still hanging on to that Russia thing? ...
Originally Posted by The_Waco_Kid
Specifically what Russian thing?
Do that, and I can address your point.
Be clear, concise, precise.
Originally Posted by Precious_b
come on, man .. you know .. the thing!
so you don't subscribe to the whole "Trump was Putin's asset" narrative? yes/no.
...
Originally Posted by The_Waco_Kid
Where did I ever directly state what you have in quotes?
Post the link where I state that.
So, i'm still left in the dark what you are trying to reference as to what I *might* have said.
So, going out on a limb, *I* stated that with the Mueller report, it is shown he had contact with Russian operatives (be it he personally or those working on his part) and *I* said he was probably too stupid to put things together to collude.
Gotta tighten things up I posted if you are refencing them for clarifying what I stated.
Otherwise, if it is to answer what you stated, "/" is my answer 
Originally Posted by Precious_b
evading answering a direct question usually implies guilt in criminal cases ..
Originally Posted by The_Waco_Kid
I noticed you didn't give me a reply back to my last response on the question you are trying to ask me.
So, since you used a courtroom analogy, i'll proceed from there since it is a reference you seem comfortable with.
The Prosecution has addressed a question in the court to the Defendant. As the Defense, I would remind the Prosecution that what he ask can be found in the contents of Discovery.
If Prosecution would look, he can find his answer. Prosecution may address query on another line of questioning if he so wishes.
Otherwise, Prosecution needs to supply further evidence before restating question in this "criminal case."
Originally Posted by The_Waco_Kid
