Not following the whole Q thing?
1 Like
Which has nothing to do with whether or not someone actually committed the crime. Just because you dont get caught doesnt change the actual actions you took. If you kill someone then rape their wife, but the state finds no evidence, you still killed someone and raped their wife. Why is this even debatable?
Still not sure why, if nothing nefarious was going on, pretty much every key figure in the campaign or administration felt a need to lie about their contacts with Russia.
Was it just incompetence?
I don’t even know what a “Q Thing” is.
You made the claim, by all means substantiate it.
It’s a pretty popular theory, for Trump fans.
Unless and until you are found guilty by a court of law you are innocent of any crime.
That isn’t debate able period under US law.
That doesn’t support your prior claim. What conspiracy is it Mueller was supposedly investigating and what makes some fringe group of kooks even relevant to the discussion?
Anything happen today? I was out golfing.
Did you read the link?
The primary aspect of the theory is that Mueller is secretly working with the Trump administration to investigate the massive Clinton-Obama-FBI-Soros-Sex trafficking-drug dealing-uranium selling conspiracy.
1 Like
Jesus dude I’m not even arguing that isnt the case
I read that they are secretly supposedly trying to expose pedophiles and pretty well gave up.
Once again, how is such a fringe group of conspiracy nuts even relevant to the discussion?
1 Like
You aren’t a criminal unless and until you have been convicted of a crime.
Wrong. If i murder someone, and I only know it, and if i was never brought to trial or convicted, I still murdered someone and broke the law. Sorry, but thats just how reality works
It’s a fine line to argue between ‘convicted criminal’ and criminal but you’ve found your huckleberry.
On the flip side, it’s a relief to end debate on whether or not Hillary is criminal.
The once CNN merrymakers are huddled together desperatley pouring over papers looking sourpuss. Each one trying to be the first to discover a glimmer of hope that the President is a Russian opertavie. They will pick over the report, every ambiguity, every imagined ommision. They will continue to manufacture conclusions and conspiracies.
At least we now know who here are huge Trump dudes and dudettes.
They can pick what they want its not going to change a damm thing, I trust that Mueller did his job although I think everyone agrees the full report should be made public.
From what I can tell, it’s very similar to the MSM’s “anonymous sources” unnamed sources.
Obviously, the President and any other official can commit obstruction in this classic sense of sabotaging a proceeding’s truth-finding function. Thus, for example, if a President knowingly destroys or alters evidence, suborns perjury, or induces a witness to change testimony, or commits any act deliberately impairing the integrity or availability of evidence, then he, like anyone else, commits the crime of obstruction.
Barr swept this under the rug…congrats…we have a corrupt administration in our mists…the very thing cons project
The New York Times and Washington Post each won a Pulitzer Prize for national reporting on Monday, capping off a newsroom battle last year for scoops on links between Donald Trump’s presidential campaign and Russia, the focus of an ongoing special counsel investigation into the 2016 election.
