Page 1 of 17 1234511 ... LastLast
Results 1 to 15 of 245

Thread: Mueller report concludes it was not needed to begin with

  1. #1 | Top
    Join Date
    Jul 2017
    Posts
    21,001
    Thanks
    6,602
    Thanked 10,883 Times in 7,893 Posts
    Groans
    147
    Groaned 1,129 Times in 1,065 Posts

    Default Mueller report concludes it was not needed to begin with

    How would you like to spend two years and $30 million assembling a report that concludes you were not needed in the first place? Voilŗ: the Mueller report. Nice work if you can get it.

    The report is appropriately thick, D.C. thick. It takes more than 400 pages to state the obvious: There was no collusion between the Trump campaign and the Russians to swing the 2016 election. Zip. Nada. Nothing to see here.

    It goes on to tee up a question about obstruction of justice that the special counsel was not asked to investigate ó and then doesnít answer it. Wait. What?

    These are some of the most elite prosecutors in the country, and they went full Hamlet on a legal determination a third-year law student would knock down between Budweisers. This is what we get for $30 million? Make a call; thatís your job as prosecutors.

    It doesnít seem the special counsel team is fooling anyone. It showed that it would indict a ham sandwich if it could. The obvious answer is that it had no confidence in a criminal obstruction case.

    Instead, it punted to the Trump-appointed attorney general. One gets the sense this may have been by design.

    Well, what about all the Russians who were indicted by Muellerís team for trying to interfere with the election? Those were chip-shot FBI counterintelligence investigations that were well in flow when the special counsel took them over. They didnít need special counsel magic.

    Had they remained FBI-controlled cases, the indictments would have been sealed and the subjects arrested when they likely returned to the United States for more mischief in 2020. We can forget about that now.

    Attorney General William Barr during his press conference early Thursday said that the ďbottom lineĒ is that no American coordinated, conspired or colluded with the Russian government to interfere in the presidential election. America should be grateful, he added.

    No, America should be disgusted. Hereís a real bottom line: A cabal of politicians and bureaucrats frivolously and cynically manipulated the levers of government to further their own political greed and lust for power by trying to exploit a falsehood. It cost us over $30 million and needlessly pitted Americans against one another.
    https://thehill.com/opinion/white-ho...was-not-needed

  2. The Following User Groans At dukkha For This Awful Post:

    Rune (04-23-2019)

  3. The Following 7 Users Say Thank You to dukkha For This Post:

    Callinectes Ocasio-Cortez (04-22-2019), Eagle Eye (04-22-2019), Earl (04-22-2019), Evmetro (04-23-2019), RB 60 (04-22-2019), Stretch (04-22-2019), Truth Detector (04-22-2019)

  4. #2 | Top
    Join Date
    Jul 2017
    Posts
    21,001
    Thanks
    6,602
    Thanked 10,883 Times in 7,893 Posts
    Groans
    147
    Groaned 1,129 Times in 1,065 Posts

    Default

    the FBI — indeed, a cornerstone agency in the continual struggle to ensure the integrity of our democratic republic — was hijacked by an irresponsible director and deputy director who insulated themselves from the rest of that seasoned, sober organization and embarked on a foolish misadventure fueled by either their stupidity or political bias. It looks like it was a combination of both.

    They were egged on, like gullible dupes, by a politically motivated CIA director and director of national intelligence. Former FBI Director James Comey and Deputy Director Andrew McCabe and the team they assembled on the seventh floor of FBI headquarters started an investigation based on insufficient cause and the obvious Russian active-measures operation.

    They likely used investigative techniques that violated established guidelines, ran informants against U.S. persons in violation of established guidelines and misused the Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Act (FISA) process to deeply invade the privacy of an American citizen.


    And they did all this against the campaign of a person running for president of the United States. When the attorney general characterized this as “unprecedented,” he was simply stating a fact.

    It will take a special kind of courage to now hold accountable those who misused the positions entrusted to them to further a made-up and costly theory of collusion. There is a sense that the attorney general is serious about seeing true justice done.

    AG Barr is taking flak but hopefully will stand firm. The triumph of rule of law over political thuggery is at stake. This is vitally important for future presidential administrations of both parties, and true statesmen will recognize that.

