CNN analyst: "I've never seen a witness who's lied to Congress, who's lied to court, who's lied to the IRS, who's lied to the Southern District ...

What with the question? It's your job to present evidence and argument. Instead you do the spiracy nutter two-step.

What laws were bent or broken, in these two cases? Name some.

You're just saying what you think you're supposed to say.
I'll let you start here.

MSN
 
I read it, maybe you didn't.
Sure you did.

Now I am supposed to read it and sift out the point I think you think you are making.

Nah, I'll hear it in your own words first.

What laws were bent or broken, in these two cases? Name some.
 
Sure you did.

Now I am supposed to read it and sift out the point I think you think you are making.

Nah, I'll hear it in your own words first.

What laws were bent or broken, in these two cases? Name some.
The point was that the Biden administration met with each of the Trump prosecutors. What do think they were discussing? Naive much?
 
Why would they meet with them? You are ignoring the obvious.
Another question? That's the spiracy nutter twostep.

YOU tell US. Then we can scrutinize your answer and decide if it is just made up out of thin air.

And... go
 
Another question? That's the spiracy nutter twostep.

YOU tell US. Then we can scrutinize your answer and decide if it is just made up out of thin air.

And... go

I see, you are one of those that smells smoke, feels the heat, hears people screaming but doesn't make a move until he sees a flame and it is too late.

You TDS nuts sure don't give the same benefit of the doubt to Trump that you afford this administration.
 
I see, you are one of those that smells smoke, feels the heat, hears people screaming but doesn't make a move until he sees a flame and it is too late.

You TDS nuts sure don't give the same benefit of the doubt to Trump that you afford this administration.
This tapdancing isn't going to help you.

It's your book report. Answer your own question. Do you not have any evidence or argument for the answer you are avoiding giving us?

Yeah, that's the case, and you know it.

You have plenty of company. The handlers feeding this nonsense to you have been investigating for 9 months. They also have nothing. I will assume you do not have special, important information to which they are not privy.

So I think you can just admit that you're making stuff up. Well, you would be, if you had the guts to answer your own sealion question.

Which you clearly do not have.
 
This tapdancing isn't going to help you.

It's your book report. Answer your own question. Do you not have any evidence or argument for the answer you are avoiding giving us?

Yeah, that's the case, and you know it.

You have plenty of company. The handlers feeding this nonsense to you have been investigating for 9 months. They also have nothing. I will assume you do not have special, important information to which they are not privy.

So I think you can just admit that you're making stuff up. Well, you would be, if you had the guts to answer your own sealion question.

Which you clearly do not have.

I get your shtick. We all get it and most Biden supported do it. Where there is smoke there is fire. This administration, along with the DOJ, are partisan hacks. They can get away with it because people like you that don't really care if they conspire to convict a political opponent because it works out like YOU want. It is sad, but predictable.
 
I get your shtick.
Yes, not doing your book report for you.

Now tell us. What laws were bent or broken? Why did Biden meet with prosecutors? How does your answer demonstrate laws were bent or broken?

You can do this. I'm rooting for you.

Okay, maybe you can't.

What is happening here is that you are running into the brick wall that normal people in the real world have to scale, to support such allegations. And it appears you are discovering the limits of your vapid message board rhetoric. Does it sting?
 
Yes, not doing your book report for you.

Now tell us. What laws were bent or broken? Why did Biden meet with prosecutors? How does your answer demonstrate laws were bent or broken?

You can do this. I'm rooting for you.

Okay, maybe you can't.

What is happening here is that you are running into the brick wall that normal people in the real world have to scale, to support such allegations. And it appears you are discovering the limits of your vapid message board rhetoric. Does it sting?

So in order for you to admit that something looks fishy, there must be a conviction in a court of law, except in the case of Trump of course.

Conspiring to convict a political opponent by weaponizing the federal government is a crime. Has it been proven that they did so? No. Does it look like a real possibility? Absolutely.

I didn't say that anyone should be convicted, I merely pointed out the obvious. This administration has, at the very least, given the appearance of impropriety. Sorry you can't see it, but I don't think any amount of evidence would convince you of anything that was detrimental to this administration.
 
So in order for you to admit that something looks fishy,
That's not what you said.

But I think you have realized that "it might be fishy" is all you have.

And I think you realize that isn't jack shit. As 9 months of a House investigation have appeared to show, as well.

I guess we are done, here.
 
That's not what you said.

But I think you have realized that "it might be fishy" is all you have.

And I think you realize that isn't jack shit. As 9 months of a House investigation have appeared to show, as well.

I guess we are done, here.

Yeah, we are done here. It is people like you that will be the downfall of this country. Protecting you party at all costs. Sad.
 
This tantrum won't help you.

What laws were bent or broken, in these cases?

Take all the time you need.
I think everyone knows what laws were potentially broken, including you. The issue is, as I have said before, this is a textbook case of the fox guarding the hen house.
 

Forum List

Back
Top