Breaking! Congress To Step In And Give Immunities to Immunize President Trump From Jack Smith ( 18 U.S. Code § 6002 – 3)

[Orangecat]

Such irony on your part.

Your low IQ renders your posts both lame and boring.

 

[postman]

Another coward. You assholes are always demanding that I search through thousands of words of text to quote some phrase, but you are unwilling to do the same.

Make you a deal. I'll take the time to quote exactly what you claim isn't in the indictment, and you in return have to fully acknowledge it. Which means retracting everything that it proves false.

And you gotta stick around to do it too. No running away.

Deal?

 

[d0gbreath]

I've already sent a letter to McCarthy pleading with him to pursue in action....

Pursuing inaction is one of his better traits.

 

[Catsnmeters]

Another coward. You assholes are always demanding that I search through thousands of words of text to quote some phrase, but you are unwilling to do the same.

Read the indictment.

It's pretty important as an American to read and understand the indictment and not just lean on right wing pundits to tell you what it means.

 

[Catsnmeters]

It's common to ask for something that takes 10 minutes to post as a citation quote, only to have them completely ignore it, or just run away to some other thread.

Their way of getting a cheap thrill, watching you knock yourself out, because it will never change their mind.

Why would any American not read a simple 45 page indictment of the president instead of just listening to pundits?

Some people are just to lazy to be good citizens.

 

[Aldo Raine]

In other words you're too lazy to read it.

Or to stupid or lazy to read the indictment!

 

[bripat9643]

It's common to ask for something that takes 10 minutes to post as a citation quote, only to have them completely ignore it, or just run away to some other thread.

Their way of getting a cheap thrill, watching you knock yourself out, because it will never change their mind.

Accept everything you demand always requires hours of searching, douchenozzle.

 

[bripat9643]

Make you a deal. I'll take the time to quote exactly what you claim isn't in the indictment, and you in return have to fully acknowledge it. Which means retracting everything that it proves false.

And you gotta stick around to do it too. No running away.

Deal?

Where did I claim "it" wasn't in the indictment? I don't even know what "it" is.

 

[bripat9643]

Read the indictment.

It's pretty important as an American to read and understand the indictment and not just lean on right wing pundits to tell you what it means.

You actually expect us to believe you've read it?

 

[Catsnmeters]

You actually expect us to believe you've read it?

I don't know who "us" is.

Group think much?

Don't care if you believe I read it or not.

 

[postman]

Where did I claim "it" wasn't in the indictment? I don't even know what "it" is.

This is where

In other words, you can't quote it.

 

[postman]

You actually expect us to believe you've read it?

You're making judgements on its contents, and you openly admitted you never read it.

Any of it.

 

[Rambunctious]

Read the indictment.

It's pretty important as an American to read and understand the indictment and not just lean on right wing pundits to tell you what it means.

There is nothing in it... this is to cover for the Biden crime family and to take out the leading presidential candidate... if your side succeeds there will be hell to pay for the dems for years to come.... and yes I read it....

 

[Catsnmeters]

There is nothing in it... this is to cover for the Biden crime family and to take out the leading presidential candidate... if your side succeeds there will be hell to pay for the dems for years to come.... and yes I read it....

There's nothing in it?

ROFL. You didn't read it either.

 

[Rambunctious]

There's nothing in it?

ROFL. You didn't read it either.

Well then tell us what you see in it we don't jackass.... Turley a Harvard law professor and many other law experts disagree with you... this is the weakest case yet and you don't indict former presidents on weak cases.... this latest case could be the one that drops the rest... keep watching and apologize to me when I'm proven correct.....

 

[bripat9643]

I don't know who "us" is.

Everyone in the forum, numskull.

Group think much?

Don't care if you believe I read it or not.

thanks for confirming that you didn't read it.

 

[Catsnmeters]

Well then tell us what you see in it we don't jackass.... Turley a Harvard law professor and many other law experts disagree with you... this is the weakest case yet and you don't indict former presidents on weak cases.... this latest case could be the one that drops the rest... keep watching and apologize to me when I'm proven correct.....

What I see in it is you didn't read it.

You are believing what your right wing (and DINO) pundits are telling you and if you didn't like what they said you would find someone else until you found what you want to hear.

 

[bripat9643]

You're making judgements on its contents, and you openly admitted you never read it.

Any of it.

I rely on the commentary of people I trust.

 

[bripat9643]

What I see in it is you didn't read it.

You are believing what your right wing (and DINO) pundits are telling you and if you didn't like what they said you would find someone else until you found what you want to hear.

You idiots still can't quote the text that points out what Trump said that's against the law.

 

[Lastamender]

I pity you.

Seriously.

You do not deserve pity. So, there is that.