04/18/2019 07:35 AM
|
HAPDigital
Posts: 16855
Joined Forum: 11/29/2004
|
Originally posted by: Sniper
I still can't believe how the media ran wild with this shit, using every unnamed and unverified source they could get their hands on. I would say the majority of the media sources at some point in time reported that they had sources who had informed them that Trump had colluded and would be prosecuted. They did it all for the ratings. I'm wondering if the Democrats will continue to trust them. Usually, if someone sells you a product that ends up being a hunk of shit, you typically try something else. I'm not sure that our media ever recovers from the self-inflicted black eyes they have given themselves over the past two years.
So you're cool with Trump being allowed to break the law because his feelings got hurt? FYI bud the report has not been released nor have we heard from Mueller. All we heard was Barr's summary again and admission and omission to Trump obstructing justice.
Edited: 04/18/2019 at 07:37 AM by HAPDigital
|
|
|
04/18/2019 07:40 AM
|
HAPDigital
Posts: 16855
Joined Forum: 11/29/2004
|
Also, you appear to be cool with the fact that the AG gave the President early secret access to the report investigating him but denied the coequal branches of government that access.
|
|
|
04/18/2019 07:41 AM
|
Sniper
Posts: 8761
Joined Forum: 09/24/2003
|
Originally posted by: HAPDigital
Originally posted by: Sniper
I still can't believe how the media ran wild with this shit, using every unnamed and unverified source they could get their hands on. I would say the majority of the media sources at some point in time reported that they had sources who had informed them that Trump had colluded and would be prosecuted. They did it all for the ratings. I'm wondering if the Democrats will continue to trust them. Usually, if someone sells you a product that ends up being a hunk of shit, you typically try something else. I'm not sure that our media ever recovers from the self-inflicted black eyes they have given themselves over the past two years.
So you're cool with Trump being allowed to break the law because his feelings got hurt? FYI bud the report has not been released nor have we heard from Mueller. All we heard was Barr's summary again and admission and omission to Trump obstructing justice.
He brought up the fact that Trump was frustrated because they had to discuss his intent. They determined that he responded the way he did on Twitter and elsewhere because he was being held back from doing his job, not because he was trying to obstruct the investigation.
HAP, you are too far gone. You are never going to accept this. You are way worse than a birther.
-------------------------
"The government who robs Peter to pay Paul can always depend on the support of Paul," - George Bernard Shaw
“Don’t underestimate Joe’s ability to f—k things up.” - Barack Obama
“End of quote. Repeat the line.” - wise words from Joe Biden
|
|
|
04/18/2019 07:44 AM
|
HAPDigital
Posts: 16855
Joined Forum: 11/29/2004
|
Originally posted by: Sniper
Originally posted by: HAPDigital
Originally posted by: Sniper
I still can't believe how the media ran wild with this shit, using every unnamed and unverified source they could get their hands on. I would say the majority of the media sources at some point in time reported that they had sources who had informed them that Trump had colluded and would be prosecuted. They did it all for the ratings. I'm wondering if the Democrats will continue to trust them. Usually, if someone sells you a product that ends up being a hunk of shit, you typically try something else. I'm not sure that our media ever recovers from the self-inflicted black eyes they have given themselves over the past two years.
So you're cool with Trump being allowed to break the law because his feelings got hurt? FYI bud the report has not been released nor have we heard from Mueller. All we heard was Barr's summary again and admission and omission to Trump obstructing justice.
He brought up the fact that Trump was frustrated because they had to discuss his intent. They determined that he responded the way he did on Twitter and elsewhere because he was being held back from doing his job, not because he was trying to obstruct the investigation.
HAP, you are too far gone. You are never going to accept this. You are way worse than a birther.
LOL Sniper is making excuses for a criminal. Don't talk to me about conspiracy, I use facts for my posts not outrageous accusation. Never have, never will.
Edited: 04/18/2019 at 07:47 AM by HAPDigital
|
|
|
04/18/2019 07:50 AM
|
Sniper
Posts: 8761
Joined Forum: 09/24/2003
|
Originally posted by: HAPDigital
Originally posted by: Sniper
Originally posted by: HAPDigital
Originally posted by: Sniper
I still can't believe how the media ran wild with this shit, using every unnamed and unverified source they could get their hands on. I would say the majority of the media sources at some point in time reported that they had sources who had informed them that Trump had colluded and would be prosecuted. They did it all for the ratings. I'm wondering if the Democrats will continue to trust them. Usually, if someone sells you a product that ends up being a hunk of shit, you typically try something else. I'm not sure that our media ever recovers from the self-inflicted black eyes they have given themselves over the past two years.
So you're cool with Trump being allowed to break the law because his feelings got hurt? FYI bud the report has not been released nor have we heard from Mueller. All we heard was Barr's summary again and admission and omission to Trump obstructing justice.
He brought up the fact that Trump was frustrated because they had to discuss his intent. They determined that he responded the way he did on Twitter and elsewhere because he was being held back from doing his job, not because he was trying to obstruct the investigation.
