Theme for today: beware the smocking gun.
“Democrats can’t find a Smocking Gun tying the Trump campaign to Russia after James Comey’s testimony. No Smocking Gun…No Collusion.” @FoxNews That’s because there was NO COLLUSION. So now the Dems go to a simple private transaction, wrongly call it a campaign contribution,…
— Donald J. Trump (@realDonaldTrump) December 10, 2018
Also, of course, the “simple private transaction” was spending money to buy the silence of two women he had sex with so that the voters wouldn’t know he’d had sex with two women outside his marriage. How dare we invade his privacy like that.
Also, it’s not “the Dems,” it’s federal prosecutors.
Comments
9 responses to “A simple private transaction”
Yes, but they’re all Dems. Everybody knows any opposition to him is biased, partisan and wrong by definition. Everyone else loves him, and his Word is Law.
Which is weird, anyway, since his infidelity during his prior marriages was common knowledge. Plus, did he really believe he could shoot someone on 42nd street and not lose any voters, but that he couldn’t have sex with two women outside of marriage and not lose any voters? Are his voters that far away from consistent behavior? (Rhetorical question – no need to ask. Trump voters defy all attempts to find consistency and coherence).
Smocking gun?
I’ve now read the next post. Should have known you’d be all over that.
Why won’t he just fock off?
You all must admit it is literally true that nobody has found nor is likely to find a smocking gun.
It’s probably locked in the same room as the covfefe.
Damn. Now I need a cup of covfefe, and it’s all locked away. Thanks a lot, Rob.
The covfefe shortage is smocking iknklast. Totally smocking.
Give Trump his due, he does come up with words flexible in their utility. Mostly because they have no defined meaning.