I have proof that the Muller report found no collusion

[jc456]

Actually you try again as you are as a group too dumb to impeach

Too stupid? Impeachment inquiries are coming.

Let's see who's too stupid then.

Will these new enquiries take the full 6 remaining years of Trumps term

Could you define what impeachment means? I'm curious. How thorough are the civics classes taught on Conservative media. It's painfully apparent that your whole notion of government has been taught to you by biased media, and not a formal education.

Talk talk talk, shut your trap and impooch already

You are getting boring

You know that GOP Senators would never vote for conviction...even if donnie murdered their entire families on national television.

why would trump do that?

Vince Foster committed suicide by two bullets in his head, where's the left again? I'm here all day.

 

[HappyJoy]

Neat, I'm waiting for the guy who made a claim to back it up.

You can read about the 10 examples of possible obstruction here:

These are the 10 episodes Mueller investigated for obstruction of justice

There is no obstruction or the dopes would be impeaching

That's simply not true. There are multiple instances of obstruction documented in the Mueller report. Whether the Democrats choose to impeach or not does not change that fact.

Just curious, do you think Obama committed any crimes?

no there isn't. otherwise he would have said he was guilty of obstruction. he didn't. he said he didn't have any evidence, you're parroting nicely the left. no impeachment is coming. If it isn't done today, it ain't ever gonna happen. so let's move on.

He won't say he's guilty because due to DOJ policy they will not indict a sitting president, so for a special prosecutor to call someone guilty and then not indict and try would be irresponsible.

he can say he's guilty, Ken Star said it eleven times for Slick Willie. you've been lied to as usual. and you believed it.

We're not talking about Ken Star, we're talking about the guy who told you exactly why he didn't bring charges and his reasoning behind it.

 

[jc456]

There is no obstruction or the dopes would be impeaching

That's simply not true. There are multiple instances of obstruction documented in the Mueller report. Whether the Democrats choose to impeach or not does not change that fact.

Just curious, do you think Obama committed any crimes?

no there isn't. otherwise he would have said he was guilty of obstruction. he didn't. he said he didn't have any evidence, you're parroting nicely the left. no impeachment is coming. If it isn't done today, it ain't ever gonna happen. so let's move on.

He won't say he's guilty because due to DOJ policy they will not indict a sitting president, so for a special prosecutor to call someone guilty and then not indict and try would be irresponsible.

he can say he's guilty, Ken Star said it eleven times for Slick Willie. you've been lied to as usual. and you believed it.

We're not talking about Ken Star, we're talking about the guy who told you exactly why he didn't bring charges and his reasoning behind it.

no, no, you said he couldn't say he's guilty cause of a sitting president, I just updated you that Ken Star did it to a sitting president. so, son, you got fking nothing under your feet at the moment. Don't look down.

Oh, and I give two shits what Mueller said, he's fking wrong by what I posted about Ken Star's eleven guilties against the sitting president Clinton.

And why then could he say he wasn't guilty of collusion? can't have it both ways jack. Hey poindexter, you need better material.

 

[Frannie]

Actually you try again as you are as a group too dumb to impeach

Too stupid? Impeachment inquiries are coming.

Let's see who's too stupid then.

Will these new enquiries take the full 6 remaining years of Trumps term

Could you define what impeachment means? I'm curious. How thorough are the civics classes taught on Conservative media. It's painfully apparent that your whole notion of government has been taught to you by biased media, and not a formal education.

Talk talk talk, shut your trap and impooch already

You are getting boring

You know that GOP Senators would never vote for conviction...even if donnie murdered their entire families on national television.

Like you killed all your kids at the clinic

Great news and thanks for that

 

[HappyJoy]

That's simply not true. There are multiple instances of obstruction documented in the Mueller report. Whether the Democrats choose to impeach or not does not change that fact.

Just curious, do you think Obama committed any crimes?

no there isn't. otherwise he would have said he was guilty of obstruction. he didn't. he said he didn't have any evidence, you're parroting nicely the left. no impeachment is coming. If it isn't done today, it ain't ever gonna happen. so let's move on.

