Explain how this is an exoneration

[Meister]

Well, you did it for eight years under Opie,

DID exactly what???..............Under a congress that was heavily republican and anti-Obama.....

Was Obama under investigation by a special counsel??......Yes or No?
Was Obama accused of obstruction of justice by a special counsel??..........Yes or No?

.....and THERE, my ignorant Opie cultist, is where you can flaunt YOUR fucked up ignorance....."OPIE TOLD YOU WHAT TO BELIEVE".........and like a good sheep, you follow the cult mentality.

The only difference is that Opie had Lynch and Holder to ride point for your messiah's protection

So, morons like you are asserting that Obama........with SIX years of a republican majority in BOTH chambers of congress, faced the same EXACT legal problems as your beloved orange fuckhead???

Is THAT what you're stating ????

How the **** do you turn on your computer all by yourself with that "brain" capacity?.........LOL

I'm saying that Holder and Lynch protected Opie from criminal investigations, you buffoon.
It's not that hard unless you are an ignorant sheep.

 

[nat4900]

How lame. It's been 3 years of constant surveillance and investigations and you loons have not been able to indict Trump for an actual crime.

And it's not a crime to obstruct a coupe attempt.

BTW.....most people who have complete junior high school regard a "COUPE" as a car with 2 doors........BUT, placing that aside.....

WHY can't you idiots come to terms with the REAL fact that Mueller cannot indict a sitting president???

WHY can't you read the ******* report and maybe you could see that Mueller stated that IF trump was not president he WOULD BE INDICTED?

WHY can;t you morons also conclude that if Trump is not reelected he WOULD be indicted once out of office?


I'm asking questions that REQUIRE some reading and some reading comprehension from Trump cult members.....and unfortunately I KNOW that you morons cannot do that.

 

[Harpy Eagle]

Mueller's report explains his prosecutorial decisions in four points.

1. The DOJ's OLC has issued the opinion that a sitting President cannot be indicted, and the SC accepted that opinion for the purposes of his investigation, further recognizing that a DOJ indictment might preempt the constitutional mechanism of impeachment.
2. The investigation was nevertheless warranted because an criminal investigation is permitted under the OLC's standard, even when an indictment is not. Other individuals engaging in obstruction could be prosecuted immediately. And the President is not immune from prosecution after leaving office, regardless of whether impeachment proceedings are brought or are successful. So the investigation served the purpose of preserving evidence while witness memories were fresh.
3. The normal public mechanism for an individual accused of a crime to clear themselves is a speedy public criminal trial. If the sitting President cannot be brought to a criminal trial while in office, then it would be unfair for the SC to affirmatively accuse him of a crime that cannot be prosecuted in a criminal court of law at this time. Even a sealed indictment's secrecy could not be guaranteed to be preserved. Accordingly, a criminal accusation against a sitting President could be harmful to the country, because the accusation cannot be resolved in the normal adversarial manner of a criminal trial.
   
4. The results of the investigation do not allow the SC to conclude that the President did not commit obstruction.

So please explain how this exhonerates Donald?

because their party masters told them it did, and these sheep never disagree with their party masters.

kinda like the party masters told them trump colluded, so everyone that wanted to believed it.

TDS is a religion.

Yes it is, both manifestations of it.

Trump Derangement Syndrome

and

Trump Defense Syndrome

Both are equally strong and equally faithful to their religion

 

[DJT for Life]

The investigation into the Trump campaign was a counter-intelligence operation, not a criminal investigation.

The above dimwit INSISTS to be labeled a dimwit.....

The investigation's objective was SPECIFICALLY to determine if there existed "obstruction of justice"......and the above moron states that the investigation was NOT a "criminal" one???.........GO FIGURE THE UTTER STUPIDITY.

The Investigation was a counter-intelligence operation. The initial FISA warrant was based on a counter-intelligence operation. A search for a possible
crime. They found no crime of collusion. No crime of collusion means there can be no crime of obstruction. There was nothing to obstruct.
You'll be laughing out your black loving ass when the Horowitz report returns.

