DevoHusker Posted August 18, 2020 Share Posted August 18, 2020 10 minutes ago, FrantzHardySwag said: Thats like reading the box score to the 1996 fiesta bowl and following it up with, there is not enough evidence that Nebraska won this game despite scoring 38 more points across 4 quarters. I guess the republicans in the committee are hoping people don't read the report they put together? Maybe they'll just read the section at the end and call it a day? Yep, it's absurd to hope that maybe, just maybe, some of them would grow a spine? Link to comment
commando Posted August 18, 2020 Share Posted August 18, 2020 so hard to reach a final conclusion 1 Link to comment
FrantzHardySwag Posted August 18, 2020 Share Posted August 18, 2020 1 minute ago, DevoHusker said: Yep, it's absurd to hope that maybe, just maybe, some of them would grow a spine? Rubio is the chairman of the committee, he said there was no collusion. But the report his committee just put out states that Manafort was working with a Russian Intel Officer, who has ties to the Kremlin and DNC email hack? Sounds like the textbook definition of collusion to me... Link to comment
ZRod Posted August 18, 2020 Share Posted August 18, 2020 44 minutes ago, FrantzHardySwag said: Rubio is the chairman of the committee, he said there was no collusion. But the report his committee just put out states that Manafort was working with a Russian Intel Officer, who has ties to the Kremlin and DNC email hack? Sounds like the textbook definition of collusion to me... Remember when this clown was on top of the world 6 years ago? What a joke. Link to comment
Notre Dame Joe Posted August 18, 2020 Share Posted August 18, 2020 1 hour ago, FrantzHardySwag said: Rubio is the chairman of the committee, he said there was no collusion. But the report his committee just put out states that Manafort was working with a Russian Intel Officer, who has ties to the Kremlin and DNC email hack? Sounds like the textbook definition of collusion to me... Lot's of intentional vagueness. It's like how your conference says the football cancellation was "based on the science" but never actually point to which science they based it on. 1 Link to comment
TGHusker Posted August 18, 2020 Share Posted August 18, 2020 31 minutes ago, Notre Dame Joe said: Lot's of intentional vagueness. It's like how your conference says the football cancellation was "based on the science" but never actually point to which science they based it on. Funny - A Trump supporter talking about science as a basis of a decision. 3 Link to comment
ZRod Posted August 18, 2020 Share Posted August 18, 2020 41 minutes ago, TGHusker said: Funny - A Trump supporter talking about science as a basis of a decision. It's pretty obvious they don't know how to read either. Every report not generated by this administration is absolutely alarming when it come to corruption and coordination with foreign powers. 1 Link to comment
commando Posted August 19, 2020 Share Posted August 19, 2020 5 hours ago, FrantzHardySwag said: Rubio is the chairman of the committee, he said there was no collusion. But the report his committee just put out states that Manafort was working with a Russian Intel Officer, who has ties to the Kremlin and DNC email hack? Sounds like the textbook definition of collusion to me... it's like he gave a book report on green eggs and ham....when it was suppose to be about gone with the wind. Link to comment
Notre Dame Joe Posted August 19, 2020 Share Posted August 19, 2020 4 hours ago, ZRod said: It's pretty obvious they don't know how to read either. Every report not generated by this administration is absolutely alarming when it come to corruption and coordination with foreign powers. again with the vagueness. Imagine if Trump claimed The Clintons did business with the Russians and #$%^Y& = Scandal! instead of: Clinton gets money Russia gets uranium. 1 Link to comment
commando Posted August 19, 2020 Share Posted August 19, 2020 6 minutes ago, Notre Dame Joe said: again with the vagueness. Imagine if Trump claimed The Clintons did business with the Russians and #$%^Y& = Scandal! instead of: Clinton gets money Russia gets uranium. how many times do you have to be beat over the head with the fact that the russians can't export any uranium they mine from the united states. it is illegal for them to export it. they have to sell it to the united states if they mine it. of course you can't let that fact interfere with your conspiracy theory. 3 Link to comment
ZRod Posted August 19, 2020 Share Posted August 19, 2020 18 hours ago, Notre Dame Joe said: again with the vagueness. Imagine if Trump claimed The Clintons did business with the Russians and #$%^Y& = Scandal! instead of: Clinton gets money Russia gets uranium. R.E.A.D. Read. It's not vague. The only parts that are vague are where they weren't able to get information because team Trump was purposely being uncooperative, as the report noted. They literally spell out that Kushner and Jr. Weren't charged because they didn't know what they did was illegal and Mueller's team didn't want to make the effort to figure out what value they gained from working with the Russians since it wasn't monetary in nature. Literally not a defense for any of us common folk. Don't be a tool and educate yourself. 1 Link to comment
Notre Dame Joe Posted August 19, 2020 Share Posted August 19, 2020 2 hours ago, commando said: how many times do you have to be beat over the head with the fact that the russians can't export any uranium they mine from the united states. it is illegal for them to export it. they have to sell it to the united states if they mine it. of course you can't let that fact interfere with your conspiracy theory. Never said they did, wise up. https://www.nationalreview.com/corner/unranium-one-focus-corruption-not-national-security/ btw talking heads are making much of the fact the Trump campaign had MEETINGS with Russian officials. Did any of them get paid $500,000 for the meeting? 1 1 Link to comment
funhusker Posted August 19, 2020 Share Posted August 19, 2020 5 hours ago, Notre Dame Joe said: Never said they did, wise up. https://www.nationalreview.com/corner/unranium-one-focus-corruption-not-national-security/ btw talking heads are making much of the fact the Trump campaign had MEETINGS with Russian officials. Did any of them get paid $500,000 for the meeting? So then what did you mean by this?: instead of: Clinton gets money Russia gets uranium Link to comment
commando Posted August 19, 2020 Share Posted August 19, 2020 1 hour ago, funhusker said: So then what did you mean by this?: instead of: Clinton gets money Russia gets uranium he didn't say that. he didn't mean it that way. he was joking. no matter what he says he is "right" Link to comment
FrantzHardySwag Posted August 19, 2020 Share Posted August 19, 2020 11 hours ago, Notre Dame Joe said: again with the vagueness. Imagine if Trump claimed The Clintons did business with the Russians and #$%^Y& = Scandal! instead of: Clinton gets money Russia gets uranium. Oh Whataboutism - straight from the Putin handbook. Nicely played. 2 Link to comment
Recommended Posts