HAP, you are too far gone. You are never going to accept this. You are way worse than a birther.
LOL Sniper is making excuses for a criminal. Don't talk to me about conspiracy, I use facts for my posts not outrageous accusation. Never have, never will.
Trump had some negative tweets about an investigation with no underlying crime.
Bill Clinton went to some people and said, "hey, the FBI is going to come to talk to you and when they do, I need you to say....."
Do you see the difference?
Oh, yeah. You use facts! lol Ones that you get from your sources. HAP, stop making a fool out of yourself and go lick your wounds.
-------------------------
"The government who robs Peter to pay Paul can always depend on the support of Paul," - George Bernard Shaw
“Don’t underestimate Joe’s ability to f—k things up.” - Barack Obama
“End of quote. Repeat the line.” - wise words from Joe Biden
|
|
|
04/18/2019 07:51 AM
|
HAPDigital
Posts: 16855
Joined Forum: 11/29/2004
|
Originally posted by: Sniper
Originally posted by: HAPDigital
Originally posted by: Sniper
Originally posted by: HAPDigital
Originally posted by: Sniper
I still can't believe how the media ran wild with this shit, using every unnamed and unverified source they could get their hands on. I would say the majority of the media sources at some point in time reported that they had sources who had informed them that Trump had colluded and would be prosecuted. They did it all for the ratings. I'm wondering if the Democrats will continue to trust them. Usually, if someone sells you a product that ends up being a hunk of shit, you typically try something else. I'm not sure that our media ever recovers from the self-inflicted black eyes they have given themselves over the past two years.
So you're cool with Trump being allowed to break the law because his feelings got hurt? FYI bud the report has not been released nor have we heard from Mueller. All we heard was Barr's summary again and admission and omission to Trump obstructing justice.
He brought up the fact that Trump was frustrated because they had to discuss his intent. They determined that he responded the way he did on Twitter and elsewhere because he was being held back from doing his job, not because he was trying to obstruct the investigation.
HAP, you are too far gone. You are never going to accept this. You are way worse than a birther.
LOL Sniper is making excuses for a criminal. Don't talk to me about conspiracy, I use facts for my posts not outrageous accusation. Never have, never will.
Trump had some negative tweets about an investigation with no underlying crime.
Bill Clinton went to some people and said, "hey, the FBI is going to come to talk to you and when they do, I need you to say....."
Do you see the difference?
Oh, yeah. You use facts! lol Ones that you get from your sources. HAP, stop making a fool out of yourself and go lick your wounds.
The problem is it was not just tweets. Also, who is Bill Clinton? I voted for Bush. Snipes your're a lawbreaker sympathizer and make posts based on speculation. The Clinton talk is proof.
Edited: 04/18/2019 at 07:55 AM by HAPDigital
|
|
|
04/18/2019 10:32 AM
|
Fish Killer
Posts: 71439
Joined Forum: 10/09/2005
|
Originally posted by: HAPDigital
I use facts for my posts not outrageous accusation.
BULLSHIT!
You have been using epic volumes of KNOWN false information for TWO FRICKIN YEARS ON THIS FORUM!
FACT!
FOOL!
-------------------------
The REAL truth is....both of the forum idiots are OWNED.
-BOTH of them have no clue who their owner is.
-They are both card carrying narcissists.
^These are PROVED facts.
|
|
|
04/18/2019 10:36 AM
|
crankit
Posts: 17531
Joined Forum: 07/30/2003
|
"After nearly two years of investigation, thousands of subpoenas, and hundreds of warrants and witness interviews, the Special Counsel confirmed that the Russian government-sponsored efforts to illegally interfere with the 2016 presidential election but did not find that the Trump campaign or other Americans colluded in those schemes," he said.
As for obstruction, Barr said that the report recounts 10 episodes involving Trump and "discusses potential legal theories for connecting these actions to elements of an obstruction offense." But he said the White House "fully cooperated" with the investigation, and that he concluded that the evidence is not sufficient to establish an obstruction-of-justice offense by Trump.
-------------------------
Romans 8;18-32 John 3;16-18
|
|
|
04/18/2019 07:47 AM
|
tpapablo
Posts: 44221
Joined Forum: 07/25/2003
|
I'm wondering if the Democrats will continue to trust them.
Really? Of course they will. These are the suckers that P.T. Barnum was referring to. We are dealing with people who cannot learn. How many times in the last couple of years have they bought a press falsehood and made fools out of themselves? Russian Collusion, Travon Martin, Michael Brown, Jussie Smollet, Covington kids, that hag that made up the assault claim against Kavanuagh, that Trump said Nazis were good people, to name a few. Hell, an amoeba would have learned by now not to trust the press. Not these progs.
-------------------------
I :heart; Q
|
|
|
04/18/2019 08:15 AM
|
sandi
Posts: 8934
Joined Forum: 03/26/2007
|
fox "news" not happy with trump.
let the tweets begin...
|
|
|