How Obama and Cronies Framed Trump

atlkvb

All-Conference
Jul 9, 2004
79,550
1,342
113
You know I was just thinking, imagine the numerous "fake news" articles @moe read alleging the wild conspiracy outlined in this assessment of the Obama/DNC/Clinton collusion hoax? 'Ol @moe read almost every one of 'em, re-posted most of 'em, and obviously swallowed every lie in all of 'em considering how much he boasted on this very forum how guilty Trump was of every salacious lie?

Now, the hard facts are here detailing chapter and verse how it was actually the treasonous Dems who "colluded" to first stop Trump from winning, then when that failed, they "colluded" to smear him with a charge of stealing the election he'd just legitimately won!

@moe probably refuses to read any of this. He certainly has had nothing or very little to say about any of it...either factually refuting it or tacitly accepting how he's been lied to. Compare that silence to his vociferous advocacy of Trump's alleged conspiratorial guilt?

Imagine what a fool believes, then how foolish he is to not even recognize it?🤔

Kids...when you grow up, don't be like @moe, because he never has!
 
Last edited:

bornaneer

Senior
Jan 23, 2014
29,838
486
83
You know I was just thinking, imagine the numerous "fake news" articles @moe read alleging the wild conspiracy outlined in this assessment of the Obama/DNC/Clinton collusion hoax? 'Ol @moe read almost every one of 'em, re-posted most of 'em, and obviously swallowed every lie in all of 'em considering how much he posted on this very forum how guilty Trump was of every salacious lie?

Now, the hard facts are here detailing chapter and verse how it was actually the treasonous Dems who "colluded" to first stop Trump from winning, then when that failed, they "colluded" to smear him with a charge of stealing the election he'd just legitimately won!

@moe probably refuses to read any of this. He certainly has had nothing or very little to say about any of it...either factually refuting it or tacitly accepting how he's been lied to. Compare that silence to his vociferous advocacy of Trump's alleged conspiratorial guilt?

Imagine what a fool believes, then how foolishness he is to not even recognize it?🤔

Kids...when you grow up, don't be like @moe, because he never has!
I don't care if moe reads it. Moe is a closed minded fool....probably from a long line of West Virginia "good ol boy" Democrat families.
 

atlkvb

All-Conference
Jul 9, 2004
79,550
1,342
113
I don't care if moe reads it. Moe is a closed minded fool....probably from a long line of West Virginia "good ol boy" Democrat families.
I can't wait until his foolish *** shows up here with his next "fake news" Trump hit piece. I'm going to ask him why we should believe it, considering how many others he's posted like this collusion scam that's nothing but a stone cold Democrat hoax?

He'll probably go back into hiding after I ask him that. 🤣
 

atlkvb

All-Conference
Jul 9, 2004
79,550
1,342
113
I think Moe is just a total dumbass and probably a mama's boy.
Ironically, he answers all of my questions about his mental acuity when he disappears over big stories that expose his ignorance. You can always tell when @moe and his lies are exposed...because that's when he typically disappears. :sneaky:

He vanished after Trump bombed Iran, after the Supreme court ruled inTrump's favor stopping rouge district court Judges from issuing nationwide injunctions against his EO's, he vanishes when the economy posts record job & stock market gains, he even disappeared after Trump got the "big beautiful bill" passed.

He predicted failure for all of those. After Trump posted each W.... @moe goes into his disappearing act.....

@moe
I really don't want to be staying around here exposed as a lunatic and being mocked mercilessly whenever I'm proven wrong

Well just damn @moe that happens all the time! No wonder we can never find 'ya!
 
Last edited:
  • Like
Reactions: bornaneer

atlkvb

All-Conference
Jul 9, 2004
79,550
1,342
113
No, this one. Russian assistance to Trump was real in 2016 election, not a hoax like you all like to keep repeating.
Look at this folks...just this past week @moe was insisting that the Russia...Russia...Russia collusion scam was real! This was earlier in the week. By Friday information is produced which says it was a complete hoax, and in fact a plot to overthrow a sitting duly elected President!

Has anyone seen @moe to refute this most recent information, or back up his post from earlier in the week?

Now where did he go...I think I remember seeing him out there somewhere?

Where's @moe ?

He's usually all over this board with Trump smears...but where is he now?

He was here just a few days ago...I know I saw him


@moe...you out there ??????


