Posted on 08/21/2020 6:58:50 PM PDT by ameribbean expat
You completely missed the point, as seems common.
It means that none of Breenanskie’s testimony before Congress (or that of any of the other Deep Staters) can be a record on which to lay a “perjury trap,” not that I think they were going to do that anyway. That is too dishonorable for them.
So where do you get the comment for them to charge him with perjury? A non-sworn interview and a TV comment? It’s ludicrous.
Check with me first next time.
Thanks Larry.
Okay, I read it and kept waiting for the part describing why nobody is gonna get arrested. It never came. Is there a part two somewhere? Please advise.
What I did see was evidence of deep state actors covering up criminal activity (leaks).
What makes you think Aldenberg, Durham, or Barr are cut from the same derp state cloth?
That's a mighty big leap.
I catch all valid points. You have made very few so far.
So where do you get the comment for them to charge him with perjury? A non-sworn interview and a TV comment? It’s ludicrous.
Where do you get the idea that Brennan wasn't put under oath for his eight hour interview? I haven't seen that written anywhere. Can you cite your source? I'll even accept your vague 'insider information'. Something.
Lying to Federal agents is a felony.
You base too many of your opinions on nothing. Gather real facts before pontificating.
And I have a useful pro-tip for you, because I don't dislike you.
You are an adequate writer, but your cute little nickname game is unprofessional and marks you as an unserious person.
It also causes the reader to stop at the name while trying to figure out who the F you're talking about, which interrupts the mental flow.
Something to think about.
I am always available for writing tips.
Brother bagster, Larry is good people. Reallllly good people. And -- I've met him -- he is NOT all high on himself, although he'd have every right to be. He's very knowledgeable about history and the ramifications on the present. He might not be right about one particular legal point, but he based his assertion on the word of others that are in the legal field.... and, imagine that, LAWYERS DISAGREE! lol. That's why we have courts.
And Larry, bagster can come off brusque, but he also is good people. Reallllly good people.
I wish you two would kiss (with tongue please) and make up.
“Unjustifiably so, by all indicators.”
He’s been correct way more times than The Oracle at Qball has.
“Trust Sessions.”
L
No he hasn't.
You are a know nothing. Stop Stanning this guy.
#BeCarefulWhoYouFollow
Haha.
#NoHomo
I walk in the field of ideas. His ideas and mine clash. And his ideas are not superior to mine.
Its business, not personal.
Old boy needs to open himself up to alternative thinking and not bash it. We are all on the same side, working toward the same goal, ultimately.
Where we go one, we go all.
“BeCarefulWhoYouFollow”
Take your own advice.
“The midterms are safe.”
“Trust Sessions.”
“Trust Wray”
L
I do, on a daily basis.
That's why I follow no one, other than myself.
Try it.
#SheepNoMore
Tongue, or I produce the videos.
Oh, alright.
But I draw the line at reach arounds.
Fair enough. :)
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.