Dog 2.0
Super Anarchist
- 4,967
- 805
We'll see.For the movie about TFG, his family and sycophants I suggest:
The Fat and the Flurious.
And Dog - is it ignorance or apathy because you don't know shit about document requirements.
We'll see.For the movie about TFG, his family and sycophants I suggest:
The Fat and the Flurious.
And Dog - is it ignorance or apathy because you don't know shit about document requirements.
Yawn.The Precedential Records Act is not a criminal statute.
I refer you to my post you just quoted. He detailed the ways in which the defeated ex-President interfered/obstructed. Then, he statedpoliticallegal issues prevent him fromstatingconcludingthe obviousobstruction.
The "technicality" being the law.He detailed the many ways your Messiah interfered/obstructed the investigation.
A technicality kept him from recommending he be charged.
Precedential Records Act? Fuck me that's funny.The Precedential Records Act is not a criminal statute.
My recollection is that Muller did not recommend pursuing the obstruction only because it is DoJ policy to not indict sitting Presidents.A technicality kept him from recommending he be charged.
Does anyone else smell that? Everyone, check your shoes.
You'll have to forgive Dog, he thinks DOJ policy is law and conveniently doesn't remember the four hundred times he was told that when he was Dog 1.0. Dogs have very short memories.My recollection is that Muller did not recommend pursuing the obstruction only because it is DoJ policy to not indict sitting Presidents.
Lol - okay, am new to this forumYou'll have to forgive Dog, he thinks DOJ policy is law and conveniently doesn't remember the four hundred times he was told that when he was Dog 1.0. Dogs have very short memories.
Bullshit.My recollection is that Muller did not recommend pursuing the obstruction only because it is DoJ policy to not indict sitting Presidents.
Ok....we shall see.'mishandling documents' covers a lot more than just the provisions of the PRA
Shorter and more truthful Doggy Deux Deux.Bullshit.
What “law”. Exact statute would be nice.The "technicality" being the law.
I don't know, I got it from your cite...What “law”. Exact statute would be nice.
Lol - okay, am new to this forum
Interesting here
Great postSorry I forgot. You missed out on some of the most ridiculous and funny defenses of Trump (and every other unsavory GOP character) anyone has ever come up with. A lot of his stuff was borrowed directly from Tucker/Hannity/Beck and all the other Fox talking heads, but Dog 1.0 was truly gifted at spreading the BS as thick a Mississippi mud. He used all the tools a talented BS'er could possible deploy: Misdirection, deflection, whataboutism, red herrings, and every logical fallacy ever invented. Truly inspiring work. @Sol Rosenberg coined the phrase Doggy Stylin' to describe his unique brand of bullshittery and word weaselling. Unfortunately, in all the years he's been here he's convinced exactly zero people of anything he tried to assert because most people here not not complete idiots. Most of his arguments have the tensile strength of wet rice paper. I can't think of a single time anyone said, "Huh, you know Dog, you're right." He self-ejected himself a while back for reasons unknown. Some have speculated he may have had a traumatizing life event caused by Trump's election loss that has left him with diminished cognitive abilities. Normally when something goes from 1.0 to 2.0 you expect some improvement, but in Dog's case that doesn't appear to be true. The energetic pup he use to be has been replaced with a fat, tired old Trump lap dog barely capable of getting to the back door before wetting himself. But at the end of the day, he's still a great pet.
Nah. At the end of the day he’s still shitting on the carpet.But at the end of the day, he's still a great pet.