democratic circular firing squad?

21 year old in 1963 wrote a manifesto lolol...

https://www.motherjones.com/politics...ago-free-love/

he was only guilty of being young in the 60s

I'm open for betting:


how long will it take before potus and potuk end up in a twitter battle?


I'd say 45 days, Boris will be trying to be laid back at first, but for sure he will start being foolish at one point.














hahaha
according to Ivanka the country is called United Kingston

Trump has been praising Boris Johnson becoming the new PM in his classic style. He said the people here call Boris "Britain (sic) Trump". Firstly, what the fuck is Britain Trump and secondly, no we absolutely don't call him that. Ever.

“Can you give me an example other than Donald Trump where the Justice Department determined that an investigated person was not exonerated because their innocence was not conclusively determined?”

Mueller could not provide an answer!

DOUBLE NEGATIVE. meaningless question. Someone in Congress needs to go read up on Logic. Innocence cannot be proven in a court of US law. Only guilt.

100% correct!

Mueller (or any investigator) is never responsible for finding someone innocent. They are charged to find evidence that can be used to prove guilt, and that is all!

I mentioned this multiple times last year. I also mentioned numerous times that collusion isn’t illegal......but conspiracy is......Mueller found nada!

Nada = ZERO obstruction, conspiracy, or collusion between the Trump campaign and Russia!!!

The reason I posted the question and non answer, Mueller eventually mentioned “unusual circumstances” and the person asking the question asked if there was guidelines / rules that deal with special circumstances......Mueller didn’t produce any.

Mueller came across as a sad old man. It was as if the only person to learn anything from the Mueller report today was Bob.

Those with logic realize this investigation was based on a unverified dossier paid for by Hillary Clinton and conducted by politically-biased prosecutors!!!

Biased TV Network coverage?

ABC, CBS and NBC preempted regularly scheduled daytime programming to cover the Mueller hearings, yet they don’t preempt programming for a Trump speech???

Bret Baier: "Democrats today are no closer to impeachment than yesterday."

Trey Gowdy: "Ah no they're not closer to anything other than wishing this had never happened. This hearing was an abject MISERABLE FAILURE!"

President Donald Trump: “the Democrats had nothing, now they have less than nothing”


Michael Moore: “A frail old man, unable to remember things, stumbling, refusing to answer basic questions...I said it in 2017 and Mueller confirmed it today — All you pundits and moderates and lame Dems who told the public to put their faith in the esteemed Robert Mueller — just STFU from now on”

I thought it was a brilliant question, but I do apologize for posting the partial snippet earlier......but it’s easy to find the logic if you know what you are looking for:

Ratcliffe, R-Texas, asked Mueller during congressional testimony to identify which Justice Department policy “set forth a legal standard that an investigated person is not exonerated if their innocence from criminal conduct is not conclusively determined.” The lawmaker was raising concern about Mueller's report saying that while the probe did not establish Trump committed a crime, it also did not exonerate him.

“Can you give an example other than Donald Trump where the Justice Department determined an investigated person was not exonerated because their innocence was not conclusively determined?” Ratcliffe continued.

Mueller replied: “I cannot but this is a unique situation."

Ratcliffe continued: “Okay, well you can't--time is short, I got five minutes, let's leave it at you can't find it because--I'll tell you why, it doesn't exist."

“The special counsel’s job didn’t say you were to determine Trump’s innocence or to exonerate him,” Ratcliffe said. “It’s not in documents, it’s not in the Office of Legal Counsel opinion, any justice manual…Respectfully it was not the special counsel’s job to conclusively determine Trump’s innocence.”

He added: “because the bedrock principle of our justice system is a presumption of innocence—everyone is entitled to it, including a sitting president, and because of a presumption of innocence, a prosecutor never, ever needs to determine it. ... You wrote 180 pages about decisions that weren’t reached, about potential crimes that weren’t charged or decided.”

He contended that the obstruction section of the report “was not authorized under the law to be written—it was written under a legal standard that does not exist at the Justice Department.”

As opposed to racist baiting grabby Joe, single mother imprisoning Kamala... etc.

Also "touts sex for adolescents" what? I know whatever you're referring to is some exaggerated horseshit but yeah it definitely wasn't anyone from Bernie's part of the political spectrum who was on Epstein's plane thats for sure lol

We've moved on to discussions of the 2020 election. No more need for these images of Obama.

/kneeslap

I kid, I kid!

Edit:


Yes, !@#$%!, I have long followed the thread and feel I have a grasp on where most posters in the thread stand. I agree that you lie pretty centrist, but have valid points on both sides.

I just get amused by silly trolling and shit-talking, even though I suck at it. I also have decided to just recently get "vocal" because, amusingly enough, I actually really agree with most of you all, and just don't want to see the Dems shoot themselves in the foot again. I do not like Trump, nor have I or ever will vote for him.

You are also right about my willingness to not take responsibility for my own thoughts and using that deflecting comment as a shield, to a point. I am admittedly very, very apathetic when it comes to politics. But I do have a severe fascination with sociology in general, espectially in this digital age of "communication."

that pic above is a cleveland steamer going into a nazi mouth

anyway i don't like bernie's proposed policies (though i find the man fairly likeable, in a cranky grandpa sort of way). i also don’t like his idea for getting there: marches and protests.

nevertheless i'd throw my support behind him if he were to win the primary.

i know congress would never let him nationalize healthcare. he'd reach a deal for a public option at best-- and i support a voluntary public option, so that outcome would be fine with me.

also, i know what you mean about apathy, which in other times, understandable, but this time around we all have to draw a line and take sides.

if this is just choosing the lesser of 2 evils, so be it. degrees of evil do matter.

at this point looks like uncle joe remains ahead though, so there's that reasonably centrist candidate you can vote for. is he a geezer? sure. does he represent the future? no. i don't care at this point.

Baltimore Mayor Catherine Pugh: 'You can smell the rats'