We got Campaign Finance Charges

[Dawg]

You clearly posted two lies. How is it wrong to note it ?

I proved both I posted of...……...keep jacking your thread

 

[Spamature]

I proved both I posted of...……...keep jacking your thread

You lied when you claimed I was derailing the thread when it was clearly YOU who brought up the topics in an effort to change the subject.

The subject is TRUMP's tax evasion, not claims about anyone else.

 

[Deleted member 21794]

This was an attack on the United States. How has our system prosecuted aiding the enemy in an attack on this nation in the past ?

I'm talking about Trump here and now. You're the expert on all the charges. So what will he be charged with?

 

[Spamature]

I'm talking about Trump here and now. You're the expert on all the charges. So what will he be charged with?

I am talking about Trump as well.

Again, what have we done in the past with people who aid the enemy in an attack on the United States ?

 

[Deleted member 21794]

I am talking about Trump as well.

Again, what have we done in the past with people who aid the enemy in an attack on the United States ?

Translation: Even I can't bring myself to say what my DNC handlers want me to say. I better tuck tail, dodge and run away if necessary. Whaa!

 

[Raoul_Luke]

So you support him telling congress they should start an impeachment inquiry rather than try to depend on his findings.

Good.

As I pointed out he was clearly biased against Trump, and I would further posit that anyone using his report for anything other than toilet paper should be ridiculed...

 

[Spamature]

As I pointed out he was clearly biased against Trump, and I would further posit that anyone using his report for anything other than toilet paper should be ridiculed...

Yet in the end he still stepped out of the way and called for this to be handled outside of the criminal justice system instead of through his investigation.

That doesn't sound biased to me.

 

[Raoul_Luke]

Yet in the end he still stepped out of the way and called for this to be handled outside of the criminal justice system instead of through his investigation.

That doesn't sound biased to me.

Even though he found no evidence whatsoever that Trump was "colluding" with the Russians, he nevertheless strongly suggested that there was probably obstruction, which is a clear over reach, as pointed out by Barr at the time (how do you "obstruct" an investigation into, well, nothing?), further suggesting it might even warrant impeachment, and you can find no evidence of bias? I'm not surprised, actually, considering your mindless TDS.

 

[EatTheRich]

Even though he found no evidence whatsoever that Trump was "colluding" with the Russians, he nevertheless strongly suggested that there was probably obstruction, which is a clear over reach, as pointed out by Barr at the time (how do you "obstruct" an investigation into, well, nothing?), further suggesting it might even warrant impeachment, and you can find no evidence of bias? I'm not surprised, actually, considering your mindless TDS.

He found and presented evidence that Trump was colluding with the Russians, no?

 

[Spamature]

Even though he found no evidence whatsoever that Trump was "colluding" with the Russians, he nevertheless strongly suggested that there was probably obstruction, which is a clear over reach, as pointed out by Barr at the time (how do you "obstruct" an investigation into, well, nothing?), further suggesting it might even warrant impeachment, and you can find no evidence of bias? I'm not surprised, actually, considering your mindless TDS.

He did not say he found no evidence of collusion. That is a Trumpian lie, not his words.

It wasn't an investigation into nothing. He is still trying to collude and still Russian individuals are involved in his continued collusion here too. What is so bad is that this was going on while he was being investigated for colluding with Russia. And on top of that Barr is involved in this collusion attempt. So if anyone is biased as you say. You have to admit anything coming from Barr is the real biased rhetoric here. Your utter hypocrisy on this matter has been exposed as well.

 

[Spamature]

Translation: Even I can't bring myself to say what my DNC handlers want me to say. I better tuck tail, dodge and run away if necessary. Whaa!

You're the one who is running away from answering.

 

[Deleted member 21794]

You're the one who is running away from answering.

Answering what?

 

[Spamature]

Answering what?

What have we done with Americans who sided with and aided an enemy in an attack against our nation.

 

[Raoul_Luke]

He did not say he found no evidence of collusion. That is a Trumpian lie, not his words.

It wasn't an investigation into nothing. He is still trying to collude and still Russian individuals are involved in his continued collusion here too. What is so bad is that this was going on while he was being investigated for colluding with Russia. And on top of that Barr is involved in this collusion attempt. So if anyone is biased as you say. You have to admit anything coming from Barr is the real biased rhetoric here. Your utter hypocrisy on this matter has been exposed as well.

