Follow along with the video below to see how to install our site as a web app on your home screen.
Note: This feature currently requires accessing the site using the built-in Safari browser.
Terms like could and interpreted are intended to muddy the waters.If they did, they may have to admit that there could be a case for obstruction, depending on how certain things he did were interpreted.
And since they're only allowed to think in binary terms, words like "could" and "interpreted" really muddy the waters.
They read the Barr four page summary....all they care to hearShep Smith Urges Fox News Viewers To Read The Mueller Report For Themselves
Are you kidding me? trump supporters won't touch the Mueller report. They know trump is a criminal....they don't care....they love being conned....
The more sane members of the Democratic Party aren't thinking about impeachment, and Mueller made it clear he could not indict Trump. So that's pretty much that.Terms like could and interpreted are intended to muddy the waters.If they did, they may have to admit that there could be a case for obstruction, depending on how certain things he did were interpreted.
And since they're only allowed to think in binary terms, words like "could" and "interpreted" really muddy the waters.
Bottom line: No real criminal acts were referred to congress to proceed with impeachment, and that "If we had confidence the President clearly did not commit a crime, we would have said so." shit turns centuries of western jurisprudence -where innocence is presumed- on its head.
View attachment 265086
Why doesn't the little punk just read us the parts he thinks proves Trump guilty?...because people would laugh him out of the studio that's why....there is no evidence of guilt in the report...I read it...and there isn't one shred of evidence for collusion nor obstruction....it would be so simple for him to read it to us...but he won't because he is full of shit....
Why doesn't the little punk just read us the parts he thinks proves Trump guilty?...because people would laugh him out of the studio that's why....there is no evidence of guilt in the report...I read it...and there isn't one shred of evidence for collusion nor obstruction....it would be so simple for him to read it to us...but he won't because he is full of shit....
Sooooooooooooooooooo ................ advising people to think for themselves is " laughable" and "full of shit", is it.
Well isn't that revealing.
He’s right. But the trump trash don’t readShep Smith Urges Fox News Viewers To Read The Mueller Report For Themselves
Are you kidding me? trump supporters won't touch the Mueller report. They know trump is a criminal....they don't care....they love being conned....
Because they’re not very bright and they don’t careThey read the Barr four page summary....all they care to hearShep Smith Urges Fox News Viewers To Read The Mueller Report For Themselves
Are you kidding me? trump supporters won't touch the Mueller report. They know trump is a criminal....they don't care....they love being conned....
Its so weak to just say "read the report" that is what all the Trump haters say when you ask them what law did Trump break...Shep must be a bigger light weight than I thought....
Can one lib here tell what law Trump broke?...I bet not one of you has an answer....
Its so weak to just say "read the report" that is what all the Trump haters say when you ask them what law did Trump break...Shep must be a bigger light weight than I thought....
Can one lib here tell what law Trump broke?...I bet not one of you has an answer....
I haven't read the report and have no idea what's in there. But I have read your posts and clearly you're intimidated by it.
I'm not a Trump bootlicker, and there's nothing there...If there were, a criminal referral would have been made....That's just the way it is.The more sane members of the Democratic Party aren't thinking about impeachment, and Mueller made it clear he could not indict Trump. So that's pretty much that.
My point is that the Trump apologists are saying there is "nothing there", and that's either intellectual dishonesty or willful ignorance. I'd have questions on a couple of things that the report didn't make very clear, but it does make clear that he tried to convince people to be dishonest.
.
