The Washington Post
Apr 18, 2019 15:54:00 #
chrisscholbe wrote:
ROTFLMAO....you won't even admit to trusting a site that you cited?
I’m not blind. I go after t***h and fact. I am aware of bias.
Even confirmation bias. Is there something wrong with justice.gov you’d like to share? Along with evidence?
Apr 18, 2019 16:05:53 #
Angmo wrote:
I’m not blind. I go after t***h and fact. I am aware of bias.
Even confirmation bias. Is there something wrong with justice.gov you’d like to share? Along with evidence?
Even confirmation bias. Is there something wrong with justice.gov you’d like to share? Along with evidence?
?????????????????????
Sorry, YOU were the one who seemed to question it's t***h.....after citing it......NOT me.
Apr 18, 2019 16:23:40 #
Elaine2025 wrote:
The indictments had zero to do with Trump or why Trump was being investigated. 34 people were indicted as their individual crimes were uncovered during the course of the investigation. Most indictments went to Russians that will never see the inside of a court room. The US people were indicted on things like Tax Fraud, lying, false statements to Congress, obstruction, witness tampering, bank fraud, money laundering, etc.
Remind me......what were those Russians indicted for?
And, all of those US people being indicted for doing illegal things......why is that a "bad" thing?
Apr 18, 2019 16:26:07 #
Elaine2025
Loc: Seattle, Wa
chrisscholbe wrote:
Didn't the indictments come out as a result of the investigation?
Sort of the same thing, only slightly different.
Why can't you just be happy that Trump didn't get indicted?
Kind of difficult to have an investigation to prevent someone from being elected after they're already in office.
PS:Shouting only makes people think you can't hear yourself think.
Sort of the same thing, only slightly different.
Why can't you just be happy that Trump didn't get indicted?
Kind of difficult to have an investigation to prevent someone from being elected after they're already in office.
PS:Shouting only makes people think you can't hear yourself think.
It is obvious to me that you do not follow the news and actually know what is going on. My assumption is that if you followed the news you would not be displaying such ignorance.
The investigation was based upon lies, can't you get that?
Apr 18, 2019 16:28:48 #
Elaine2025
Loc: Seattle, Wa
chrisscholbe wrote:
Remind me......what were those Russians indicted for?
And, all of those US people being indicted for doing illegal things......why is that a "bad" thing?
And, all of those US people being indicted for doing illegal things......why is that a "bad" thing?
The Russians were indicted for trying to meddle in the e******n through social media.
US people being indicted.....who said it was bad??? I said it had nothing to do with why the investigation was started, thus the investigation was a dem bought and paid for sham. Some were indicted for lying to congress.
Apr 18, 2019 16:37:02 #
Elaine2025 wrote:
The Russians were indicted for trying to meddle in the e******n through social media.
US people being indicted.....who said it was bad??? I said it had nothing to do with why the investigation was started, thus the investigation was a dem bought and paid for sham. Some were indicted for lying to congress.
US people being indicted.....who said it was bad??? I said it had nothing to do with why the investigation was started, thus the investigation was a dem bought and paid for sham. Some were indicted for lying to congress.
OK...Now I get it.....the end justifies the....."reason not to have begun in the first place".
There are many Grand Juries that don't result in indictments....should we do away with Grand Juries?
Or only in the cases where they don't bring an indictment...but then, how would we know ahead of time.
For the sake of argument...let's stipulate that Dems made false accusations.
How do we know they're false, unless it's investigated?
Apr 18, 2019 16:52:04 #
Elaine2025
Loc: Seattle, Wa
chrisscholbe wrote:
OK...Now I get it.....the end justifies the....."reason not to have begun in the first place".
There are many Grand Juries that don't result in indictments....should we do away with Grand Juries?
Or only in the cases where they don't bring an indictment...but then, how would we know ahead of time.
For the sake of argument...let's stipulate that Dems made false accusations.
How do we know they're false, unless it's investigated?
There are many Grand Juries that don't result in indictments....should we do away with Grand Juries?
Or only in the cases where they don't bring an indictment...but then, how would we know ahead of time.
For the sake of argument...let's stipulate that Dems made false accusations.
How do we know they're false, unless it's investigated?
What is wrong with you mentally?
Apr 18, 2019 16:58:45 #
Elaine2025 wrote:
What is wrong with you mentally?
Are you disagreeing, or disagreeing, with the statement that ..."We can't "know" that someone did/didn't do something illegal until it's investigated?"
It's a very simple question?
Apr 18, 2019 17:01:28 #
chrisscholbe wrote:
Remind me......what were those Russians indicted for?
