someone will accuse you of whataboutism now. Comparing what others have done is a great way to find hypocrisy. But it scares libs and so they label such comparisons as “whataboutism” and declare that to be strictly a Russian propaganda technique.
they should be using the same flimsy standards used to “suspect” trump. For example; accusing a security advisor of collusion or treason for performing duties and functions given to him by his position. or how about someone who has no official capacity due to govt request or position to go negotiate with the enemy? John Kerry Ted Kennedy, Obama and a long line of Dem hatch act violators.
Here’s another good opportunity to test the thesis that There Is Always a Tweet.
So is there a Tweet?
Let’s see:
2 Likes
if A and B are both doing the same things and A is committing a crime then so is B. the law is supposed to treat every one who does the same thing equally. That is if what they were doing really is a crime. it either is or it isn’t. but if it is then everyone who does it is also committing a crime; not just people you want targeted.
He’s the best worst con man ever.
definitely. Maybe turn off Rachael and you may find that it was Dem collusion that tried to create a bogus dossier on Trump… not to mention all the money going to the Clintons for favors… errr… speeches and world charity.
I still have not read anything that incriminated Trump or even paints him in a bad light. All lawyers are scum sucking bottom feeders. ( Do I need to reference the plethora of lawyer jokes that are out there?) And that’s why I’m so happy we have a President that didn’t come out of some law school.
None of us will know that until the investigation is over and the results are presented to Congress. Be patient.
You should alert the authorities.
If (and I’m not saying they did) Renova made a pay-to-play donation to Cohen, that doesn’t necessarily mean every other donation they made was for play-to-play.
like in a can of mixed nuts, you have the equivalent of
Conviction of guilty- Brazil nuts
Proof - pecans
Evidence - almonds
Accusations - cashews
Innuendo - peanuts
It seems that you guys are now at the peanut level… hoping to stir up distrust.
Good luck. You tried the peanut approach in 2016, but you just made Trump more famous, more harmless to the common man, and more a hero to those who hate Washington swamps.
Where are you getting your information from inside the investigation?
if you had more than innuendo, your lib buddies would be posting it in every thread.
“He reached out to us,” the Novartis employee said, providing STAT with the company’s version of events as it scrambles to contain the fallout from being entangled in the investigations surrounding Trump and his inner circle, including Cohen. “With a new administration coming in, basically, all the traditional contacts disappeared and they were all new players. We were trying to find an inroad into the administration. Cohen promised access to not just Trump, but also the circle around him. It was almost as if we were hiring him as a lobbyist.”
You only have innuendo (peanuts… not even a real nut) against Trump. You don’t really care about Cohen… only Trump. But you only have this stuff on Cohen that you hope plays well as innuendo against Trump.
Interesting.
Hahahahaha
You’re losing your nuts bro. Just be patient and we will all find out together.
Despite all of this, obstruction will still be far easier to prove.
Innuendo can be very damaging.
It was for Clinton.
