Reuters: No Collusion
- Thread starter wvkeeper(HN)
- Start date
"Knowingly"
Yeah. "Knowingly" - a term with a specific legal meaning. As in, you have to "knowingly" and "voluntarily" join in an agreement to commit a criminal act in order to be found guilty of criminal conspiracy. Hence, no criminal charges because no one was found to have "knowingly" entered into a criminal agreement to commit an underlying felony or misdemeanor. So now what? You think they negligently or unintentionally colluded with Russia?
It would take an even bigger idiot to think that might have happened.
Hey, you threw out the hypothetical question. Don't blame me for answering.
No Russian collusion, no obstruction of justice. Haven't we been guaranteed of one or the other by the resident libs (@countryroads89 @dherd @HerdBuckeye ) and closet lib (@Raoul Duke MU )?
Actually the letter says obstruction could not be proven...which tells me Trump obstructed. We all know OJ killed two people, right?
And I've said for a long time if Trump goes down it will be for shit he did before POTUS, mainly money laundering and tax evasion.
We voted for same guy, and you call me a closet lib. Dumbass.
Yeah, dumbass, and OJ was indicted. Trump? Negative, ghost rider.
The point is, the judicial system may be the legal definitive of what someone has done, but a lot of times it isn't the realistic definitive.
History will judge Trump...and likely harshly.
Yeah, for sure, if liberals and closet liberals have anything to say about it.
Last edited:
