I, personally, would like to add mustard and tan suits to the menu. It’s a classic dish.
If this claim gets fully corroborated then Fat Donald should be toast. Well, if at least 18 Republicans in the Senate could find their spines.
That’s about the number that are up for re-election.
I would much rather see Donald Trump soundly rejected by the American people both at the ballot box and of course in the electoral college, but shamed out of office via impeachment-conviction will work as well.
Oops… Muller’s team just said Buzzfeed’s story details are not accurate
I hope so for the sake of the country, but the senate still doesn’t have to convict or whatever they call it in a impeachment trial. There better be some rock solid evidence for today’s republicans to actually do anything about it, and they might even need more crimes than this singular one. Ludicrous as it might seem, these idiots could overlook “just one” little crime as it were.
The collusion gimps are gonna have to find something else to Strzok themselves over.
Even if the report is correct, Donald Trump should not be held accountable for his actions. Michael Cohen is a man who can never be trusted. That’s why, despite the fact that he was a lawyer for many years, Trump became a victim of this whole test. This lawyer will tell Donald Trump that what he is asking is illegal and then this will not happen. Donald Trump must be properly represented by a qualified person, and Michael Cohen denied this. If this happens to the court, I predict that Donald Trump will win millions of dollars.
And just like that the information falls apart and goes back to false information to a news organization.
Now you (Trump supporters) believe what Mueller has to say? Interesting.
You can sense the collective sigh of relief.
Many folks moved away from edges of ledges.
They didn’t say it didn’t happen. They said Buzzfeed’s report was not accurate.
“BuzzFeed’s description of specific statements to the Special Counsel’s Office, and characterization of documents and testimony obtained by this office, regarding Michael Cohen’s Congressional testimony are not accurate,”
Could be the documents and testimony were obtained by the SDNY and not the SCO.
They need a win.
Or they weren’t text messages or myriad other scenarios. All these leaks have pretty much all had something to them with varying degrees of “accuracy”.
This is ■■■■■■■ fascinating
Well, as I said on another thread - this reminds me of an article “Woodstein” wrote which contained one inaccuracy and you would have thought at the time the whole Watergate story had imploded. Of course, history proved it didn’t.
That’s not even what the SCO is disputing.
But people won’t understand the difference between the SCO statement and the reporting on it.