SERIOUS question for all Trump acolytes on this forum....

[Meister]

Why is it that you think we care? Nothing in that sport will even come close to changing our votes in 2020.

^^^ poster boy ^^^

I would rather be a friend of his than a suicided friend of the Clintons.

lol... donny doesn't have friends... only people that can give him something. & i'm am sure you would give it to him......

oh for fuck's sake.

you are the one defending him... so follow the bouncing orange ball..............

MAGA, thank God the old coot isn't our president

 

[jillian]

WHERE......for sanity sake......do you Trump acolytes that Trump was EXONERATED by the Mueller report???

Seriously, you can say that Barr "exonerated" Trump

You can say that Trump, exonerated Trump
You can say that KellyAnn has exonerated Trump
You can say that Hannity has exonerated Trump

BUT, when you state that Mueller has exonerated Trump you are either a fucking idiot.....You did not read the redacted report, or you're beyond sanity in discussing this issue...

READ THE DAMN REPORT and you CANNOT conclude that Mueller "exonerated" Trump.......

READ, COMPREHEND and LEARN, for God's sake.

Because the morons didn’t actually read the report.

Ijits

 

[jillian]

^^^ poster boy ^^^

I would rather be a friend of his than a suicided friend of the Clintons.

lol... donny doesn't have friends... only people that can give him something. & i'm am sure you would give it to him......

oh for fuck's sake.

you are the one defending him... so follow the bouncing orange ball..............

MAGA, thank God the old coot isn't our president

MAGA? Does that mean Donald resigned?

 

[Meister]

I would rather be a friend of his than a suicided friend of the Clintons.

lol... donny doesn't have friends... only people that can give him something. & i'm am sure you would give it to him......

oh for fuck's sake.

you are the one defending him... so follow the bouncing orange ball..............

MAGA, thank God the old coot isn't our president

MAGA? Does that mean Donald resigned?

That means you lost, Jill. Move on, darling

 

[talksalot]

There are THREE ways to interpret Mueller's report (with its Barr redactions)

LEGALLY........Trump cannot be indicted based on DOJ policy (NOT law)

POLITICALLY...........Trump is as guilty as OJ Simpson

MORALLY.........Trump is as guilty as Charlie Manson

You're gonna have a stroke if you continue this level of stress.

 

[jknowgood]

Was Trump charged with something?

MORON......Under DOJ "guidelines" a president CANNOT be charged with anything. He is BEYOND the LAW.

If you read the report even an idiot like you would understand that Mueller is calling for Trump to be charged AFTER he leaves office.

He found nothing dumbass.

Read the report, don't just parrot Hannity.

I don't have cable. Maybe you should quit CNN. Then you wouldn't look like this everyday.

Was Trump charged with something?

MORON......Under DOJ "guidelines" a president CANNOT be charged with anything. He is BEYOND the LAW.

If you read the report even an idiot like you would understand that Mueller is calling for Trump to be charged AFTER he leaves office.

He found nothing dumbass.

Read the report, don't just parrot Hannity.

I don't have cable. Quit speaking liberal talking points.

 

[Markle]

they didn't get al capone on murder charges - but nailed him on tax evasion & fraud........

How many years in a row do you think President Donald Trump's tax returns have been audited? My guess is that if there was a year in which he was NOT audited, he would call them and ask them where's the love, have they forgotten him?

Keep on with your beautiful fantasies.

You LOST. Time and again you have LOST. Get over it!

Here's a suggestion for you. Sit back, relax and enjoy all the good things happening to our country over the next six years. In your fantasy world, maybe you can pretend that Hillary Won and all these great things are because of her.

Would that help you sleep?

 

[Markle]

Yes, Collusion
Even with redactions, the Mueller report contains ample evidence Trump and his campaign sought foreign help in 2016.
By ALEX SHEPHARD
April 18, 2019
Add to Pocket

Subscribe


Over the course of Donald Trump’s presidency, “no collusion” has become a mantra, rivaling only “Make America Great Again” as a motto and, at times, an organizing principle. The president and his defenders have uttered the phrase hundreds of times. For Trump, “no collusion” is a shield—proof the Russia inquiry that has dogged his presidency is a sham concocted by his perceived enemies: the Democrats, the media, and the deep state. The president’s public statements in the wake of Attorney General William Barr’s summary of the Mueller report and the release of the redacted version of the report itself have all centered on the inability to prove criminal conspiracy, equating that with an absence of any criminality or misbehavior.