 

[boedicca]

How lame. It's been 3 years of constant surveillance and investigations and you loons have not been able to indict Trump for an actual crime.

And it's not a crime to obstruct a coupe attempt.

BTW.....most people who have complete junior high school regard a "COUPE" as a car with 2 doors........BUT, placing that aside.....

WHY can't you idiots come to terms with the REAL fact that Mueller cannot indict a sitting president???

WHY can't you read the ******* report and maybe you could see that Mueller stated that IF trump was not president he WOULD BE INDICTED?

WHY can;t you morons also conclude that if Trump is not reelected he WOULD be indicted once out of office?


I'm asking questions that REQUIRE some reading and some reading comprehension from Trump cult members.....and unfortunately I KNOW that you morons cannot do that.

Oh gee, I made a typo.

But back to the topic at hand. The Mueller report documents that Trump was angry at being falsely accused. That's basically it - and quite a justifiable emotion. The Mueller team was packed with Dem partisans and operatives. With all of the resources and power they had, they were unable to indict Trump for a crime. Nuff said.

 

[boedicca]

Mueller's report explains his prosecutorial decisions in four points.

1. The DOJ's OLC has issued the opinion that a sitting President cannot be indicted, and the SC accepted that opinion for the purposes of his investigation, further recognizing that a DOJ indictment might preempt the constitutional mechanism of impeachment.
2. The investigation was nevertheless warranted because an criminal investigation is permitted under the OLC's standard, even when an indictment is not. Other individuals engaging in obstruction could be prosecuted immediately. And the President is not immune from prosecution after leaving office, regardless of whether impeachment proceedings are brought or are successful. So the investigation served the purpose of preserving evidence while witness memories were fresh.
3. The normal public mechanism for an individual accused of a crime to clear themselves is a speedy public criminal trial. If the sitting President cannot be brought to a criminal trial while in office, then it would be unfair for the SC to affirmatively accuse him of a crime that cannot be prosecuted in a criminal court of law at this time. Even a sealed indictment's secrecy could not be guaranteed to be preserved. Accordingly, a criminal accusation against a sitting President could be harmful to the country, because the accusation cannot be resolved in the normal adversarial manner of a criminal trial.
   
4. The results of the investigation do not allow the SC to conclude that the President did not commit obstruction.

So please explain how this exhonerates Donald?

because their party masters told them it did, and these sheep never disagree with their party masters.

kinda like the party masters told them trump colluded, so everyone that wanted to believed it.

TDS is a religion.

Yes it is, both manifestations of it.

Trump Derangement Syndrome

and

Trump Defense Syndrome

Both are equally strong and equally faithful to their religion

Sorry bub, but Trump defenders don't worship Trump. Trump defenders are interested in protecting the Rule of Law. I wouldn't want to see ANY President be subject to spying, entrapment, and an unethical investigation the way Trump has been. If you had a shred of integrity, you'd feel the same way.

 

[nat4900]

I'm saying that Holder and Lynch protected Opie from criminal investigations, you buffoon.

You mean that folks like McConnell couldn't find the balls to bring charges against Obama?

How EXACTLY were Holder and Lynch protecting Obama from WHAT charges?

You see, eternal moron, you CANNOT equate the Obama administration's problems with what YOUR orange buffoon is facing....

But, keep showing your stupidity and biases......Kind of entertaining.........LOL

 

[iceberg]

Mueller's report explains his prosecutorial decisions in four points.

