By golly…you nailed it!
My understanding is that the redacted Mueller report that will be released tomorrow may run to up to 400 pages. How long does it take to thoughtfully read 400 pages? Depends on the author, of course, as well as the reader.
But would it make sense to assume an average pace of 50 pages an hour and declare a moratorium on announcing conclusions for a span of at least eight hours so people asserting conclusions actually know what they are talking about?
Anything faster suggests that the poster’s mind was made up in advance of the data.
Trump never told the Russians to hack into Queens emails. Stop listening to fake media.
He said in July 2016
“Russia, if you’re listening, I hope you’ll be able to find the 30,000 emails that are missing,” he said, referring to deleted emails from the private account Hillary Clinton used as secretary of State. “I think you’ll probably be rewarded mightily by our press.”
Oooh more conspiracies.
Now libs saying Barr is covering up for Trump. Is that what Rachel Maddow is telling you all?
The Vegas line on the number of pages that are partially or fully redacted is at 225.
Would anyone take the under?
Info from Grand jury will be redacted…it’s the laws that libs implemented after Starr report.
So any restrictions on that blame democrats…after all they would be following the rules that they set forth.
Oh wait…that’s right. Democrats have two sets of standards/laws/regulations. One for them…and one for everyone elese.
Exactly, but at least it’s also nice.
I thought I actually did hear something about Barr being “in on it” as well.
Well we know you don’t actually know what your talking about.
The question wasn’t made in good faith and my response was appropriate. If you feel I’ve crossed some line, please feel free to bring it up with the mods.
You are certainly welcome to your opinion.
The Democrats/“libs” didn’t control Congress back during the late 1990s.
Its not opinion its fact, you could of course prove us wrong but you won’t.
Sure it was. You just don’t want to answer, for obvious reasons.
No thanks, I’m glad to call out the lack of good faith responses directly when I see them. There was nothing to flag. But there was a lack of good faith to call out, so I did, and I will continue to do so.
The question was disingenuous. I responded in kind. There was never any actual interest in cue’s regarding Trump. The poster knows it and I know it.
Well, literally, he expressed a hope, not a request. So the most you can say is, taken literally, he had a hope of what they might find. Also, he didn’t literally say what they should do with those emails if they found them, did he? If you insist on taking him literally, you need to stick to that.
Knowing nothing about me, I’m somewhat baffled by your claim that you know for a fact I don’t know what I’m talking about.
But then again, I don’t doubt for one second that LIBs honestly do believe they alone have all of the facts.
To be literal, here are his words.
TUR: You said, I welcome them to find those 30,000 e-mails of Hillary
TRUMP: Well, they probably have them. I`d like to have them released.
TUR: Does that not give you pause?
TRUMP: No. It gives me no pause if they have it. If they have them, we
might as well find –
TUR: To have a foreign government able to hack into –
TRUMP: Hey, you know what gives me more pause? That a person in our
government, crooked Hillary Clinton –
TUR: What if it was someone else and not Hillary Clinton?
TRUMP: Here is what gives me more – be quiet. I know you want to, you
know, save her. If Russia or China or any other country has those e-mails,
I mean, to be honest with you, I`d love to see them.
And your point is???
Oh you mean repugs actually voted with libs back then?