Libs are you FINALLY ready to throw in the towel on Russia?

#1

I understand that the odds of me getting an actual answer are not that good. But here goes.

The finding of no obstruction was due to the fact that the President did nothing to withhold witnesses or documents. All he did was to fire a corrupt director. Which is entirely his right.

And the fact that the whole case was bogus should matter as well. Is it possible to obstruct justice for the investigation of a non existent crime? In other words was there was justice to obstruct?

3 Likes
#2

We definitely need ANOTHER Russia/Mueller/collusion/corruption/obstruction thread. Definitely.

2 Likes
#3

You might want to read some of the report before posting this.

2 Likes
#4

…because that Director was investigating all the evidence of communication between the Trump campaign and the Russians.

I’m sure if it was Dems having all those meetings and communications with a hostile power, you wouldn’t have thought anything of it.

1 Like
#5

We definitely need another “Trump is bad” thread. Definitely. What we “need” depends on your political stance. Am I right?

1 Like
#6

You mean like this meeting?

1 Like
#7

Well I know that after getting killed in the ratings after their Russia hoax was exposed, CNN and MSNBC are right back at it again. I think most Americans have just had enough and are ready to move on.

What do you think? Start another investigation? Impeach 45? Or move on?

1 Like
#8

Or maybe you meant this one? I’m sorry, what was the question again? :laughing:

2 Likes
#9

No.

There are a plethora of threads on the Russia report, some of which with “hur hur lib” already here.

If there were 10 threads for every single Tweet he sends out, you’d have a point. Threads complaining about different things are not the same as ANOTHER Russia/collusion/hur hur libs r stoopid thread.

#10

Are those before Obama was president? Did Obama lie about the nature of these meetings? Were the transcripts of these meetings kept secret?

1 Like
#11

Well perhaps he meant this one then. It’s hard to keep up with the narrative always changing.

https://www.express.co.uk/news/world/778320/Hillary-Clinton-Donald-Trump-Vladimir-Putin-Russia-US-election-ambassador

1 Like
#12

Hardly…now it’s time for democrat congress to start their public trial of obstructionism and get this impeachment process going.

3 Likes
#13

But Conan, the report said there wasn’t enough evidence to convict on obstruction. However are they going to do that without making it up? Oh wait.

1 Like
#14

Begin another investigation? Impeach 45? Move on?

What do you think should be next?

1 Like
#15

Have you read the report. Someone has to be niave or pretty dumb to think that this exonerates the President. It certainly casts a lot of doubt over the integrity of the President which I suspect will resonate with the floating voters who put him into office last time.

Yes his hard core base will remain steadfast behind Trump but that would have been the same if Mueller had recommended prosecution.

Mueller’s investigation did exactly what it was supposed to do - investigate the allegations and made a determination. How can you determine if an allegation is bogus or not unless you investigate it?

#16

Their good at making stuff up…and their base will love em for it.

1 Like
#17

From the other thread:

The “doesn’t exonerate him” line cracks me up honestly. Innocent until proven guilty, you twits. Of course the report doesn’t exonerate him. The lack of evidence of his guilt does. There wasn’t enough evidence to bring a case against him.

Based on the facts and the applicable legal standards, we are unable to reach that judgment.

Not that they weren’t trying their damnedest to do so. For over two years.

1 Like
#18

Right now they are down to their final two decisions. Impeach or not. Here’s what they will do. They will talk about impeachment right up to the next election. But will do exactly nothing.

2 Likes
#19

Who are you referring to?

1 Like
#20

What’s up with all these Russian ■■■■ bags and being so freakishly short? :thinking: