pfife

Right? Last I heard it was 300million people have crossed!

Weird how these trumper arguments all require the reader not remembering what actually happened.

no solid proof except for Trump administration literally releasing a memo admitting what they did but go off chief

dude you literally said collusion was the only focus.

Yes. What freaks me out is in a lot of ways, the election, and potentially the government, were saved by the good character of a few people. The GOP knows who they were and are not going to let that happen again. It's really a bad moment in time for the country.

I read it too and I also agree.

LMAO. So you're just going to refuse to accept reality and that's your argument. Way to be wrong but strong chief. Not that you actually care about the report, as evidenced by your posts regarding the report - but Mueller didn't go "into the investigation with focus on obstruction" as you stated and I quoted - the obstruction in the report was obstruction OF THE INVESTIGATION HE WAS CONDUCTING IN THE FIRST HALF OF THE REPORT. It's quite clear to me you have not read the report.

Did you read the report? It's a smart move for you to bow out of a conversation you clearly know nothing about. This is a new leaf.

been gainfully employed since 2018. It's had good performance though as you can see from some posts here.

LMAO. At least you're right about the Ukraine call being what he was impeached for. The rest of this is fiction. The Mueller literally report made no attempt to find evidence of "collusion" and explicitly stated so within the report. So when you say all of the focus was on "collusion" like you explicitly stated, you're absolutely incorrect. "Collusion" is not a crime and therefore was not within the scope of a prosecutor. However, they did attempt to identify evidence of CONSPIRACY which is a crime, but concluded that he did not have enough evidence to charge and even if he did, he couldn't anyways because of the OLC memo. Furthermore- When you said all of the focus was on colluding, you also were also wrong b/c the conspiracy part was only the first half of the report. There's a second half of the report that was about Trump's obstruction of justice. So obviously "all the focus was on colluding" is false - there's literally no part of the report focused on colluding. The second part is loaded with evidence of criminality. For this part of the report, and b/c of the OLC memo, Mueller punted to congress b/c it's their responsibility through impeachment mechanism to do something about it. I have to ask, when you say that "all the focus was on colluding" - did you read the report? Because not only does it explicitly not address collusion but also focuses on a bunch of stuff other than collusion. You couldn't be more inaccurate in your statements about this report. The report itself literally addresses the fact that it doesn't address collusion. And here you are saying that's all it focused on. Hilarious chief.

This reminds me of when Tuck Chodd phrased that question to Nicole Hannah Jones about "parents" and also "parents of color" I love how these republicans get to define who's an american and who isnt. and also don't play identity politics according to republicans

My understanding is they were not submitted through the official channels

oh and for the record the Ukraine call was perfect people are saying

???? The Mueller report was released before the Ukraine call happened. Trump was impeached for Ukraine call.

Yep. Republicans don't get pressed on their behavior. The press only sees their behavior as something Democrats must adjust to.

I love how this jabroni just declares stuff about the intentions of the Democrats. What a crock.

ok chief

It is hilarious how posters pretend 19 state legislatures didn't do anything after 2020 and thus you're a hypocrite if you think 2020 was secure but 2022 might not be.

Imagine thinking ending that is bad for democracy.

I feel like he found the grievance gravy train when he was able to claim victimization from Bammer.

Calling it "so called" isn't libertarian. Unless you're a libertarian who likes theocracy-ish stuff which seems oxymoronic. ETA: I wasn't making a constitutional law argument. I was responding to Oblong's characterization of Gorsuch as libertarian.

I dont think the three justices are always going to rule in trumps interest but I think they will always vote I. The conservative direction. I for one and highly skeptical that it's from and objective analysis of the law and facts and every time it happens to be the republican outcome. And yes obviously it's the same on the other side too.

Idk about libertarian. He recently called it the so called separation of church and state.

lol

Surprised Rosen didn't hit him with a Lets Go Brandon too