  5. The Following 3 Users Say Thank You to dukkha For This Post:

    Callinectes Ocasio-Cortez (04-22-2019), Earl (04-22-2019), Truth Detector (04-22-2019)

  6. #3 | Top
    Join Date
    Jan 2019
    Posts
    9,114
    Thanks
    15,706
    Thanked 4,026 Times in 3,178 Posts
    Groans
    7,694
    Groaned 526 Times in 493 Posts
    Blog Entries
    2

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by bodhisattva View Post
    How would you like to spend two years and $30 million assembling a report that concludes you were not needed in the first place? Voilŗ: the Mueller report. Nice work if you can get it.

    The report is appropriately thick, D.C. thick. It takes more than 400 pages to state the obvious: There was no collusion between the Trump campaign and the Russians to swing the 2016 election. Zip. Nada. Nothing to see here.

    It goes on to tee up a question about obstruction of justice that the special counsel was not asked to investigate — and then doesn’t answer it. Wait. What?

    These are some of the most elite prosecutors in the country, and they went full Hamlet on a legal determination a third-year law student would knock down between Budweisers. This is what we get for $30 million? Make a call; that’s your job as prosecutors.

    It doesn’t seem the special counsel team is fooling anyone. It showed that it would indict a ham sandwich if it could. The obvious answer is that it had no confidence in a criminal obstruction case.

    Instead, it punted to the Trump-appointed attorney general. One gets the sense this may have been by design.

    Well, what about all the Russians who were indicted by Mueller’s team for trying to interfere with the election? Those were chip-shot FBI counterintelligence investigations that were well in flow when the special counsel took them over. They didn’t need special counsel magic.

    Had they remained FBI-controlled cases, the indictments would have been sealed and the subjects arrested when they likely returned to the United States for more mischief in 2020. We can forget about that now.

    Attorney General William Barr during his press conference early Thursday said that the “bottom line” is that no American coordinated, conspired or colluded with the Russian government to interfere in the presidential election. America should be grateful, he added.

    No, America should be disgusted. Here’s a real bottom line: A cabal of politicians and bureaucrats frivolously and cynically manipulated the levers of government to further their own political greed and lust for power by trying to exploit a falsehood. It cost us over $30 million and needlessly pitted Americans against one another.
    https://thehill.com/opinion/white-ho...was-not-needed
    Excellent.

    Thanks.

  7. The Following 2 Users Say Thank You to Earl For This Post:

    dukkha (04-22-2019), Truth Detector (04-22-2019)

  8. #4 | Top
    Join Date
    Mar 2017
    Posts
    9,354
    Thanks
    2
    Thanked 5,439 Times in 3,895 Posts
    Groans
    0
    Groaned 303 Times in 288 Posts

    Default

    There is no shame in such matters.

    Things like this are protected by the establishment that perpetrates them. This isn't the first and it won't be the last.
    I think we are all equally appalled by Washington, the waste and the obvious disregard for what 30 million dollars is, or would mean to most of us.
    On a witch hunt to appease hurt feelings.
    Our money is like afterthought to them, they take in trillions from us so what's 30 million here or there.

    And the real irony is that when half of us unite in a protest vote to this establishment, we send someone like Trump there to make that very point, enough is enough....NO WE DONT WANT ANOTHER CLINTON JUST BECAUSE IT"S HER TURN...
    the other half joins the establishment to protest that someone dare protest.

    It's a maddening circle that will never be fixed because it feeds itself.
    I VOTED FOR THE WHITE GUY THIS TIME

    C̶N̶N̶ SNN.... Shithole News Network

    WHERES RUTH

  9. The Following 6 Users Say Thank You to Getin the ring For This Post:

    Callinectes Ocasio-Cortez (04-22-2019), Darth Omar (04-22-2019), Earl (04-22-2019), Evmetro (04-23-2019), Stretch (04-22-2019), Truth Detector (04-22-2019)

  10. #5 | Top
    Join Date
    Dec 2018
    Posts
    627
    Thanks
    0
    Thanked 204 Times in 160 Posts
    Groans
    0
    Groaned 29 Times in 27 Posts

    Default

    Conclusion one from the Mueller report - Russia interfered with the US election. That conclusion is supported by the indictments of several Russians. It also includes a lot of evidence.
    Conclusion two - While the Trump campaign accepted help from Russia it didn't rise to criminal because the Trump campaign seemed to be unaware it is illegal to do so.
    Conclusion three - Because of the DoJ standard of not indicting a President and because the DoJ also has a policy of giving people a chance to defend themselves in court if they accuse them, the Office decided they couldn't do anything more than lay out the evidence. To reach a conclusion would violate one of the 2 policies in place.