OK @moe ...you can come out of hiding now...we know you're wrong again!
 
Last edited:

moe

Sophomore
May 29, 2001
32,462
137
63
"Weak attempt" do better clowns. Trump is as guilty as Epstein but they'll never prove it especially after they offer Maxwell anything she wants to keep her quiet, here comes that pardon. No way that Trump didn't sample the underage goods that his best bud for years Epstein had readily available. Why do you think that panican pedo Trump is so desperate to make this go away?

Obama Hits Back at Trump’s Treason Accusation: ‘Weak Attempt at Distraction’

“Out of respect for the office of the presidency, our office does not normally dignify the constant nonsense and misinformation flowing out of this White House with a response,” Patrick Rodenbush said in a statement. “But these claims are outrageous enough to merit one. These bizarre allegations are ridiculous and a weak attempt at distraction.”

The statement added that Gabbard’s so-called evidence does not undercut “the widely accepted conclusion that Russia worked to influence the 2016 presidential election but did not successfully manipulate any votes.” It noted that “these findings were affirmed in a 2020 report by the bipartisan Senate Intelligence Committee, led by then-Chairman Marco Rubio,” who is now Trump’s Secretary of State and acting National Security Adviser.

Democrats have largely echoed Obama’s response, accusing Trump and his allies of attempting to distract from Epstein. “Another day, another wave of absurd lies and distractions from Donald Trump,” Sen. Chris Van Hollen of Maryland posted on X. “It’s clear he wants us talking about *anything* other than his refusal to release the Epstein files…or rising prices. It’s not going to work.”
 

bornaneer

Senior
Jan 23, 2014
29,838
486
83
"Weak attempt" do better clowns. Trump is as guilty as Epstein but they'll never prove it especially after they offer Maxwell anything she wants to keep her quiet, here comes that pardon. No way that Trump didn't sample the underage goods that his best bud for years Epstein had readily available. Why do you think that panican pedo Trump is so desperate to make this go away?

Obama Hits Back at Trump’s Treason Accusation: ‘Weak Attempt at Distraction’

“Out of respect for the office of the presidency, our office does not normally dignify the constant nonsense and misinformation flowing out of this White House with a response,” Patrick Rodenbush said in a statement. “But these claims are outrageous enough to merit one. These bizarre allegations are ridiculous and a weak attempt at distraction.”

The statement added that Gabbard’s so-called evidence does not undercut “the widely accepted conclusion that Russia worked to influence the 2016 presidential election but did not successfully manipulate any votes.” It noted that “these findings were affirmed in a 2020 report by the bipartisan Senate Intelligence Committee, led by then-Chairman Marco Rubio,” who is now Trump’s Secretary of State and acting National Security Adviser.

Democrats have largely echoed Obama’s response, accusing Trump and his allies of attempting to distract from Epstein. “Another day, another wave of absurd lies and distractions from Donald Trump,” Sen. Chris Van Hollen of Maryland posted on X. “It’s clear he wants us talking about *anything* other than his refusal to release the Epstein files…or rising prices. It’s not going to work.”
Thanks for your effort....but please explain how Trump is as guilty as Epstein.
 

moe

Sophomore
May 29, 2001
32,462
137
63
Thanks for your effort....but please explain how Trump is as guilty as Epstein.
Already did.

No way that Trump didn't sample the underage goods that his best bud for years Epstein had readily available.

Gabbard’s suggestion that Obama betrayed the U.S. government by directing a supposedly misleading intelligence assessment is “just silly,” said Williams. “Intelligence assessments are sometimes ambiguous. There are different opinions that can be made about them, but merely disagreeing with one or the findings of one or what’s drawn from one is not treason,” he said. “Now, can it be a hassle and a pain in the *** to the person who’s investigated, who’s got to hire a lawyer and go through all the motions? Sure. But this is not an investigation to be grounded in any reality.”

Beyond that, there’s also the issue of presidential immunity. In a ruling favorable to Trump last year, the Supreme Court established a broad framework that former Presidents enjoy “absolute immunity from criminal prosecution for actions within his conclusive and preclusive constitutional authority” and “at least presumptive immunity from prosecution for all his official acts.”

