Reply With Quote
So who are you saying was bribed?
Moving the goalpost (again)
I didn't say she was bribed.
So who are you saying was bribed?
oh, who was bribed then? because you said "It (bribery) happened." Here's the quote so I don'tmisrepresent you
unless you're saying bribery happened but nobody was bribed which would make absolutely no sense of course but at least you can buy a few more posts to keep flailing about semanticsThe committee approved. She sits on the committee. Ergo she approve. Her husband was given 500K by the Russians during this time.
There's never any way to prove bribery influenced anyone's decision, only that bribery happened. It happened.
Damn you Hillary supporters are salty as ...
I didn't say nobody was bribed.oh, who was bribed then? because you said "It (bribery) happened." Here's the quote so I don't
unless you're saying bribery happened but nobody was bribed which would make absolutely no sense of course but at least you can buy a few more posts to keep flailing about semantics
Contrasting proving effect to proving the act. You can say "bribery happened" but you cannot say if it influenced a decision. You have no way of knowing. You can only say "It happened".
If that money was given to Trump there'd be no argument from any of you
The NYT and Chicago Tribune reported on the funds changing hands. You be the judge (with your obviously objective viewpoint)
I didn't say anyone was bribed. That's why you're asking. If I said it you could quote it.
Think that was just a coincidence? As former federal prosecutor Andy McCarthy points out, the Uranium One deal is not a national security scandal, it is a corruption scandal involving "Clinton family self-dealing." Ask yourself: How many half-a-million-dollar speeches has Bill Clinton given to Kremlin-linked banks since Hillary Clinton was defeated? How much Russian money is flowing into the Clinton Foundation's coffers today? If Donald Trump had given a $500,000 speech paid for by a Kremlin bank, and his private foundation had accepted $145 million from Vladimir Putin-linked oligarchs and their Western business partners, do you think that his critics would be insisting there was nothing to see here?
-Chicago Tribune
Right, that's why I am asking.
I never said you were specific about whom was bribed because you somehow have to be a about it and not say.
Who was bribed, DMC?
Who was bribed, DMC?
So you admit I never said anyone was bribed?
Yes or no
Skeeter begging for a back and forth, leopard can't change its spots.
No one ever claimed you said who was bribed.
I claimed you said this:
lol dumbass
You've gone full derp with straw man accessories.
My narrative is you said this:
You said:
you sure showed us all
Schroedingers bribe
Cool zinger
I never addressed anyone specifically being bribed so the attempt to paint me into a corner on it failed for you folks.
You said bribery happened. Who did it happen to?
Not Trump.
Who was bribed?
Ad nauseum etc...
I didn't ask who wasn't bribed.
I asked who was bribed.
Who was bribed, DMC?
You painted yourself into a corner.
‘Faithless execution’: Watch law professor detail how Trump violated the cons ution with Matt Whitaker move
After explaining the statutory and cons utional problems with Trump’s appointment,
Shugerman explained how
Trump himself may have violated the cons ution with his actions.
“There’s also a bigger picture cons utional problem, the president takes an oath to faithfully execute the office,”
Describing
Trump’s attempt to install Whitaker, Shugerman said, “that is faithless execution of the law.”
“That language of faithful execution means that presidents need to act in good faith —
they need have public interest in mind
and not their own interest in mind,” he concluded.
https://www.rawstory.com/2018/11/fai...e+Raw+Story%29
Rachel Maddow Drops Clue That Mueller Has More Dirt On Trump Than We Thought
, the special counsel’s office said
it would need more time with former Trump campaign deputy Rick Gates
because he is cooperating with them on “several ongoing investigations.”
But as Maddow pointed out on Wednesday, when the special counsel’s office filed a similar update
in August, they noted that Gates was only cooperating with a single investigation.
Today’s do ent suggests
there are additional probes the former Trump official is now involved in,
which is probably not the news the White House wanted to hear.
https://www.politicususa.com/2018/11...iticus+USA+%29
Last edited by boutons_deux; 11-15-2018 at 12:21 AM.
Grandpa Donald highly upset this morning
There are currently 1 users browsing this thread. (0 members and 1 guests)
Posting Permissions