Comments by "CatsRule" (@1133saginaw) on "Jesse Watters speaks out on House's vote to censure Adam Schiff" video.

@angrytater2456 Benghazi had no indictments as Durham had no indictments. Mueller had 34 and several convictions.
5
California is a beautiful state. San Francisco is amazing.
3
Oh, they will listen. There is no end to the cult.
3
Censure him for what? Asking tough questions?
3
75% of the new jobs are in his district.
3
@timogul Are you kidding? Trump incriminated himself on live TV. He added fuel to the fire.
3
The Second Amendment was intended to fight off Indian attacks.
2
Except the "rule" here is daring to take Trump on for his criminal activity. He can't have that.
2
For taking on Trump? You people are really into that Trump cult aren't you.
1
Durham: "I don't think there was a question that the Russians intruded into the system." " The conclusion of the ICA and the Mueller investigation was the Russians intended to disrupt the (Clinton) campaign."
1
@Red-Check-Mark On what grounds? Trump admitted stealing the documents on live TV. There is no contest.
1
How can anyone be more ethical than taking on Trump, your many times indicted spiritual leader? Two indictments with more on the way? That's more than Jeffery Dahmer received.
1
@TROLLBUSTER12 I get it. He's a criminal because he took on Trump as well.
1
@KevinPierce-pu4bd But England was not the governing authority. The Constitution was written after the revolution. Indian attacks were the major concern at the time.
1
His crime is taking on Trump, something spineless Republicans should try so they won't be totally scorched by history.
1
@KevinPierce-pu4bd I don't think they organized militias to attack their own government. Think about it.
1
Well the 2nd Amendment mentions militias. What do you think militias were used for prior to having an army, insurrections?
1
@Yooper2024 What was the lie?
1
@Lucylou7070 They were the same hard core facts that were used to indict Trump. How can it be "nothing" when it was enough to drag the former President of the United States into court in disgrace?
1
@Lucylou7070 John Durham testified the Russians intruded into the 2016 elections to damage the Clinton campaign. The Mueller Report said the same thing. What more do you need to know?
1
The GOP want's to shut him up because he is taking on Trump - something the GOP should have done years ago. How many elections do you guys want to lose?
1
@Lucylou7070 You should look up the Senate Intelligence Committee Report , vol. 5, regarding Trump's contacts with Russia. It's all laid out. It was made while the GOP still had control, authored by Marco Rubio, I believe. Very damning evidence.
1
@Lucylou7070 So you are saying he lied about crimes but the DOJ indicted him for the same crimes. That makes a lot of sense. I think Republicans just want to pull off a few stunts so their followers think they are actually doing things for the American people. Not quite doing that though are they.
1
Convicted liar? That didn't happen. He was never convicted in court. Who's the liar? His "crime" was holding Trump accountable, something no spineless Republican dares to do.
1
@Yooper2024 How about Trump winning the election? How about claiming Trump is innocent of all the indictments piling up at an ever-increasing rate?
1
Failed? California holds 75% of the new jobs.
1
@ginaguarino3163 John Durham: "I don't think there was any question that the Russians intruded into the system". The conclusion of the ICA and the Mueller investigation was that the Russians intended to disrupt the (Clinton) campaign."
1
He was censored for taking on Trump. History will not be kind to spineless cowards.
1
@SoundsBogus Acquitted? I don't think so. Is Fox telling you that? Time for a new news source or a new brain, a functioning one.
1
Durham: "I don't think there was a question that the Russians intruded into the system." " The conclusion of the ICA and the Mueller investigation was the Russians intended to disrupt the (Clinton) campaign."
1