Look, if there were any evidence of "collusion" Trump would have been impeached by now, so you are simply veering steeply into "conspiracy theory" territory here, by maintaining that there was. Hypocrisy? I was 100% correct from the get go that there was no Russian "collusion" and the Mueller investigation, despite being run by a disgruntled reject for FBI director, and employing a phalanx of democratic sympathizers, despite being riddled with bias from one end to the other, has proven me precisely, well, 100% correct. Here's some news for you - a "hypocrite" is someone who pretends their position was upheld, when in fact it was not. That would be YOU comrade, not me.

 

[Deleted member 21794]

What have we done with Americans who sided with and aided an enemy in an attack against our nation.

Why is it my job to educate you?

 

[Raoul_Luke]

He found and presented evidence that Trump was colluding with the Russians, no?

If he had, Trump would be impeached by now. You are referring to the "contacts" with "Russians" that you conspiracy theorists believe suggest "collusion" when, in fact, they were simply conversations.

 

[Spamature]

Look, if there were any evidence of "collusion" Trump would have been impeached by now, so you are simply veering steeply into "conspiracy theory" territory here, by maintaining that there was. Hypocrisy? I was 100% correct from the get go that there was no Russian "collusion" and the Mueller investigation, despite being run by a disgruntled reject for FBI director, and employing a phalanx of democratic sympathizers, despite being riddled with bias from one end to the other, has proven me precisely, well, 100% correct. Here's some news for you - a "hypocrite" is someone who pretends their position was upheld, when in fact it was not. That would be YOU comrade, not me.

Excuse me. Trump is being impeached. Now if you are saying the GOP would have impeached him during the over two years they were in control of the House. You are certainly being disingenuous to say the least. What ever you want to call Republicans is up to you. But they were in charge of all investigations until Jan 2019. If you are saying Republicans are biased against Republicans then as Reagan often said, there you go again.

As for any of this being a conspiracy theory. He look at where we are now. Collusion funded by a Russian(s). Or there he goes again.

 

[Raoul_Luke]

Excuse me. Trump is being impeached. Now if you are saying the GOP would have impeached him during the over two years they were in control of the House. You are certainly being disingenuous to say the least. What ever you want to call Republicans is up to you. But they were in charge of all investigations until Jan 2019. If you are saying Republicans are biased against Republicans then as Reagan often said, there you go again.

As for any of this being a conspiracy theory. He look at where we are now. Collusion funded by a Russian(s). Or there he goes again.

We were discussing the Mueller report, no? That only came out in 2019. And Trump is not being impeached for anything the report covered (because there was nothing in there he could be impeached over). Instead the deep state & "resistance" have "trumped up" another charge over this Ukrainian phone call because that's all they had. So just which one of us is being "disingenuous" here? Obviously, it's you.

 

[Spamature]

We were discussing the Mueller report, no? That only came out in 2019. And Trump is not being impeached for anything the report covered (because there was nothing in there he could be impeached over). Instead the deep state & "resistance" have "trumped up" another charge over this Ukrainian phone call because that's all they had. So just which one of us is being "disingenuous" here? Obviously, it's you.

Charges have not been brought forth. We don't know right now how much of what is known will be part of his impeachment. Mueller clearly identified instances obstruction of justice and said it should be handle outside of the criminal justice system. We are beyond just the phone call. Just about all of the major members of his cabinet has been ensnared in this criminal conspiracy. Those aren't members of the "deep state" or the resistance testifying to congress about his wrong doing. Those are "the very best people" he himself appointed.

 

[Mick]

Charges have not been brought forth. We don't know right now how much of what is known will be part of his impeachment. Mueller clearly identified instances obstruction of justice and said it should be handle outside of the criminal justice system. We are beyond just the phone call. Just about all of the major members of his cabinet has been ensnared in this criminal conspiracy. Those aren't members of the "deep state" or the resistance testifying to congress about his wrong doing. Those are "the very best people" he himself appointed.

Good lord, and we thought Hillary was insane when she was spreading conspiracies about 10 year olds hacking and rigging our elections and when she said Tulsi Gabbard was a Russian operative sent in to rig the 2020 election. You've got her beat by a mile, man. ROFL.

Mueller identified NO obstruction. Mueller's own words:

"Unlike cases in which a subject engages in obstruction of justice to cover up a crime, the evidence we obtained did not establish that the President was involved in an underlying crime related to Russian election interference......the absence of that evidence affects the analysis of the President’s intent and requires consideration of other possible motives for his conduct."

19 Trump-hating Democrats couldn't even muster a legitimate accusation and had to admit that an innocent can't obstruct his own justice. Now Dems in the House are holding top secret investigations and trying desperately to keep exculpatory evidence out while selectively leaking. And you are just dumb enough to keep lapping this up.

A diseased left wing mind can be an awful, ugly thing.