Mueller Time?

[Oerets]

Originally Posted by icenine

Democrats should impeach even though Trump will not get convicted in the Senate.
America should not condone obstruction of justice or corruption.

Agree 100%!

Be the party of principles, expose the hypocrites and corrupt for the dark souls they be.

Then vote the B@sterds out!

[Chicks]

Prodded by Putin, Russians Sought Back Channels to Trump Through the Business World

https://www.nytimes.com/2019/04/20/u...a-mueller.html

...Mr. Trump’s comments often strike foreign policy experts as remarkably sympathetic to Mr. Putin. But the would-be influence peddlers in the United States and in Russia generally proceeded without much regard for the growing recognition that Moscow had just interfered in multiple ways with the American election and that any contacts outside established channels — especially those that mixed business and diplomacy — carried substantial political risks.

More great reporting by the NYT, virtually all of which has been shown to be accurate by Mueller, right, Whell? As opposed to the blatant lying from Donny, Ugly Sarah and Faux “News”...

[Chicks]

From 'total exoneration' to 'total bullsh**': Donny lingers on damning report

https://www-m.cnn.com/2019/04/20/pol...ger/index.html

Hey Whell, your Dear Leader can’t seem to make his mind up about the Mueller report. I’m quite sure you are very confused by his conflicting responses. So which is it for this “Nothing-Burger”? Total exoneration, bullshit, or a disastrous expose of the lying, corruption, desperation, self-dealing and incompetence of your hero? You must feel like a complete fool...

[donquixote99]

Originally Posted by Oerets

Agree 100%!

Be the party of principles, expose the hypocrites and corrupt for the dark souls they be.

Then vote the B@sterds out!

It begins to appear to me that if the Dems do not try to impeach Trump, they risk promoting apathy from voters convinced they are 'the same' as the Republicans.

[Oerets]

Seems it would be better to go down fighting for the country's soul then play games with any what if's. Make the Republicans defend, make excuses, ignore even deny the dirty close to if not fully treasonous actions perpetuated.

One only needs to substitute Clinton or Obama for Trump into a similar report, to then know the reaction from the Right. Look no further then the last Impeachment and the underlining crime.

[Dondilion]

The devolution of 'Mueller'.

[bobabode]

Originally Posted by Dondilion

The devolution of 'Mueller'.

Really? Seems to me that Nadler and the Dems are just getting started on the Turnip's proctological exam.

[Pio1980]

Mueller has officially confirmed what those who bothered to do the background already knew about the chaos clown before he was a contending candidate, but deeper and worse than I'd dare thought. He exceeds my expectation bias by a greater degree than I'd anticipated.

[nailer]

Originally Posted by Dondilion

The devolution of 'Mueller'.

Meaning Mueller is no longer on the board?

[nailer]

Originally Posted by donquixote99

I never said a mumblin' word about anything non-rule-of-law. Here's what I am saying:



Let's say this guy is a judge, and let's say he says he's holding up four fingers. In fact, he RULES he's holding up four fingers, and if you don't say it too he will throw you in jail for contempt.

Now regardless of what you say to the judge, who decides how many fingers you really believe he is holding up? If you get to decide inside your own head about the fingers, I get to decide what I believe about Trump.

The sources do count. You wanted to know about Trump's intent, right? Ignore them at your ignorance.

I did not say or imply that you said anything at all about anarchy.

I'll play. So I'm in court, either as witness or attorney, the judge holds up three fingers and asks me how many fingers is he holding up. I answer 3 and he says no there are 4, rules there are 4 and asks again still holding up 3 fingers. I will always answer 3, although if I was tortured long and intensely I just might start believing there were 4. See the lights?

Your rewriting of my question is not what I asked.