1. The DOJ's OLC has issued the opinion that a sitting President cannot be indicted, and the SC accepted that opinion for the purposes of his investigation, further recognizing that a DOJ indictment might preempt the constitutional mechanism of impeachment.
2. The investigation was nevertheless warranted because an criminal investigation is permitted under the OLC's standard, even when an indictment is not. Other individuals engaging in obstruction could be prosecuted immediately. And the President is not immune from prosecution after leaving office, regardless of whether impeachment proceedings are brought or are successful. So the investigation served the purpose of preserving evidence while witness memories were fresh.
3. The normal public mechanism for an individual accused of a crime to clear themselves is a speedy public criminal trial. If the sitting President cannot be brought to a criminal trial while in office, then it would be unfair for the SC to affirmatively accuse him of a crime that cannot be prosecuted in a criminal court of law at this time. Even a sealed indictment's secrecy could not be guaranteed to be preserved. Accordingly, a criminal accusation against a sitting President could be harmful to the country, because the accusation cannot be resolved in the normal adversarial manner of a criminal trial.
   
4. The results of the investigation do not allow the SC to conclude that the President did not commit obstruction.

So please explain how this exhonerates Donald?

because their party masters told them it did, and these sheep never disagree with their party masters.

kinda like the party masters told them trump colluded, so everyone that wanted to believed it.

TDS is a religion.

she doesn't sound deranged. we have many examples of that on here. while i may not agree with her viewpoints nor conclusions, she's at least going at it in an adult manner.

TDS is just screaming and shouting ORANGE MAN BAD and doing nothing but variations on trumps name so you can feel like you got an accomplishment in for the day.

 

[Meister]

I'm saying that Holder and Lynch protected Opie from criminal investigations, you buffoon.

You mean that folks like McConnell couldn't find the balls to bring charges against Obama?

How EXACTLY were Holder and Lynch protecting Obama from WHAT charges?

You see, eternal moron, you CANNOT equate the Obama administration's problems with what YOUR orange buffoon is facing....

But, keep showing your stupidity and biases......Kind of entertaining.........LOL

deflection

 

[Harpy Eagle]

Mueller's report explains his prosecutorial decisions in four points.

1. The DOJ's OLC has issued the opinion that a sitting President cannot be indicted, and the SC accepted that opinion for the purposes of his investigation, further recognizing that a DOJ indictment might preempt the constitutional mechanism of impeachment.
2. The investigation was nevertheless warranted because an criminal investigation is permitted under the OLC's standard, even when an indictment is not. Other individuals engaging in obstruction could be prosecuted immediately. And the President is not immune from prosecution after leaving office, regardless of whether impeachment proceedings are brought or are successful. So the investigation served the purpose of preserving evidence while witness memories were fresh.
3. The normal public mechanism for an individual accused of a crime to clear themselves is a speedy public criminal trial. If the sitting President cannot be brought to a criminal trial while in office, then it would be unfair for the SC to affirmatively accuse him of a crime that cannot be prosecuted in a criminal court of law at this time. Even a sealed indictment's secrecy could not be guaranteed to be preserved. Accordingly, a criminal accusation against a sitting President could be harmful to the country, because the accusation cannot be resolved in the normal adversarial manner of a criminal trial.
   
4. The results of the investigation do not allow the SC to conclude that the President did not commit obstruction.

So please explain how this exhonerates Donald?

because their party masters told them it did, and these sheep never disagree with their party masters.

kinda like the party masters told them trump colluded, so everyone that wanted to believed it.

TDS is a religion.

Yes it is, both manifestations of it.

Trump Derangement Syndrome

and

Trump Defense Syndrome

Both are equally strong and equally faithful to their religion

Sorry bub, but Trump defenders don't worship Trump. Trump defenders are interested in protecting the Rule of Law. I wouldn't want to see ANY President be subject to spying, entrapment, and an unethical investigation the way Trump has been. If you had a shred of integrity, you'd feel the same way.

Sorry dude, but a great many of Trump's followers truly worship the man. he can do no wrong in their eyes and will defend every single thing he does. They are easy to spot, they are the ones that are incapable of saying 'yeah, that was a dumb thing to say"....go look in the mirror and you will see one

 

[nat4900]

With all of the resources and power they had, they were unable to indict Trump for a crime. Nuff said.

