Draft: Articles of Impeachment

Getin the ring said:
Although the investigation established that the Russian government perceived it would benefit from a Trump presidency and worked to secure that outcome, and that the Campaign expected it would benefit electorally from information stolen and released through Russian efforts, the investigation did not establish that members of the Trump Campaign conspired or coordinated with the Russian government in its election interference activities. [/COLOR]
Click to expand...

"did not establish" doesn't mean "cleared".

It just means there wasn't enough to establish a conspiracy or rule one out.

But seriously, hang your hat on that point and use it as your defense from the 11 instances of obstruction Trump committed that he and you will have to answer for and defend.
 
Getin the ring said:
I thought you read the Mueller report, you keep saying you did,
well so did a lot of people
here, read this part back to yourself while you eat your cookies

Although the investigation established that the Russian government perceived it would benefit from a Trump presidency and worked to secure that outcome, and that the Campaign expected it would benefit electorally from information stolen and released through Russian efforts, the investigation did not establish that members of the Trump Campaign conspired or coordinated with the Russian government in its election interference activities.
Click to expand...

Didn't establish a conspiracy, but didn't rule one out either.
 
LV426 said:
Didn't establish a conspiracy, but didn't rule one out either.
Click to expand...
you can't be this stupid ^^^

not possible, so if Mueller and 2+ years of the greatest legal mind resource on the planet could not "establish", who do you think can?

seriously dude, you cannot be this thick, check your tin foil hat at the door, engage in reality

here's another question for you
Muller report excert
WikiLeaks' s first release came in July 2016. Around the same time, candidate Trump announced that he hoped Russia would recover emails described as missing from a private server
used by Clinton when she was Secretary of State he later said that he was speaking sarcastically .

If you heard the tongue and cheek actual reference trump made no sane person would conclude that was anything but sarcastic. And Mueller has the naivity or partisan idiocy your choice, to put this in his report as if he didnt think it was

WikiLeaks began releasing Podesta' s stolen emails on October 7, 2016, less than one hour after a U.S. media outlet released
video considered damaging to candidate Trump. Section lII of this Report details the Office's

the highlighted text concerning the "release of a video considered damaging to Trump" by our own media is at least as "colluding" or "conspiring" that anything Russia did
 
Getin the ring said:
you can't be this stupid ^^^

not possible, so if Mueller and 2+ years of the greatest legal mind resource on the planet could not "establish", who do you think can?

seriously dude, you cannot be this thick, check your tin foil hat at the door, engage in reality

here's another question for you
Muller report exert
WikiLeaks' s first release came in July 2016. Around the same time, candidate Trump announced that he hoped Russia would recover emails described as missing from a private server
used by Clinton when she was Secretary of State he later said that he was speaking sarcastically .
If you heard the tongue and cheek actual reference trump made no sane person would conclude that was anything but sarcastic

WikiLeaks began releasing Podesta' s stolen emails on October 7, 2016, less than one hour after a U.S. media outlet released
video considered damaging to candidate Trump. Section lII of this Report details the Office's

the highlighted text concerning the "release of a video considered damaging to Trump" by our own media is at least as "colluding" or "conspiring" that anything Russia did
Click to expand...

You haven't read Mueller's report, so you are talking out of your ass here.

If Trump was cleared, then Mueller would have said so.

Mueller specifically said Trump wasn't cleared.

Get a grip.
 
LV426 said:
You left the rest of that sentence off. Why did you do that? Because the rest of the sentence says he isn't cleared of committing a crime either.

So why did you leave the second part of that sentence out?

It's because you're a Christian, and all Christians have to act in bad faith because all Christians are really immoral, evil slugs and leeches.
Click to expand...

nope.....because I've watched you idiots post the second half of the sentence for the last two weeks but ignore THIS half........why do you do that?........is it because you're a mindless dickhead and mindless dickheads have to act in bad faith because all mindless dickheads are really immoral, evil slugs and leeches?.......
 
domer76 said:
Let’s see, dumbfuck. To investigate if there was Russian collusion and to determine whether Trump obstructed justice. He wasn’t prevented from a determination, stupid fuck, he was prevented from indicting.

