- Joined
- Sep 13, 2012
- Messages
- 18,233
- Reaction score
- 15,861
- Location
- veni, vidi, volo - now back in NC
- Gender
- Male
- Political Leaning
- Undisclosed
Toppling treasonous Trump will not hurt the country one bit. We've been through this before.
Umm...how did they get "slick willie" to lie under oath? Isn't it up to "slick willie" to tell the truth or lie about it? Funny how you claim that the GOP got someone to lie and yet when it comes to Trump it is purely Trumps responsibility. I agree that its Trumps responsibility. I do not agree that its the GOP's fault that they supposedly "got slick willie" to lie. That's about as a partisan a statement as you can possibly get.
I would recommend listening to Mr. Schiff's opening statement; there are some comments within that I was previously not aware of.
As he states, these things could be coincidental but they need to be thoroughly investigated.
yes, Slick Willie lied of his own free will; I grant anyone here that & stand corrected.
does not change the fact that the GOP has offered the US nothing but BS since 1854 ..................
You have been watching the hearing from the beginning? lol It just started but yet you are making assumptions already, you are no better than the Trump haters you diss, have a look in the mirror bud.
Your statement "Quit talking retarded ****"" is just another form of telling another DP member to STFU; you just happen to state it differently
your implication is NO DIFFERENT; only the verbiage you utilize
Says a king cheeto worshipper.
Assumption of innocence is the basis of our legal system. You have a problem with that? Or, do you feel that we should condemn people by popular disdain, rather than actual proof? I don't like the guy. He embarrasses the hell out me sometimes with the crap he says and does. However, my dislike for him and his actions is not going to sway me to condemn him as guilty before the investigations have even concluded. Those are the types of assumptions that you and others seem to think are okay assumptions to make, but the assumption of innocence until proven guilty is not.
That's telling.
See, that's why your posts are a joke. You have a good day.
If he's committed treason, I agree. You make the definitive statement that he is "treasonous Trump." What if he isn't? In your opinion, if it turns out that he hasn't committed treason, do you feel that all the statements like yours above, will or at least could harm the country?
I have no problem with you posting, I have a problem with how retarded what you are saying is.
Assumption of innocence is the basis of our legal system. You have a problem with that? Or, do you feel that we should condemn people by popular disdain, rather than actual proof? I don't like the guy. He embarrasses the hell out me sometimes with the crap he says and does. However, my dislike for him and his actions is not going to sway me to condemn him as guilty before the investigations have even concluded. Those are the types of assumptions that you and others seem to think are okay assumptions to make, but the assumption of innocence until proven guilty is not.
That's telling.
wow, there you go again; now you are referring to another DP member as a retard ........
I make no assumptions myself & that is why I believe all investigations need to take place & then let the chips fall where they may
I see a lot of Trump supporters expressing the idea that ANY investigation is BS
I don't think so
Nope. He's saying that what another poster is saying is retarded. There is a difference.
wow, there you go again; now you are referring to another DP member as a retard ........
Do not get your panties in a bunch there Buttercup. You started the post with an assumption of what I thought, that was your first error. The second error was to spin that into some rambling about me convicting Trump before all the evidence was in, mistake on your part. If you continue to make assumptions about strangers on a public forum, get used to being wrong.
I was only discussing what you stated.
Being that you have twice now called me names and twice now been demeaning and rude, I will respectfully withdraw from responding to your posts going forward.
Well, yeah it is. The only conclusion that the FBI has drawn and gone on record with is their assumed motive that looks like the Russian involvement was as opposition to Clinton. Their only statement regarding Trump collusion with the Russians is that there is no proof.
Keep thinking yours are not a joke, KCW.
I didn't give you that much credit or power either. I said ALL the statements -- "... do you feel that all the statements like yours above, will or at least could harm the country?" It is my opinion that all of them together, do.My statement does not carry enough weight to harm a country.
That is an honorable statement, and I believe you.I will gladly recant if I am incorrect.
Being that Oswald didn't own a multi-billion dollar international company, and Trump does... that was never in question.Trump has more Russian ties than Oswald had.
seems to be an EPIDEMIC here .........
We use cookies and similar technologies for the following purposes:
Do you accept cookies and these technologies?
We use cookies and similar technologies for the following purposes:
Do you accept cookies and these technologies?