Conspiracy Theorist Rachel Maddow CRIES ON AIR Over Mueller Report ..

[BWK]

Republicans do not debate on this forum. What are you all afraid of?

Liberals are to be ridiculed. They are simply not smart enough or moral enough to carry on any meaningful debate.

A lot of it has to do with being afflicted with the Trump Derangement Syndrome mental illness.

Answer me this, seeing that you feel qualified to debate. Can Congress impeach for criminal obstruction, or non-criminal obstruction as long as there is intent, or both?

 

[Soupnazi630]

I’ll never forget when she spent a week hyping this up for ratings....

And the other years? Oh that's right, they're still in audit. Lol!

I’m glad we have people like maddcow to highlight the desperation you must be feeling.

Just to give you a heads up, obstruction need not be criminal to qualify for impeachment. All that is needed is intent. I got rid of Comey because of the Russia thing, then went and bragged about it to the Russian officials
. That is intent to obstruct an investigation. Criminal or not. Maddow was right all along.

He did not get rid of comey because of the " Russian thing " nor did he brag about it to Russians you liar.

He had a perfectly valid reason to fire comey

Comey was incompetent

 

[skookerasbil]

Lol.....wait'll he see's this.....

Daily Presidential Tracking Poll - Rasmussen Reports®

He's gonna be crying again!

 

[Flash]

Republicans do not debate on this forum. What are you all afraid of?

Of course they do.

You merely ignore facts and evidence

The dude was shown a govt website stating that gays are 8 times more likely to contract and spread AIDS than straight people and he calls ME ignorant.

At this point he's like a ball. You play with him and get your thrills and then put him away.

You can try and substitute ignorance and retardation into an argument, but that seldom works. It could be fifty times, and it would not tell us anything, other than the virus does not discriminate.

You can repeat your proven delusion all day but the facts are irrefutable.

You are a small minded conspiracy theorist who can produce zero evidence for your stupid claims

You have no evidence of collusion or obstruction and.never have had any

You have lost and been defeated boy.

Mueller investigated it for two years and said there was no collusion.

BWK just listens to the TDS afflicted hate mongering assholes on CNN and thinks he knows. LOL!

 

[Flash]

Republicans do not debate on this forum. What are you all afraid of?

Liberals are to be ridiculed. They are simply not smart enough or moral enough to carry on any meaningful debate.

A lot of it has to do with being afflicted with the Trump Derangement Syndrome mental illness.

Answer me this, seeing that you feel qualified to debate. Can Congress impeach for criminal obstruction, or non-criminal obstruction as long as there is intent, or both?

You are confused Moon Bat.

The Special Counsel did not indict for obstruction. No crime no obstruction.

If you didn't have that mental illness known as Trump Derangement Syndrome you would understand something as simple as that. TDS has destroyed your brain, hasn't it Moon Bat?

 

[Flash]

Republicans do not debate on this forum. What are you all afraid of?

Of course they do.

You merely ignore facts and evidence

The dude was shown a govt website stating that gays are 8 times more likely to contract and spread AIDS than straight people and he calls ME ignorant.

At this point he's like a ball. You play with him and get your thrills and then put him away.

You can try and substitute ignorance and retardation into an argument, but that seldom works. It could be fifty times, and it would not tell us anything, other than the virus does not discriminate.

You are the definition of ignorance and retardation.

He has a mental illness. TDS is a serious mental illness. He really needs to seek competent mental health treatment. That way he wouldn't come across as a sicko when he post his silly TDS bullshit.

 

[BWK]

I’ll never forget when she spent a week hyping this up for ratings....

And the other years? Oh that's right, they're still in audit. Lol!

I’m glad we have people like maddcow to highlight the desperation you must be feeling.

Just to give you a heads up, obstruction need not be criminal to qualify for impeachment. All that is needed is intent. I got rid of Comey because of the Russia thing, then went and bragged about it to the Russian officials
. That is intent to obstruct an investigation. Criminal or not. Maddow was right all along.

He did not get rid of comey because of the " Russian thing " nor did he brag about it to Russians you liar.

He had a perfectly valid reason to fire comey

Comey was incompetent

We have two accounts of Trump admitting he got rid of Comey because of Russia, and there is nothing you can say to change that reality.

 

[tycho1572]

I’ll never forget when she spent a week hyping this up for ratings....

And the other years? Oh that's right, they're still in audit. Lol!