MORON........the Mueller team CANNOT indict the fuckhead under current DOJ policy...Find a grown up to explain THAT to your half brain.

NOW.....Mueller DID state that if Trump were NOT president, there is evidence to indict him....and THAT may occur when the orange buffoon is out of office.

Again, ask mommy for some help in comprehension.

 

[Aldo Raine]

Mueller's report explains his prosecutorial decisions in four points.

1. The DOJ's OLC has issued the opinion that a sitting President cannot be indicted, and the SC accepted that opinion for the purposes of his investigation, further recognizing that a DOJ indictment might preempt the constitutional mechanism of impeachment.
2. The investigation was nevertheless warranted because an criminal investigation is permitted under the OLC's standard, even when an indictment is not. Other individuals engaging in obstruction could be prosecuted immediately. And the President is not immune from prosecution after leaving office, regardless of whether impeachment proceedings are brought or are successful. So the investigation served the purpose of preserving evidence while witness memories were fresh.
3. The normal public mechanism for an individual accused of a crime to clear themselves is a speedy public criminal trial. If the sitting President cannot be brought to a criminal trial while in office, then it would be unfair for the SC to affirmatively accuse him of a crime that cannot be prosecuted in a criminal court of law at this time. Even a sealed indictment's secrecy could not be guaranteed to be preserved. Accordingly, a criminal accusation against a sitting President could be harmful to the country, because the accusation cannot be resolved in the normal adversarial manner of a criminal trial.
   
4. The results of the investigation do not allow the SC to conclude that the President did not commit obstruction.

So please explain how this exonerates Donald?

It exonerates TRUMP by exposing the underlying purpose of the entire Russia investigation and appointment of Mueller as being political.

Mueller, a Rethugicon was appointed by a Rethugicon, go figure!

 

[WEATHER53]

No exoneration necessary,not part of the process.

 

[boedicca]

because their party masters told them it did, and these sheep never disagree with their party masters.

kinda like the party masters told them trump colluded, so everyone that wanted to believed it.

TDS is a religion.

Yes it is, both manifestations of it.

Trump Derangement Syndrome

and

Trump Defense Syndrome

Both are equally strong and equally faithful to their religion

Sorry bub, but Trump defenders don't worship Trump. Trump defenders are interested in protecting the Rule of Law. I wouldn't want to see ANY President be subject to spying, entrapment, and an unethical investigation the way Trump has been. If you had a shred of integrity, you'd feel the same way.

Sorry dude, but a great many of Trump's followers truly worship the man. he can do no wrong in their eyes and will defend every single thing he does. They are easy to spot, they are the ones that are incapable of saying 'yeah, that was a dumb thing to say"....go look in the mirror and you will see one

You're projecting bub. And your powers of logic are as poor as your powers of perception. I'm a gal.

Trump is a flawed human being as we all knew prior to the election. No credible person ever called him a "sort of God'. He never claimed to have power over NATURE by halting the rise of the oceans. What he has done is FIGHT BACK. Normal people are sick and tired of being attacked and demonized by the Prog-Left while their supposed leaders remained idle or made excuses. That's what has you loons TERRIFIED...along with with the spotlight on the Prog-Dem corruption the Barr investigation into Obamagate will place. There isn't enough popcorn to do justice to your Epic Meltdown when you finally understand that Obama oversaw the surveillance operation on a political opponent and used the powers of the executive branch to punish political enemies. Worse Than Watergate.

 

[Olde Europe]

Mueller's report explains his prosecutorial decisions in four points.