    I would suggest you read the report. It lays out quite a bit of evidence of obstruction. Whether it is criminal is a question we don't have an answer to. Whether it is acceptable behavior by someone who has taken an oath to defend the Constitution should be pretty obvious.
    Experience keeps a dear school, but fools will learn in no other, and scarce in that.

  11. The Following 5 Users Say Thank You to Poor Richard Saunders For This Post:

    CharacterAssassin (04-22-2019), christiefan915 (04-23-2019), domer76 (04-22-2019), Earl (04-22-2019), JPF (04-22-2019)

  12. #6 | Top
    Join Date
    Nov 2015
    Posts
    26,007
    Thanks
    6,580
    Thanked 14,726 Times in 10,132 Posts
    Groans
    5
    Groaned 928 Times in 889 Posts

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Poor Richard Saunders View Post
    Conclusion one from the Mueller report - Russia interfered with the US election. That conclusion is supported by the indictments of several Russians. It also includes a lot of evidence.
    Conclusion two - While the Trump campaign accepted help from Russia it didn't rise to criminal because the Trump campaign seemed to be unaware it is illegal to do so.
    Conclusion three - Because of the DoJ standard of not indicting a President and because the DoJ also has a policy of giving people a chance to defend themselves in court if they accuse them, the Office decided they couldn't do anything more than lay out the evidence. To reach a conclusion would violate one of the 2 policies in place.

    I would suggest you read the report. It lays out quite a bit of evidence of obstruction. Whether it is criminal is a question we don't have an answer to. Whether it is acceptable behavior by someone who has taken an oath to defend the Constitution should be pretty obvious.
    Jonathan Turley addressed obstruction in his recent column.

    It basically came down to Mullet not knowing whether Trump had criminal intent when he discussed removing Mullet. In Mullet’s words ‘he couldn’t tell what Trump was thinking’ or to the effect.

    That, coupled with the fact the investigation itself, produced no crime, equals no charge. Or maybe more precisely, no charge worth pursuing. Unless, you’re really bad desperate to impeach and remove a president.

    And yes, any third year law student could knock it down between Budweisers.
    Iím a straight white cisgender Easter worshipper~how else may I offend you?

  13. The Following 4 Users Say Thank You to Darth Omar For This Post:

    Callinectes Ocasio-Cortez (04-22-2019), Earl (04-22-2019), Stretch (04-22-2019), Truth Detector (04-22-2019)

  14. #7 | Top
    Join Date
    Jul 2017
    Posts
    21,001
    Thanks
    6,602
    Thanked 10,883 Times in 7,893 Posts
    Groans
    147
    Groaned 1,129 Times in 1,065 Posts

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Poor Richard Saunders View Post
    Conclusion one from the Mueller report - Russia interfered with the US election. That conclusion is supported by the indictments of several Russians. It also includes a lot of evidence.
    Conclusion two - While the Trump campaign accepted help from Russia it didn't rise to criminal because the Trump campaign seemed to be unaware it is illegal to do so.
    Conclusion three - Because of the DoJ standard of not indicting a President and because the DoJ also has a policy of giving people a chance to defend themselves in court if they accuse them, the Office decided they couldn't do anything more than lay out the evidence. To reach a conclusion would violate one of the 2 policies in place.

    I would suggest you read the report. It lays out quite a bit of evidence of obstruction. Whether it is criminal is a question we don't have an answer to. Whether it is acceptable behavior by someone who has taken an oath to defend the Constitution should be pretty obvious.
    No evidence of collusion . not "some", "not rising to criminal intent" - none -by anyone associated with the Trump campaign
    ~~

    the rest of the crap is Trump throwing a fit as an innocent man -but there WAS NO OBSTRUCTION

    There was full transparency, full access to depositions.full document request fulfillment ,
    and no claims/executions of privileges.

    Trump yelling at his staff to fire Mueller/persona isn't meaningful without a firing.

  15. The Following 3 Users Say Thank You to dukkha For This Post:

    Callinectes Ocasio-Cortez (04-22-2019), Earl (04-22-2019), Truth Detector (04-22-2019)

  16. #8 | Top
    Join Date
    Jul 2017
    Posts
    21,001
    Thanks
    6,602
    Thanked 10,883 Times in 7,893 Posts
    Groans
    147
    Groaned 1,129 Times in 1,065 Posts

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Darth Beto Omar View Post
    Jonathan Turley addressed obstruction in his recent column.