He won't say he's guilty because due to DOJ policy they will not indict a sitting president, so for a special prosecutor to call someone guilty and then not indict and try would be irresponsible.

he can say he's guilty, Ken Star said it eleven times for Slick Willie. you've been lied to as usual. and you believed it.

We're not talking about Ken Star, we're talking about the guy who told you exactly why he didn't bring charges and his reasoning behind it.

no, no, you said he couldn't say he's guilty cause of a sitting president, I just updated you that Ken Star did it to a sitting president. so, son, you got fking nothing under your feet at the moment. Don't look down.

Oh, and I give two shits what Mueller said, he's fking wrong by what I posted about Ken Star's eleven guilties against the sitting president Clinton.

And why then could he say he wasn't guilty of collusion? can't have it both ways jack. Hey poindexter, you need better material.

Yes, and Ken Star was irresponsible.

I'm telling you what Mueller had said, per DOJ policy they cannot indict a sitting president. To call the president guilty would be unfair to the president since there would not be a way through the criminal justice system for Trump to have his day in court. Mueller stated that the only avenue left was impeachment and in that case it's up to Congress.

That Mueller and Star handled it differently is irrelevant.

 

[BlindBoo]

Neat, I'm waiting for the guy who made a claim to back it up.

You can read about the 10 examples of possible obstruction here:

These are the 10 episodes Mueller investigated for obstruction of justice

There is no obstruction or the dopes would be impeaching

That's simply not true. There are multiple instances of obstruction documented in the Mueller report. Whether the Democrats choose to impeach or not does not change that fact.

Just curious, do you think Obama committed any crimes?

no there isn't. otherwise he would have said he was guilty of obstruction. he didn't. he said he didn't have any evidence, you're parroting nicely the left. no impeachment is coming. If it isn't done today, it ain't ever gonna happen. so let's move on.

He won't say he's guilty because due to DOJ policy they will not indict a sitting president, so for a special prosecutor to call someone guilty and then not indict and try would be irresponsible.

he can say he's guilty, Ken Star said it eleven times for Slick Willie. you've been lied to as usual. and you believed it.

That Ken Starr talking point (or butwhatabout) has been debunked because Starr was appointed by Congress under the Independent Counsel Act and was not subject to the DOJ rule.

 

[Camp]

"The House needs the Mueller report, Trump’s tax returns and McGahn’s testimony now — to make legislative decisions and to reach conclusions relevant to its oversight responsibilities"

why?

I was answering a poster who falsely claimed Trump's poll numbers were rising.

 

[Nosmo King]

Too stupid? Impeachment inquiries are coming.

Let's see who's too stupid then.

Dude this is the third year of babies shitting.

You keep playing with your TV remote, let me know when you actually find an impeachment

You may use as much vaseline as u need

Do you understand the meaning of impeachment? What happens during an impeachment? Who conducts it?

I understand that trump will not be impeached by the Senate that ratified Kavanaugh

So you impooch all you want girly boy

So the Republican Senate is not comprised of impartial jurors, but partisan hacks without regard of the rule of law. And what's noble about that?

The gop will not impeach based on no evidence, neither will the house that is not impeaching anyway

Were u born stupid oar dud u stubdy

The senate does not impeach. Evidence is presented to the house from witnesses and documents.

And I would avoid calling others stupid given your posts.

 

[HappyJoy]

There is no obstruction or the dopes would be impeaching

That's simply not true. There are multiple instances of obstruction documented in the Mueller report. Whether the Democrats choose to impeach or not does not change that fact.

Just curious, do you think Obama committed any crimes?

no there isn't. otherwise he would have said he was guilty of obstruction. he didn't. he said he didn't have any evidence, you're parroting nicely the left. no impeachment is coming. If it isn't done today, it ain't ever gonna happen. so let's move on.

He won't say he's guilty because due to DOJ policy they will not indict a sitting president, so for a special prosecutor to call someone guilty and then not indict and try would be irresponsible.

he can say he's guilty, Ken Star said it eleven times for Slick Willie. you've been lied to as usual. and you believed it.

That Ken Starr talking point has been debunked because Starr was appointed by Congress under the Independent Counsel Act and was not subject to the DOJ rule.

Ah, thank you!

