Trump loves those 3-syllable slogans, plus m.a.g.a. to make it only 2! This is your trumper.
Trump loves those 3-syllable slogans, plus m.a.g.a. to make it only 2! This is your trumper.
Sally Vix wrote:
. . . No one but Mueller and his minions and Barr and a few others know what is in it but you Trump haters claim to know that it has evidence of collusion but not rising to a convictable crime. How do you know that? That is the narrative now but no one outside of a select few know squat.
Actually the narrative is that the Mueller report has evidence of obstruction of justice and we know that because Barr directly quoted the report were it said so.
But you know this.
Says the troll of St Putingrad, which is literally a swampy area. The “Venice of the North,” if Venice was cold, poor, ruled by a_ss_holes, and had 99% less tourists, ha ha.
Tired of the lies wrote:
Sally Vix wrote:
. . . No one but Mueller and his minions and Barr and a few others know what is in it but you Trump haters claim to know that it has evidence of collusion but not rising to a convictable crime. How do you know that? That is the narrative now but no one outside of a select few know squat.
Actually the narrative is that the Mueller report has evidence of obstruction of justice and we know that because Barr directly quoted the report were it said so.
But you know this.
Can you show me specifically where the Barr report mentioned obstruction of justice? I will be waiting.
Tired of the lies wrote:
Sally Vix wrote:
. . . No one but Mueller and his minions and Barr and a few others know what is in it but you Trump haters claim to know that it has evidence of collusion but not rising to a convictable crime. How do you know that? That is the narrative now but no one outside of a select few know squat.
Actually the narrative is that the Mueller report has evidence of obstruction of justice and we know that because Barr directly quoted the report were it said so.
But you know this.
Hey, did you read the report, Slick? You are full of it.
After reviewing the Special Counsel's final report on these issues; consulting with Department officials, including the Office of Legal Counsel; and applying the principles of federal prosecution that guide our charging decisions, Deputy Attorney General Rod Rosenstein and I have concluded that the evidence developed during the Special Counsel's investigation is not sufficient to establish that the President committed an obstruction-of-justice offense. Our determination was made without regard to, and is not based on, the constitutional considerations that surround the indictment and criminal prosecution of a sitting president.
Sally Vix wrote:
Tired of the lies wrote:
Actually the narrative is that the Mueller report has evidence of obstruction of justice and we know that because Barr directly quoted the report were it said so.
But you know this.
Hey, did you read the report, Slick? You are full of it.
After reviewing the Special Counsel's final report on these issues; consulting with Department officials, including the Office of Legal Counsel; and applying the principles of federal prosecution that guide our charging decisions, Deputy Attorney General Rod Rosenstein and I have concluded that the evidence developed during the Special Counsel's investigation is not sufficient to establish that the President committed an obstruction-of-justice offense. Our determination was made without regard to, and is not based on, the constitutional considerations that surround the indictment and criminal prosecution of a sitting president.
Really tired of the BS lies you Liberals are putting out there. Enough. How about just facts now?
Dowdy Dow wrote:
TrumpCONomy wrote:
Oh, my. We have an internet tough guy gracing us with his low IQ.
Not sure how you can claim to be a tough guy - even of the Internet variety. But low IQ? Yeah, you've got that for sure.
Reading comprehension is not one of your skills.
Sally Vix wrote:
Tired of the lies wrote:
Actually the narrative is that the Mueller report has evidence of obstruction of justice and we know that because Barr directly quoted the report were it said so.
But you know this.
Can you show me specifically where the Barr report mentioned obstruction of justice? I will be waiting.
It's in the Barr letter under the bold type heading "Obstruction of Justice."
Sally Vix wrote:
Sally Vix wrote:
Hey, did you read the report, Slick? You are full of it.
After reviewing the Special Counsel's final report on these issues; consulting with Department officials, including the Office of Legal Counsel; and applying the principles of federal prosecution that guide our charging decisions, Deputy Attorney General Rod Rosenstein and I have concluded that the evidence developed during the Special Counsel's investigation is not sufficient to establish that the President committed an obstruction-of-justice offense. Our determination was made without regard to, and is not based on, the constitutional considerations that surround the indictment and criminal prosecution of a sitting president.
Really tired of the BS lies you Liberals are putting out there. Enough. How about just facts now?
coming from you, hahahahahahahahahaha
you've been caught lying over and over and to my knowledge you have never corrected your factual errors.
Although to your credit you have changed your opinions from time to time.
Ghost of Igloi wrote:
Low Interest wrote:
You really seem to love the super low interest your savings are "earning".
How was the last quarter of 2018?
Please post a link to the wonderful savings interest rates we seem to have enjoyed during the last quarter of 2018, as you have claimed.
TrumpCONomy wrote:
Dowdy Dow wrote:
Not sure how you can claim to be a tough guy - even of the Internet variety. But low IQ? Yeah, you've got that for sure.
Reading comprehension is not one of your skills.
But human comprehension is. And it aint hard to recognize you as a blowhard moron with nothing to say and plenty of hot air to say it with.
agip wrote:
Sally Vix wrote:
Really tired of the BS lies you Liberals are putting out there. Enough. How about just facts now?
coming from you, hahahahahahahahahaha
you've been caught lying over and over and to my knowledge you have never corrected your factual errors.
Although to your credit you have changed your opinions from time to time.
Have you corrected factual errors?
Sally Vix wrote:
jesseriley wrote:
In Russia they beg for democracy.
They also beg for bread over there. People stand in line for up to 4 hours to get 10 loaves of bread.
Recent pics--this year--or it didn't happen,
agip wrote:
Sally Vix wrote:
Trump IS the drainer of the swamp. McCabe, Strozok, Page, Brennan, Comey, Rosenstein and all the other high-level guys at the FBI and DOJ ARE the swamp. They have done everything to politicize those once-proud American institutions. Those traitors have ruined them. It is going to be a great day when those turncoats go down. And are locked up.
lies. utter. lies. propaganda. shame.
Sally's pink panties obviously have a red hammer and sickle logo.
Actually 2 1/2 loaves of bread per hour is better pay than most jobs in Russia.
Dowdy Dow wrote:
TrumpCONomy wrote:
Reading comprehension is not one of your skills.
But human comprehension is. And it aint hard to recognize you as a blowhard moron with nothing to say and plenty of hot air to say it with.
You do not have human comprehension skills of any sort.
You chose to whine about a reply to someone about interest rates, crying that that belongs in the Dow thread. Who knew, except you, that interest rates were one of the Dow indices?
PS. Knowledge of money and investments are not one of your skills.
PPS. Whining is one of your skills.
agip wrote:
Rs never said Trump is a saint.
Correct. The problem is that they say that as if it's a badge of honor...stuff like, "We didn't elect a Boy Scout Leader, blah, blah, blah." There's a BIG difference between being tough or caustic and being the serial lying, criminal incompetent a$$hole that Trump is.
Sally Vix wrote:
agip wrote:
coming from you, hahahahahahahahahaha
you've been caught lying over and over and to my knowledge you have never corrected your factual errors.
Although to your credit you have changed your opinions from time to time.
Have you corrected factual errors?
yes
agip wrote:
Sally Vix wrote:
Have you corrected factual errors?
yes
Which factual errors did you correct?