1. The DOJ's OLC has issued the opinion that a sitting President cannot be indicted, and the SC accepted that opinion for the purposes of his investigation, further recognizing that a DOJ indictment might preempt the constitutional mechanism of impeachment.
2. The investigation was nevertheless warranted because an criminal investigation is permitted under the OLC's standard, even when an indictment is not. Other individuals engaging in obstruction could be prosecuted immediately. And the President is not immune from prosecution after leaving office, regardless of whether impeachment proceedings are brought or are successful. So the investigation served the purpose of preserving evidence while witness memories were fresh.
3. The normal public mechanism for an individual accused of a crime to clear themselves is a speedy public criminal trial. If the sitting President cannot be brought to a criminal trial while in office, then it would be unfair for the SC to affirmatively accuse him of a crime that cannot be prosecuted in a criminal court of law at this time. Even a sealed indictment's secrecy could not be guaranteed to be preserved. Accordingly, a criminal accusation against a sitting President could be harmful to the country, because the accusation cannot be resolved in the normal adversarial manner of a criminal trial.
   
4. The results of the investigation do not allow the SC to conclude that the President did not commit obstruction.

So please explain how this exonerates Donald?

Quite obviously, it doesn't exonerate Trump.

Quite obviously, Mueller was desperate not to necessitate Trump to be indicted. The reasons for that are probably complex, having to do with a sitting President not indictable under DoJ guidelines, and a Constitutional crisis in case an indictment is pending, since this breaks the rule of law.

In order to accomplish this, Mueller had to make a few stark, almost scurrilous decisions.

1. He indicted no one in the innermost Trump circle. That would, almost by necessity, require Trump also to be indicted, at least as a co-conspirator. And that's why the Trump Tower meeting, despite being quite obviously a blatant violation of the law (no thing of value be accepted from a foreigner) on the even more scurrilous contention the participants cannot possibly have known it was a crime, even though they lied and lied about it, including Trump himself.

2. He chose not to follow the evidentiary standard of Grand Juries (probable cause), but rather inexplicably the standard of a jury trial (beyond reasonable doubt).

3. He chose to almost ignore the amassed evidence for Trump and the GRU working together, and focused on an allegedly required "agreement" necessary to prove criminal conspiracy. So, not having been able to unearth such an agreement, the whole Volume I detailing collusion remained without consequences.

4. The same as above happened to Volume II and the detailed evidence for obstruction, not to mention witness tampering and suborning perjury. There is even a section arguing that the established pattern of obstruction is itself evidence for corrupt intent, but still, the whole thing remained without the obviously inevitable prosecutorial decision, namely, indict the crook.

5. He chose not to pursue in earnest a personal interview, and not to subpoena him, knowing full well that there's a guarantee the off-the-leash blowhard would perjure himself.

So, in a way, Mueller, following DoJ guidelines like the good soldier he is, suffers Trump crowing about "complete exoneration", while his mindless minions even take it a step further crowing "no there there, no exoneration necessary." I cannot begin to imagine how much this has to grate the old man. A DoJ guideline rendering the President above the law forced him to make a joke out of his own investigation, and to do immeasurable damage to the rule of law itself.

There is just one single saving grace in this (which he also explained), that is, to preserve the evidence for the Constitutionally created powers, namely Congress, to go about their Constitutionally mandated work. It is way past time they start in earnest.

 

[boedicca]

With all of the resources and power they had, they were unable to indict Trump for a crime. Nuff said.

MORON........the Mueller team CANNOT indict the fuckhead under current DOJ policy...Find a grown up to explain THAT to your half brain.

NOW.....Mueller DID state that if Trump were NOT president, there is evidence to indict him....and THAT may occur when the orange buffoon is out of office.

Again, ask mommy for some help in comprehension.

Really? Tell that to James Comey.

Mueller didn't make a recommendation to indict Trump. Nuff said.

 

[boedicca]

Mueller's report explains his prosecutorial decisions in four points.

