(March 25, 2019 at 7:24 am)Brian37 Wrote: It should have been enough, with all the repetitive vile rhetoric coming out of the bully's mouth on Twitter multiple times a day, to deem him unfit. But what has been said in this report, is not a 100% vindication and once again, the orange asshole has to lie about it. This is not like when a jury says, "not guilty" and jurors get interviewed and directly confirm that. This report is more like a hung jury where many interviewed afterwords, the accused stunk like shit, but still wanted more to have a solid conviction.
An no, this is not a matter of wanting the office to fail, this for me is about the individual, the man, and his behavior alone. Gotti got away with alot before he was finally nailed. That is what we are looking at here. It is not a conspiracy on my part, the very fact that Mueller didn't come out and say he was 100% not guilty, as if DNA proved he was not the killer, says alot. This is more like in The First 48, when the detective question a bunch of people, including the person of interest, and still let him go because they still do not have enough.
I do not fault Mueller one bit. But this is not over, not in the slightest. I am damned sure this more of a smart move on Mueller's part so that when 45 gets nailed by state investigators, Mueller cannot be painted as corrupt as the orange bully has wrongfully been calling him.
If Dems are smart, they won't push this too far, because 45 will play victim in 2020 and use this. I think our best tactic now is to pound the fact that he and the GOP are going to try to gut social security and medicare, and pound his attacks on McCain.
I would love to see the fucker impeached. But now, still have to wait for the report to come out, not this summery, and we also have to let the state investigations play out too.
What happened with this report, was a lot like when I went to traffic court a long time ago. Before the judge got to mere traffic cases a couple hours were spent on criminal charges. Cab driver identified a suspect in the court as robbing him, problem was, he was the only witness, the accused had his entire family say he was watching TV and never left the house. True? Um maybe, maybe not, because based on what the judge said before dismissing the case, the judge himself said he thought the entire thing stunk. That says to me, that judge was probably privy to other prior arrests or convictions of the accused, but had no choice but to dismiss it. When a case isn't indicted, they are not saying the person cannot be indicted later, it merely means that the court wants a solid case that cannot be easily overturned upon appeal.
what a puppet. it's almost like you have a transcript of rachel maddow/madcow thoughts on this and just tweaked them just enough to make it yours. Do any of you reseach anything beyond the talking head on the same news who lied to you when they said it was going to be a clinton landslide?
How many times must they get things wrong before you begin to take their word with a grain of salt? How many times must a source like msnbc show it self to be untruth worthy before you cut it loose as a place to get the truth?