I’m glad we have people like maddcow to highlight the desperation you must be feeling.

Just to give you a heads up, obstruction need not be criminal to qualify for impeachment. All that is needed is intent. I got rid of Comey because of the Russia thing, then went and bragged about it to the Russian officials
. That is intent to obstruct an investigation. Criminal or not. Maddow was right all along.

He did not get rid of comey because of the " Russian thing " nor did he brag about it to Russians you liar.

He had a perfectly valid reason to fire comey

Comey was incompetent

We have two accounts of Trump admitting he got rid of Comey because of Russia, and there is nothing you can say to change that reality.

I’m gonna guess you watch CNN and/or MSNBC. lol

 

[BWK]

Republicans do not debate on this forum. What are you all afraid of?

Liberals are to be ridiculed. They are simply not smart enough or moral enough to carry on any meaningful debate.

A lot of it has to do with being afflicted with the Trump Derangement Syndrome mental illness.

Answer me this, seeing that you feel qualified to debate. Can Congress impeach for criminal obstruction, or non-criminal obstruction as long as there is intent, or both?

You are confused Moon Bat.

The Special Counsel did not indict for obstruction. No crime no obstruction.

If you didn't have that mental illness known as Trump Derangement Syndrome you would understand something as simple as that. TDS has destroyed your brain, hasn't it Moon Bat?

"Did not exonerate Trump for obstruction" according to Mueller, may not be a go to jail card, and since there is no indictment under a certain opinion, it does not mean he cannot be held accountable. That will be for Congress to decide. If he cannot obstruct or be indicted, then a president is above the law, and the SC or this investigation would have zero meaning.

 

[Soupnazi630]

I’ll never forget when she spent a week hyping this up for ratings....

And the other years? Oh that's right, they're still in audit. Lol!

I’m glad we have people like maddcow to highlight the desperation you must be feeling.

Just to give you a heads up, obstruction need not be criminal to qualify for impeachment. All that is needed is intent. I got rid of Comey because of the Russia thing, then went and bragged about it to the Russian officials
. That is intent to obstruct an investigation. Criminal or not. Maddow was right all along.

He did not get rid of comey because of the " Russian thing " nor did he brag about it to Russians you liar.

He had a perfectly valid reason to fire comey

Comey was incompetent

We have two accounts of Trump admitting he got rid of Comey because of Russia, and there is nothing you can say to change that reality.

You have to unsubstantiated and unreliable rumors and nothing more.

 

[tycho1572]

Republicans do not debate on this forum. What are you all afraid of?

Liberals are to be ridiculed. They are simply not smart enough or moral enough to carry on any meaningful debate.

A lot of it has to do with being afflicted with the Trump Derangement Syndrome mental illness.

Answer me this, seeing that you feel qualified to debate. Can Congress impeach for criminal obstruction, or non-criminal obstruction as long as there is intent, or both?

You are confused Moon Bat.

The Special Counsel did not indict for obstruction. No crime no obstruction.

If you didn't have that mental illness known as Trump Derangement Syndrome you would understand something as simple as that. TDS has destroyed your brain, hasn't it Moon Bat?

"Did not exonerate Trump for obstruction" according to Mueller, may not be a go to jail card, and since there is no indictment under a certain opinion, it does not mean he cannot be held accountable. That will be for Congress to decide. If he cannot obstruct or be indicted, then a president is above the law, and the SC or this investigation would have zero meaning.

 

[BWK]

And the other years? Oh that's right, they're still in audit. Lol!

I’m glad we have people like maddcow to highlight the desperation you must be feeling.

Just to give you a heads up, obstruction need not be criminal to qualify for impeachment. All that is needed is intent. I got rid of Comey because of the Russia thing, then went and bragged about it to the Russian officials
. That is intent to obstruct an investigation. Criminal or not. Maddow was right all along.

He did not get rid of comey because of the " Russian thing " nor did he brag about it to Russians you liar.

He had a perfectly valid reason to fire comey

Comey was incompetent

We have two accounts of Trump admitting he got rid of Comey because of Russia, and there is nothing you can say to change that reality.

I’m gonna guess you watch CNN and/or MSNBC. lol

Comey and his words are neither one. Try again.

 

[tycho1572]

I’m glad we have people like maddcow to highlight the desperation you must be feeling.