    It basically came down to Mullet not knowing whether Trump had criminal intent when he discussed removing Mullet. In Mullet’s words ‘he couldn’t tell what Trump was thinking’ or to the effect.

    That, coupled with the fact the investigation itself, produced no crime, equals no charge. Or maybe more precisely, no charge worth pursuing. Unless, you’re really bad desperate to impeach and remove a president.

    And yes, any third year law student could knock it down between Budweisers.
    Thinking (intent) isn't a crime without an actionable obstruction.
    Trump yelling at his staff, giving orders to his staff isn't criminal unless there is actionable obstruction

    Volume II is a POLITICAL GUIDE for the dems to impeach ( a political action) Mueller was a political hit man.

    I'm sure they figured out "no collusion" a year ago,but they kept it going hoping for a perjury trap like Flynn

  17. The Following 3 Users Say Thank You to dukkha For This Post:

    Earl (04-22-2019), Stretch (04-22-2019), Truth Detector (04-22-2019)

  18. #9 | Top
    Join Date
    Nov 2015
    Posts
    26,007
    Thanks
    6,580
    Thanked 14,726 Times in 10,132 Posts
    Groans
    5
    Groaned 928 Times in 889 Posts

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by bodhisattva View Post
    Thinking (intent) isn't a crime without an actionable obstruction.
    Trump yelling at his staff, giving orders to his staff isn't criminal unless there is actionable obstruction

    Volume II is a POLITICAL GUIDE for the dems to impeach ( a political action) Mueller was a political hit man.

    I'm sure they figured out "no collusion" a year ago,but they kept it going hoping for a perjury trap like Flynn
    If Mullet testifies before Congress he needs to be asked that very question.

    The patently obvious answer is a preliminary finding of Ďno collusioní, a year ago, would have risked shutting down the investigation and costing Mullet and cronies millions of dollars in legal fees.

    Isnít DC just wonderful lol?
    Iím a straight white cisgender Easter worshipper~how else may I offend you?

  19. The Following 3 Users Say Thank You to Darth Omar For This Post:

    Earl (04-22-2019), Stretch (04-22-2019), Truth Detector (04-22-2019)

  20. #10 | Top
    Join Date
    Mar 2011
    Location
    Ventura CA
    Posts
    61,913
    Thanks
    71,706
    Thanked 12,381 Times in 10,579 Posts
    Groans
    3,768
    Groaned 2,847 Times in 2,589 Posts
    Blog Entries
    1

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Poor Richard Saunders View Post
    Conclusion one from the Mueller report - Russia interfered with the US election. That conclusion is supported by the indictments of several Russians. It also includes a lot of evidence.
    That wasn't Mueller's job you moron. If you had a brain, which you don't, you would still be skeptical about Russians doing it when so many other players do it and Wikileaks founder claims the e-mails were not obtained from Russian sources. But hey, who wants to listen to the very person that would know right???

    Quote Originally Posted by Poor Richard Saunders View Post
    Conclusion two - While the Trump campaign accepted help from Russia it didn't rise to criminal because the Trump campaign seemed to be unaware it is illegal to do so.
    Hey, moron, let me see the criminal code that says a campaign can't get information on opposing parties via Russians. I would love to see that one. If that were the case, Hillary should be in prison by now for being the financial source of the salacious and fabricated Steele Dossier. Funny how you asshats don't want to discuss REAL corruption and criminality. Nah, it's predictable coming from dishonest leftist dunces.

    Quote Originally Posted by Poor Richard Saunders View Post
    Conclusion three - Because of the DoJ standard of not indicting a President and because the DoJ also has a policy of giving people a chance to defend themselves in court if they accuse them, the Office decided they couldn't do anything more than lay out the evidence. To reach a conclusion would violate one of the 2 policies in place.
    Wrong; they knew that the sparse evidence they had gathered was so weak as to make them look like morons if they would have acted. I would love to see the Party of the Jackass try to impeach Trump on such weak pathetic evidence. I really would.

    Why leave any bridges standing???? BURN THEM all Democrats!

    Quote Originally Posted by Poor Richard Saunders View Post
    I would suggest you read the report. It lays out quite a bit of evidence of obstruction.
    I have; I downloaded it and it contains a bunch of weak sauce when it comes to trying to argue that someone obstructed and investigation that found no criminal conduct.

