• AdelleChattre (edited 5 years ago)
    +2

    Maybe that's got something to do with the indictments themselves. Not so much how many are for crimes that were public knowledge before the investigation. Not so much for the chickenshit charges against "the" Russians working at an ad agency. Not because it'd be all that hard to find something to indict Trump on because for pity's sake he's bent like a coathanger. Not even because it's unrealistic to expect Democrats will convince an all-down-the-line Republican-held government to bring Pence to power. No, I'll disregard them because they're not what I was talking about, evidence of the president committing some fairly specific crimes. You know, light treason. Years into the Trump Administration now, midterms coming up fast, and the Democratic Party's big plan is that Dubya's pick to be J. Edgar Hoover, Bobby "Three Sticks" Mueller, and his crack team of pecksniffs, is going to lead us into the RussiaGhaziPalooza promised land. Moses would do a faster job. Looks like Saint Bobby has to draw this out for yet a few more election cycles.

    • WhoNeedszZz
      +3

      I have no idea what you're trying to argue here.

      • AdelleChattre
        +5

        Me, I'm good. No argument, was just responding to some non sequitur whataboutery.

      • WhoNeedszZz
        +3
        @AdelleChattre -

        Uh? I was referring to the actual meaning of the word "argue" and not the incorrect connotation people associate with it.

      • AdelleChattre
        +4
        @WhoNeedszZz -

        "Do you want to have the full argument or were you thinking of taking a course?"