- Joined
- Jun 22, 2013
- Messages
- 20,271
- Reaction score
- 28,078
- Location
- Mid-West USA
- Gender
- Male
- Political Leaning
- Other
Dershowitz: I don't see any crimes in Mueller memos Fox News Published on Dec 7, 2018.
People opposed to the Trump Administration have been commenting and speculating on every anti-Trump news item; from Stormy Daniels and campaign finance violations, through alleged violations of the emoluments clause, to contacts with Russia for plans to build a Trump hotel...all under the canopy of alleged conspiracy with Russia to influence (validate it was stolen) the 2016 election.
Every time some new bit of alleged validation pops up, the oppositions cheers and says "This is it! This is what will bring him down!" only to find it isn't quite what they hoped. Yet every bit is still hoarded as ammunition in repetitive arguments whenever something new comes up for how the totality of information shows somehow that Trump should never have been elected President.
Now we have the Cohen, Flynn, and Manafort sentencing recommendation letters/memos, and the Opposition is on yet another campaign claiming "the dots are connected/connecting, we will be vindicated!" again.
Then we hear rational arguments about what is really happening, and maybe it is not so damningly supportive of the resistance efforts after all.
Listen to how Mr. Dershowitz explains (again) how the facts don't necessarily equate to anything much at all.
Or (as I expect posts to show) not. :coffeepap:
This is why rightwingers aren't concerned that Napolitano isn't falling in line on Trump. They still have Dershowitz so all is well in Trumpland.
This is why rightwingers aren't concerned that Napolitano isn't falling in line on Trump. They still have Dershowitz so all is well in Trumpland.
There's plenty of evidence in the public record that establishes the Trump camp was communicating with Russian nationals, and assessing whether they had stolen documents from the state department and DNC.Im sorry, but what is it Mueller has produced with regard to collusion?
(Zero is the correct answer)
It is the truth that is in the idea that counts, not who speaks it, as you should know.
This is what education was supposed to teach you.
What Happened?
I suspect that you don't even make sense in Trumpland.
*shrug*
Sorry to break it to you, but there's no way to spin this as anything but a day the implicates Trump in several crimes.Dershowitz: I don't see any crimes in Mueller memos Fox News Published on Dec 7, 2018.
People opposed to the Trump Administration have been commenting and speculating on every anti-Trump news item; from Stormy Daniels and campaign finance violations and vague allegation's of obstruction, through alleged violations of the emoluments clause, to contacts with Russia for plans to build a Trump hotel...all under the canopy of alleged conspiracy with Russia to influence (validate it was stolen) the 2016 election.
Every time some new bit of alleged validation pops up, the opposition cheers and says "This is it! This is what will bring him down!" only to find it isn't quite what they hoped. Yet every bit is still hoarded as ammunition in repetitive arguments whenever something new comes up for how the totality of information shows somehow that Trump should never have been elected President.
Now we have the Cohen, Flynn, and Manafort sentencing recommendation letters/memos, and the Opposition is on yet another campaign claiming "the dots are connected/connecting, we will be vindicated!" again.
Then we hear rational arguments about what is really happening, and maybe it is not so damningly supportive of the resistance efforts after all.
Listen to how Mr. Dershowitz explains (again) how the facts don't necessarily equate to anything much at all. That so far there are no Trump "crimes," and really nothing (so far) that justified the Mueller investigation.
Or (as I expect many posts to show) don't listen, since it does not suit the impeachment narrative. :coffeepap:
Sorry to break it to you, but there's no way to spin this as anything but a day the implicates Trump in several crimes.
The SDNY documents establish that Trump directed a subordinate to commit several felonies. Whether you think it's important or not, whether you think it's grounds for impeachment or not, it's something that Trump is going to have to deal with after he becomes a citizen again, and he will himself at that time will be indicted.
Hahahahahaha!!!Im sorry, but what is it Mueller has produced with regard to collusion?
(Zero is the correct answer)
There's plenty of evidence in the public record that establishes the Trump camp was communicating with Russian nationals, and assessing whether they had stolen documents from the state department and DNC.
And beyond the Mueller memo, the SDNY all but indicted Trump in several felonies.
Hint: "all but indicted" says there are not indictments, but that they have clearly said he violated the law.Where, beyond your imagination, are those indictments?
It's illegal to communicate with Russians?There's plenty of evidence in the public record that establishes the Trump camp was communicating with Russian nationals, and assessing whether they had stolen documents from the state department and DNC.
Hint: "all but indicted" says there are not indictments, but that they have clearly said he violated the law.
Why all the dishonesty tonight?
This is why rightwingers aren't concerned that Napolitano isn't falling in line on Trump. They still have Dershowitz so all is well in Trumpland.
It's illegal to communicate with Russians?
It's illegal to communicate with Russians?
Show you what? Where the SDNY clearly stated "In particular, and as Cohen himself has now admitted, with respect to both payments, he acted in coordination with and at the direction of Individual-1"? It's in the Cohen sentencing memo, page 11.Really? Show me.
You know as well as I do current DOJ guidelines say a sitting President should not be indicted.If he violated the law he'd be under indictment.
Try reading my posts again, this time try to understand it.It's illegal to communicate with Russians?
Where's your evidence?It's illegal to plot with Russians in exchange for favors to win a U.S. presidential election which is exactly what they were doing.
You don't have a clue.Really? Show me. Why all the dishonesty every night? If he violated the law he'd be under indictment. Another FOS propaganda piece.
You seem to be stuck on "they were communicating with Russians" - if one walks up to you and claims he has a hot Rolex, does that mean I get to arrest you because you were communicating with him about a stolen watch?Try reading my posts again, this time try to understand it.
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?