“Before Trump v. US, people could ask pesky questions like, ‘If President Obama committed so many crimes, why hasn’t the DOJ indicted him?’ But Presidential immunity makes evidence of wrongdoing (or lack thereof in Obama’s case) irrelevant,” Milan Markovic, a law professor at Texas A&M University, posted on Bluesky. Posted Graham Steele, former assistant secretary for financial institutions at the Treasury Department and a fellow at the Rock Center for Corporate Governance at Stanford Law School: “One of SCOTUS’s rationales for the Trump immunity decision was that it would protect former presidents of *both parties* from political prosecutions. And yet, this administration is openly talking about indicting a former Democratic president on (literally and figuratively) trumped-up charges.”
 

SoCo

Sophomore
May 29, 2001
35,600
134
63
I have no idea what nonsense moe is repeating.

Most of us have known Russia collusion was fake and that it originated in the Oval Office for several years.

Wasn't it the release of the twitter files that exposed it by publishing the White House logs and notes from the Obama/Hillary meeting?

Who would have thought the guy who created the "very Fine People' hoax was also behind Russia collusion?
 
  • Like
Reactions: roadtrasheer

Gunny46

Senior
Jul 2, 2018
50,128
486
83
Already did.

No way that Trump didn't sample the underage goods that his best bud for years Epstein had readily available.

Gabbard’s suggestion that Obama betrayed the U.S. government by directing a supposedly misleading intelligence assessment is “just silly,” said Williams. “Intelligence assessments are sometimes ambiguous. There are different opinions that can be made about them, but merely disagreeing with one or the findings of one or what’s drawn from one is not treason,” he said. “Now, can it be a hassle and a pain in the *** to the person who’s investigated, who’s got to hire a lawyer and go through all the motions? Sure. But this is not an investigation to be grounded in any reality.”

Beyond that, there’s also the issue of presidential immunity. In a ruling favorable to Trump last year, the Supreme Court established a broad framework that former Presidents enjoy “absolute immunity from criminal prosecution for actions within his conclusive and preclusive constitutional authority” and “at least presumptive immunity from prosecution for all his official acts.”

“Before Trump v. US, people could ask pesky questions like, ‘If President Obama committed so many crimes, why hasn’t the DOJ indicted him?’ But Presidential immunity makes evidence of wrongdoing (or lack thereof in Obama’s case) irrelevant,” Milan Markovic, a law professor at Texas A&M University, posted on Bluesky. Posted Graham Steele, former assistant secretary for financial institutions at the Treasury Department and a fellow at the Rock Center for Corporate Governance at Stanford Law School: “One of SCOTUS’s rationales for the Trump immunity decision was that it would protect former presidents of *both parties* from political prosecutions. And yet, this administration is openly talking about indicting a former Democratic president on (literally and figuratively) trumped-up charges.”


You need to be quiet. The truth is coming and no amount of spinning the facts are going to stop it. You were told the truth as far back as 2018.




 

Gunny46

Senior
Jul 2, 2018
50,128
486
83



All the same people like Comey and Brennan that created the Russia coup were the same people protecting Epstein. You can add Robert Mueller's name to the list too. That's why Maureen Comey was given cases like Epstein and Combs and why she just got fired.
 
Last edited:

Gunny46

Senior
Jul 2, 2018
50,128
486
83
You need to be quiet. The truth is coming and no amount of spinning the facts are going to stop it. You were told the truth as far back as 2018.






It's the same players involved in Russia Gate, Epstein, and even Combs. As Tolman says above and like I have said numerous times. None of these investigations were conducted properly.


 

bornaneer

Senior
Jan 23, 2014
29,838
486
83
Already did.

No way that Trump didn't sample the underage goods that his best bud for years Epstein had readily available.

Gabbard’s suggestion that Obama betrayed the U.S. government by directing a supposedly misleading intelligence assessment is “just silly,” said Williams. “Intelligence assessments are sometimes ambiguous. There are different opinions that can be made about them, but merely disagreeing with one or the findings of one or what’s drawn from one is not treason,” he said. “Now, can it be a hassle and a pain in the *** to the person who’s investigated, who’s got to hire a lawyer and go through all the motions? Sure. But this is not an investigation to be grounded in any reality.”

Beyond that, there’s also the issue of presidential immunity. In a ruling favorable to Trump last year, the Supreme Court established a broad framework that former Presidents enjoy “absolute immunity from criminal prosecution for actions within his conclusive and preclusive constitutional authority” and “at least presumptive immunity from prosecution for all his official acts.”

