Hood Critic
The Power Circle
ThisThere's a difference between healthy skepticism and just being a contrarian.
ThisThere's a difference between healthy skepticism and just being a contrarian.
what can they do in a month
Then it's pointless if they don't hurry and the GOP is about to takeover so this is dead. 6 years isn't substantialOnly can go back 6 years for the tax returns
Bannon got what a few months and still is out on appeal which is months away. I'm not being a contrarian. I'm being a realest. How's meadows and scavino contempt cases going? Any normal person does what Trump has done they're in federal prison for decades. There's example after example of this. I'll gladly eat crow but 2 years after his presidency we're still waiting for an indictment on any charge.Those were his responses to the oath keepers and Bannon.
We know he convicted Bannon for two counts.
The oath keepers leaders trial for seditioud conspiracy is currently under way.
There's a difference between healthy skepticism and just being a contrarian.
Way to twist my words. I've consistently said garland doesn't want to indict Trump. He's had the time and evidence to do it immediately following his presidency. He knew Trump was going to run, so instead of indicting him for current crimes(the ones he let go untouched for 1.5 years or expire) he punts it to a special counsel who will report back to him what he's already known and should've done long ago. That Trump should be indicted. Doj didn't even start investigations into J6 until the select committee dropped bombs and witnesses. DOJ even asked for their information. The spin you guys put on it would make the DC insiders blush.He's not being skeptical. He's just assuming everything is bullshyt and denying the realities that happen.
In the last week he's argued:
Garland appointed a special counsel so he doesn't have to make the decision.
Then he argued, the special counsel is irrelevant because Garland is making the decision.
He then criticized folks for falling for propoganda like they did during the Mueller investigation and then immediately cites Claude Taylor's brainchild "Rawstory."
He's too far down the Rabbit hole.
Most objective people view most of these cases as ultimately leading to a letdown because it's highly unlikely for Trump to be convicted even if he's indicted because the same voters Payday23 says are a lost cause (his family and peers) aren't going to vote to convict him.
The idea that GOP leadership should all be indicted and arrested isn't even good fantasy, yet he's in here pushing that.
But it doesn't matter he's going to continue moving the goal post no matter what happens.
Your end goal is just to indict someone.Way to twist my words. I've consistently said garland doesn't want to indict Trump. He's had the time and evidence to do it immediately following his presidency. He knew Trump was going to run, so instead of indicting him for current crimes(the ones he let go untouched for 1.5 years or expire) he punts it to a special counsel who will report back to him what he's already known and should've done long ago. That Trump should be indicted. Doj didn't even start investigations into J6 until the select committee dropped bombs and witnesses. DOJ even asked for their information. The spin you guys put on it would make the DC insiders blush.
Coming in hot.The special counsel is starting fast.