Phil Hands for March 27, 2019

  1. Gedc0251
    Charliegirl Premium Member about 5 years ago

    He didn’t need to. He undermines it every day just by existing.

     •  Reply
  2. Triumph
    Daeder  about 5 years ago

    That’s not the worst news ever. It’s a good thing if he wasn’t conspiring.

    The real bad news is that he’s still a criminal con man, still unhinged and incompetent, and STILL in office.

     •  Reply
  3. Ban crosscheck
    hermit48  about 5 years ago

    If he wasn’t then, how about after the election?

     •  Reply
  4. 2b21f09a 63d7 4ad1 83a6 fdf4d8b30651
    Zev   about 5 years ago

    Maybe Trump IS smarter than he looks – he had his campaign staff (and the NRA) collude with foreign agents, thus keeping his hands clean enough to avoid indictment with the help of a friendly AG. I would still like to see those elusive tax returns to see just how many favors are owed to the Russians.

     •  Reply
  5. Picture
    Ontman  about 5 years ago

    Mr. Hands merely pointed out the good news side of the investigation. That is good for the country. Now go out there and turf the orange idiot out of office.

     •  Reply
  6. Missing large
    JHayes  about 5 years ago

    Why is the entire establishment willing to believe Barr’s 4 page synopsis of Mueller’s 500 page report. Even Barr states that Mueller did’t consider the crime of Obstruction of justice.Obstruction why Nixion got impeached.

    Barr was hired to Kill the Mueller probe why is every body accepting Barr’s report without questions.

     •  Reply
  7. Missing large
    walfishj  about 5 years ago

    Can you spell BS?

     •  Reply
  8. Missing large
    walfishj  about 5 years ago

    https://www.gocomics.com/clayjones/2019/03/27

     •  Reply
  9. Agent gates
    Radish the wordsmith  about 5 years ago

    Trump publicly asked Russia for Hilliary’s e-mails, knowing they had them.

    The Russian provided the e-mails and president Trump lifted sanctions on the Russians.

     •  Reply
  10. New year large
    stealth694  about 5 years ago

    Check out Stuart Carlson’s cartoon, Christmas in D.C.

     •  Reply
  11. Frank
    Frankfreak  about 5 years ago

    Barr puts out his opinion of the report of a 2+ year investigation given to him less than 48hrs earlier and everyone believes him. The republicans start processes to block the release of the report. Let the report become public and then make a decision on what is in it. At the moment I see more obstruction than revelation.

     •  Reply
  12. Images  10
    nz4m60  about 5 years ago

    Russa elected the creep to tear the country apart. It’s working too!

     •  Reply
  13. Pine marten3
    martens  about 5 years ago

    The definition of evidence in law is quite different from that in science. Probability of an event is measured in science statistically, whereas in law it has to be beyond reasonable doubt (ideally speaking, in both cases). This is why obstruction of justice is difficult to prove, as it is based on corrupt intent, which in the case of Trump was displayed openly, unlike the hidden 18 minutes of tape that did Nixon in.

     •  Reply
  14. Image
    SukieCrandall Premium Member about 5 years ago

    Okay, speaking as an INDEPENDENT:

    Given the bases of several convictions and confessions there were attempts at collusion (which is itself a crime) by multiple members of the campaign, and at least one (Manafort) was in a situation in which his laundered money and tax scam could be held over him by the Russians and Russian allies who helped him do it (which is why the trial about his finances was held first).

    Now some might say that despite multiple attempts at collusion that the campaign would not have done it if the opportunity arose. To that my response is “Huh? Then why so many people spending time trying?”.

    The current interesting questions are these:

    Is an employer responsible for the actions of his employees that were taken for his campaign, business, mob, drug cartel, whichever-type-of-entity when they were employees with whom he met?

    If an employer (or mob boss if someone then uses it as a precedent) is not responsible for the actions of those he employs then is it collusion if he attempts to obstruct them talking about their own crimes, or is it obstruction only if he himself is charged with the crimes that were related to the obstruction attempts no matter how public those attempts were?

    We might soon get courts creating some strange precedents which might be expanded in defenses by drug lords, CEOs of companies which endanger employees or pollute badly, and heads of mobs.

     •  Reply
  15. Celtic tree of life
    mourdac Premium Member about 5 years ago

    No collusion has not absolved Prez. Thugga-slug in the numerous other investigations he is currently facing and the new ones which will be started soon.

     •  Reply
  16. Agent gates
    Radish the wordsmith  about 5 years ago

    @Scott Dworkin

    AG Barr is refusing to send the Mueller report to Congress. He plans on sending over another summary. Whatever’s in the report, must be bad enough that it would end Trump’s presidency. Let’s get that report.
     •  Reply
  17. Missing large
    thelordthygod666  about 5 years ago

    Trump Won. The Democrats and “fake news media” lost (and trying to now make this about a “full” release of the report sounds like more whining from the losers). The Democrats need to shut up and wait for Trump to do something stupid again they can use….like trying to take healthcare away from sick people.

     •  Reply
  18. Marx.
    DeepState  about 5 years ago

    Where did you get the Mueller report? No one else seems to be able to get a copy. But, that hasn’t stopped the baseless claims.

     •  Reply
  19. Brain guy dancing hg clr
    Concretionist  about 5 years ago

    No evidence found sufficient to indict for collusion. As summarized by Barr who has told us he would be unbiased despite his many instances of showing bias. Show me the whole report or I simply don’t believe you.

     •  Reply
  20. The eye of god
    Woodstock Generation Premium Member about 5 years ago

    The Attorney General for Trump (and maybe/maybe not the USA) said that he felt there wasn’t enough evidence to convict Trump due to the difficulties in proving collusion in a court of law. But he isn’t sharing the proof of this lack of evidence with anyone who might disagree!

     •  Reply
  21. Princess
    FrankSF Premium Member about 5 years ago

    No, the worst news ever came in the wee hours of November 9th, 2016.

     •  Reply
Sign in to comment

More From Phil Hands