Posted by dino27 on 12/13/2018 10:03:00 AM (view original):
you just dont want to be here for the mueller report.....so you are making a gradual escape.

Posted by all3 on 12/13/2018 3:59:00 PM (view original):

Posted by bagchucker on 12/13/2018 11:00:00 AM (view original):

Posted by all3 on 12/13/2018 9:56:00 AM (view original):
"when a liar calls a liar a liar it is the opposite of information, it is noise, it is a total waste o breath, a total waste o time"

This is exactly why I've blocked those who insist of spreading lies (or should I say unfounded accusations, so as not to offend them) about our Country's President and those around him and am trying to wean myself from these Forums.

yet you haven't blocked the Don

As soon as he posts a lie here, I will.

Posted by all3 on 12/14/2018 10:22:00 AM (view original):
Same sheit you, and others, have been posting here for 2 years bob.
What part of "When (if) something is proven, THEN bash and convict him." is hard to understand?
Why is is so hard to afford someone elected POTUS the same rights you'd afford someone living under a bridge?
Why can't you understand that nobody from any Country will respect our President if we don't?

Three people have come forward with hundreds of pages of evidence of potential wrongdoing by the Clinton Foundation, including misappropriation of funds and allegations of quid-pro-quo promises made to donors during Hillary Clinton’s tenure as secretary of state, Rep. Mark Meadows, R-N.C., told Fox News on Thursday.

Meadows, the leader of the conservative House Freedom Caucus, is also the chairman of the House Oversight Subcommittee on Government Operations. The panel is set to hold an investigative hearing next week on the status of the Foundation case.

U.S. Attorney John Huber was tasked to investigate the foundation last year by then-Attorney General Jeff Sessions.

Posted by cccp1014 on 12/14/2018 11:30:00 AM (view original):

Three people have come forward with hundreds of pages of evidence of potential wrongdoing by the Clinton Foundation, including misappropriation of funds and allegations of quid-pro-quo promises made to donors during Hillary Clinton’s tenure as secretary of state, Rep. Mark Meadows, R-N.C., told Fox News on Thursday.

Meadows, the leader of the conservative House Freedom Caucus, is also the chairman of the House Oversight Subcommittee on Government Operations. The panel is set to hold an investigative hearing next week on the status of the Foundation case.

U.S. Attorney John Huber was tasked to investigate the foundation last year by then-Attorney General Jeff Sessions.

Posted by bad_luck on 12/14/2018 11:41:00 AM (view original):
And my point is that anyone who sees the evidence against Clinton as significant but sees the evidence against Trump as insignificant, is a ******* moron.

Posted by cccp1014 on 12/14/2018 11:43:00 AM (view original):

Posted by bad_luck on 12/14/2018 11:41:00 AM (view original):
And my point is that anyone who sees the evidence against Clinton as significant but sees the evidence against Trump as insignificant, is a ******* moron.

What evidence? Mueller was hired to find collusion between Trump and Russia. Instead he came back with "Trump likes hot women". Thank you, Mr. Mueller....

Posted by bad_luck on 12/14/2018 11:51:00 AM (view original):

Posted by cccp1014 on 12/14/2018 11:43:00 AM (view original):

Posted by bad_luck on 12/14/2018 11:41:00 AM (view original):
And my point is that anyone who sees the evidence against Clinton as significant but sees the evidence against Trump as insignificant, is a ******* moron.

What evidence? Mueller was hired to find collusion between Trump and Russia. Instead he came back with "Trump likes hot women". Thank you, Mr. Mueller....

Thank you for making my point, mr. ******* moron.

NAPOLITANO: But, a very, very telling statement came out of the judge's mouth yesterday after he read all the documents and heard all the arguments from the government prosecutors in D.C., prosecutors in New York, Michael Cohen, and his lawyers, and that was about the president. The judge finding that the president ordered and paid for Michael Cohen to commit a crime. That is very telling.

STEVE DOOCY (CO-HOST): What crime?

NAPOLITANO: The intentional deception and failure to report campaign payments --

KILMEADE: But out of his own pocket --

DOOCY: But Donald Trump -- Donald Trump has said that that was not a campaign violation because it wasn't involving the campaign. It was a damage-control payment.

NAPOLITANO: Unfortunately, the president wasn't in the courtroom, and the people who were, the federal prosecutors, who had a statement from David Pecker, the guy that owns the --

DOOCY: National Enquirer.

NAPOLITANO: -- National Enquirer said it was for the campaign, the prosecutors said it was for the campaign, Michael Cohen said it was for the campaign. The president wasn't there. Maybe he should have had lawyers there. So, if you make an honest mistake in failing to report something, or if you take $100,000 and you're only supposed to take $2,500, you can correct that by returning the money, paying a fine and correcting the report. If you do this as part of a scheme to hide it, then it's not a civil wrong, then it's a crime. That's what the judge found yesterday.

KILMEADE: Well, if, like, for example, Reverend Wright is speaking out, making President Obama -- candidate Obama look bad, and he -- and someone walks up to Reverend Wright and says, "Hey, could you stop making the president -- the senator look bad? He's running for president." What does that have to do with the campaign? But yet, it is -- how -- that might influence how I vote.

NAPOLITANO: That -- that would not be a campaign --

KILMEADE: So this is no difference, this is a negative story the president wanted out because he was running for president.

NAPOLITANO: I understand the president's argument. Unfortunately, the court and the prosecutors, who work for the president, disagree with him.

AINSLEY EARHARDT (CO-HOST): Judge --

DOOCY: Yeah, but they went after John Edwards for essentially the same idea because there was money paid to a woman who he had had an affair with and had a child. That went to court, that went to trial, and he was found not guilty.

NAPOLITANO: The John Edwards case actually hurts the president. Because John Edwards' lawyers made a motion to dismiss the indictment saying it's not a crime, and the judge published an opinion saying why it's a crime. Now, the jury didn't believe the government and believed John Edwards. But the fact of the matter is, any scheme to defraud the government by failing to report what must be reported is a crime, unless it's an honest mistake in which case it's not a scheme.