1. The DOJ's OLC has issued the opinion that a sitting President cannot be indicted, and the SC accepted that opinion for the purposes of his investigation, further recognizing that a DOJ indictment might preempt the constitutional mechanism of impeachment.
2. The investigation was nevertheless warranted because an criminal investigation is permitted under the OLC's standard, even when an indictment is not. Other individuals engaging in obstruction could be prosecuted immediately. And the President is not immune from prosecution after leaving office, regardless of whether impeachment proceedings are brought or are successful. So the investigation served the purpose of preserving evidence while witness memories were fresh.
3. The normal public mechanism for an individual accused of a crime to clear themselves is a speedy public criminal trial. If the sitting President cannot be brought to a criminal trial while in office, then it would be unfair for the SC to affirmatively accuse him of a crime that cannot be prosecuted in a criminal court of law at this time. Even a sealed indictment's secrecy could not be guaranteed to be preserved. Accordingly, a criminal accusation against a sitting President could be harmful to the country, because the accusation cannot be resolved in the normal adversarial manner of a criminal trial.
   
4. The results of the investigation do not allow the SC to conclude that the President did not commit obstruction.

So please explain how this exonerates Donald?

Quite obviously, it doesn't exonerate Trump.

Quite obviously, Mueller was desperate not to necessitate Trump to be indicted. The reasons for that are probably complex, having to do with a sitting President not indictable under DoJ guidelines, and a Constitutional crisis in case an indictment is pending, since this breaks the rule of law.

In order to accomplish this, Mueller had to make a few stark, almost scurrilous decisions.

1. He indicted no one in the innermost Trump circle. That would, almost by necessity, require Trump also to be indicted, at least as a co-conspirator. And that's why the Trump Tower meeting, despite being quite obviously a blatant violation of the law (no thing of value be accepted from a foreigner) on the even more scurrilous contention the participants cannot possibly have known it was a crime, even though they lied and lied about it, including Trump himself.

2. He chose not to follow the evidentiary standard of Grand Juries (probable cause), but rather inexplicably the standard of a jury trial (beyond reasonable doubt).

3. He chose to almost ignore the amassed evidence for Trump and the GRU working together, and focused on an allegedly required "agreement" necessary to prove criminal conspiracy. So, not having been able to unearth such an agreement, the whole Volume I detailing collusion remained without consequences.

4. The same as above happened to Volume II and the detailed evidence for obstruction, not to mention witness tampering and suborning perjury. There is even a section arguing that the established pattern of obstruction is itself evidence for corrupt intent, but still, the whole thing remained without the obviously inevitable prosecutorial decision, namely, indict the crook.

5. He chose not to pursue in earnest a personal interview, and not to subpoena him, knowing full well that there's a guarantee the off-the-leash blowhard would perjure himself.

So, in a way, Mueller, following DoJ guidelines like the good soldier he is, suffers Trump crowing about "complete exoneration", while his mindless minions even take it a step further crowing "no there there, no exoneration necessary." I cannot begin to imagine how much this has to grate the old man. A DoJ guideline rendering the President above the law forced him to make a joke out of his own investigation, and to do immeasurable damage to the rule of law itself.

There is just one single saving grace in this (which he also explained), that is, to preserve the evidence for the Constitutionally created powers, namely Congress, to go about their Constitutionally mandated work. It is way past time they start in earnest.

You don't grok much about the Rule of Law, do you?

 

[Care4all]

The investigation into the Trump campaign was a counter-intelligence operation, not a criminal investigation.

It was both. Matters naught if it were a counter intelligence investigation or a criminal one, when it comes to the Law on Obstructing an Official Investigation, etc.

The SC found no conspiracy or collusion by the Trump campaign with a foreign government. Thus the SC never
found a crime..

Simply not true! The Mueller report found a plethora of collusion between the Trump Campaign and the Russians, what they did not find is a Conspiracy, where the Trump campaign aided the Russians in their hack....or gave them something in return for their help in getting Trump elected....

they colluded with them, left and right and up and down, every which way but loose, except they did not commit the theft of the emails.... and could not prove they gave the Russians something in return, for the soul reason of paying them for their help.... the admin has given them several things, but not solidified that Trump was doing so, simply as a payback.

