Jumbo

Moose & Squirrel v Boris & Natasha: what's the deal with the rooskies and trumpland?

Recommended Posts

21 minutes ago, twa said:

 

If they had confidence he did commit a crime they would have said so.

 

 

 

You have a comprehension problem.  

Share this post


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

 

You have a comprehension problem.  

 

I think ya'll do.

 

Nadler obviously does :pint:

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
17 minutes ago, twa said:

 

Stating the facts is not indicting, nor accusing.

 

If he had more evidence than what is in the report you might have a point, 

 

The fact is he provided the information he gathered, if you see a crime in it it is up to congress to pursue  formal charges.

 

 

He said, rapidly moving the goalpost from "There's no crime because Mueller didn't file charges" to "There's no crime because Congress hasn't impeached him (yet)"  

 

  • Like 1

Share this post


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

 

I think ya'll do.

 

Nadler obviously does :pint:

 

This isnt personal, so I dont want you to think it is. But if you ever want anyone to have respect for you, you have to know when you are beat. You are beat, Twa. This is a losing argument. 

  • Thanks 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

So what are the chances Congress can impeach Barr as well because that dude did his best to cloud the facts and has been acting as Trump's defense lawyer from the jump. 

  • Like 1

Share this post


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

 

He said, rapidly moving the goalpost from "There's no crime because Mueller didn't file charges" to "There's no crime because Congress hasn't impeached him (yet)"  

 

 

That goalpost has been in place since the report was released.

 

If you see a crime in the information provided then you need to pursue it.

 

Relying on that Mueller could not indict to say it does indict is speculative and of no use if you do not act.

9 minutes ago, Llevron said:

 

This isnt personal, so I dont want you to think it is. But if you ever want anyone to have respect for you, you have to know when you are beat. You are beat, Twa. This is a losing argument. 

 

I am highly respected by those that matter to me.....no offense .

  • Haha 1

Share this post


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

 

If you see a crime in the information provided then you need to pursue it.

 

So......would Democrats requesting Mueller (and others via subpoenas) to testify, and requesting documents related to the investigation to be turned over so they can further look into questions the report may have raised considered "pursuing it?"   

Share this post


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

 

So......would Democrats requesting Mueller (and others via subpoenas) to testify, and requesting documents related to the investigation to be turned over so they can further look into questions the report may have raised considered "pursuing it?"   

 

Mueller just told you he gave you all he had....if you don't believe him feel free to pursue him.

Congress can request whatever it desires, though opening impeachment hearings would be the best way IF they see something worth pursuing.(the courts give more weight in that case).

 

The Dem leadership lacks the courage of it's stated convictions otherwise.

 

 

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
4 minutes ago, BenningRoadSkin said:

Looks like TWA is playing his classic hits today.

 

What is Nancy playing?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
7 minutes ago, twa said:

The Dem leadership lacks the courage of it's stated convictions

 

Well TWA has said one true thing this week.

  • Like 2

Share this post


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

 

 

Prosecution was declined.  

 

Complete exoneration.  

 

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, twa said:

 

If they had confidence he did commit a crime they would have said so.

 

 

 Obviously you didn't listen to Robert Mueller.  Or if you did, you did not understand what he said.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Just now, Dan T. said:

 

 Obviously you didn't listen to Robert Mueller.  Or if you did, you did not understand what he said.

 

Obviously you didn't unless you think they said he committed a crime in the report.

 

If ya do ya might be better served calling Nancy.

 

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Rational people: It looks like a duck.  It quacks like a duck. It was hatched from an egg laid by a duck.

 

Trump supporters:  it could be a chicken with orange swim fins glued to its feet.

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Mueller investigation ultimately was a huge wast of time. He basically said “we didn’t come to a conclusion on whether or not he committed a crime”

 

 

That doesn’t mean he’s innocent.

that doesn’t mean he’s guilty.

 

it means mueller and his team were ineffective. I understand if the AG ties your hand you cannot charge the president even if you think you should, but it doesn’t stop you from rendering an opinion on whether or not a crime was committed.

 

This is another display of the ineffectiveness of a modern democracy.

 

Russia is laughing at us. And it isn’t all on Trump. 

2 minutes ago, Dan T. said:

Rational people: It looks like a duck.  It quacks like a duck. It was hatched from an egg laid by a duck.

 

Mueller Report:  it could be a chicken with orange swim fins glued to its feet.

 

 

^fixed it for you.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
3 minutes ago, CousinsCowgirl84 said:

^fixed it for you.

 

^^^ That is just stupid.  800 former federal prosecutors, both Democratic and Republican disagree with you, along with anybody with half a brain who has read the Mueller Report and isn't hopelessly blinded by partisanship.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
4 minutes ago, Dan T. said:

 

^^^ That is just stupid.  800 former federal prosecutors, both Democratic and Republican disagree with you, along with anybody with half a brain who has read the Mueller Report and isn't hopelessly blinded by partisanship.

 

Here is what mueller said;

 

If we had had confidence that the president clearly did not commit a crime, we would have said so,” Mr. Mueller said, reading from prepared notes behind a lectern at the Justice Department. “We did not, however, make a determination as to whether the president did commit a crime.”

 

Edited by CousinsCowgirl84

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

A better "fix":

 

Special prosecutor: This is the gun Trump used.  Here's his purchase receipt.  The gun has his fingerprints on it.  Here are the witnesses who watched him shoot the victim, in the middle of 5th Avenue.  But because he's the President, I cannot charge him with a crime.

 

Trump and his idiot followers: Total exoneration!

 

 

  • Like 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2 minutes ago, Dan T. said:

A better "fix":

 

Special prosecutor: This is the gun Trump used.  Here's his purchase receipt.  The gun has his fingerprints on it.  Here are the witnesses who watched him shoot the victim, in the middle of 5th Avenue.  But because he's the President, I cannot charge him with a crime.

 

Trump and his idiot followers: Total exoneration!

 

 

 

 

No. That isn’t what he said. This is what he said:

 

Special prosecutor: This is the gun Trump used.  Here's his purchase receipt.  The gun has his fingerprints on it.  Here are the witnesses who watched him shoot the victim, in the middle of 5th Avenue. “We did not, however, make a determination as to whether the president did commit a crime.”

 

eg.

 

Mueller Report:  it could be a chicken with orange swim fins glued to its feet.

  • Haha 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2 minutes ago, CousinsCowgirl84 said:

 

Here is what mueller said;

 

If we had had confidence that the president clearly did not commit a crime, we would have said so,” Mr. Mueller said, reading from prepared notes behind a lectern at the Justice Department. “We did not, however, make a determination as to whether the president did commit a crime.”

 

He also said that he COULDNT because the investigation was obstructed. And he listed the ways. 

 

No matter how hard you try, you can’t make me think you are actually this stupid. I know you can read. 

  • Thanks 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    No registered users viewing this page.