@JuddLegum I’m just gonna leave this here:https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=NJG75FJkjr8 …
Q: Can you say unequivocally that no Trump associates colluded with Russia? SPICER: Depends on what you mean by "associates"pic.twitter.com/nGPHu2FhOY
-
-
- 他1件の返信
-
-
-
@JuddLegum Sounds like a "yes" to me -
@JasonInWA@JuddLegum when they start trying to play the semantics game, you know they've lost.
-
-
-
I guess the
@GOP is done with that whole 'is' thing, now.@JuddLegum@word_34 -
@TheFreshBrew@GOP@JuddLegum@word_34 Spicer actually makes a good point but to obfuscate. Reporters should be more direct with questions.
-
-
-
@JuddLegum he compared Paul Manafort to a guy he sat next to on a plane. Lol. - 他1件の返信
-
-
I'm staggered that he chose to focus on the term "associate" rather than "collusion"
@JuddLegum -
-
@JuddLegum please define “with”, also please define “can”. - 他1件の返信
-
-
@JuddLegum so "colluded" isn't the word he parses, just "associates" -
@JuddLegum flashback: "It depends upon what the meaning of the word 'is' is" -
@juddlegum No collusion! You’re the collusion! -
@JuddLegum We're not far off from, "Depends on what the definition of is is." -
@JuddLegum Wow. It really is the beginning of the end for them, isn't it. -
@JuddLegum I wish the next question was "Can you say unequivocally that no Trump transition team members colluded with Russia?" -
@JuddLegum Wow. He's about as lame as it gets. Like Sarah Palin lame! -
@JuddLegum Um...so did anyone open a dictionary and read the meaning of "associates"?
読み込みに時間がかかっているようです。
Twitterの処理能力の限界を超えているか、一時的な不具合が発生しています。やりなおすか、Twitterステータスで詳細をご確認ください。