And, all of those US people being indicted for doing illegal things......why is that a "bad" thing?
And, all of those US people being indicted for doing illegal things......why is that a "bad" thing?
If you read, not for collusion but for what they were indicted for. Nothing to do with Trump.
Read up. It helps.
Apr 18, 2019 17:03:20 #
Angmo wrote:
If you read, not for collusion but for what they were indicted for. Nothing to do with Trump.
Read up. It helps.
Read up. It helps.
I NEVER said it had it had anything to do with Trump....try to keep up.
Apr 18, 2019 17:04:57 #
chrisscholbe wrote:
?????????????????????
Sorry, YOU were the one who seemed to question it's t***h.....after citing it......NOT me.
Sorry, YOU were the one who seemed to question it's t***h.....after citing it......NOT me.
I question all sources until I verify facts and t***hfulness. I’ve just about given up with leftie sources. Rarely do that have value or t***h and fact supporting their theories (at best...)
Mueller has verified lefties have lied about everything the past two years over Trump that I’ve heard from them. He spent a lot of money, time and over a dozen trump h**ers and proved it. I’m satisfied.
Just read. Stop opining and whining like a spoiled little girl.
Apr 18, 2019 17:08:19 #
Elaine2025
Loc: Seattle, Wa
chrisscholbe wrote:
Are you disagreeing, or disagreeing, with the statement that ..."We can't "know" that someone did/didn't do something illegal until it's investigated?"
It's a very simple question?
It's a very simple question?
You appear to have mental issues that keep you from carrying on a sane conversation. You also lack knowledge on the issue you are trying to discuss. Go learn about what took place. Right now you look completely ignorant and unable to comprehend.
Apr 18, 2019 17:29:49 #
I'm on the late freight; but again what's the problem?
So the story didn't end like you had hoped, own it.
In the words of David Hannum "There's a sucker born every minute"
After this whole debacle being proved false I wear my tin foil hat proudly
"After two years of conjecture from all sides, some hard t***hs have emerged. Russia did try to influence the 2016 e******n. Neither Trump nor his campaign conspired with Russia. The president’s actions did not rise to criminal obstruction of justice. And how and why this all began may well turn out to be the most troubling story of all.
During his confirmation hearing in January, Barr told senators, “I am not going to do anything that I think is wrong, and I will not be bullied into doing anything I think is wrong. By anybody. Whether it be editorial boards, or Congress or the president. I’m going to do what I think is right.” Observers at the time took Barr’s comments as reassurance of his independence from Trump, but in hindsight it should be noted that he mentioned editorial boards and Congress first.
Barr’s career does not paint a portrait of someone who chases tin-foil-hat conspiracies. There’s enough evidence in the public record to raise valid suspicions that the FBI’s investigation of the Trump campaign was motivated not by real concerns about national security, but rather by a loathing of the candidate. And though new facts may emerge in the full, redacted report, they won’t change the larger t***h. It would behoove serious journalists to put aside their political biases and delve into a story that might actually be worthy of Watergate comparisons — even if it includes the painful admission that Fox News has been right all along."
So the story didn't end like you had hoped, own it.
In the words of David Hannum "There's a sucker born every minute"
After this whole debacle being proved false I wear my tin foil hat proudly
"After two years of conjecture from all sides, some hard t***hs have emerged. Russia did try to influence the 2016 e******n. Neither Trump nor his campaign conspired with Russia. The president’s actions did not rise to criminal obstruction of justice. And how and why this all began may well turn out to be the most troubling story of all.
During his confirmation hearing in January, Barr told senators, “I am not going to do anything that I think is wrong, and I will not be bullied into doing anything I think is wrong. By anybody. Whether it be editorial boards, or Congress or the president. I’m going to do what I think is right.” Observers at the time took Barr’s comments as reassurance of his independence from Trump, but in hindsight it should be noted that he mentioned editorial boards and Congress first.
Barr’s career does not paint a portrait of someone who chases tin-foil-hat conspiracies. There’s enough evidence in the public record to raise valid suspicions that the FBI’s investigation of the Trump campaign was motivated not by real concerns about national security, but rather by a loathing of the candidate. And though new facts may emerge in the full, redacted report, they won’t change the larger t***h. It would behoove serious journalists to put aside their political biases and delve into a story that might actually be worthy of Watergate comparisons — even if it includes the painful admission that Fox News has been right all along."
Apr 18, 2019 17:31:03 #
soba1 wrote:
I'm on the late freight; but again what's the prob... (show quote)
T***h and fact wins out over evil. Again.
Apr 18, 2019 17:33:46 #
If you want to reply, then register here. Registration is free and your account is created instantly, so you can post right away.