    Again, NO ONE got fired. NO ONE destroyed evidence? NO ONE refused to cooperate. NO ONE shut down the investigation NO ONE chose not to release the entire report. NO ONE exercised executive privilege.

    The REAL enemy of the American people isn't the Russians or Trump, but rather, the leftist media and the Democratic Party of the Jackass.


    Quote Originally Posted by Poor Richard Saunders View Post
    Whether it is criminal is a question we don't have an answer to. Whether it is acceptable behavior by someone who has taken an oath to defend the Constitution should be pretty obvious.
    It isn't remotely criminal and expected behavior from someone who has been unfairly targeted by the Obama Administration, the Department of Justice, the Democratic Party of the Jackass and the FAKE media.

    Anyone on the left should be embarrassed by the despicable rhetoric being thrown about by highly visible members and leaders of the Party of the Jackass. But, that would require an IQ above room temperature. You're all like a bunch of petulant little children, spoiled brats, who didn't get their way and now want to kick and scream and burn down the house.
    Page 173 V I: Ultimately, the investigation did not establish that the Campaign coordinated or conspired with the Russian government in its election-interference activities.


    Eric Holder: ďIím still enjoying what Iím doing, thereís still work to be done,Ē Iím still the Presidentís wing-man, so Iím there with my boy.Ē

  21. The Following 3 Users Say Thank You to Truth Detector For This Post:

    dukkha (04-22-2019), Earl (04-22-2019), Stretch (04-22-2019)

  22. #11 | Top
    Join Date
    Jul 2017
    Posts
    21,001
    Thanks
    6,602
    Thanked 10,883 Times in 7,893 Posts
    Groans
    147
    Groaned 1,129 Times in 1,065 Posts

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Darth Beto Omar View Post
    If Mullet testifies before Congress he needs to be asked that very question.

    The patently obvious answer is a preliminary finding of ‘no collusion’, a year ago, would have risked shutting down the investigation and costing Mullet and cronies millions of dollars in legal fees.

    Isn’t DC just wonderful lol?
    Muellet is much too slippery a fish ( lol) to get tied down to particulars.
    It will be "we were still investigating all leads" or " we needed to look for intent" (and the dang Trump wouldn't give us an interview.)

    It was a political hit job, ginned up by Comey and Rosenweasel's Deep State Creeps ,
    prosecuted by a bunch of Hillary Dems.

  23. The Following 3 Users Say Thank You to dukkha For This Post:

    Darth Omar (04-22-2019), Earl (04-22-2019), Stretch (04-22-2019)

  24. #12 | Top
    Join Date
    Mar 2011
    Location
    Ventura CA
    Posts
    61,913
    Thanks
    71,706
    Thanked 12,381 Times in 10,579 Posts
    Groans
    3,768
    Groaned 2,847 Times in 2,589 Posts
    Blog Entries
    1

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by bodhisattva View Post
    Thinking (intent) isn't a crime without an actionable obstruction.
    Trump yelling at his staff, giving orders to his staff isn't criminal unless there is actionable obstruction

    Volume II is a POLITICAL GUIDE for the dems to impeach ( a political action) Mueller was a political hit man.

    I'm sure they figured out "no collusion" a year ago,but they kept it going hoping for a perjury trap like Flynn
    Mueller absolutely is corrupt. Volume II is nothing more than that. A weak attempt to hand the Party of the Jackass something to pursue politically.

    But here is the real crux of Mueller's corrupt behavior; for TWO years he said NOTHING. For two years his department leaked like a sieve and he says NOTHING in his report about it. The NYT's apparently had a copy of everything we are seeing in the report. I am fairly certain it is a Federal crime for Mueller's team to be leaking information from a SC investigation.

    The rot within DC and the political system in this country is palpable and has now been exposed by the Trump election. Another benefit.
    Page 173 V I: Ultimately, the investigation did not establish that the Campaign coordinated or conspired with the Russian government in its election-interference activities.


    Eric Holder: ďIím still enjoying what Iím doing, thereís still work to be done,Ē Iím still the Presidentís wing-man, so Iím there with my boy.Ē

  25. The Following 3 Users Say Thank You to Truth Detector For This Post:

    Darth Omar (04-22-2019), Earl (04-22-2019), Stretch (04-22-2019)

  26. #13 | Top
    Join Date
    Mar 2011
    Location
    Ventura CA
    Posts
    61,913
    Thanks
    71,706
    Thanked 12,381 Times in 10,579 Posts
    Groans
    3,768
    Groaned 2,847 Times in 2,589 Posts
    Blog Entries
    1

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Darth Beto Omar View Post
    If Mullet testifies before Congress he needs to be asked that very question.