Are you that fucking dense?

FACTUAL RESULTS OF THE OBSTRUCTION INVESTIGATION”


A. The Campaign's Response to Reports About Russian Support for Trump
B. The President's Conduct Concerning the Investigation of Michael Flynn
C. The President's Reaction to Public Confirmation of the FBl's Russia Investigation
D. Events Leading Up To and Surrounding the Termination of FBI Director Corney
E. The President's Efforts to Remove the Special Counsel
F. The President's Efforts to Curtail the Special Counsel Investigation
H. The President's Further Efforts to Have the Attorney General Take Over the Investigation
I. The President Orders McGahn to Deny that the President Tried to Fire the Special Counsel
J. The President's Conduct Towards Flynn, Manafort,
K. The President's Conduct Involving Michael Cohen
Click to expand...

You not understand the distinction between *possible instances* of obstruction and an actual conclusion of obstruction?
 
LV426 said:
You haven't read Mueller's report, so you are talking out of your ass here.

If Trump was cleared, then Mueller would have said so.

Mueller specifically said Trump wasn't cleared.

Get a grip.
Click to expand...

you pretentious little fu@k, who the hell do you think you are,

how do you know I havnt read it, or anyone else hasn't read it for that matter

I'm convinced you may actually be retarded
 
PostmodernProphet said:
nope.....because I've watched you idiots post the second half of the sentence for the last two weeks but ignore THIS half........why do you do that?........is it because you're a mindless dickhead and mindless dickheads have to act in bad faith because all mindless dickheads are really immoral, evil slugs and leeches?.......
Click to expand...

You left the back half of that sentence off in order to deceive people into thinking Mueller cleared Trump when he hadn't.

You do that because you are an evil person.
 
Darth Omar said:
You not understand the distinction between *possible instances* of obstruction and an actual conclusion of obstruction?
Click to expand...

Would love to watch you defend the 11 instances of obstruction Mueller lays out in his report.

Go ahead. Defend them.
 
Getin the ring said:
you pretentious little fu@k, who the hell do you think you are,
how do you know I havnt read it, or anyone else hasn't read it for that matter
I'm convinced you may actually be retarded
Click to expand...

Not only have I read it, but I'm kicking your ass all over these boards about it.

You're a faker and a phony, and I see right through you.
 
PostmodernProphet said:
really?......is it a massive lie that Mueller concludes his report by saying that they did not conclude the president committed a crime?.......
Click to expand...

Again, your evil is showing.

Mueller said he couldn't conclude Trump didn't commit a crime either.

Though he lays out at least 11 instances of obstruction by Trump.

You won't even talk about those.

It's obvious why.
 
Getin the ring said:
ok so you had to cross the line,
This is being reported, I'll take that as a death threat , and I don't and wont take that lightly

stand by
Click to expand...

Wait...

I was being sarcastic.

Isn't that what sarcasm is? That's what you said it was. What's the matter? Can't take it because you're too much of a limp-dicked loser?
 
Getin the ring said:
ok so you had to cross the line,
This is being reported, I'll take that as a death threat , and I don't and wont take that lightly

stand by
Click to expand...

You crossed the line when you lied your fat ass off on these boards.

All bets are off now, thanks to you and the actions you took.

You reap what you sow.

BTW - I was being sarcastic. I'm allowed to say it was sarcasm after the fact.
 
domer76 said:
Finish the sentence, lying cunt.
Click to expand...

Conservatives and Christians always selectively edit things.

That's what they do with their book of Stone Age fables, commissioned and adapted from Latin and Aramaic just 408 years ago, to assert the King's divine authority over the peasantry.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top