How heavy?B.A. Bearacus said:
The complete, heavily redacted report in PDF:
https://www.cnn.com/2019/04/18/politics/full-mueller-report-pdf/index.html
How heavy?B.A. Bearacus said:
The complete, heavily redacted report in PDF:
https://www.cnn.com/2019/04/18/politics/full-mueller-report-pdf/index.html
Regarding this section above:B.A. Bearacus said:
Ink toner stock just went up.
But there DOES seem to be conspiracy. It's mincing legalities and fudging definitions of collusion and who is Russian. This was illegal and unethical **** from day one.Anarchistbear said:
You should be happy. Trump didn't conspire with the Russians to interfere with the elections. T
blungld said:But there DOES seem to be conspiracy. It's mincing legalities and fudging definitions of collusion and who is Russian. This was illegal and unethical **** from day one.Anarchistbear said:
You should be happy. Trump didn't conspire with the Russians to interfere with the elections. T
By Trump's team connections to Wiki which is conduit to Russia.Anarchistbear said:blungld said:But there DOES seem to be conspiracy. It's mincing legalities and fudging definitions of collusion and who is Russian. This was illegal and unethical **** from day one.Anarchistbear said:
You should be happy. Trump didn't conspire with the Russians to interfere with the elections. T
And you know this how? By your prosecutorial expertise? Or your bias?
blungld said:By Trump's team connections to Wiki which is conduit to Russia.Anarchistbear said:blungld said:But there DOES seem to be conspiracy. It's mincing legalities and fudging definitions of collusion and who is Russian. This was illegal and unethical **** from day one.Anarchistbear said:
You should be happy. Trump didn't conspire with the Russians to interfere with the elections. T
And you know this how? By your prosecutorial expertise? Or your bias?
To quid pro actions with sanctions and election interference.
By meetings and lies about those meetings with Russian agents and oligarchs.
By handing information to Russian agents.
By creating back channel communication with Russians.
Trump was put in office by Russian action and team Trump knew and accepted and has paid back.
Yeah, no. Are you reading the report? Let's grab one example. Page 28--how is that not collusion with IRA?Anarchistbear said:blungld said:By Trump's team connections to Wiki which is conduit to Russia.Anarchistbear said:blungld said:But there DOES seem to be conspiracy. It's mincing legalities and fudging definitions of collusion and who is Russian. This was illegal and unethical **** from day one.Anarchistbear said:
You should be happy. Trump didn't conspire with the Russians to interfere with the elections. T
And you know this how? By your prosecutorial expertise? Or your bias?
To quid pro actions with sanctions and election interference.
By meetings and lies about those meetings with Russian agents and oligarchs.
By handing information to Russian agents.
By creating back channel communication with Russians.
Trump was put in office by Russian action and team Trump knew and accepted and has paid back.
You realized this has all been debunked, right?
Weird that you give DT the benefit of the doubt, while you discount so many other political figures outright, even if what they say in a specific instance is valid, based on that fact that you feel they lied in the past or are part of some corrupt lineage. Your all over the place views don't seem to reflect any consistent, core set of beliefs and seem to just be contrarian for its own sake.Anarchistbear said:
And you know this how? By your prosecutorial expertise? Or your bias?
blungld said:Yeah, no. Are you reading the report? Let's grab one example. Page 28--how is that not collusion with IRA?Anarchistbear said:blungld said:By Trump's team connections to Wiki which is conduit to Russia.Anarchistbear said:blungld said:But there DOES seem to be conspiracy. It's mincing legalities and fudging definitions of collusion and who is Russian. This was illegal and unethical **** from day one.Anarchistbear said:
You should be happy. Trump didn't conspire with the Russians to interfere with the elections. T
And you know this how? By your prosecutorial expertise? Or your bias?
To quid pro actions with sanctions and election interference.
By meetings and lies about those meetings with Russian agents and oligarchs.
By handing information to Russian agents.
By creating back channel communication with Russians.
Trump was put in office by Russian action and team Trump knew and accepted and has paid back.
You realized this has all been debunked, right?
