Eric Loh

7 minutes ago, JHolmesJr said:

There is plenty of evidence on Biden...none of which has been "debunked". His time is coming.

Give it up. It’s a nothing burger. Just deflection. Trump defense team has abandoned this Biden conspiracy theory in their presentation. 

4 minutes ago, Chazar said:

They  all  lie

Nothing on the scale like Trump.

1 hour ago, mogandave said:

Or just dismiss it and let the left complete their case and try again. 
 

What happened to all the documents and testimony that you swore overwhelmingly proved Trump’s guilt? 

All those documents and testimonies got him convicted by the House. Now is for the Reps senators to reciprocate and called for the witnesses and documents stonewalled by WH. 
 

Don’t they want any the truth like you? Oh never mind. 

1 minute ago, WalkingOrders said:

That's the guy.

Corrected ‘that’s the lying guy’. Done

54 minutes ago, Skallywag said:

Why would anyone want Trump to hold another office?  POTUS has no government or political experience.

Always amazes me when Trump talks about Hunter Biden getting a job in the Ukraine with no experience because his father used his political power. 

Well Mr. Trump, you got your current job with no experience whatsoever because of republican fundraisers by political big wigs and duping the public and the GOP with lies.  

Pot calling the kettle black

Peace

Not to be missed out on getting jobs without experience; Ivanka and Jared. 

3 minutes ago, candide said:

It 's what Barr said, not Mueller. Where are those transcripts?

Allow me to step in and provide a link to show that Ricohoc was wrong. To be fair Muller was ambiguous in commenting on the DOJ policy against indicting a sitting President. True that he didn’t “determine” the charges but that doesn’t mean there were no charges. Just scroll down to the juiciest part of the house hearing when he was asked if Trump can be charged if he is out of the office and he replied with an affirmative “YES”. 

https://www.nbcnews.com/politics/donald-trump/did-mueller-mean-trump-could-be-indicted-when-he-leaves-n1033901

12 minutes ago, PhonThong said:

A bad name to who? The Democratic party? Republicans love him. His base is stronger than ever. It is going to be so good when the Republican regain control of the house. The Dems have nothing to run on. They haven't accomplished anything other than spend millions in taxpayer money on witch hunts.

I admire your steadfast loyalty but you not seeing the forest for the trees. His base is eroding especially the farmers and even Evangelical. The younger base loathe him and he is not winning in popularity with non white. He created the House lose and the senate house will follow. Just look at his overall approval ratings that have never climbed above 50%. Things are going south and his shenanigans will damage his party for years to come. 

Merkel’s keynote address at Davos deserved applause.

 
“Governments were obliged to act on the younger generation’s concerns over climate change. Older politicians has to use the positive manner and constructive impatience of young people who have a completely different horizon in terms of time”. 
 

By contrast we have Mnuchin juvenile attack on Greta to study economic. What with Trump’s men who not only denying climate change but going after a teen. Inappropriate and shameful antics. 

1 hour ago, BobBKK said:

It is not a 'conspiracy theory' Biden forced them to fire the prosecutor in return for MONEY. Be polite thank you.

Never knew Biden has such power to fire a foreign country prosecutor. That will be an impeachable act. 

2 minutes ago, Tippaporn said:

True, it wasn't a witch hunt.  It's an attempted soft coup.

 

If you refuse to believe it be patient.  The facts and undeniable truth will emerge not long from now.

You not putting on your critical thinking cap. Muller was appointed by Trump’s appointed Deputy AG Rod Rosenstein. 

5 minutes ago, Tippaporn said:

I have to say that if that's the best response you can muster I have to simply laugh.  For instance:

 

"Sprawling set of allegations, encompassing both election interference charges against overseas Russians . . . "

 

Where's the proof of the allegations?  Have you seen it?  Or do you simply take team Mueller claims at face value?

 

I'll repeat myself:  Gullible people suck it all up despite a complete lack of proof and with nary a question.  People with critical thinking skills ask hard questions and demand proof.  These people take Americans for fools and there's far to many Americans who prove them correct.

Sure your critical thinking has nothing to do with Trump calling the Muller probe a witch hunt 84 times. Thinking critically, with so many indicted for connection with the election and 8 pleaded guilty or convicted of felonies which include Trump associates and election campaign officials, 2016 election was compromised. That’s my stance. 

11 hours ago, Tippaporn said:

25 of those charged were Russians.

 

12 Russians were claimed to be GRU intelligence officers.  It's a bogus indictment as Mueller charged that they conspired to interfere with the election by hacking computers, stealing documents, and releasing those documents with intent to interfere while full well knowing that he would never have to prove those charges.  No proof ever provided to the American public.  Just take his word for it.

 

The other 13 were Russian citizens associated with 3 Russian companies and were accused of running a troll farm.  One of the Russian companies, Concord, blindsided Mueller by actually showing up in court to dispute the charges.  That certainly doesn't appear to be conclusive of anything.  No proof ever provided.

 

The others were associated with the Trump campaign and none of the charges against any of them had anything to do with Russian election interference.

 

So, as Chiphigh has been asking, where is definitive proof of Russian election interference?  Mueller's report stated: "The Russian government interfered in the 2016 presidential election in sweeping and systematic fashion."  Given this wildly general assertion which is no where defined in detail there was no proof provided in the report.  How can the American public decide for themselves as to the true scope?  Or was it simply hyperbole which, again, Mueller never had to fear having to prove.

 

And as I've mentioned, no proof of Russian election interference has ever been provided to the American people by either Mueller or the intelligence agencies.  No one knows with certainty who stole the emails or how they accomplished it.  And since it's not known then it's easy to make the claim that it was the Russians.

 

Gullible people suck it all up despite a complete lack of proof and with nary a question.  People with critical thinking skills ask hard questions and demand proof.  These people take Americans for fools and there's far to many Americans who prove them correct.

 

Indicted and got guilty pleas Russians by Muller’s team in the Trump Russia election meddling investigation. On top of that, seven of which six were Trump’s advisers. Sprawling set of allegations, encompassing both election interference charges against overseas Russians and various other crimes by American Trump advisors. Any sensible and intelligent person can see the connection. POTUS got away because of DOJ policy but how long can that policy protect him. He will meet his fate as a civilian, no doubt about that. 

55 minutes ago, Chiphigh said:

Where are the names of the people who are making these statements. Who, when and where were they made and more importantly, where in the article does it say specific examples of votes that were affected. 

 

3 years on, there still is no evidence of their claims. 

Evidences were enough for Mueller and his team to file charges against 37 defendants, secured seven guilty pleas and one conviction at trial. Six former associates and advisors of POTUS were among those charged. The case of Trump’s former deputy campaign chairman Rick Gates was transferred from the special counsel’s office to federal prosecutors in Washington. Perhaps the best part is when Trump leave office and not protected by DOJ policy and indicted as a civilian. That may come this year. 

53 minutes ago, Baerboxer said:

Unless India and China seriously buy into this, which at the moment they aren't, whatever the RoW do won't matter diddly squat.

What about US which the second largest polluter in the world. Their leader has even denied climate change, reversing many environment policies and championing the return of coal and fossil fuels. That is doing diddly squat bigly.