Don Junior and Kushner got off on Campaign finance laws being broken, NOT because they did not break the law... because they did break the Law, but because they may not have known what they were doing was against the Law. And with campaign finance felonies, you have to KNOW you are breaking the law.... you have to have an intent to break the law with campaign finance laws, and Mueller could not establish beyond a reasonable doubt, that they knew what they were doing was breaking the law.... some peeps are saying it is because Mueller never interviewed them... but I dunno?

Manafort did give Kilimnik intricate Trump Campaign polling data on several occasions and also discussed with him the specific polling in the 3 Democratic leaning States that Trump barely won and pulled off an electoral win. The Russians also targeted these State's voter registration rolls.... and gathered this data to focus their interference goal of causing division among Democratic voters, to discourage them from voting, or voting for Hillary.

If that was not collusion between the campaign and Russians, then what the hell is?

but as stated many many times by Trumpsters, "Collusion is not a crime".

The POTUS cooperated fully with the SC providing him with unlimited access to WH files and employees and not invoking
Executive Privlidge.

the President himself, did NOT cooperate at all with the special counsel.... Mueller spells it out in the report.... He refused to testify or be questioned in person, he refused to answer any questions about Obstruction of Justice via obstructing an official gvt investigation.... the questions Trump's lawyer team finally said they would have Trump answer, Trump refused to answer 30 of them, by saying "I don't recall"..... yeah, the man who brags about what a great memory he has and how smart he is.... could not recall... He tried to have Mueller fired, even after being told it was illegal to do such, an abuse of power he tried dozens of times more through all kinds of back door people, including Corey Lewendowski, and Don McGahn, tried to get Sessions to unrecuse himself and all kinds of crap.... BY NO MEANS DID HE COOPERATE.... that is a flat out LIE.

In actuality, the POTUS was defending himself from being unfairly portrayed as committing a crime that the SC said never
happened. He will be forever remember as the POTUS that prevented the FBI and the DOJ along with Pres Zero from
obstructing justice.

Cry me a river, the president is not some weakling, helpless peon.... ANY PERSON at all that did what the President did to Obstruct this investigation, would be in prison already.

 

[Mike473]

Well, you did it for eight years under Opie,

DID exactly what???..............Under a congress that was heavily republican and anti-Obama.....

Was Obama under investigation by a special counsel??......Yes or No?
Was Obama accused of obstruction of justice by a special counsel??..........Yes or No?

.....and THERE, my ignorant Opie cultist, is where you can flaunt YOUR fucked up ignorance....."OPIE TOLD YOU WHAT TO BELIEVE".........and like a good sheep, you follow the cult mentality.

The only difference is that Opie had Lynch and Holder to ride point for your messiah's protection

So, morons like you are asserting that Obama........with SIX years of a republican majority in BOTH chambers of congress, faced the same EXACT legal problems as your beloved orange fuckhead???

Is THAT what you're stating ????

How the **** do you turn on your computer all by yourself with that "brain" capacity?.........LOL

You must face reality. Trump is in the clear. Your insults do not change the facts. No collusion. No conspiracy. No coordination. No obstruction.

Trump is facing no charges. Pelosi and Nadler are too weak to attempt impeachment.

Why get yourself worked up any longer. Time to move on. There is nothing more to argue about here.

 

[nat4900]

Trump is facing no charges. Pelosi and Nadler are too weak to attempt impeachment.

Why get yourself worked up any longer. Time to move on. There is nothing more to argue about here.

Moron, YOU are the one bringing up impeachment of Trump.....I don't want that......Trump has not yet finished completely destroying the GOP....now split between decent republicans and Trump cult members......

The lingering suspicions that Trump is both corrupt and wholly inept to sit in the oval office, are BETTER than making him into a "martyr" threatened by impeachment.

Learn how to play chess instead of tiddlywinks