Welcome to DU!
The truly grassroots left-of-center political community where regular people, not algorithms, drive the discussions and set the standards.
Join the community:
Create a free account
Support DU (and get rid of ads!):
Become a Star Member
Latest Breaking News
General Discussion
The DU Lounge
All Forums
Issue Forums
Culture Forums
Alliance Forums
Region Forums
Support Forums
Help & Search
General Discussion
Related: Editorials & Other Articles, Issue Forums, Alliance Forums, Region ForumsWhat a surprise! Burr and GOPers on committee find no direct evidence of collusion.
Seriously? So much for reports that the committee was operating in a bi-partisan manner. The weak kneed Republicans are all afraid of being primaried. What a bunch of cowards. There is a ton of evidence already unearthed.
InfoView thread info, including edit history
TrashPut this thread in your Trash Can (My DU » Trash Can)
BookmarkAdd this thread to your Bookmarks (My DU » Bookmarks)
5 replies, 612 views
ShareGet links to this post and/or share on social media
AlertAlert this post for a rule violation
PowersThere are no powers you can use on this post
EditCannot edit other people's posts
ReplyReply to this post
EditCannot edit other people's posts
Rec (3)
ReplyReply to this post
5 replies
= new reply since forum marked as read
Highlight:
NoneDon't highlight anything
5 newestHighlight 5 most recent replies
What a surprise! Burr and GOPers on committee find no direct evidence of collusion. (Original Post)
redstateblues
Feb 2019
OP
Please amend you OP to state "no DIRECT evidence of collusion" ....big big difference. nt
UniteFightBack
Feb 2019
#4
struggle4progress
(118,282 posts)1. "I understand Putin told the President it's not true!"
getagrip_already
(14,750 posts)2. except that's not what he said.....
look up seth abramsons tweet. He explains it well.
Burr never said there "no evidence" of collusion. He said in effect there was no absolute evidence. He used a legal phrase. He didn't say there was no evidence, he just stopped short of saying it was absolutely incriminating.
guillaumeb
(42,641 posts)3. Did anyone really expect them to find any evidence?
Or to act with integrity?
UniteFightBack
(8,231 posts)4. Please amend you OP to state "no DIRECT evidence of collusion" ....big big difference. nt
uponit7771
(90,339 posts)5. STRAWMAN !! No one was looking for "direct" evidence ... of course there's no contract between
... Red Don and Russia