Flynn was career military and intelligence professional. People like him do not inaccurately recall details of meetings.

Military intelligence? That's a well-established oxymoron.

It doesn't exist, my friend. The guy's an idiot.

Who had the ear of an even bigger idiot.

---

If something can corrupt you, you're corrupted already.
- Bob Marley


 

Military intelligence? That's a well-established oxymoron.

It doesn't exist, my friend. The guy's an idiot.

Who had the ear of an even bigger idiot.

It just kills you that he is a billionaire while you live off of government checks, doesn't it?

Life ain't fair, buddy. He was born into a moderately rich family and then made it wealthy through his ambition and drive that you simply don't have. Don't worry - I don't have it either.. that's why we are both posting here instead of living on a yacht.

Jealousy is very ugly though.

---

Who had the ear of an even bigger idiot.

It just kills you that he is a billionaire while you live off of government checks, doesn't it?

Do you feel like a big man now?

---

Plenty of RINOs out there. Besides, we don't know his motivation, and if his motivation supersedes his political affiliations.


Fear, arrogance, ignorance, you name it.

It doesn't mean he's hiding something. Mueller doesn't have anything on anyone.

Based on what we know, you cannot say this. You're basing your opinion on four indictments. Those four may well be talking, and we have no idea what they are saying.

Based on what we know, I feel very confident in saying this. After all this time, the two people he chose to arrest include someone lying about doing something legal and one with financial crimes. Considering the amount of time and money that has been spent on the investigation, there's good reason to believe that he picked them to justify the entire investigation. I wouldn't be surprised to see it come to end in the next few months. 

I'm curious what evidence is out there to support collusion because I haven't seen it.

If we're basing what we say on what we know, then you absolutely cannot say there was collusion much less that they may be talking / assisting to the FBI.

---

Based on what we know, you cannot say this. You're basing your opinion on four indictments. Those four may well be talking, and we have no idea what they are saying.

Based on what we know, I feel very confident in saying this. After all this time, the two people he chose to arrest include someone lying about doing something legal and one with financial crimes. Considering the amount of time and money that has been spent on the investigation, there's good reason to believe that he picked them to justify the entire investigation. I wouldn't be surprised to see it come to end in the next few months. 

I'm curious what evidence is out there to support collusion because I haven't seen it.

If we're basing what we say on what we know, then you absolutely cannot say there was collusion much less that they may be talking / assisting to the FBI.

Collusion? There isn't even proof that Russia did the hacking, that's just supposition. There's no case on collusion without it.

Yes, all 47 thousand intelligence agencies agree that it was Russia, but that's all based on one report by a company working for the DNC.

Crowd Strike

---

                                                                          

"Why should I give information to you when all you want to do is find something wrong with it?"

The Russia probe is on life support. Beep, beep, beep, beep, beep, beeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeep.

We lost it. Time of death, January 14th, 2018, 12:02PM.

---

Based on what we know, you cannot say this. You're basing your opinion on four indictments. Those four may well be talking, and we have no idea what they are saying.

Based on what we know, I feel very confident in saying this. After all this time, the two people he chose to arrest include someone lying about doing something legal and one with financial crimes. Considering the amount of time and money that has been spent on the investigation, there's good reason to believe that he picked them to justify the entire investigation. I wouldn't be surprised to see it come to end in the next few months. 

I'm curious what evidence is out there to support collusion because I haven't seen it.

If we're basing what we say on what we know, then you absolutely cannot say there was collusion much less that they may be talking / assisting to the FBI.

To quote another populist president, "There you go again...", invoking the strange math of opinion + fact = fact, which is as faulty as 2 = 4 (the actual number indicted).

Since opinion is now fact, the oft-invoked "no collusion" mantra is used as much as a smokescreen on one side as it is an accusation based on hope on the other.

---

If something can corrupt you, you're corrupted already.
- Bob Marley


 

Based on what we know, I feel very confident in saying this. After all this time, the two people he chose to arrest include someone lying about doing something legal and one with financial crimes. Considering the amount of time and money that has been spent on the investigation, there's good reason to believe that he picked them to justify the entire investigation. I wouldn't be surprised to see it come to end in the next few months. 

I'm curious what evidence is out there to support collusion because I haven't seen it.

If we're basing what we say on what we know, then you absolutely cannot say there was collusion much less that they may be talking / assisting to the FBI.

To quote another populist president, "There you go again...", invoking the strange math of opinion + fact = fact, which is as faulty as 2 = 4 (the actual number indicted).

Since opinion is now fact, the oft-invoked "no collusion" mantra is used as much as a smokescreen on one side as it is an accusation based on hope on the other.

So, you can't show the evidence then?

You're right. There are 4 people arrested. It's obvious I'm referring to Mike Flynn and Paul Manafort--the same people most people refer to when they talk about it. Rick Gates and George Papadopolous are nobodies, but since you brought them up, we can talk about them too. Gates, like Manafort, was arrest for things that have absolutely nothing to do with Trump. Is he the one you're using to support collusion? Because it doesn't have to do with collusion. Papadopolous, like Flynn, was arrested for lying. They supposedly know what he talked about, and the things listed in the warrant aren't even illegal. Nothing that has been listed in any of the charges show collusion, but you want me to believe that it exist. 

You can substitute Russia with almost any other country. It's only a problem with Russia because Hillary pushed this narrative to justify her illegal activity with the servers. While investigating her, Strozk cleared her of wrongdoing despite the evidence of criminal activity. He purposely failed to abide by FBI standards of interrogations and didn't even record the conversation he had with Clinton who was a suspect to a crime! Clinton's campaign then paid for a fake dossier, and now the same investigator is investigating Trump using information gained from this dossier. There's more evidence to suggest collusion between Clinton and the FBI than Trump and Russia. Hell, there's so much more too (Fusion GPS and the DOJ connection), but I'm not interested in spending all day on this.

These same investigators didn't have a problem when Hillary lied to them. Why is lying a problem now unless they have ulterior motives? Sure, sure send them to jail for lying, but let's not pretend that they care about lying when they've been doing it all along.

---

Jags in playoffs Trumps first year in office. Last appearance during Bush era. Coincidence? Hmm....Obama was literally useless!

---