Anyone can “suggest” anything, especially when they hate you. Luckily evidence of a crime is required not just suggestive speculation.
-6 ( +1 / -7 )
Just can’t admit you were wrong. No such thing as “not exonerated”. It’s proof of crimes and indictment or no indictment. Which one happened here again?
Totally would have been guilty of obstruction if only his inner circle had obstructed like he told them to? Nope. Not even close.
-9 ( +4 / -13 )
great start to the day indeed. Will be great to see all the Trump haters trying to pick out a sentence and tell us it means Trump is really guilty of something after all.
-9 ( +6 / -15 )
Sad liberals. “There is no such thing as collusion anyway! That’s the only reason why he was exonerated.”
-13 ( +6 / -19 )
Nope I mean your guy Mueller just failed you. No collusion, no obstruction, nothing at all. No redactions other than those DOJ and Mueller chose and no executive privilege.
1 ( +2 / -1 )
Didn’t Comey have a press conference to announce Hillary wouidnt be charged at all?
CNN full of custodial and office staff too. This violence against janitors must stop. It was addressed to a person. Non journalist. Try again.
-3 ( +2 / -5 )
The paid free press will get an opportunity to be updated, ask questions and report facts. Why do Dems hate that idea?
-3 ( +2 / -5 )
Why are Deme against a “press conference” today? Do they hate the press?
-3 ( +2 / -5 )
They didn’t detonate cause they couldn’t detonate. Which makes your “bombs” not actually a bomb at all. And no amount of word twisting will turn anyone who received those into journalists.
-2 ( +2 / -4 )
The topic is violence against journalists. it’s such a huge problem that it gets its own article and a pic of Trump. But none of you can name even one journalist who was a victim of this supposed violence.
But it’s ok as long as you feel morally right the facts don’t matter, right?
-1 ( +3 / -4 )
So please name the journalists involved in this violence.
-3 ( +3 / -6 )
To CNN addressed to James Clapper. Also not a journalist.
-4 ( +2 / -6 )
Quite from NY Times. None of them ever exploded so it appears they were incapable of doing so. Unless George Soros and Obama and Hillary and Robert Deniro are journalists now- it didn’t happen.
-3 ( +4 / -7 )
None of the devices harmed anyone, and it was not immediately clear whether any of them could have. One law enforcement official said investigators were examining the possibility that they were hoax devices that were constructed to look like bombs but would not have exploded.
-4 ( +3 / -7 )
And you forgot none of those people are journalists.
Apparently you've already forgotten about the bombs sent to US journalists. The same folks Trump attacks as enemies of the people, go figure.
-2 ( +3 / -5 )
Nothing to do with Trump. I am not aware of any violent acts at all directed at journalists in the United States.
No, “mean” tweets don’t count.
-2 ( +5 / -7 )
The man is “unidentified” yet at the same time “known to police”. Hmmm
0 ( +3 / -3 )
Interesting way to admit Trump was right all along about the crisis at the border.
-2 ( +1 / -3 )
Then there is also no problem if Dems get it 2 hrs after. Will still be just as “damaging” plus you can call for Barr to resign under the narrative that he inaccurately summarized what the report really says.
just another 3D. Democrat Disappointment Day.
If the report is damaging to Trump what is the big advantage for Democrats in getting it before this BS press event? It's not like 24 hours later is going to make it any less damaging.
-1 ( +1 / -2 )
Now Dems are crying that they won’t get the report until after the press conference.
so no time to leak and set up their liberal media buddies with talking points.
barr also said some members of Congress will get the reports with fewer redactions. So no more drama there either as long as the same number of Dems and Repubs get it.
-5 ( +2 / -7 )
The other day by a liberal media TV show who thought it would be cute to put assassinate, President, Trump in order in a tweeted list.
just an oversight or something, oops sorry. Not inciting at all.
1 ( +3 / -2 )
Yeah yeah. And he is one of only 40 or so people to have ever been president of the United States and is a billionaire with a model wife.
Yep his life is so horrible. Keep on believing that.
-4 ( +1 / -5 )
Why after two and a half years does this statement still start with “if”? Prove a crime then we will talk about how I feel about what you supposedly proved.
. If the Democratic Party discovered iron-clad proof that Trump is a criminal, they'd reply, "So? His crimes are good and cool". They're full on cultists.
-5 ( +1 / -6 )
Liberals trying to disavow Cher now, it’s hilarious. Loved her all the times she was attacking Trump though. Wonder what Avenatti thinks about all this so you can pretend you never loved him either.
-1 ( +3 / -4 )
that was a hypothetical question that we know the answer to. Even die hard liberal entertainer Cher knows this. (crazy typing is hers, not mine). So its basically talk until they are expected to do something, then hide behind our homeless veterans as a shield while doing nothing for them.
I Understand Helping struggling Immigrants,but MY CITY (Los Angeles) ISNT TAKING CARE OF ITS OWN.WHAT ABOUT THE 50,000+ Citizens WHO LIVE ON THE STREETS .PPL WHO LIVE BELOW POVERTY LINE,& HUNGRY? If My State Can’t Take Care of Its Own(Many Are VETS)How Can it Take Care Of More
-7 ( +1 / -8 )
until illegals can be prevented from entering (build the wall) the next best option is to release them to sanctuary cities who want them and adore them.
Why would sanctuary cities not want all of these people that are available?
-3 ( +5 / -8 )
no collusion. This dude needs a law book. You can impeach someone for something you cant even prove? Nope.
"History suggests," Montoya said, "the impeachment process does not rely on establishing wrongdoing beyond a reasonable doubt."
-3 ( +0 / -3 )
No chance. If any of these lower tier white male candidates get popular, Hillary will re-emerge and take it away from them.
-2 ( +2 / -4 )
Liberals and your “condemn this and disavow that”. I don’t play that gotcha game.
Did Omar condemn the 9/11 attacks? Where is her disavowal of the guy who threw a kid over a railing for. 3 stories high at a mall in the state she represents?
Say hateful and inciting things, people hold you accountable. That’s how it goes. This is a member of the United States Congress.
-13 ( +3 / -16 )
Nice pivot away from their religious group (omar’s) to their country of residence at the time. But nope.
“The September 11 attacks (also referred to as 9/11)[a] were a series of four coordinated terrorist attacks by the Islamic terrorist group al-Qaeda”
so why would she say some people did something when it’s very clear who did it and what they did?
-15 ( +3 / -18 )