President Trump: The NEW one and only politics thread

In my correct opinion, you are trying to make that the pissing match because he helped expose the crap you've been dumping on this thread for weeks. Once the argument is lost, try to change the argument.

 

Rather than the point be lost, here is daemon's post. Alma seems focused on turning this into a separate pissing match rather than acknowledge the insightful interpretation of his recent posts.

 

Per CNN:


Robert Mueller's team declined to prosecute Donald Trump, Jr. and members of the campaign for campaign finance violations for their participation in the June 2016 meeting at Trump Tower in part because they couldn't prove that they "willfully" violated the law.

Here's what it says in the report:

"Taking into account the high burden to establish a culpable mental state in a campaign-finance prosecution and the difficulty in establishing the required valuation, the office decided not to pursue criminal campaign-finance charges against Trump Jr. or other campaign officials for the events culminating in the June 9 meeting."
Mueller's team explained: "The office ultimately concluded that, even if the principal legal questions were resolved favorably to the government, a prosecution would encounter difficulties proving that campaign officials or individuals connected to the campaign willfully violated the law."

 

so not likely at all, then

 

i didn't know crimes were illegal my bad almost childish on my part

 

At a loss for words.

 

He doesn’t need my defense, but @Alma is very thoughtful. Perhaps to a fault, here. You may disagree with his position, but I have no doubt he’s put some thought into it.

 

Enough with this pussy-footing. Subpoena Mueller and ask him questions. And for god's sake, can the guy and his office speak out already? Their silence doesn't engender confidence; it engenders the idea that there's no there there. "We're not saying he committed a crime, but we're not saying he didn't."

JFC, what a waste of time.

 

That's not "insightful" at all. The whole premise of that post is just plain wrong.

I've been reading Alma's stuff for many years and never once seen him identify as Republican, and many of his views are quite contrary to what Republicans believe. I'm confident none of his posts were motivated by a desire to protect the friggin Republican Party.

 

I read and responded to daemon's post. I already acknowledged its existence.

You read and rebuked daemon's post for not realizing you'd already scolded me.

What argument is there otherwise?

 

oop: still undefeated.