Politics for Pros- moderated Message Board

STOCKTALK

We've detected that you're using an ad content blocking browser plug-in or feature. Ads provide a critical source of revenue to the continued operation of Silicon Investor. We ask that you disable ad blocking while on Silicon Investor in the best interests of our community. If you are not using an ad blocker but are still receiving this message, make sure your browser's tracking protection is set to the 'standard' level.

Politics : Politics for Pros- moderated

Public Reply Prvt Reply Mark as Last Read File

Previous 10 Next 10 Previous Next

Recommended by:

alanrs

SirWalterRalegh

skinowski

To: sm1th who wrote (696634)	11/21/2019 6:05:54 PM
From: niceguy767	3 Recommendations Read Replies (1) of 793921

Why? The best defense is an aggressive offense! 1. Mueller failed badly with his aggressive "Russia collusion" offense. 2. Nadler failed badly with his aggressive "obstruction" offense. 3. Schiff failed badly with his aggressive "quid pro quo", morphing into "extortion", and once again morphing into "bribery" offense. Question is: Why would so many seemingly bright Democrats climb on these faulty buses 3 times knowing they had zero arrows in their quiver, just lame ducks? That's a "huge" risk for them to take! My guess is that they were willing to go all out on offense in hopes that they could break our duly elected President so that he wouldn't be able to uncover the Obama/Clinton era multitude of sins comprising (you guessed it) 1. Collusion 2. Obstruction 3.Quid pro quo, extortion and bribery Let's start with that $7.4 billion Ukraine misallocation of US dollars via Burisma (and Bidens), and go backwards from their into Iran, Clinton Foundation and Uranium One.

Report TOU Violation

Share This Post

Public Reply Prvt Reply Mark as Last Read File

Previous 10 Next 10 Previous Next