Donald J. Trump

✔@realDonaldTrump

As I have been saying all along, NO COLLUSION - NO OBSTRUCT12:59 PM - Apr 18, 2019


The president and, particularly, his attorneys have gone to great lengths to narrow the definition of “collusion,” which is itself not a legal term. In their hands, only a proven conspiracy between the Trump campaign and Russian officials—a stated and agreed upon quid pro quo in advance of any illegal conduct—could qualify as collusion. Mueller’s team’s inability to find proof of that conspiracy, in Team Trump’s opinion, is all they need to show that the president has been completely exonerated. For the “Russia thing,” as Trump has called it, to be real, the special counsel would have had to prove this level of criminal coordination.

The text of the Mueller report, however, offers a very different picture. While an improbable smoking gun showing an agreed upon deal between the Trump campaign and Russian officials has not been produced, the report—even with all its redactions—is full of instances in which Trump and a number of his aides, advisers, and family members are talking with figures linked in various ways to Russia. These conversations broadly fall into two disquieting categories: what the hacked information being disseminated by WikiLeaks might contain; and what Russia, its officials, operatives, or cutouts could do for the campaign. Even without clear evidence of criminal conspiracy, there’s plenty of evidence of collusion in what amounts to a consistently damning portrait of a campaign welcoming—and egging on—election interference.

The Mueller report represents a clear narrative on interference in the 2016 election. Russia chose to intervene in the election in an effort to promote Trump and damage Hillary Clinton. The Trump campaign welcomed their help and encouraged it, both publicly and privately. Trump’s “Russia, if you’re listening” comment from July 2016 is presented as evidence in the report, as are more than one hundred interactions between campaign officials and figures with ties to Russia.

The Trump team “expected it would benefit” from the release of hacked emails. As soon as they became aware that WikiLeaks had in its possession stolen emails from the Democratic National Committee, Trump and his associates began “planning a press strategy, a communications campaign, and messaging based on the possible release of Clinton emails by WikiLeaks” to press their advantage. In so doing, the Trump Campaign turned an influence effort from a foreign power into a key strategy for a United States presidential election. Over the course of 2016, moreover, Trumpworld figures repeatedly reached out to people with ties to Russia to inquire about future hacks.

The now infamous Trump Tower meeting of June 9, 2016 between Donald Trump Jr., then-campaign chairman Paul Manafort, Jared Kushner, and Russian attorney Natalia Veselnitskaya is case in point. That meeting was arranged after Trump Jr. had been told that the Russian government had “‘offered to provide the Trump Campaign with some official documents and information that would incriminate Hillary and her dealings with Russia’ as ‘part of Russia and its government’s support for Mr. Trump.’” There’s no evidence that any information was passed between Veselnitskaya and the Trump officials at that meeting, but its existence points to the Trump campaign’s efforts to gain what it perceived as valuable information from figures with ties to Russia.

NO COLLUSION. Get over it!

Volume one, page two
Redacted Mueller Report

“The investigation did not establish that the Trump Campaign coordinated with the Russian government in its election interference activities”.

 

[edward37]

Yes, Collusion
Even with redactions, the Mueller report contains ample evidence Trump and his campaign sought foreign help in 2016.
By ALEX SHEPHARD
April 18, 2019
Add to Pocket

Subscribe


Over the course of Donald Trump’s presidency, “no collusion” has become a mantra, rivaling only “Make America Great Again” as a motto and, at times, an organizing principle. The president and his defenders have uttered the phrase hundreds of times. For Trump, “no collusion” is a shield—proof the Russia inquiry that has dogged his presidency is a sham concocted by his perceived enemies: the Democrats, the media, and the deep state. The president’s public statements in the wake of Attorney General William Barr’s summary of the Mueller report and the release of the redacted version of the report itself have all centered on the inability to prove criminal conspiracy, equating that with an absence of any criminality or misbehavior.


Donald J. Trump

✔@realDonaldTrump

As I have been saying all along, NO COLLUSION - NO OBSTRUCT12:59 PM - Apr 18, 2019


The president and, particularly, his attorneys have gone to great lengths to narrow the definition of “collusion,” which is itself not a legal term. In their hands, only a proven conspiracy between the Trump campaign and Russian officials—a stated and agreed upon quid pro quo in advance of any illegal conduct—could qualify as collusion. Mueller’s team’s inability to find proof of that conspiracy, in Team Trump’s opinion, is all they need to show that the president has been completely exonerated. For the “Russia thing,” as Trump has called it, to be real, the special counsel would have had to prove this level of criminal coordination.

The text of the Mueller report, however, offers a very different picture. While an improbable smoking gun showing an agreed upon deal between the Trump campaign and Russian officials has not been produced, the report—even with all its redactions—is full of instances in which Trump and a number of his aides, advisers, and family members are talking with figures linked in various ways to Russia. These conversations broadly fall into two disquieting categories: what the hacked information being disseminated by WikiLeaks might contain; and what Russia, its officials, operatives, or cutouts could do for the campaign. Even without clear evidence of criminal conspiracy, there’s plenty of evidence of collusion in what amounts to a consistently damning portrait of a campaign welcoming—and egging on—election interference.