 

[AzogtheDefiler]

Try reading the Mueller report. You'll sound less stupid.

Mueller report - Department of Justice

Lakhota is now more well versed in the law than Alan Dershowitz? This is fantastic.

 

[HappyJoy]

Try reading the Mueller report. You'll sound less stupid.

Mueller report - Department of Justice

Lakhota is now more well versed in the law than Alan Dershowitz? This is fantastic.

Dershowitz thought OJ was innocent too. Just like with O.J., Dershowitz has been a Trump defender and he is only one voice among many. There have been hundreds of prosecutors who have gone on record to say Trump committed crimes.

 

[jc456]

no there isn't. otherwise he would have said he was guilty of obstruction. he didn't. he said he didn't have any evidence, you're parroting nicely the left. no impeachment is coming. If it isn't done today, it ain't ever gonna happen. so let's move on.

He won't say he's guilty because due to DOJ policy they will not indict a sitting president, so for a special prosecutor to call someone guilty and then not indict and try would be irresponsible.

he can say he's guilty, Ken Star said it eleven times for Slick Willie. you've been lied to as usual. and you believed it.

We're not talking about Ken Star, we're talking about the guy who told you exactly why he didn't bring charges and his reasoning behind it.

no, no, you said he couldn't say he's guilty cause of a sitting president, I just updated you that Ken Star did it to a sitting president. so, son, you got fking nothing under your feet at the moment. Don't look down.

Oh, and I give two shits what Mueller said, he's fking wrong by what I posted about Ken Star's eleven guilties against the sitting president Clinton.

And why then could he say he wasn't guilty of collusion? can't have it both ways jack. Hey poindexter, you need better material.

Yes, and Ken Star was irresponsible.

I'm telling you what Mueller had said, per DOJ policy they cannot indict a sitting president. To call the president guilty would be unfair to the president since there would not be a way through the criminal justice system for Trump to have his day in court. Mueller stated that the only avenue left was impeachment and in that case it's up to Congress.

That Mueller and Star handled it differently is irrelevant.

 

[jc456]

Try reading the Mueller report. You'll sound less stupid.

Mueller report - Department of Justice

Lakhota is now more well versed in the law than Alan Dershowitz? This is fantastic.

Dershowitz thought OJ was innocent too. Just like with O.J., Dershowitz has been a Trump defender and he is only one voice among many. There have been hundreds of prosecutors who have gone on record to say Trump committed crimes.

so what? move forward. what are you waiting for, we're waiting!!! ready set go!! why do you drag your feet liar? too fking funny. you're a subservient sheep

 

[jc456]

"The House needs the Mueller report, Trump’s tax returns and McGahn’s testimony now — to make legislative decisions and to reach conclusions relevant to its oversight responsibilities"

why?

I was answering a poster who falsely claimed Trump's poll numbers were rising.

they were according to some polls. so fking what, they mean absolutely nothing. you obviously didn't learn anything from 2016

 

[BlindBoo]

That's simply not true. There are multiple instances of obstruction documented in the Mueller report. Whether the Democrats choose to impeach or not does not change that fact.

Just curious, do you think Obama committed any crimes?

no there isn't. otherwise he would have said he was guilty of obstruction. he didn't. he said he didn't have any evidence, you're parroting nicely the left. no impeachment is coming. If it isn't done today, it ain't ever gonna happen. so let's move on.

He won't say he's guilty because due to DOJ policy they will not indict a sitting president, so for a special prosecutor to call someone guilty and then not indict and try would be irresponsible.

he can say he's guilty, Ken Star said it eleven times for Slick Willie. you've been lied to as usual. and you believed it.

That Ken Starr talking point has been debunked because Starr was appointed by Congress under the Independent Counsel Act and was not subject to the DOJ rule.

Ah, thank you!

It's like shoot'in fish in a barrel.

They parrot good sounding propaganda though!

 

[jc456]

There is no obstruction or the dopes would be impeaching

That's simply not true. There are multiple instances of obstruction documented in the Mueller report. Whether the Democrats choose to impeach or not does not change that fact.