Just to give you a heads up, obstruction need not be criminal to qualify for impeachment. All that is needed is intent. I got rid of Comey because of the Russia thing, then went and bragged about it to the Russian officials
. That is intent to obstruct an investigation. Criminal or not. Maddow was right all along.

He did not get rid of comey because of the " Russian thing " nor did he brag about it to Russians you liar.

He had a perfectly valid reason to fire comey

Comey was incompetent

We have two accounts of Trump admitting he got rid of Comey because of Russia, and there is nothing you can say to change that reality.

I’m gonna guess you watch CNN and/or MSNBC. lol

Comey and his words are neither one. Try again.

 

[Soupnazi630]

Republicans do not debate on this forum. What are you all afraid of?

Liberals are to be ridiculed. They are simply not smart enough or moral enough to carry on any meaningful debate.

A lot of it has to do with being afflicted with the Trump Derangement Syndrome mental illness.

Answer me this, seeing that you feel qualified to debate. Can Congress impeach for criminal obstruction, or non-criminal obstruction as long as there is intent, or both?

You are confused Moon Bat.

The Special Counsel did not indict for obstruction. No crime no obstruction.

If you didn't have that mental illness known as Trump Derangement Syndrome you would understand something as simple as that. TDS has destroyed your brain, hasn't it Moon Bat?

"Did not exonerate Trump for obstruction" according to Mueller, may not be a go to jail card, and since there is no indictment under a certain opinion, it does not mean he cannot be held accountable. That will be for Congress to decide. If he cannot obstruct or be indicted, then a president is above the law, and the SC or this investigation would have zero meaning.

Is there proof he did not do anything ? No.

Is there proof he colluded or obstructed ? No.

That is the same as exonerated.

You have nothing and no evidence of any kind and your dream is over.
f

 

[Soupnazi630]

I’m glad we have people like maddcow to highlight the desperation you must be feeling.

Just to give you a heads up, obstruction need not be criminal to qualify for impeachment. All that is needed is intent. I got rid of Comey because of the Russia thing, then went and bragged about it to the Russian officials
. That is intent to obstruct an investigation. Criminal or not. Maddow was right all along.

He did not get rid of comey because of the " Russian thing " nor did he brag about it to Russians you liar.

He had a perfectly valid reason to fire comey

Comey was incompetent

We have two accounts of Trump admitting he got rid of Comey because of Russia, and there is nothing you can say to change that reality.

I’m gonna guess you watch CNN and/or MSNBC. lol

Comey and his words are neither one. Try again.

You have no words from him proving anything and comey was fired for incompetance you are cooked and finished

 

[BWK]

Republicans do not debate on this forum. What are you all afraid of?

Liberals are to be ridiculed. They are simply not smart enough or moral enough to carry on any meaningful debate.

A lot of it has to do with being afflicted with the Trump Derangement Syndrome mental illness.

Answer me this, seeing that you feel qualified to debate. Can Congress impeach for criminal obstruction, or non-criminal obstruction as long as there is intent, or both?

You are confused Moon Bat.

The Special Counsel did not indict for obstruction. No crime no obstruction.

If you didn't have that mental illness known as Trump Derangement Syndrome you would understand something as simple as that. TDS has destroyed your brain, hasn't it Moon Bat?

"Did not exonerate Trump for obstruction" according to Mueller, may not be a go to jail card, and since there is no indictment under a certain opinion, it does not mean he cannot be held accountable. That will be for Congress to decide. If he cannot obstruct or be indicted, then a president is above the law, and the SC or this investigation would have zero meaning.

Is there proof he did not do anything ? No.

Is there proof he colluded or obstructed ? No.

That is the same as exonerated.

You have nothing and no evidence of any kind and your dream is over.
f

You seem to have a real problem with critical thinking. What does "not exonerate" mean? According to Barr's account of what Mueller was referring to, he quoted Mueller as saying there were "difficult issues with the law" . Guess who investigates that, and who will render that decision? It's going to go to Congress. Barr got in front of all the decision making ahead of Congress, which on its face is a laughable joke. Why? Because Barr, over a year ago wrote a nineteen page memo claiming that a sitting president could not obstruct justice. Lol! If that's the case, then why was there an investigation into Trump over obstruction?

And that's where it all breaks down off into crazy town, and it's also the reason why Barr will not have the last say on obstruction. Barr has no stake in this fight based on his partisan opinion that a president is above the law.

Once that happens, the Constitution and the rule of law have no meaning, and we are back to the British days of Kings and Queens.

