you remember the timeline, Hillary's servers were already in the possession of the FBI, having previously been hacked by, reportedly, a number of hackers to include a Romanian farmer (Guccifer).  The Russians would only have to peruse what they already possessed.

Once more, WikiLeaks revealed the emails from the DNC servers.  Julian Assange states his source was a disgruntled DNC employee.   

Chelsea Manning exposed thousands of classified emails via WikiLeaks.  Is Julian Assange actually a Russian agent?  If, not, then, the Russians had nothing to do with exposing either the DNC or Chelsea Manning's information.  If, so, then Julian Assange is a Russian agent.  If he is a Russian agent, why did Obama commute his sentence from 35 to seven years?  Is the real culprit Obama? 

what if trump asked or knew about the leaks and already had the information. supplied by putin.  where was your outrage over the leaks during the election? seems like i remember the republicon talking point 'who cares where the leaks came from, look what's in the information'.... republicons spent millions to find out about bill's oval office encounter... wouldn't it be prudent to find out if your president colluded with a foreign power to win the presidency? seems kinda strange , the lengths republicons will go to dismiss anything trump does, while spending millions to investigate any democrat.

Last edited by Crash.Override

hahahahaha! i'd go back to ignoring me , too, if i were you... obviously you can't defend every one of trump's actions...  now without sounding like more of a fool than  you already do. so much for the self proclaimed 'great forensic accountant and world traveler'.  we'll see you at the impeachment hearings... where you can tell us there's nothing going on. ha!

 obviously you can't defend every one of trump's actions - Crash

Which at this point can only be summed up as assumptions and assertions based ostensibly forwarded by a single news source.  How can anyone defend a hogdge podge of this, that or other.  No one can but the detail sent to investigate and to sort it out.  Remember,  WikiLeaks had already done Clumsy's job.  All he had to do was proofread for accuracy.  And when he found the fact, was clueless as how to handle a political football.  The Democrates were the first to recognize this and but that was before they recognized he could.  Flip.  Flop.

Here, we've no evidence.  No evidence under sworn testimony.  Eventually we may get to it by surprise disclosures of secret tapes during the Nixon Watergate hearing.  Or instead a wet spot will literally be dropped in our laps as was done during the Clinton impeachment.  Or may lacking substance, it will not.

So go ahead and let the social medial be your guide, liberals.  No on is going to defend all the wild machinations you can come up with, not even your own special prosecutor, even if there was such a thing, would even attempt to do so.  Well, maybe Timothy Leary back in the day.

Congratulations, you've outsmarted yourselves.  You come up with stuff you can proof, and I will be waiting at the finish line where only the proof of the truth prevails and smacks you right between the running lights.

Worse case scenario for me,  like Clinton, Trump is impeached and finishes out his second term.

Best case, Trump is not impeached, Sessions indicts the Clintons, Trump completes his second term, and all liberals go live in sanctuary cities where by popular vote to elect another loser.

In the mean time, its jobs, jobs, jobs for the American blue collar worker.

 

  

jtdavis posted:

To this day, the only federal official who ever requested the Russians to interfere with a US election was Ted Kennedy in 1984.

What did Trump tell the Russians to do concerning Hillary's Emails during this last campaign?

Why don't you tell us jt? Instead of making wild claims with no basis in facts, you tell us what Trump told the Russians, and give us a link to a reputable source for your information. While you're at it, show the post where I insulted you as you claim. You are such a fibber.

Last edited by Bestworking
Crash.Override posted:

well, the fbi thought there were enough facts to appoint a special council to look into the matter.. .but, not the party of hypocrites.. they're more concerned with hillary's emails. as evidenced in this above posts.

Say what about who appointed what on facts?

Bowing to public and Congressional pressure, Deputy U.S. Attorney General Rod Rosenstein appointed former FBI Director Bob Mueller on Wednesday to be a special counsel overseeing the investigation into Russian interference in the 2016 campaign, Justice Department officials said.

http://www.nbcnews.com/politic...nvestigation-n761271

I'm more concerned about Hillary lying to Congress.  I think they are too.  The emails are just part of the evidence.  And it's hard not to consider the evidence given the way the American criminal justice system is supposed to work.  Clintons not excluded.

As you pointed out, Nixon supporters backed him right up to the incitements.  And you're going to do the same for the Clintons.  You wear your hypocrisy well.   

Imagine the coincidence of all this happening at the same time.

 

Add Reply

Post

Untitled Document
×
×
×
×
Link copied to your clipboard.
×