0
5

[–] 19980750? 0 points 5 points (+5|-0) ago 

I think he said if the charges are true then it’s stunning but that he would accept the judgment of Barr if he decided not to prosecute. He most likely already knew that Barr wouldn’t prosecute for this.

[–] [deleted] 1 point 2 points (+3|-1) ago 

[Deleted]

0
0

[–] 19983865? ago 

I dont know you and you dont know me, but I would say you know nothing about the Hill, or this case specifically.

0
1

[–] 19980134? [S] 0 points 1 point (+1|-0) ago 

Source?

1
1

[–] 19980662? 1 point 1 point (+2|-1) ago 

Q/POTUS/DOJ continues to be Lucy promising to hold the ball for Charlie Brown. We are Charlie Brown.

0
2

[–] 19980934? [S] 0 points 2 points (+2|-0) ago 

So we shouldn't keep and open mind and instead become helpless crybabies in your image?

1
-1

[–] 19985552? 1 point -1 points (+0|-1) ago 

Or we could resort to pulling gross fake mischaracterization out of our ass like you when we have nothing of value or intelligence to offer,

0
0

[–] 19981951? ago 

They already declined. Buwahahahaha Told you Q-tards there would be ZERO NADA ZILCH accountability. Woo Hoo. I am always RIGHT.

0
0

[–] 19983375? ago 

They need to start strong with slam dunk cases and build some momentum with the normies. I trust the plan but can we just get going with it already?

0
1

[–] 19980558? 0 points 1 point (+1|-0) ago 

You guys missed it again. You missed the part when Hannity said the word "FIRST" watch it again. What was that about? These cases need to be done in a specific order.

0
1

[–] 19980186? 0 points 1 point (+1|-0) ago 

https://invidio.us/watch?v=pd32gz-spRE :

Graham: Would be 'stunning' if DOJ declined to prosecute Comey - YouTube


This has been an automated message.

0
0

[–] 19981517? ago 

load more comments ▼ (3 remaining)