The Mueller report represents a clear narrative on interference in the 2016 election. Russia chose to intervene in the election in an effort to promote Trump and damage Hillary Clinton. The Trump campaign welcomed their help and encouraged it, both publicly and privately. Trump’s “Russia, if you’re listening” comment from July 2016 is presented as evidence in the report, as are more than one hundred interactions between campaign officials and figures with ties to Russia.

The Trump team “expected it would benefit” from the release of hacked emails. As soon as they became aware that WikiLeaks had in its possession stolen emails from the Democratic National Committee, Trump and his associates began “planning a press strategy, a communications campaign, and messaging based on the possible release of Clinton emails by WikiLeaks” to press their advantage. In so doing, the Trump Campaign turned an influence effort from a foreign power into a key strategy for a United States presidential election. Over the course of 2016, moreover, Trumpworld figures repeatedly reached out to people with ties to Russia to inquire about future hacks.

The now infamous Trump Tower meeting of June 9, 2016 between Donald Trump Jr., then-campaign chairman Paul Manafort, Jared Kushner, and Russian attorney Natalia Veselnitskaya is case in point. That meeting was arranged after Trump Jr. had been told that the Russian government had “‘offered to provide the Trump Campaign with some official documents and information that would incriminate Hillary and her dealings with Russia’ as ‘part of Russia and its government’s support for Mr. Trump.’” There’s no evidence that any information was passed between Veselnitskaya and the Trump officials at that meeting, but its existence points to the Trump campaign’s efforts to gain what it perceived as valuable information from figures with ties to Russia.

NO COLLUSION. Get over it!

Volume one, page two
Redacted Mueller Report

“The investigation did not establish that the Trump Campaign coordinated with the Russian government in its election interference activities”.

how many trump people met with the russians ? and you bought that it was all about adoptions?? Again, might not be enough proof for impeachment but sure is enough to prove he's a scumbag jimho

 

[Crepitus]

Was Trump charged with something?

MORON......Under DOJ "guidelines" a president CANNOT be charged with anything. He is BEYOND the LAW.

If you read the report even an idiot like you would understand that Mueller is calling for Trump to be charged AFTER he leaves office.

He found nothing dumbass.

Read the report, don't just parrot Hannity.

I don't have cable. Maybe you should quit CNN. Then you wouldn't look like this everyday.

Was Trump charged with something?

MORON......Under DOJ "guidelines" a president CANNOT be charged with anything. He is BEYOND the LAW.

If you read the report even an idiot like you would understand that Mueller is calling for Trump to be charged AFTER he leaves office.

He found nothing dumbass.

Read the report, don't just parrot Hannity.

I don't have cable. Quit speaking liberal talking points.
View attachment 257054

Why do you think not having cable absolves you from thinking for yourself?

 

[nat4900]

You're gonna have a stroke if you continue this level of stress.

NO, no stress on my part for the task of holding up a mirror to your sorry faces.......

ANYONE who still believes that Trump is NOT the worst piece of orange crap to ever infest the oval office, deserves to be called a cultist moron......LOL

 

[nat4900]

Because the morons didn’t actually read the report.

Like for Trump, reading is too hard.....all those words and punctuation take time and effort....LOL

They rather have Barr's, Giuliani's and Fox and Friends' version of what they should believe.

 

[Wyatt earp]

You're gonna have a stroke if you continue this level of stress.

NO, no stress on my part for the task of holding up a mirror to your sorry faces.......

ANYONE who still believes that Trump is NOT the worst piece of orange crap to ever infest the oval office, deserves to be called a cultist moron......LOL

NO, no stress on my part for the task of holding up a mirror to your sorry faces.......

ANYONE who still believes that Trump is NOT the worst piece of orange crap to ever infest the oval office, deserves to be called a cultist moron......LOL



We’ve found 1 writing issue in your text.

Grammar

Punctuation
1
1Comma Misuse within Clauses
Spelling

Enhancement

Style

Sentence Structure

Plagiarism was not detected

 

[toobfreak]

SERIOUS question for all Trump acolytes on this forum....

Just another bullshit baiting thread that starts out with a "serious" slant while making the idiotic assumption that just because you voted for Trump, like Trump or even support him, that this makes you out as an "acolyte" of his. Fallacy One.

Only then to go on with his typical broad brush stroke categorizing all of us as thinking Trump was exonerated when Mueller said the exact OPPOSITE, that he could NOT exonerate him. But neither does he charge him. He just dropped his Part II bag of garbage in the lap of Congress and the media to give them another baiting red herring to play around with for several more months telling us nothing more that we didn't already know: that Trump is a highly driven, aggressive businessman not content with or used to the painfully slow, circuitous machinations of Washington DC which exists wholly unto itself---- FOR itself.