“Before Trump v. US, people could ask pesky questions like, ‘If President Obama committed so many crimes, why hasn’t the DOJ indicted him?’ But Presidential immunity makes evidence of wrongdoing (or lack thereof in Obama’s case) irrelevant,” Milan Markovic, a law professor at Texas A&M University, posted on Bluesky. Posted Graham Steele, former assistant secretary for financial institutions at the Treasury Department and a fellow at the Rock Center for Corporate Governance at Stanford Law School: “One of SCOTUS’s rationales for the Trump immunity decision was that it would protect former presidents of *both parties* from political prosecutions. And yet, this administration is openly talking about indicting a former Democratic president on (literally and figuratively) trumped-up charges.”
Where is your proof of your outrageous claim that Trump sampled the goods. Show us the proof you have.
 

bornaneer

Senior
Jan 23, 2014
29,838
486
83
I've already explained it. It's just common sense.
Your explanation is meaningless and NOT proof of anything....only your opinion.
However, I will look at any actual proof, NOT your opinion, you can produce.
 
  • Haha
Reactions: moe

atlkvb

All-Conference
Jul 9, 2004
79,550
1,342
113
Why do you think that panican pedo Trump is so desperate to make this go away?
Then explain how Trump is "trying to make this all go away" by ordering a release of any and all documents related to the Epstein files?

Trump And Bondi Promised Epstein Grand Jury Docs—
President Donald Trump directed Attorney General Pam Bondi on Thursday to release grand jury documents related to disgraced financier Jeffrey Epstein, but while Bondi vowed to ask the court Friday to unseal the filings, it could take months for any documents to actually be released—if the court allows them to come out at all.

@moe

Trump's guilty, a pedo, and a reprobate. That's the media narrative and I'm stickin' with it.

OK @moe , no one ever accused YOU of ignoring facts huh? :cautious:
 
  • Like
Reactions: mlblack16.

mlblack16.

Heisman
Mar 9, 2017
10,772
12,288
8
I don't care if moe reads it. Moe is a closed minded fool....probably from a long line of West Virginia "good ol boy" Democrat families.
^^This

Too many smooth-brain simps like Moe-lester who do not understand today's version of the Democratic party isn't the same one his grandpappy told him to swear allegiance to.
 

atlkvb

All-Conference
Jul 9, 2004
79,550
1,342
113
^^This

Too many smooth-brain simps like Moe-lester who do not understand today's version of the Democratic party isn't the same one his grandpappy told him to swear allegiance to.
I dare @moe (or any other dyed-in-the-wool-Leftist) to watch this 5 minute video outlining the actual true history of the true original racist party....the Democrat party! :mad:


Did you know that the Democratic Party defended slavery, started the Civil War, founded the KKK, and fought against every major civil rights act in U.S. history? Watch as Carol Swain, professor of political science at Vanderbilt University, shares the inconvenient history of the Democratic Party.
 
Last edited:

atlkvb

All-Conference
Jul 9, 2004
79,550
1,342
113
Hey @moe... did the Praetorian guard legacy media or your brainwashers in government schools ever tell you about the true racist history of the Democrat party that's historically recounted in post # 23?

@moe
What do I look like, a history buff atl?

Well no @moe ...actually you look like a media mind numbed bot

*(and maybe a racist yourself too?) :unsure:
 

phillya

Sophomore
Jan 2, 2009
5,383
106
63
I've already explained it. It's just common sense.
Common sense tells me that, if Trump was involved in wrong doing with Epstein, the blood thirsty, TDS Dems would have exposed the evidence when they had the power to do so. That was four years under Biden, with Merrick Garland and his corrupt DOJ, with all the files being held in the Trump-hating Southern District of New York DA's office. But not a peep out of them which tells you they have nothing on Trump.
In fact, it's been all the Dems who have long been trying to suppress the Epstein files. It's MAGA Republicans who want transparency.
 