Surely you must understand that?

 

[tycho1572]

Liberals are to be ridiculed. They are simply not smart enough or moral enough to carry on any meaningful debate.

A lot of it has to do with being afflicted with the Trump Derangement Syndrome mental illness.

Answer me this, seeing that you feel qualified to debate. Can Congress impeach for criminal obstruction, or non-criminal obstruction as long as there is intent, or both?

You are confused Moon Bat.

The Special Counsel did not indict for obstruction. No crime no obstruction.

If you didn't have that mental illness known as Trump Derangement Syndrome you would understand something as simple as that. TDS has destroyed your brain, hasn't it Moon Bat?

"Did not exonerate Trump for obstruction" according to Mueller, may not be a go to jail card, and since there is no indictment under a certain opinion, it does not mean he cannot be held accountable. That will be for Congress to decide. If he cannot obstruct or be indicted, then a president is above the law, and the SC or this investigation would have zero meaning.

Is there proof he did not do anything ? No.

Is there proof he colluded or obstructed ? No.

That is the same as exonerated.

You have nothing and no evidence of any kind and your dream is over.
f

You seem to have a real problem with critical thinking. What does "not exonerate" mean? According to Barr's account of what Mueller was referring to, he quoted Mueller as saying there were "difficult issues with the law" . Guess who investigates that, and who will render that decision? It's going to go to Congress. Barr got in front of all the decision making ahead of Congress, which on its face is a laughable joke. Why? Because Barr, over a year ago wrote a nineteen page memo claiming that a sitting president could not obstruct justice. Lol! If that's the case, then why was there an investigation into Trump over obstruction?

And that's where it all breaks down off into crazy town, and it's also the reason why Barr will not have the last say on obstruction. Barr has no stake in this fight based on his partisan opinion that a president is above the law.

Once that happens, the Constitution and the rule of law have no meaning, and we are back to the British days of Kings and Queens.

Surely you must understand that?

How long will it take you to accept the report? Are you seriously going to keep following democrats down another failed path?

 

[Flash]

Republicans do not debate on this forum. What are you all afraid of?

Liberals are to be ridiculed. They are simply not smart enough or moral enough to carry on any meaningful debate.

A lot of it has to do with being afflicted with the Trump Derangement Syndrome mental illness.

Answer me this, seeing that you feel qualified to debate. Can Congress impeach for criminal obstruction, or non-criminal obstruction as long as there is intent, or both?

You are confused Moon Bat.

The Special Counsel did not indict for obstruction. No crime no obstruction.

If you didn't have that mental illness known as Trump Derangement Syndrome you would understand something as simple as that. TDS has destroyed your brain, hasn't it Moon Bat?

"Did not exonerate Trump for obstruction" according to Mueller, may not be a go to jail card, and since there is no indictment under a certain opinion, it does not mean he cannot be held accountable. That will be for Congress to decide. If he cannot obstruct or be indicted, then a president is above the law, and the SC or this investigation would have zero meaning.

Mueller Denial is almost as serious mental health affliction as Trump Denial Syndrome.

So see a doctor and get mental health help. You sound like an asshole with your mindless sicko rantings.

 

[MAGAman]

We have two accounts of Trump admitting he got rid of Comey because of Russia, and there is nothing you can say to change that reality.

Guess what?
1. It's possible to have multiple reasons.
2. He never said that all of the Democrats calling for his firing wasn't a reason.
2. He never said the DAG (AKA Comey's boss) calling for his firing wasn't a reason.
3. It doesn't matter. Comey was quoted as saying Trump could fire him for ANY reason or NO reason.

Read the Constitution some time. POTUS is the boss of everyone in the Executive Branch, and it is his duty to fire a corrupt, unethical, and incompetent FBI Director.

 

[MAGAman]

"Did not exonerate Trump for obstruction" according to Mueller, may not be a go to jail card, and since there is no indictment under a certain opinion, it does not mean he cannot be held accountable. That will be for Congress to decide. If he cannot obstruct or be indicted, then a president is above the law, and the SC or this investigation would have zero meaning.

He was investigates for 2 years by a group of Trump hating Hillary fan boys, had an unlimited budget, had 100s of people, gave 1000s of subpoenas, made 100s of interviews.....

And found NADDA...

That, Jr, is the textbook definition of exonerated.

You Troofers are making Bigfoot believers look smart.