If Hillary was President, would you want Ken Starr leading a post incident crusade?
I view him as irrelevant to whether not we should have a nonpartisan commission to study this outbreak and our national response
You mean enemies of the state of course…right?
This isn’t a crusade, so your question is invalid.
So democrats can do no wrong, got it.
I didn’t say that. But ok…
Ok I agree the after action review should be non-partisan.
But I have no hope that will happen. There will instead be competing ones that will come to polar opposite conclusions.
More’s the pity because there are learnings galore.
Nope. You just want the partisan witch hunt leader leading something else to hang the president.
It would depend on how the commission is structured
If theres a reason to so be it. That’s how people learn
Didn’t say that either. But ok…
Anything more in your imagination that you’d like to get out?
Telling that Trump and his supporters want zero oversight and study into any of this. And frightening.
Definitely not with Schiff leading it. He can’t be nonpartisan.
Should we similarly exclude all Republicans responsible for the Benghazi [strike] witch-hunts [/strike] investigations? Have they lost all respect and not deserving of calling for any future investigations?
I think not.
So you agree with Schiff, you just don’t want him leading it?
I’d be ok with it if he’s nowhere near it. He’s an ■■■■■■■■
So in other words, you don’t disagree with anything Schiff said. Yet…here you are.
Funny. That’s how I thought discussion boards worked.
I agree. It is funny. You admit you agree with everything schiff says, yet rage about some imaginary intention. Talk about SDS
Is that what I said? Cut the crap dude. I don’t play this silly assed game with you.
Okay. Back to the topic. Shifty. The world’s biggest hater of the President. He is the one who should lead a non partisan fact finding mission and people are supposed to take it seriously?
1 Like