30CAT

All-Conference
May 29, 2001
170,326
3,569
113
Democrats used judicial activist judges in heavily Democrat areas to wrongly convict Trump of felonies hoping to turn public opinion against him. They've tried at least twice to lie and hopefully the truth will come out about homObama, Comey, Clapper and Hilliary. If that truth is that they tried to subvert an election (treason) then they should face the full extent of the law . However, Patel and Bondi need to make sure they're not duplicating Democrat playbooks because all faith in the system will be lost which we cannot have. Just the truth.....not just Democrat heads.
 

moe

Sophomore
May 29, 2001
32,462
137
63
Common sense tells me that, if Trump was involved in wrong doing with Epstein, the blood thirsty, TDS Dems would have exposed the evidence when they had the power to do so. That was four years under Biden, with Merrick Garland and his corrupt DOJ, with all the files being held in the Trump-hating Southern District of New York DA's office. But not a peep out of them which tells you they have nothing on Trump.
In fact, it's been all the Dems who have long been trying to suppress the Epstein files. It's MAGA Republicans who want transparency.
Cool story. So Dems would have just released docs involving Trump only? No. Likely lots of Dems and Repubs involved and you can't just release info on Cankles Trump. The docs they're talking about releasing now are only a small portion of the overall and there is zero chance Trump will be mentioned if any docs are released. Need someone not named Maxwell (because she won't incriminate Trump if she wants a pardon) to come forward to talk about Trump's involvement but most would be too scared. It's a Trump admin coverup and they just want this to go away.
 
Last edited:
  • Haha
Reactions: bornaneer

atlkvb

All-Conference
Jul 9, 2004
79,550
1,342
113
Common sense tells me that, if Trump was involved in wrong doing with Epstein, the blood thirsty, TDS Dems would have exposed the evidence when they had the power to do so. That was four years under Biden, with Merrick Garland and his corrupt DOJ, with all the files being held in the Trump-hating Southern District of New York DA's office. But not a peep out of them which tells you they have nothing on Trump.
In fact, it's been all the Dems who have long been trying to suppress the Epstein files. It's MAGA Republicans who want transparency.
Offering this type of logical thinking to a mind controlled bot like @moe is not conducive to his recovery from terminal TDS.
 
  • Like
Reactions: bornaneer

atlkvb

All-Conference
Jul 9, 2004
79,550
1,342
113
Cool story. So Dems would have just released docs involving Trump only? No. Likely lots of Dems and Repubs involved and you can't just release info on Cankles Trump. The docs they're talking about releasing now are only a small portion of the overall and there is zero chance Trump will be mentioned if any docs are released. Need someone not named Maxwell to come forward to talk about Trump's involvement but most would be too scared. It's a Trump admin coverup and they just want this to go away.
@moe you bot, Maxwell was running the entire operation for Epstein! Who better to ask about the people he routinely serviced? Can you think of anyone else who had more intimate interaction with Epstein?

She knows more about the girls and their perverted customers than probably Epstein! I know TDS has warped your logical thinking, but looks like it's damaged your common sense too? :unsure:

Pity.

@moe
I'm perfectly capable of logical thinking atl, however that doesn't quite serve my purposes feeding an irrational hatred I harbor for Trump. Besides...TDS is much more suitable for the way I've been brainwashed to think!

Oh well excuse me @moe , didn't mean to interfere withe your media mind control programming. :sneaky:
 
Last edited:
  • Like
Reactions: 30CAT

atlkvb

All-Conference
Jul 9, 2004
79,550
1,342
113
Already did.

No way that Trump didn't sample the underage goods that his best bud for years Epstein had readily available.

Gabbard’s suggestion that Obama betrayed the U.S. government by directing a supposedly misleading intelligence assessment is “just silly,” said Williams. “Intelligence assessments are sometimes ambiguous. There are different opinions that can be made about them, but merely disagreeing with one or the findings of one or what’s drawn from one is not treason,” he said. “Now, can it be a hassle and a pain in the *** to the person who’s investigated, who’s got to hire a lawyer and go through all the motions? Sure. But this is not an investigation to be grounded in any reality.”

Beyond that, there’s also the issue of presidential immunity. In a ruling favorable to Trump last year, the Supreme Court established a broad framework that former Presidents enjoy “absolute immunity from criminal prosecution for actions within his conclusive and preclusive constitutional authority” and “at least presumptive immunity from prosecution for all his official acts.”