"multiple members of the Trump campaign"Anarchistbear said:blungld said:Yeah, no. Are you reading the report? Let's grab one example. Page 28--how is that not collusion with IRA?Anarchistbear said:blungld said:By Trump's team connections to Wiki which is conduit to Russia.Anarchistbear said:blungld said:But there DOES seem to be conspiracy. It's mincing legalities and fudging definitions of collusion and who is Russian. This was illegal and unethical **** from day one.Anarchistbear said:
You should be happy. Trump didn't conspire with the Russians to interfere with the elections. T
And you know this how? By your prosecutorial expertise? Or your bias?
To quid pro actions with sanctions and election interference.
By meetings and lies about those meetings with Russian agents and oligarchs.
By handing information to Russian agents.
By creating back channel communication with Russians.
Trump was put in office by Russian action and team Trump knew and accepted and has paid back.
You realized this has all been debunked, right?
Where is Trump campaign mentioned on page 28?
blungld said:"multiple members of the Trump campaign"Anarchistbear said:blungld said:Yeah, no. Are you reading the report? Let's grab one example. Page 28--how is that not collusion with IRA?Anarchistbear said:blungld said:By Trump's team connections to Wiki which is conduit to Russia.Anarchistbear said:blungld said:But there DOES seem to be conspiracy. It's mincing legalities and fudging definitions of collusion and who is Russian. This was illegal and unethical **** from day one.Anarchistbear said:
You should be happy. Trump didn't conspire with the Russians to interfere with the elections. T
And you know this how? By your prosecutorial expertise? Or your bias?
To quid pro actions with sanctions and election interference.
By meetings and lies about those meetings with Russian agents and oligarchs.
By handing information to Russian agents.
By creating back channel communication with Russians.
Trump was put in office by Russian action and team Trump knew and accepted and has paid back.
You realized this has all been debunked, right?
Where is Trump campaign mentioned on page 28?
I often disagree with your posts but thought you were reasonable, if not inflammatory and extreme. You are losing credibility with these recent posts.
The only conclusion I can think of is that Donald Trump honestly thought he colluded with the Russians.bearister said:
"This is the end of my Presidency" and "I'm ****ed," can only reasonably be interpreted as the reaction of an innocent man, right?
She will be able to get a job as a pundit on a partisan show. But she will never (should not) be able to run for office or earn money as a brand rep (commercials). I suppose she can charge for speeches, or write a book.B.A. Bearacus said:
Seems that SHS blatantly lies. Who knew?
MSNBC:
Page 288: Press Sec. Sanders told the press after Comey's firing that the White House heard from "countless" FBI agents who said they had lost confidence in Comey.
"Sanders acknowledged to investigators that her comments were not founded on anything," the Mueller report states.
Okay. We can be done. Your tone and where you are coming from is not about what is best for the country. I don't know what you are trying to win or be right about, but I'm not down with it.Anarchistbear said:blungld said:"multiple members of the Trump campaign"Anarchistbear said:blungld said:Yeah, no. Are you reading the report? Let's grab one example. Page 28--how is that not collusion with IRA?Anarchistbear said:blungld said:By Trump's team connections to Wiki which is conduit to Russia.Anarchistbear said:blungld said:But there DOES seem to be conspiracy. It's mincing legalities and fudging definitions of collusion and who is Russian. This was illegal and unethical **** from day one.Anarchistbear said:
You should be happy. Trump didn't conspire with the Russians to interfere with the elections. T
And you know this how? By your prosecutorial expertise? Or your bias?
To quid pro actions with sanctions and election interference.
By meetings and lies about those meetings with Russian agents and oligarchs.
By handing information to Russian agents.
By creating back channel communication with Russians.
Trump was put in office by Russian action and team Trump knew and accepted and has paid back.
You realized this has all been debunked, right?
Where is Trump campaign mentioned on page 28?
I often disagree with your posts but thought you were reasonable, if not inflammatory and extreme. You are losing credibility with these recent posts.
Promoted tweets, is that the one? And I'm losing credibility. This from the guy with the sealed indictments coming down on Kushner and the super duper secret Mueller reports
I think the operating manual dictates that someone in the Administration must clarify that he was just joking.golden sloth said:The only conclusion I can think of is that Donald Trump honestly thought he colluded with the Russians.bearister said:
"This is the end of my Presidency" and "I'm ****ed," can only reasonably be interpreted as the reaction of an innocent man, right?
