Mueller enpannels grand jury

Midnightrider

Midnightrider

Well-Known Member
PsyOps said:
And you base this on what? We haven't received anything on why this GJ was formed. You're doing the same thing you're laughing at people on the other side of this for doing - speculating.
Click to expand...

I base it on the fact that there have been no
Reports of clinton folks being questioned by mueller.

But like I said, it's possible.
 
PsyOps

PsyOps

Pixelated
Midnightrider said:
I base it on the fact that there have been no
Reports of clinton folks being questioned by mueller.

But like I said, it's possible.
Click to expand...

We're not even supposed to know that another grand jury has been stood up; but the #### keeps leaking out. So, who knows what the heck is going on? Given that Mueller brought in a team of leftist Clintonites, I'm not too confident they are even going to entertain any evidence that may lead them in that direction.
 
Midnightrider

Midnightrider

Well-Known Member
PsyOps said:
We're not even supposed to know that another grand jury has been stood up; but the #### keeps leaking out. So, who knows what the heck is going on? Given that Mueller brought in a team of leftist Clintonites, I'm not too confident they are even going to entertain any evidence that may lead them in that direction.
Click to expand...

Come in dude. I know repeating the lie is fun and all, but other than trumps tweets what do you have that indicates mueller brought in a team of clintonites? The worst I have heard is that about a third may have made donations to democrats. That means the other 2/3 didn't.
 
Hijinx

Hijinx

Well-Known Member
Midnightrider said:
Come in dude. I know repeating the lie is fun and all, but other than trumps tweets what do you have that indicates mueller brought in a team of clintonites? The worst I have heard is that about a third may have made donations to democrats. That means the other 2/3 didn't.
Click to expand...

No: It doesn't.
 
littlelady

littlelady

God bless the USA
littlelady said:
I don't know if that is a good idea. You seem to not be able to get yours off.
Click to expand...

I replied to you again separate from my first post to you because I have decided that vrai and David should have a new option on the forum. That option would be to just hit auto reply. My reply to you would be,...Snap out of it. :slap: or, it could be :rolleyes:, or are you kidding me, or wake up snoozer loser, or what are you thinking, or why don't you get it... I could go on and on, but I am sure you get what I am trying to say. The thing is...do you get what is going on in America, and do you really want to be part of Her downfall? Oh, I forgot the most important auto reply....be careful what you wish for. Just looking out for my fellow Americans. I guess you don't identify. :shrug:
 
PsyOps

PsyOps

Pixelated
Midnightrider said:
Come in dude. I know repeating the lie is fun and all, but other than trumps tweets what do you have that indicates mueller brought in a team of clintonites? The worst I have heard is that about a third may have made donations to democrats. That means the other 2/3 didn't.
Click to expand...

Come on dude... you're the one who is absolutely convinced there is collusion; and you have yet to provide a source that supports this. Now you demand I provide a source for my claim? You're a typical 'do as I say not as I do' liberal.

They shouldn't be bringing lawyers and investigators that have shown any loyalty to any candidate. You love to operate on 'the mere hint of impropriety is evidence of guilty' when it fits you; so there you go... I am convinced that if there are any loyalists to Clinton involved in this investigation, it is tainted and can't be trusted.
 
Midnightrider

Midnightrider

Well-Known Member
PsyOps said:
Come on dude... you're the one who is absolutely convinced there is collusion; and you have yet to provide a source that supports this. Now you demand I provide a source for my claim? You're a typical 'do as I say not as I do' liberal.

They shouldn't be bringing lawyers and investigators that have shown any loyalty to any candidate. You love to operate on 'the mere hint of impropriety is evidence of guilty' when it fits you; so there you go... I am convinced that if there are any loyalists to Clinton involved in this investigation, it is tainted and can't be trusted.
Click to expand...

Here is the difference. The investigators ostensibly admitted to their donations to democrats. Whereas the trump team lied about their meetings with Russians. Still, you haven't addressed the fact that 2/3 of the investigators did not make donations to the left, and very well may have donated to the right.


It's kind of like having a black mark on your record when you put in your security clearance. If tell the truth and it's not a disqualifying offense you are fine. However, even if it is minor and you lie about it you could be denied.
 
PsyOps

PsyOps

Pixelated
Midnightrider said:
Here is the difference. The investigators ostensibly admitted to their donations to democrats. Whereas the trump team lied about their meetings with Russians. Still, you haven't addressed the fact that 2/3 of the investigators did not make donations to the left, and very well may have donated to the right.


It's kind of like having a black mark on your record when you put in your security clearance. If tell the truth and it's not a disqualifying offense you are fine. However, even if it is minor and you lie about it you could be denied.
Click to expand...

I don't need to justify anything to you, who can't produce evidence of collusion. You provide all sorts of non-related stuff the claim this is evidence.

Where in this post is evidence of collusion by Trump with the Russians to manipulate the election?
 
hotbikermama40

hotbikermama40

New Member
PsyOps said:
I don't need to justify anything to you, who can't produce evidence of collusion. You provide all sorts of non-related stuff the claim this is evidence.

Where in this post is evidence of collusion by Trump with the Russians to manipulate the election?
Click to expand...

I think he's referring to the Leftist claim that Jr "lied" about meeting with the Russians, which we know he didn't. But they conveniently forget that his denial was to the question put to him whether he had any meetings to discuss specific topics.
Semantics, so bothersome
 
PsyOps

PsyOps

Pixelated
hotbikermama40 said:
I think he's referring to the Leftist claim that Jr "lied" about meeting with the Russians, which we know he didn't. But they conveniently forget that his denial was to the question put to him whether he had any meetings to discuss specific topics.
Semantics, so bothersome
Click to expand...

This all centers in on MR's belief that Trump colluded with the Russians. All of this non-related stuff is evidence to him that Trump colluded.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Top