 

[OKTexas]

WHERE......for sanity sake......do you Trump acolytes that Trump was EXONERATED by the Mueller report???

Seriously, you can say that Barr "exonerated" Trump

You can say that Trump, exonerated Trump
You can say that KellyAnn has exonerated Trump
You can say that Hannity has exonerated Trump

BUT, when you state that Mueller has exonerated Trump you are either a fucking idiot.....You did not read the redacted report, or you're beyond sanity in discussing this issue...

READ THE DAMN REPORT and you CANNOT conclude that Mueller "exonerated" Trump.......

READ, COMPREHEND and LEARN, for God's sake.

The better question is, how can you say it didn't? Barr fucked up by not forcing Mueller to remove all his legal theorizing from the report. His job was to do a report of his charging decisions, not spew out a shit load of useless theories.

.

 

[SmokeALib]

WHERE......for sanity sake......do you Trump acolytes that Trump was EXONERATED by the Mueller report???

Seriously, you can say that Barr "exonerated" Trump

You can say that Trump, exonerated Trump
You can say that KellyAnn has exonerated Trump
You can say that Hannity has exonerated Trump

BUT, when you state that Mueller has exonerated Trump you are either a fucking idiot.....You did not read the redacted report, or you're beyond sanity in discussing this issue...

READ THE DAMN REPORT and you CANNOT conclude that Mueller "exonerated" Trump.......

READ, COMPREHEND and LEARN, for God's sake.

Why do they allow these idiots to start threads?

 

[EvilCat Breath]

There is no cross examination of witnesses in a grand jury proceeding.

MORON......FIRST, there is cross-examination of a witness by FBI and special prosecutor questioners...

Second, there IS cross-examination of witnesses in a grand jury setting.....IT IS THE FUCKING JURORS WHO CROSS-EXAMINE....

Go back to your GED classes.

Because the prosecutor is the only attorney present there is no cross examination of witnesses.

A Crash Course in the American Grand Jury System

Admit you are the moron

 

[EvilCat Breath]

Mueller never made a finding that anyone obstructed justice. If no one did and there was no crime, no one could be exonerated.

 

[Yarddog]

WHERE......for sanity sake......do you Trump acolytes that Trump was EXONERATED by the Mueller report???

Seriously, you can say that Barr "exonerated" Trump

You can say that Trump, exonerated Trump
You can say that KellyAnn has exonerated Trump
You can say that Hannity has exonerated Trump

BUT, when you state that Mueller has exonerated Trump you are either a fucking idiot.....You did not read the redacted report, or you're beyond sanity in discussing this issue...

READ THE DAMN REPORT and you CANNOT conclude that Mueller "exonerated" Trump.......

READ, COMPREHEND and LEARN, for God's sake.

It was a prosecutors report, put together by Lawyers who hated Trump to begin with, and despite all their innuendo, there is no conviction recomended. Hundreds of years of western law has brought our civilization to the point where a man is innocent(exonerated) until proven guilty. Lets not change all that now just because we dont like someone.

 

[Markle]

For all you liberal persons, nice job screwing this country over. Nice, allowing illegal aliens "sanctuary" nobody asked for or needed. Thanks for screwing the middle class burogosie , we never ask for you wealthy overlords dictating moral standards. Our wishes don't matter although we are 99 percent of America.

These are excellent points, and ones I don't think the radical Left on this Forum realize. They want to pretend that their scream-at-the-sky antics and childish insults are the American norm, but if they were honest they'd know this just isn't so.

They act like they constitute a majority, but in fact I'm convinced they are just a tiny whining cult. They may have a few physical friends that join in their silliness, but I'm certain they are largely basement dwellers desperately seeking attention, and the rich overlords who egg them on in their constant gaslighting.

We see the incidents they cause - psychotic wackos that attack hats - but if there were really any significant numbers it would be obvious. "Antifa" is the closest, but even there they hide behind masks, accomplish nothing, and end up being shunned even by their own instigators.

So take note, edward37, nat4900, and others of your ilk: We're on to you. You're the mindless parrots of CNN word salad and you have no capacity for logical debate, as evidenced by your swift descent into base insults. You start a thread with a theory taken from your gods of Fake News, you fail to defend a single point in it, and you end up blubbering "orange man bad". You don't act like this in the real world, because you know you'd be slapped sillier if you did. We know, you know it, and the world knows it.

But please, don't stop. You're providing endless entertainment, and whether you know it or not you're sharpening the debate skills of the conservatives here. Why? Because when we see your ridiculous claims and conspiracy theories, we can't help but debunk them completely. We disdain the insult option you choose, and instead address the true issues. And each time we do that, we become more firm in our stance as Real Americans.

Spot on!

Thank you for taking the time and effort to put forth such a fine post.