sailordeac
Well-known member
supportive of what?
supportive of what?
why redact any of it
National security, and personal security concerns. Everything else should be made public.
fuck it; how much could we possibly be giving away. burn it all down.
Not redacting anything is fine by me, and I have said that before.
Yea. Sailor needs to clarify if he’s “fine with Barr’s redactions” or “fine by me” if the whole thing is released. There’s a not a middle ground there, especially given Barr’s super shady past with these things.
That’s what Rachel told me!!!!!
Then why are you stopping by this thread to say shit like "whatever the amount the lefty media and Dem pols will hyperventilate and claim that the proof of Trump's collusion with Russia is in the redacted part" mocking people for calling for the entire report to be released. (Commas would also help, by the way.)
Yea. Sailor needs to clarify if he’s “fine with Barr’s redactions” or “fine by me” if the whole thing is released. There’s a not a middle ground there, especially given Barr’s super shady past with these things.
My statement read, "Not redacting anything is fine by me, and I have said that before." And it does not, and did not, need additional commas.
You guys are hallucinating. As I have repeatedly said, I have no problem with the realease of the unredacted Mueller Report. Indeed, I would like to see all of the materials released, unredacted, that are related to the Russia hoax, and that includes the FISA applications and information collected by intelligence agencies.
My statement read, "Not redacting anything is fine by me, and I have said that before." And it does not, and did not, need additional commas.
You guys are hallucinating. As I have repeatedly said, I have no problem with the realease of the unredacted Mueller Report. Indeed, I would like to see all of the materials released, unredacted, that are related to the Russia hoax, and that includes the FISA applications and information collected by intelligence agencies.
you need a comma here:
whatever the amount, the lefty media and Dem pols will hyperventilate and claim that the proof of Trump's collusion with Russia is in the redacted part
My statement read, "Not redacting anything is fine by me, and I have said that before." And it does not, and did not, need additional commas.
You guys are hallucinating. As I have repeatedly said, I have no problem with the realease of the unredacted Mueller Report. Indeed, I would like to see all of the materials released, unredacted, that are related to the Russia hoax, and that includes the FISA applications and information collected by intelligence agencies.
You're so right. It's a hoax.
It's not like his campaign manager didn't work one of Putin's top associates and make over $20M in a decade.
It's not like his NSA wasn't paid to speak to the new Pravda and sit with Putin.
It's not like is son-in-law didn't meet with Russian diplomats and try to set up a direct line to Putin that US intel wouldn't have access to.
It's not like Putin's piggy bank didn't bail Trump Tower Toronto out with a $100M+ loan.
It's not like Trump''s longtime buddy, Roger Stone, didn't meet with Russian agent Gucifer.
It's not like Putin's buddy didn't launder millions by grossly overpaying for a Trump property and then show up at Trump campaign events.
It's not like Trump didn't take out anti-Russian language from the RNC platform.
It's not like Trump didn't have AG Sessions let of Russians money launderers with barely a slap on the wrist for a $220M scam.
It's not like Trump Soho wasn't financed by convicted Russian mobster Felix Sater.
This is just SOME of what we know to be fact. Imagine what we don't know.
So why didn’t Mueller recommend an indictment?
I literally quoted your comment where you mock people for holding the same opinion as you, only stronger. No hallucinations on my part, perhaps selective memory on your part.