“Before Trump v. US, people could ask pesky questions like, ‘If President Obama committed so many crimes, why hasn’t the DOJ indicted him?’ But Presidential immunity makes evidence of wrongdoing (or lack thereof in Obama’s case) irrelevant,” Milan Markovic, a law professor at Texas A&M University, posted on Bluesky. Posted Graham Steele, former assistant secretary for financial institutions at the Treasury Department and a fellow at the Rock Center for Corporate Governance at Stanford Law School: “One of SCOTUS’s rationales for the Trump immunity decision was that it would protect former presidents of *both parties* from political prosecutions. And yet, this administration is openly talking about indicting a former Democratic president on (literally and figuratively) trumped-up charges.”
Your propaganda doesn't address the seminal issue here. Why didn't Obama accept the initial analysis of his own DNI which concluded the Russians DID NOT affect the outcome of the election?

Instead, the evidence proves he directed Brennan and Clapper to develop a new narrative after they rejected the facts of their own original investigation. Instead, they concocted an entirely different scenario not based in any fact, but a totally fabricated narrative which they all knew was bogus because Obama is the one who ordered it, according to these new DNI documents!

Your propaganda didn't mention that, nor did it point out that illegally spying on innocent Americans and lying to Courts in order to justify breaking the law doesn't make anyone "immune" from prosecution.

Who ordered the illegal spying @moe ? Why didn't your propaganda piece explain that? It happened you know, and someone gave the illegal order. Wonder who that was? :unsure:

@moe
If I honestly answered that, I might be forced to admit how Obama even had me fooled!

Well @moe , that wasn't exactly hard for Zero to do considering how much the legacy media YOU suck up to sucked up to him?
 
Last edited:
  • Like
Reactions: bornaneer and 30CAT

atlkvb

All-Conference
Jul 9, 2004
79,550
1,342
113
Trump is as guilty as Epstein but they'll never prove it especially after they offer Maxwell anything she wants to keep her quiet, here comes that pardon. No way that Trump didn't sample the underage goods that his best bud for years had readily available.
You need to be reminded who brought Maxwell to Justice? Trump's D.O.J.

You also need to be reminded who banned Epstein from Mar-a-Lago after he discovered what a pervert Jeffrey was?

Yup that was me too!


I've always had eye for pretty young ladies, but not little girls!



Moe's a deranged bot DJT...just keep winning...drives him nuts! 😜

I know!
 
Last edited:

atlkvb

All-Conference
Jul 9, 2004
79,550
1,342
113
Just watched it...it's all out there with the documentation to back it up. Moe needs to let us know how MSNBC is spinning this one.
He won't watch it, but he should. It shoots holes into all of the propaganda he's been posting as a defense for Obama's lawlessness. :cautious:
 
  • Like
Reactions: bornaneer

bornaneer

Senior
Jan 23, 2014
29,838
486
83
He won't watch it, but he should. It shoots holes into all of the propaganda he's been posting as a defense for Obama's lawlessness. :cautious:
He should because it's on on the record and now the public has access to the records.
 
  • Like
Reactions: atlkvb

atlkvb

All-Conference
Jul 9, 2004
79,550
1,342
113
He should because it's on on the record and now the public has access to the records.
That bot doesn't care. He's filled with hate, and nothing will ever substitute for that. Not even hard cold documented facts. :sneaky:
 
  • Like
Reactions: bornaneer

moe

Sophomore
May 29, 2001
32,462
137
63
Just watched it...it's all out there with the documentation to back it up. Moe needs to let us know how MSNBC is spinning this one.
lol MAGA loves story time. MSNBC and rest of MSM are laughing at MAGA who gets excited about Trump's efforts to distract from the Epstein cover up. BO should sue Trump admin for slander.
 
  • Haha
Reactions: bornaneer

atlkvb

All-Conference
Jul 9, 2004
79,550
1,342
113
lol MAGA loves story time. MSNBC and rest of MSM are laughing at MAGA who gets excited about Trump's efforts to distract from the Epstein cover up. BO should sue Trump admin for slander.
You never answered why Obama didn't accept the factual findings of his own DNI once they looked into allegations that the Russians changed the outcome of the election in favor of Trump. You can deny reality for only so long before you look like a pre-programmed bot.

There was no legitimate reason for Obama to order an alternate assessment of what the Russians were up to after his own DNI said they didn't change the outcome of the election.

So why didn't he accept their factual conclusions, and why did he order an entirely new assessment?

@moe
Do you really expect me to honestly answer that atl?

Well it would be more like you thinking on your own if you could, instead of just repeating the lies you've been fed about Trump "colluding" with those pesky Russians. :rolleyes:
 
Last edited:
  • Like
Reactions: bornaneer