    The patently obvious answer is a preliminary finding of ‘no collusion’, a year ago, would have risked shutting down the investigation and costing Mullet and cronies millions of dollars in legal fees.

    Isn’t DC just wonderful lol?
    It was all about the money and the fact that Mueller didn't like Trump either. He is corrupt as they come. Comey, he needs to be handcuffed and taken to prison.
    Page 173 V I: Ultimately, the investigation did not establish that the Campaign coordinated or conspired with the Russian government in its election-interference activities.


    Eric Holder: ďIím still enjoying what Iím doing, thereís still work to be done,Ē Iím still the Presidentís wing-man, so Iím there with my boy.Ē

  27. The Following 3 Users Say Thank You to Truth Detector For This Post:

    Earl (04-22-2019), Evmetro (04-23-2019), Stretch (04-22-2019)

  28. #14 | Top
    Join Date
    Jan 2019
    Posts
    9,114
    Thanks
    15,706
    Thanked 4,026 Times in 3,178 Posts
    Groans
    7,694
    Groaned 526 Times in 493 Posts
    Blog Entries
    2

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Poor Richard Saunders View Post
    Conclusion one from the Mueller report - Russia interfered with the US election. That conclusion is supported by the indictments of several Russians. It also includes a lot of evidence.
    Conclusion two - While the Trump campaign accepted help from Russia it didn't rise to criminal because the Trump campaign seemed to be unaware it is illegal to do so.
    Conclusion three - Because of the DoJ standard of not indicting a President and because the DoJ also has a policy of giving people a chance to defend themselves in court if they accuse them, the Office decided they couldn't do anything more than lay out the evidence. To reach a conclusion would violate one of the 2 policies in place.

    I would suggest you read the report. It lays out quite a bit of evidence of obstruction. Whether it is criminal is a question we don't have an answer to. Whether it is acceptable behavior by someone who has taken an oath to defend the Constitution should be pretty obvious.
    No collusion, insufficient evidence to pursue obstruction.

    What part of that declarative sentence is confusing you?

  29. The Following User Says Thank You to Earl For This Post:

    Truth Detector (04-22-2019)

  30. #15 | Top
    Join Date
    Mar 2017
    Posts
    9,354
    Thanks
    2
    Thanked 5,439 Times in 3,895 Posts
    Groans
    0
    Groaned 303 Times in 288 Posts

    Default

    Mueller's "findings" were that Trump didn't collude with Russia to win the election. Period.
    And to say he obstructed an investigation that didn't conclude what it was investigating is just stupid on the face.

    So your neighbors house is broken into and your neighbor thinks its you, guy next to him says it's you too. And so does the guy down the street, and his neighbor says it was you too.
    It's starting to look bad, most of the neighborhood now believes it's you.
    So you tell your wife to say it wasn't you, you were with her at the time,
    you even want the cop investigating removed from the case because he's friends with the neighbors accusing you.

    They finally conclude it wasn't you.

    but now they want you arrested for trying to get your wife to vouch for you, and for wanting the crooked cop fired.
    I VOTED FOR THE WHITE GUY THIS TIME

    C̶N̶N̶ SNN.... Shithole News Network

    WHERES RUTH

  31. The Following 3 Users Say Thank You to Getin the ring For This Post:

    Earl (04-22-2019), Stretch (04-22-2019), Truth Detector (04-22-2019)

Similar Threads

  1. Replies: 54
    Last Post: 04-15-2019, 02:06 PM
  2. Replies: 10
    Last Post: 04-03-2019, 09:06 AM
  3. Replies: 5
    Last Post: 03-26-2019, 02:33 PM
  4. While Trump's away, 'much-needed' White House renovations begin
    By Cancel 2018.2 in forum Current Events Forum
    Replies: 13
    Last Post: 08-05-2017, 11:47 PM
  5. Report details BP's ability to deliver oil where least needed
    By Guns Guns Guns in forum Current Events Forum
    Replies: 3
    Last Post: 06-07-2012, 06:16 AM

Bookmarks

Posting Rules

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •