Nonprofit, nonpartisan journalism. Supported by readers.


Trump’s exoneration talk just insults our intelligence

President Donald Trump
REUTERS/Shannon Stapleton
On the issue of whether President Donald Trump actively participated in a conspiracy with Russians to interfere in the 2016 election, Robert Mueller concluded that he had not found sufficient evidence to recommend charges against Trump.

Perhaps I’m a prideful person, with an exaggerated desire to be treated as a person of reasonable intelligence. Make that probably. When someone insults my intelligence by trying to get me to swallow a proposition that is clearly false, I tend to think it’s either an insult to my intelligence or perhaps evidence of the other’s lack of it.

Asserting that the Mueller report was a complete and total exoneration of President Donald Trump is a pretty good example of that kind of proposition.

On the issue of whether Trump actively participated in a conspiracy with Russians to interfere in the 2016 election, Robert Mueller concluded that he had not found sufficient evidence to recommend charges against Donald Trump. That is a far cry from anything that could be called “total and complete exoneration.” If Trump had said, about that conclusion, that he was relieved, I would have no complaint, at least about that claim. (I would be relieved, if it were me.)

Trump on the other hand, insists on referring to the crime by the wrong name (there is no crime called “collusion”) and then exaggerating the nature of the finding as “total and complete exoneration.” But at least here, he would not be wrong in claiming that Mueller found no evidence that he participated in such a conspiracy (although others in his camp seem to have been trying to participate in one, for which Trump asks that we assign him zero responsibility). OK.

But in the matter of the crime of obstruction of justice, which in this context would mean efforts to interfere with and impede the investigation of whether Trump had conspired, Mueller specifically said that his findings DID NOT EXONERATE Trump. And there is much in the report that borders on evidence of such a crime.

There is a lot of speculation about this. Did Mueller believe that there was evidence sufficient to lodge such a charge against Trump, but that where a sitting president was involved, the only entity authorized to charge him would be the Congress through the impeachment process? That is a leading theory. Other possible theories exist, which is among the arguments for asking Mueller to come before a congressional committee and explain what he meant by not-charged-but-not-exonerated of obstruction of justice.

You know all this. But back to the issue of insulting intelligence. Instead of acknowledging this very, very shall we say awkward not-charged-but-not-exonerated status, Trump (or whoever writes under his name for the purpose of rallying and fundraising from his base) continues to play the – I would say – Mueller-totally-exonerated-me card.

I know this because, as I’ve previously mentioned, a friend passes along to me the emails that go to the mailing list of the Trump-Pence Trump Make America Great Again Committee, and here are two recent ones, that were time-stamped just one day apart, both of which claim exoneration, and both of which move quickly to solicitation of campaign contributions, and one of which is signed by Donald Trump, with nice mugshot of him included, although I have no clue and plenty of skepticism about whether the actual Donald Trump has direct knowledge.

Here they are, from last week, just one day apart, and both ending in a desperate plea for campaign contributions:

Email #1:

Dear Your Name Here.

The summary of the Mueller Report said there was NO COLLUSION, but you already knew that. So Democrats and the Fake News claimed the full report would tell a different story….


How many times do I have to be exonerated before they stop? WHAT A JOKE!

Sadly, this is just the beginning, your name here. The attacks and lies will keep coming because Democrats know they don’t stand a chance in 2020. That’s why we need to fight back BIGGER and STRONGER than ever before.

Let’s send a HUGE message to all of the Trump Haters by raising $1,000,000 in the NEXT 24 HOURS.

Please contribute $5 in the next 24 hours to help us CRUSH our goal and send a powerful message to the entire nation that this WITCH HUNT must end.

I know this is an enormous goal. That’s why I’m only reaching out to my top supporters.

I have asked to be given the list of everyone who contributes before our deadline. I hope to see your name, Your Name Here.

Contribute in the next 24 hours to send a powerful message to the entire nation that this WITCH HUNT must end.

Thank you,

Donald J. Trump

President of the United States

My friend, by the way, has never contributed to Trump’s campaign or any of his committees, a fact which Trump (or whoever) acknowledges in the next day’s email, while urging my friend (and others who, for some reason, get these emails despite having never contributed) to do so.

Although this second one is not signed by Trump, or any other named human, it does include another copy of the day one email below the day two pleading. Here’s day two:

The Mueller Report confirmed what we have known all along – NO COLLUSION!

There was never a single ounce of evidence to support claims made by Democrat conspiracy theorists like Adam Schiff, but that didn’t stop the FAKE NEWS media from reporting their bogus claims to push their anti-Trump WITCH HUNT.

We need to FIGHT BACK. We need YOU to step up and help us CRUSH our ambitious goal of raising $1 million.

President Trump noticed that you have never donated to our movement. There has never been a more important time than right now to publicly show your support of President Trump.

Even if it is only $5, your contribution will give us the resources we need to DEFEND the President.

Contribute $5 or more IMMEDIATELY to DEFEND President Trump against the left’s lies and attacks.


You can also learn about all our free newsletter options.

Comments (60)

  1. Submitted by cory johnson on 04/23/2019 - 09:54 am.

    Seems like a politician trying to spin it in the best way possible. The insult to any intelligent person is that the whole “investigation” was a taxpayer funded political hit job. It’s quite obvious the collusion part was nonsense from the beginning and the rest of the time was spent trying to goad him into a perjury trap and dig up dirt.

    • Submitted by David Lundeen on 04/23/2019 - 10:11 am.

      I think the real taxpayer hit job is the expenses related to him going to his properties every weekend, not to mention all these costs for secret service protection for his children.

      Bannon clearly warned Trump not to fire Comey. This advice was ignored, and he brought the investigation upon himself. He was just lucky that he was too dumb to conspire, and too incompetent to obstruct.

    • Submitted by Leon Webster on 04/23/2019 - 11:31 am.

      Mr. Johnson, can we assume that you were equally outraged about the ten investigations into the Benghazi attacks, six of them by Republican controlled house committees? How about the investigation into Hillary’s Emails? and last but not least, let’s not forget about $60,000,000 looking into Whitewater.

      • Submitted by Paul Brandon on 04/23/2019 - 12:40 pm.

        Except that there was no there there.
        Accusations must be supported.

      • Submitted by Curtis Senker on 04/23/2019 - 02:34 pm.

        The investigation into Hillary’s email identified >3000 classified pieces of information, and 2 Top Secret intel reports that she had on her unsecured server.

        She lied to Congress when she said she never used the server to send or receive classified info.

        She destroyed evidence after having received a court order to preserve everything.

        But according to Comey, she didn’t mean any harm, so no prosecution was warranted.

        If you’re hoping to throw shade on Trump, she isnt someone you want to bring into the discussion, friend.

        • Submitted by David Lundeen on 04/23/2019 - 03:25 pm.

          Just like Trump didn’t mean to obstruct Justice, but he did.

          • Submitted by Bob Petersen on 04/24/2019 - 08:47 am.

            If you think Trump obstructed justice, where’s the proof? Adam Schiff keeps saying the same thing but isn’t offering up anything.

        • Submitted by Neal Rovick on 04/23/2019 - 03:32 pm.

          Nothing like the guy who campaigned on “buttermails” using his unsecured phone for conversations and his appointees and family using AOL and other very public communication methods.

          So, if Trump is fine with that why are you still busting on Clinton?

          Living in the past.

          If Trump does it, it’s OK.

          Donch ya keep up with new GOP rules?

          • Submitted by Curtis Senker on 04/23/2019 - 09:51 pm.

            Candidate Trump was not conducting the country’s business.

            Is President Trump using an unsecured email server today? Is his cell phone unsecured? No? What’s your point.

            • Submitted by Connie Sullivan on 04/24/2019 - 10:41 am.

              Donald Trump never uses nor has he ever used, email.

              He does, however regularly use his unsecured telephone. He has various phones, and in 2018 it was revealed that he dislikes the secured government phone. So. Oh well.

              For those Trumpites who keep insisting that Trump has not committed obstruction of justice: Read Volume II of the Mueller report.

              It’s all there, chapter and verse. How each instance happened, detail by detail, an analysis of what it means for the three-factor legal assessment on obstruction, and Mueller’s team even gave some instructions about how to indict and prosecute a criminal president after he’s left office (Trump is only not indicted by Mueller because he’s our sitting president and Mueller buys the DOJ policy–not law–that prohibits such indictment; we can’t prosecute until he’s out of office).

              • Submitted by Curtis Senker on 04/24/2019 - 03:29 pm.

                Wow. Looks like y’all got the goods. I think you should call your Democrat US House delegation and demand they vote immediately for articles of impeachment. Be presistant.

        • Submitted by ian wade on 04/23/2019 - 04:04 pm.

          Classified after the fact which makes the rest of your post moot.

          • Submitted by Steve Rose on 04/23/2019 - 09:04 pm.

            Still not true, but still parroted endlessly.

            CBS News:

            “Clinton turned over about half of the 60 thousand emails that were on her server, after telling the State Department that the emails deleted by her lawyers — about 30,000 — were personal, involving her daughter’s wedding plans, family vacations, yoga routines and condolence notes.
            In total, she submitted roughly 55,000 pages of emails. From the group of approximately 30,000 emails that Clinton provided to the State Department, the FBI found 110 emails in 52 email chains that were “determined by the owning agency to contain classified information at the time they were sent or received.”


            Over one hundred classified emails (at the time sent or received). We will never know how many more of the 30,000 deleted ones were classified at the time sent or received because justice was obstructed.

            • Submitted by Connie Sullivan on 04/24/2019 - 10:52 am.

              You know, I read all these Oh! Isn’t She Horrible! claims about how awful it was that Hillary Clinton, while Secretary of State, had about a hundred later-deemed-classified emails on her server (they were NOT so marked during her term as Secretary of State), and in the context of the Mueller Report on Donald Trump, I can’t help but ask: Boys, Is that all ya got?

              We’ve got a bumbling Donald Trump and Trump campaign urging the Russians on in their “sweeping and systematic” campaign to steal our 2016 election to elect Trump, never thinking that asking for foreign help–or even just welcoming it with a silly grin–should be reported to the FBI. Bumbling, but encouraging. (Read Volume I of Mueller.)

              Then, after taking office, Trump repeatedly tells Russians some of our national secrets (meetings with Kislyak) and bows to Putin’s opinions and authority? You’ve got Donald Trump as President actively obstructing the investigation into Russian interference in the 2016 election in order to elect Trump.

              Repeat: Is that all you boys have–a few emails not marked “classified’ or “Top Secret” when Hillary Clinton had them on her email server?


              • Submitted by Steve Rose on 04/24/2019 - 07:49 pm.

                Wow indeed. Clearly, you are not someone who has been entrusted with some of our nation’s secrets. I have. And, I know that if I had treated one document with such cavalier disregard that I would today be in prison.

                No, it is not all that I’ve got. I didn’t bring this up; I am just tired of the false claim that nothing was classified at the time sent or received. Still not true.

            • Submitted by Neal Rovick on 04/24/2019 - 10:55 am.

              But it’s all OK now–Trump and his buddies do it all the time…

        • Submitted by Leon Webster on 04/26/2019 - 09:30 am.

          from the Mueller Report:

          “Further, the Office learned that some of the individuals we interviewed or whose conduct we investigated, including some associated with the Trump Campaign, deleted relevant communications or communicated during the relevant period using applications that feature or that do not provide for long-term retention of data or communications records. In
          such cases, the Office was not able to corroborate witness statements through comparison to contemporaneous communications or fully question witnesses about statements that appeared inconsistent with other known facts.” sounds like me like Hillary isn’t the only one with missing emails.

    • Submitted by Henry Johnson on 04/23/2019 - 12:03 pm.

      :”the collusion part was nonsense” ?? Are you saying that with a straight face? Most of the Trump associates and family members had contacts with the Russians, and were open to accepting their help, and Kushner even suggesting using backdoor communications channels, thru the Russian embassy!

      The only “nonsense” was that Meuller was too timid to charge Trump Jr. for conspiracy, and say flatly, yes, the Trump campaign conspired (“collusion” is not a term used by the legal profession) with Russia to affect the 2016 election.

      If the Clinton campaign had done the same thing, you’d be screaming “Treason!” wouldn’t you?

    • Submitted by ian wade on 04/23/2019 - 01:11 pm.

      “Goad him into perjury?” The guy admitted to 30 lies in a 2007 deposition. It seems he’s clearly capable of lying through his teeth all by himself.

    • Submitted by Frank Phelan on 04/23/2019 - 09:08 pm.

      How to avoid a perjury trap:

      Do. Not. Lie.

      But then I suppose for Don Trump, that makes any question a perjury trap.

  2. Submitted by RB Holbrook on 04/23/2019 - 10:43 am.

    Appealing to, or respecting, anyone’s intelligence was not the point of the letter. The point was keeping the base motivated by repeating the same old talking points (Witch hunt! Haters! Adam Schiff!). The base is happy to repeat the fairy tale that Trump was exonerated, not because it’s true, but because it’s sticking it to the libs.

    Expect to hear increased calls for investigating those who were responsible for this “hit job.” Odds are good, it will come to naught. Nonetheless, it will keep the base angry, and anger is what it’s all about.

    BTW, I think that it’s way past the time to be noting insults to our intelligence. We have a President with the prose style of the kid on the verge of being made to repeat the fifth grade. We’ve gone long past any concern for our intelligence.

    • Submitted by Curtis Senker on 04/23/2019 - 02:26 pm.

      We have a President with the prose style of the kid on the verge of being made to repeat the fifth grade. We’ve gone long past any concern for our intelligence.

      So, lies (eg: everyone will save $2500 per year with ACA) are no insult to our intelligence if they’re well articulated?

      I don’t agree. Lying of any sort is not acceptable, but there are crudely lies that make you shake your head and chuckle (completely vindicated!) and articulate lies that turn our lives upside down (If you like your plan, you can keep your plan).

      • Submitted by RB Holbrook on 04/23/2019 - 03:38 pm.

        “So, lies (eg: everyone will save $2500 per year with ACA) are no insult to our intelligence if they’re well articulated?” That’s your take away from what I said?

        “Lying of any sort is not acceptable,” and yet you continue to support Trump. Do we have different understandings of what “unacceptable” means?

        “[B]ut there are crudely lies that make you shake your head and chuckle (completely vindicated!)” It’s only the “crudely” lies that are okay? Now, that is what I call a stretch.

        “[A]nd articulate lies that turn our lives upside down (If you like your plan, you can keep your plan).” Is it an insult to our intelligence that you folks keep on bringing that up? Just more of the same and so tired, as one noted commenter puts it.

        The real fact of the matter is that Trump’s appeal is not about intelligence, nor does he make any effort to pretend that it is. It is all about a visceral reaction to modern America, and a profound hatred of the other. Intelligence just isn’t in it.

      • Submitted by ian wade on 04/23/2019 - 04:06 pm.

        Translation – “Lies are okay as long as they get me SCOTUS justices.”

        • Submitted by RB Holbrook on 04/23/2019 - 04:26 pm.

          It’s more nuanced than that. Lies are okay if they tick off the liberals.

        • Submitted by Curtis Senker on 04/23/2019 - 09:35 pm.

          You’re not far off, but it’s lies that do no harm are tolerable if they get us SCOTUS justices that respect the US Constitution, as written.

          • Submitted by RB Holbrook on 04/24/2019 - 09:33 am.

            Presidential lies – especially a constant barrage of them – do plenty of harm. It doesn’t matter if it’s some unfulfilled promise about legislation, or a reflexive aversion to the truth. They erode trust in our institutions, which, frankly, is the glue holding our Republic together. The fact that lies are not just tolerated, but accepted and even celebrated as some kind of antagonist to opponents is proof of a moral failure that cannot help but be detrimental to our nation.

            Every now and again, I read a conservative blog run by some former acquaintances of mine. The writing is quite good, and they discuss interesting ideas intelligently, even if they often reach the wrong conclusion. Anyway, they’re big fans of the late Russell Kirk, and his Ten Conservative Principles. The first of those principles is that “the conservative believes that there exists an enduring moral order. That order is made for man, and man is made for it: human nature is a constant, and moral truths are permanent.”

            They don’t make an exception for appointing the right sort of Supreme Court justices. I suppose belief in an “enduring moral order” would be kind of hard to square with unquestioning devotion to Donald Trump.

          • Submitted by David Lundeen on 04/24/2019 - 10:57 am.

            This is the most anti American comment I have ever seen written on the website. If you think these judges are upholding ‘conservative’ views of the law, you’re wrong. I’m assuming by conservative you mean in the Reagan mold. He was anything but conservative. He despised the middle class and working class, believed in expanding government, and creating artificial deficits to support an unnecessary military industrial complex. I suggest you read David Stockman’s account of the matter. You’re very misinformed on what conservatism actually is.

      • Submitted by Tom Crain on 04/24/2019 - 08:40 am.

        This is pure ODS and what-about-ism. But getting back to the subject of this article, Trump is by many, many accounts a man of low intellect. And we don’t need to ask his critics, just talk to his own people.

        His Sec of State Tillerson called him a ‘moron’.
        His chief economic advisor Cohen was “astounded” at how dumb he is.
        His Def Sec Mattis said he “had the understanding of ‘a fifth- or sixth-grader.'”
        Treasury Secretary Steve Mnuchin and former Chief of Staff Reince Priebus both refer to him as an “idiot”.
        His EPA chief Pruitt called him an imbecile “when it comes to things like the Constitution and rule of law.”

        When one of Trump’s campaign aides tried to educate him about the Constitution, Trump couldn’t focus. “I got as far as the Fourth Amendment,” the aide recalled, “before his finger is pulling down on his lip and his eyes are rolling back in his head.”

        What Trump does have is emotional intelligence, the ability to recognize and influence the emotions of others. He’s a con man and he’s conned just enough of the voting electorate to attain the most powerful position in the world.

      • Submitted by David Therkelsen on 04/24/2019 - 08:57 pm.

        In the first place, Obama’s statement was mostly true. Most people, post-ACA were able to keep their doctors. In the second place, it wasn’t a lie anyway. Obama had every reason to believe in the truth of this proposition. It was the subsequent compromises that were necessary to get something passed that resulted in some people – but far from all people – not having access to their prior doctor.

        • Submitted by RB Holbrook on 04/25/2019 - 08:48 am.

          What you say is very true; however, it is a waste of your time to try to refute the claim. Conservatives have been told this is a lie, and they will keep repeating it until the ends of their days (or, until right-wing media tells them to focus on something else).

  3. Submitted by Tony Wessel on 04/23/2019 - 11:21 am.

    Eric, once again an excellent article. I would love to share this article on some social media feeds, but MinnPost puts this article in the Politics & Policy category. MinnPost until recently would tag this as opinion – which is most or your articles. Just don’t want to be accused of sharing “news” which is “opinion”.

    MinnPost is a nonprofit, nonpartisan enterprise whose mission is to provide high-quality journalism for people who care about Minnesota.

  4. Submitted by Connie Sullivan on 04/23/2019 - 11:27 am.

    I have decided that I will not discuss Donald Trump again with anyone who has not read the entire [redacted] Mueller Report. And can prove it by direct reference to chapter, verse, and volume.

    The Special Counsel’s factual evidence, and his reasoning for not bringing criminal charges against Trump for obstruction of justice, are very clear: He’s prevented from doing so because of the DOJ policy on not indicting a sitting president. Mueller thus threw this sordid mess to Congress, or to the DOJ after Trump is not longer a sitting president and can be charged with the crimes he’s clearly committed.

    What bothers me still? That without impeachment proceedings, the American public will accept Trump’s drumbeat of “no collusion!” and ‘total exoneration” because they neither have read the Mueller Report nor will they have the benefit of public airings of the dirt on Donald.

    Can we wait until the 2020 election, which Trump–if he loses–will challenge as “rigged”?

    • Submitted by Pat Berg on 04/23/2019 - 01:10 pm.

      Can anyone confirm that if Trump wins re-election, that he will “skate” on everything because the statute of limitations will have run out on all charges that could potentially be brought against him? This is something I heard the other day, and I’m wondering how accurate it is.

      • Submitted by RB Holbrook on 04/23/2019 - 05:32 pm.

        For most federal crimes, the statute of limitations is five years. Rep. Nadler is planning to introduce a bill that would toll the limitations period during a President’s term of office, but I don’t think it has a snowball’s chance of passing the Senate.

        He is, of course, under investigation in New York, which is free to set its own limitations period independent of the federal law.

  5. Submitted by Paul Brandon on 04/23/2019 - 12:42 pm.

    The only questions are:
    When Trump ends up in jail…
    And for what.
    Once he’s out of office he will be indicted.

    • Submitted by Connie Sullivan on 04/24/2019 - 03:25 pm.

      Trump will get away with the crimes outlined in the evidence in Mueller’s report only if he gets re-elected in 2020. (February 2021 is when his established crimes will outlive the time limit for prosecution.)

      Or if the House impeaches him. Now.

      Democrats are foolish to wait for a Democratic presidential win in 2020, as Nancy Pelosi wishes, and just do a bunch of “investigations” in the meantime. Trump is defying Congress at every turn: He is refusing documents, he is instructing all his aides and former aides that they may not respond to Congressional subpoenas to testify. and the Secretary of the Treasury, Mnuchin has inserted himself illegally into the issue of whether the Director of the IRS responds to a House Committee’s request for Trump’s tax returns. Trump recognizes no authority but his own.

      And when Congress can’t or won’t act, and the courts rule in Trump’s favor? We will have the textbook definition of a dictator, not a president, ruling the United States of America.

      Impeach now. So Trump goes down in history as an impeached President, along with Nixon and Bill Clinton.

      n sum, Donald Trump is daring anyone or any agency in America to stop him from committing any crimes he wants. He is thumbing his nose at the rule of law.

      • Submitted by Paul Brandon on 04/24/2019 - 05:11 pm.

        If Trump is somehow re-elected in 2020, he is sure to commit more impeachable offenses.
        His total ignorance of law and the Constitution guarantee it.

  6. Submitted by Neal Rovick on 04/23/2019 - 12:49 pm.

    Andrew Sullivan provides a very persuasive summary in NYMag..

    His conclusion, no evidence of coordination with Russia–Trump and his people were happy to receive the benefits but did not actively pursue the relationship. Perhaps though understanding of the problems made by that action but possibly through ineptness.

    But, but, but, he also believes Trump should be impeached due to to his obstruction of justice.(obstruction of justice can exist in the absence of a crime)


    …It’s about recrafting the rule of law into one where one man controls everything and can do anything he pleases….All of this is an unprecedented series of impeachable offenses. It is a textbook definition of “high crimes and misdemeanors.” It is the story of a president assaulting the rule of law, attempting to manipulate the justice system, dangling pardons to induce perjury, and reflexively putting his own personal interests — or simply ego — before any interest of the country as a whole. Mueller openly states that his own investigation was thwarted by the president to the extent that the “the justice system’s integrity [was] threatened.” When a president openly threatens the integrity of the justice system, and says he has unlimited power to do so in the future, he not only can be impeached, he must be impeached….

    (end quote)

    And there it is.

  7. Submitted by Brian Simon on 04/23/2019 - 01:48 pm.

    My takeaway is that Trump supporters, and apparently most Congressional Republicans, are ok with US political campaigns working with foreign governments that hack domestic political opponents. So if, say, the Chinese decide to hack the Trump 2020 campaign, it is fair game for Dems to seek out that info from the Chinese, in order to use it against the Trump campaign.