Just curious, do you think Obama committed any crimes?

no there isn't. otherwise he would have said he was guilty of obstruction. he didn't. he said he didn't have any evidence, you're parroting nicely the left. no impeachment is coming. If it isn't done today, it ain't ever gonna happen. so let's move on.

He won't say he's guilty because due to DOJ policy they will not indict a sitting president, so for a special prosecutor to call someone guilty and then not indict and try would be irresponsible.

he can say he's guilty, Ken Star said it eleven times for Slick Willie. you've been lied to as usual. and you believed it.

That Ken Starr talking point (or butwhatabout) has been debunked because Starr was appointed by Congress under the Independent Counsel Act and was not subject to the DOJ rule.

absolutely incorrect, the point is saying guilty. he had every right to. he said he didn't collude, correct? how is it he's allowed to do that? you all have struggled your way into a fking knot.

let me help you out a bit more..

Barr Says Mueller Was Wrong, 'Could've Reached a Decision' on Obstruction

 

[jc456]

no there isn't. otherwise he would have said he was guilty of obstruction. he didn't. he said he didn't have any evidence, you're parroting nicely the left. no impeachment is coming. If it isn't done today, it ain't ever gonna happen. so let's move on.

He won't say he's guilty because due to DOJ policy they will not indict a sitting president, so for a special prosecutor to call someone guilty and then not indict and try would be irresponsible.

he can say he's guilty, Ken Star said it eleven times for Slick Willie. you've been lied to as usual. and you believed it.

That Ken Starr talking point has been debunked because Starr was appointed by Congress under the Independent Counsel Act and was not subject to the DOJ rule.

Ah, thank you!

It's like shoot'in fish in a barrel.

They parrot good sounding propaganda though!

Trump is innocent. post where anyone said he was guilty of anything? I'll wait poacher man.

 

[jc456]

There is no obstruction or the dopes would be impeaching

That's simply not true. There are multiple instances of obstruction documented in the Mueller report. Whether the Democrats choose to impeach or not does not change that fact.

Just curious, do you think Obama committed any crimes?

no there isn't. otherwise he would have said he was guilty of obstruction. he didn't. he said he didn't have any evidence, you're parroting nicely the left. no impeachment is coming. If it isn't done today, it ain't ever gonna happen. so let's move on.

He won't say he's guilty because due to DOJ policy they will not indict a sitting president, so for a special prosecutor to call someone guilty and then not indict and try would be irresponsible.

he can say he's guilty, Ken Star said it eleven times for Slick Willie. you've been lied to as usual. and you believed it.

That Ken Starr talking point (or butwhatabout) has been debunked because Starr was appointed by Congress under the Independent Counsel Act and was not subject to the DOJ rule.

then why did he tell congress they should impeach? if he didn't work for them, right? are you sure you get how all of this works? I think you be clueless bubba.

 

[jc456]

I like how when they got nothing, the left get silent in a thread. it's like they have to reach out for help!! help!!!

 

[BlindBoo]

That's simply not true. There are multiple instances of obstruction documented in the Mueller report. Whether the Democrats choose to impeach or not does not change that fact.

Just curious, do you think Obama committed any crimes?

no there isn't. otherwise he would have said he was guilty of obstruction. he didn't. he said he didn't have any evidence, you're parroting nicely the left. no impeachment is coming. If it isn't done today, it ain't ever gonna happen. so let's move on.

He won't say he's guilty because due to DOJ policy they will not indict a sitting president, so for a special prosecutor to call someone guilty and then not indict and try would be irresponsible.

he can say he's guilty, Ken Star said it eleven times for Slick Willie. you've been lied to as usual. and you believed it.

That Ken Starr talking point (or butwhatabout) has been debunked because Starr was appointed by Congress under the Independent Counsel Act and was not subject to the DOJ rule.

absolutely incorrect, the point is saying guilty. he had every right to. he said he didn't collude, correct? how is it he's allowed to do that? you all have struggled your way into a fking knot.

let me help you out a bit more..

Barr Says Mueller Was Wrong, 'Could've Reached a Decision' on Obstruction

Starr also reported directly to Congress not the DOJ.

Barr's Monday morning QBing has doesn't change Mueller's report or reasoning. The joint statement yesterday proclaimed no conflict between the two statements.