That post actually supports “No Collusion”. There has to be knowledge and intent in order for there to be collusion. Do your own research but you could start with the Berlin Wall which was pretty danm effective.
Seems like there is a lack of clear understanding of what a mindless shill sounds like since this is not the first thread OP created to defend our Unwitting Conspirator-in-Chief.
That is literally the most perfect meme ever for this situation!!! Although he had more of a chance with that lady than Trump does of getting indicted for collusion. Kudos!!!
So, you want to go with the strong trump defense of "trump and his people unwittingly colluded with the Russians?
I support Trump. I don't support CNN I supported Obama for a few years. If Trump gets indicted I will eat crow.
That’s ok. “Your” liberal party is wasting millions of tax dollars by chasing unicorns and trying to impeach “our” (both yours and mine) POTUS. Just like I hated Ken Star and the Republican Party for wasting millions of tax payer dollars impeaching Bill Clinton that lead to nothing. I know it’s hard for partisan people to understand
BREAKING SPORTS NEWS: Mikaela Shiffrin does not win gold medal; NOT Linked to Ryan Anderson's home 3 point shooting form. @crash5179 - you're a very stable genius. What a fail, if you are not a bot.
"Dang, we didn't lose him, he is still on our tail, Jared and Boris..." Mueller Still Investigating Possible Collusion, Source Says https://www.bloomberg.com/news/arti...-still-be-investigating-collusion-with-russia
So your criteria for supporting a President is whether he gets indicted or not? Not based in his intellectual merit or his grasp on policy? Pretty low bar but It makes sense in your context.
LOL, so you choose to speak your proof into existence rather than provide it? Why was the Berlin Wall effective? How long was it? What was the per capita of manpower that guarded that wall? What was the penalty for being caught trying to cross it? What a frightening comparison, but it does give insight to your way of thinking of what the wall should be. What else you got?
LOL... Mueller didn't say trump didn't collude. Probably why he is still investigating trump for collusion... https://www.bloomberg.com/news/arti...-still-be-investigating-collusion-with-russia
Did you ever go to Schiller's Liquor Bar? Obviously it was kind of a rip and full of poseurs, because Keith McNally, you know. But damned, if it wasn't kind of awesome in spite of all that.
First off collusion isn't a federal crime other than in the realm of anti-trust. So we all need to stop using it, I have used it as well but when you start talking about to intricacies of it, that isn't the proper term. Conspiracy or illegal recruitment is likely the better legal terms. However it really depends on the exact circumstances are for the exact legal term or remedy. There has to be some agreement to commit or look the other way about a crime between the Russians and the Trump administration for there to be a conspiracy. At this point we don't know if we have that. The investigators may well have the evidence, or they may not. We will not know until the investigators decide to indict or end the investigation. There are strategic reasons for indicting when they do.
If Trump unwittingly colluded with a foreign power to get elected after calling it a hoax for a year, then fired the head of the FBI for not dropping the investigation, then refused to implement sanctions on that foreign power, and then didn't do anything to prevent that power from interfering in our elections again then we're good. - crash1579 (non-Trump shill)
Wait till he learns that the Berlin Wall was effective because of the snipers. The wall just slowed them down which is a pointless desire in a wall that expands to middle of nowhere where 'being slowed down' means **** .
Oh, I like how this is working out time wise... a few more months as the midterm campaigning is in full bloom. Keep investigating Mueller...