    • Submitted by Henry Johnson on 04/23/2019 - 08:27 pm.

      “My takeaway is that Trump supporters, and apparently most Congressional Republicans, are ok with US political campaigns working with foreign governments that hack domestic political opponents.”

      Well they are okay with Republican campaigns working with foreign governments.

      If a democratic campaign tries the same thing in the future they”ll be screaming “treason!” for sure.

      The double-standard and glaring hypocrisy are a clear sign of how corrupt the republican party has become.

      They didn’t have such a strong double-standard back in Nixon’s day, the republicans of that day had enough integrity to tell the guy to pack his bags, because they wouldn’t be supporting him in impeachment hearings.

      They ultimately put aside partisan politics and did the right thing for the sake of the country.

  8. Submitted by Tom Christensen on 04/23/2019 - 02:50 pm.

    I’m not worried about Trump as he has many more charges coming and his own actions will just exacerbate his standing. What I worry about are the Republicans who no longer have any standards of decency, ethics, morality, or the ability to connect the dots regarding Trump and his criminal cohorts. Trump can’t surround himself with criminals and not be one. Even Trump thought, knowing how he has conducted his life, his presidency would be ended. The head coward has turned the entire Republican congressional members into cowards as well.

  9. Submitted by Ron Gotzman on 04/23/2019 - 03:44 pm.

    After several days of planning, proposing, searching for an angle, arguing, analyzing, – this is the best you got?

    A least you are giving those with T.D.S. a chance to vent. I even guessed that angle of attack you would take!

    I just wish I did not have to subsidize this emotional support for those infected with T.D.S.

    • Submitted by ian wade on 04/23/2019 - 04:08 pm.

      This coming from the same people who happily engaged (and still do) in O.D.S.
      Irony is dead.

    • Submitted by RB Holbrook on 04/23/2019 - 04:25 pm.

      Why do you keep coming here and reading the articles if they offend you so much?

      I’m guessing you say that you claim you’re “subsidizing” MinnPost because it’s tax exempt. Does that mean I’m subsidizing churches and seminaries who are teaching things with which I disagree?

  10. Submitted by Charles Holtman on 04/23/2019 - 04:52 pm.

    “President Trump noticed that you have never donated to our movement.” This is very strange prose. Foremost, it conjures an image of a slovenly Trump in his half-open bathrobe, on his bed, surrounded by McDonald’s trash, Fox droning in the background and casting its bluish glow on his wrinkled pink folds, rubbing his nose and penciling his way thru thick stacks containing lists of citizens that have and haven’t sent him his $10.

  11. Submitted by Joe Musich on 04/23/2019 - 08:21 pm.

    Defending anything the man says in light of the report is laughable. I am now beyond having my intelligence insulted. It’s more my funny bone that I am working about. Even before the election the insulting was a best marginal which is kind of sad in that he was performing as he always has ineptly and inappropriately. That people blindly worship the man has never been shocking. The beast is in all of us. Some just tame it other exploit it. The part that worries me the most at this point is there does not seem to be anyone to tell him to sit down and shut up. Unless that is what the queen intends to do by inviting him to London. Now that would be hilarious.

  12. Submitted by Dennis Wagner on 04/23/2019 - 09:43 pm.

    Erik, Trump period, is an insult to our intelligence, evidently his supporters don’t consider their intelligence insultable!

    • Submitted by Dennis Wagner on 04/23/2019 - 10:02 pm.

      PS Erik, this follows closely with your Stalin article, nothing “T would like more than to be a Stalin type dictator and it appears he has ~ 40% +/- of the US voters as minions supporting him!

  13. Submitted by Ole Johnson on 04/24/2019 - 04:08 pm.

    Uffda. The big smoking gun is a couple fundraising emails?

    I’m shocked! Shocked that some PAC is spamming as many email addresses as possible to raise money. Surely this is another thing that was never done before Trump was elected.

Leave a Reply