Period!blungld said:But there DOES seem to be conspiracy. It's mincing legalities and fudging definitions of collusion and who is Russian. This was illegal and unethical **** from day one.Anarchistbear said:
You should be happy. Trump didn't conspire with the Russians to interfere with the elections. T
Another Bear said:
The anti-intellectualism demonstrated by the vast majority of anarchists makes honest discourse a waste of time. Cynicism without thinking is basically crapping in your own mouth.
lolololB.A. Bearacus said:I think the operating manual dictates that someone in the Administration must clarify that he was just joking.golden sloth said:The only conclusion I can think of is that Donald Trump honestly thought he colluded with the Russians.bearister said:
I"This is the end of my Presidency" and "I'm ****ed," can only reasonably be interpreted as the reaction of an innocent man, right?
blungld said:Okay. We can be done. Your tone and where you are coming from is not about what is best for the country. I don't know what you are trying to win or be right about, but I'm not down with it.Anarchistbear said:blungld said:"multiple members of the Trump campaign"Anarchistbear said:blungld said:Yeah, no. Are you reading the report? Let's grab one example. Page 28--how is that not collusion with IRA?Anarchistbear said:blungld said:By Trump's team connections to Wiki which is conduit to Russia.Anarchistbear said:blungld said:But there DOES seem to be conspiracy. It's mincing legalities and fudging definitions of collusion and who is Russian. This was illegal and unethical **** from day one.Anarchistbear said:
You should be happy. Trump didn't conspire with the Russians to interfere with the elections. T
And you know this how? By your prosecutorial expertise? Or your bias?
To quid pro actions with sanctions and election interference.
By meetings and lies about those meetings with Russian agents and oligarchs.
By handing information to Russian agents.
By creating back channel communication with Russians.
Trump was put in office by Russian action and team Trump knew and accepted and has paid back.
You realized this has all been debunked, right?
Where is Trump campaign mentioned on page 28?
I often disagree with your posts but thought you were reasonable, if not inflammatory and extreme. You are losing credibility with these recent posts.
Promoted tweets, is that the one? And I'm losing credibility. This from the guy with the sealed indictments coming down on Kushner and the super duper secret Mueller reports
You said no mention of Trump campaign, there was. You said no evidence of colluding with Russians, I pointed to one. There are a lot more and way worse ones. That was just an early clear connection in the report. I haven't read the whole thing yet. You are being dishonest and aggressive.
Don't quit now. You are winning.blungld said:Okay. We can be done. Your tone and where you are coming from is not about what is best for the country. I don't know what you are trying to win or be right about, but I'm not down with it.Anarchistbear said:blungld said:"multiple members of the Trump campaign"Anarchistbear said:blungld said:Yeah, no. Are you reading the report? Let's grab one example. Page 28--how is that not collusion with IRA?Anarchistbear said:blungld said:By Trump's team connections to Wiki which is conduit to Russia.Anarchistbear said:blungld said:But there DOES seem to be conspiracy. It's mincing legalities and fudging definitions of collusion and who is Russian. This was illegal and unethical **** from day one.Anarchistbear said:
You should be happy. Trump didn't conspire with the Russians to interfere with the elections. T
And you know this how? By your prosecutorial expertise? Or your bias?
To quid pro actions with sanctions and election interference.
By meetings and lies about those meetings with Russian agents and oligarchs.
By handing information to Russian agents.
By creating back channel communication with Russians.
Trump was put in office by Russian action and team Trump knew and accepted and has paid back.
You realized this has all been debunked, right?
Where is Trump campaign mentioned on page 28?
I often disagree with your posts but thought you were reasonable, if not inflammatory and extreme. You are losing credibility with these recent posts.
Promoted tweets, is that the one? And I'm losing credibility. This from the guy with the sealed indictments coming down on Kushner and the super duper secret Mueller reports
You said no mention of Trump campaign, there was. You said no evidence of colluding with Russians, I pointed to one. There are a lot more and way worse ones. That was just an early clear connection in the report. I haven't read the whole thing yet. You are being dishonest and aggressive.