Russian Bounty on US Soldiers...and Trump’s known for months...

Subduction Zone said:

One more question. Whose cash was it?

Click to expand...

Hey buddy. Haven't heard from you since the start of covid.

...Glad you're alive.

disciple Clint said:

“On the facts here, the government would unlikely be able to prove beyond a reasonable doubt that the June 9 meeting participants had general knowledge that their conduct was unlawful..."
which is a rather biased way of saying there was no crime. Much like the “If we had had confidence that the president clearly did not commit a crime, we would have said so,” he noted. “We did not, however, make a determination as to whether the president did commit a crime.” It was never their assignment to clear the president but wording it this way leaves the implication that he might have committed a crime and that was all the msm needed to run with it.

Click to expand...

I don't see any indication of bias, nor can we honestly conclude either way whether there was a crime committed or not. It's enough to speak honestly and say that Mueller said he didn't think the government would be able prove beyond a shadow of a doubt that Don junior and the others knew they were breaking the law. Elsewhere in the report he said that there was not "strong evidence" to prove that this meeting was done surreptitiously.

But there's more to the story than just this incident. There is the DNC hacking, Roger Stone's connections to WikiLeaks, which he is so tight lipped about he would rather go to prison than give up the information.
And there's Manafort and Kilimnik and the issue of why Manafort was sending polling data to Kilimnik. There's still a lot we don't know.

What I do know for certain, is that if Trump was an honest and forthright man, he would not be claiming it was a hoax invented by the Democrats as an excuse for losing the election. He's lying to the American people, slandering the Democrats, stoking hatred within his base against others who did nothing wrong, and creating a strenuous division amongst the citizenry in doing so. Which is why I am posting you, to respectfully ask you to not be a party to believing and spreading the same disinformation.

childeye 2 said:

I don't see any indication of bias, nor can we honestly conclude either way whether there was a crime committed or not. It's enough to speak honestly and say that Mueller said he didn't think the government would be able prove beyond a shadow of a doubt that Don junior and the others knew they were breaking the law. Elsewhere in the report he said that there was not "strong evidence" to prove that this meeting was done surreptitiously.

But there's more to the story than just this incident. There is the DNC hacking, Roger Stone's connections to WikiLeaks, which he is so tight lipped about he would rather go to prison than give up the information.
And there's Manafort and Kilimnik and the issue of why Manafort was sending polling data to Kilimnik. There's still a lot we don't know.

What I do know for certain, is that if Trump was an honest and forthright man, he would not be claiming it was a hoax invented by the Democrats as an excuse for losing the election. He's lying to the American people, slandering the Democrats, stoking hatred within his base against others who did nothing wrong, and creating a strenuous division amongst the citizenry in doing so. Which is why I am posting you, to respectfully ask you to not be a party to believing and spreading the same disinformation.

Click to expand...

I would respectfully suggest to you that the liberals are every bit as guilty of the things that you accuse Trump of doing. Regarding the way the Mueller report was worded you do not need to have a law degree to see that the statements were designed to suggest, without having any proof that something illegal had happened. When have you ever had a prosecutor say, we were not able to prove that the accused is innocent. Such a statement would immediately draw objection and rightly so. This statement is in the same classification as "Mueller said he didn't think the government would be able prove beyond a shadow of a doubt that Don junior and the others knew they were breaking the law." The inference here is that we know a crime occurred but we cant prove it. In fact each of those statements is biased in that they are designed to communicate the existence of a crime without actually saying that a crime exists let alone being able to provide evidence. That investigation and the report are about as dishonest as it is possible to be and quite possibly violated the law, that investigation is going on at this time in the senate and by Mr Durham. I have no intention of ignoring the highly unethical events that have been perpetrated by the liberals who have little or no morality. I am expecting the investigations of Durham and the senate to expose the extent of those activities.

disciple Clint said:

I would respectfully suggest to you that the liberals are every bit as guilty of the things that you accuse Trump of doing. Regarding the way the Mueller report was worded you do not need to have a law degree to see that the statements were designed to suggest, without having any proof that something illegal had happened.

Click to expand...

Which specific items of evidence listed in the report did you find unconvincing? Please be specific - volume and page number of the points you disagree with and why.

KCfromNC said:

Which specific items of evidence listed in the report did you find unconvincing? Please be specific - volume and page number of the points you disagree with and why.

Click to expand...

you can read it in your spare time I am not going to waste my time with you anymore.

disciple Clint said:

you can read it in your spare time I am not going to waste my time with you anymore.

Click to expand...

I read it and found the evidence convincing. I would be curious to know what you found unconvincing. Volume and page number of the unconvincing parts so I can take a look.