Trump-Mueller tensions escalate

  • Thread starter Thread starter AFerri48
  • Start date Start date
Status
Not open for further replies.
dvdjs said:
Says who?
Click to expand...
An accusation of rape, whether real or not, still entails a specific crime and an individual/victim of said crime? So whatā€™s the specific crime that Trump and his campaigners committed and who is the victim/accuser?
 
Jeanne_S said:
In other words,he doesnā€™t knowā€¦:rolleyes:
Click to expand...
There is no object for investigating Trump because nobody filled a complain for the hacking of the DNC computers, or hacking the election or hacking the wikileaks emails.

It was only a fake ā€œDossierā€ and allegations made by some of the intel chiefs appointed by demoncrats with no proofs ever: ā€œWe think Russia tried to influence the election, Trump won while democrats thought he has no chance, therefore there must be something, and we have to find it!ā€
Waiting for the Clinton-Ucraine collusion investigation! If Clinton did not win that doesnā€™t make it legal!!!
 
josie_L said:
An accusation of rape, whether real or not, still entails a specific crime and an individual/victim of said crime? So whatā€™s the specific crime that Trump and his campaigners committed and who is the victim/accuser?
Click to expand...
You pick an example that does not, by any stretch of the imagination, exhaust all possibilities of investigations leading to criminal prosecutions. Why would you think that one example is sufficient for a substantive argument?
 
Jeanne_S said:
In other words,he doesnā€™t knowā€¦:rolleyes:
Click to expand...
I have explicitly said this before. The relevant question is so what? The responsible parties, who are privy to far more information than nay of us posting here are moving forward. What proof do you have that they are acting in bad faith?
 
Hoosier_Daddy said:
Riiiightā€¦

Because dubuya had it soooooo easyā€¦
Click to expand...
I am not sure why anyone would care whether we are kind to any of our presidents, republican or democrat. First of all, they work for us and if they are too thinned skinned for criticism, they should resign. Second they should have known that severe criticism comes with the office. I think itā€™s pretty clear that Obama and Trump are two of the thinnest skinned presidents we ever had.
 
dvdjs said:
I have explicitly said this before. The relevant question is so what? The responsible parties, who are privy to far more information than nay of us posting here are moving forward. What proof do you have that they are acting in bad faith?
Click to expand...
Yes, I believe that Comey was acting in bad faith. And the media, and Schumer, and Fusion GPS, and many Democrats, for the various reasons that I have cited throughout this thread and many other Trump/Russia related threads because were it not for them we would not have said investigation.

So I ask again, what is the crime committed and who is the victim/accuser?
 
josie_L said:
Yes, I believe that Comey was acting in bad faith. And the media, and Schumer, and Fusion GPS, and many Democrats. n.
Click to expand...
You have fascinating beliefs. I believe in God. Everything else requires proof.
 
dvdjs said:
You have fascinating beliefs. I believe in God. Everything else requires proof.
Click to expand...
I have provided proof (many times over), so sorry, that you are so biased as to render anything I say (backed by sources) as moot.
 
josie_L said:
Yes, I believe that Comey was acting in bad faith. And the media, and Schumer, and Fusion GPS, and many Democrats, for the various reasons that I have cited throughout this thread and many other Trump/Russia related threads because were it not for them we would not have said investigation.

So I ask again, what is the crime committed and who is the victim/accuser?
Click to expand...
I know you live in Canada, but you might be able to get C-span on cable. If you actually watch some of the hearings that are public you might get a different take than the propaganda sites you like to cite. I donā€™t say that in a nasty way. There is much more info out there that you, as a news junkie, (like me) would benefit from investigating.
 
Sojourner003 said:
I know you live in Canada, but you might be able to get C-span on cable. If you actually watch some of the hearings that are public you might get a different take than the propaganda sites you like to cite. I donā€™t say that in a nasty way. There is much more info out there that you, as a news junkie, (like me) would benefit from investigating.
Click to expand...
I do not visit propaganda sites, i.e., Washington Times is not a propaganda site anymore than the NYT is. Nor are the MULTITUDE of news outlets I visit and read from (like the WSJ, the Washington Examiner, NY POST, Townhall, Forbes, the Hill, Politico. . .etc.), so stop with the drivel that I am visiting propaganda sites.

In fact, itā€™s absolutely arrogant of you to think that you are in the know of what is or isnā€™t propaganda, being that I can describe much of what is stated in the NYT and WAPO as propaganda or do such bastions of honest reporting hold no biases???
 
josie_L said:
I do not visit propaganda sites, i.e., Washington Times is not a propaganda site anymore than the NYT is. Nor are the MULTITUDE of news outlets I visit and read from (like the WSJ, the Washington Examiner, NY POST, Townhall, Forbes, the Hill, Politico. . .etc.), so stop with the drivel that I am visiting propaganda sites.

In fact, itā€™s absolutely arrogant of you to think that you are in the know of what is or isnā€™t propaganda, being that I can describe much of what is stated in the NYT and WAPO as propaganda or do such bastions of honest reporting hold no biases???
Click to expand...
Please clarify your last sentence.
 
josie_L said:
Yes, I believe that Comey was acting in bad faith. And the media, and Schumer, and Fusion GPS, and many Democrats, for the various reasons that I have cited throughout this thread and many other Trump/Russia related threads because were it not for them we would not have said investigation.

So I ask again, what is the crime committed and who is the victim/accuser?
Click to expand...
If there is no proof that the Russians interfered with our elections why is a Republican House and Senate putting together a veto proof bill to sanction Russia. And why is this same congress putting limits on the presidents ability to disregard these sanctions?
 
steve_b said:
I would prefer to think ā€œthe fatherā€ didnā€™t know who the person spoken of, and that he defends, is.
Click to expand...
I am most well aware of who Mrs. Clinton isā€¦both from her years as First Lady of the United States and her years as Secretary of State.

 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top