Exactly, but at least it’s also nice. 
I thought I actually did hear something about Barr being “in on it” as well. 
3 Likes
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
Clinton.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?
2 Likes
Clinton and Republican’s worked together on the new legislation. Bottom line is that Republican congress got to see Ken Starr’s report - unredacted. With the change, the report is now sent to the DOJ. They have no mandate to share the report with anyone, including congress. But of course public pressure will force their hand. House DEMs can sue for an unredacted version, but it is unlikely they will prevail. IMHO
No it wasn’t.
Asking how we’re supposed to know when Trump is joking and when he is not is a very legitimate question. Going all the way back to the campaign, Trump supporters have had to continually explain things away for him for which there was no indication that what he was saying was a joke other than the explanation that followed.
Same people who don’t get it on reasonable is a personal attack and it’s not an attempt to have a discussion in good faith, and rather than attempting to explain you decided that only a reasonable person would understand so you decided not to try to explain, insinuating the other poster was not reasonable.
Try acting in good faith. You might just get some in return
Nope I don’t have ALL the facts, but you not knowing what your talking about is one that I DO have.
No.
You have to have intent to obstruct justice and if you committed no crime to try to hide, you can’t have any intent to hide it.
You are innocent and you know it.
And that’s the way both Bill Barr and Rod Rosenstein saw it - as well as a bevy of DoJ lawyers whose opinions they asked.
No obstruction.
M
Obviously that he was literally saying what he wished would happen and he was not asking Russia to do anything.
But maybe we should investig…oh, that’s right. We just spent two years doing that and…No Collusion.
And if Mueller had seen that it was obstruction he would have called it. The fact that he did not should give the strongest Trump hater pause to consider that there was not proof beyond a reasonable doubt…the standard in criminal cases.
But it wont.
