Jump to content

Trump sent the troops in Portland


HSFBfan

Recommended Posts

10 minutes ago, Troll said:

Not talking about T ...

which you appear to be so 'not bothered by'...🤣

Talking about your beloved 'investigation'....

and ...you know...the "FINDINGS" 👍

 

What where they again ?

 

Clue: starts with the word  "No.....

 

 

Lol, you're out of material again, aren't ya?

Is this you, buddy?

qEmF6pmJy9IT_640x360.jpg

Link to comment
Share on other sites

9 minutes ago, Troll said:

Yes...we know....

so why are you trying to dispute them now?

Still waiting on you to be  'Tidy'.....but you have got just an aweful lot of typing there....

for two whole words 🤣

 

Cmon...what were the the "ACTUAL FINDINGS"? 👍

giphy.gif

Clue: starts with the word  "No.....

BTW: you need more clues or something? 😝

 

You clearly didn't read the post that you quoted, I pretty clearly stated that there wasn't enough direct evidence for the law to bring a conspiracy charge (collusion as it's often called), though obstruction seemed possible if Trump wasn't the sitting President (Mueller refused to exonerate him there).

Again, you seem to think this trouble's me...not sure why.

Too much nonsense swirling around in your head, I guess. Sad face for you...

spnphotosnine524633-1200x630.jpg

Link to comment
Share on other sites

18 minutes ago, DownSouth said:

You clearly didn't read the post that you quoted, I pretty clearly stated that there wasn't enough direct evidence for the law to bring a conspiracy charge (collusion as it's often called), though obstruction seemed possible if Trump wasn't the sitting President (Mueller refused to exonerate him there).

Again, you seem to think this trouble's me...not sure why.

Too much nonsense swirling around in your head, I guess. Sad face for you...

That tidy post of yours?

.....you left out the end...

what was the final result again?...

giphy.gif

Clue: starts with the word  "No.....

BTW: you need more clues or something? 😝

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

19 minutes ago, DownSouth said:

 

 I pretty clearly stated that there wasn't enough direct evidence for the law to bring a conspiracy charge (collusion as it's often called)

 

BTW: From your very latest post above.....

Overly verbose and not very tidy now is it? 

Is this how you choke out "No Collusion" as the result of the investigation?

 

 

 

Yes....

19 minutes ago, DownSouth said:

Too much nonsense swirling around in your head, I guess. Sad face for you...

Talking to yourself again? 😝

Link to comment
Share on other sites

3 hours ago, Troll said:

BTW: From your very latest post above.....

Overly verbose and not very tidy now is it? 

Is this how you choke out "No Collusion" as the result of the investigation?

 

 

 

Yes....

Talking to yourself again? 😝

 

4 paragraphs, in reply to someone else, is too much for you to handle? (Tidy means that it's neat and in order - unlike your crap against the wall mess of memes and nonsense)

There was no actual determination of "no collusion" in the sense you seem to think there was. In fact, there's quite a bit of evidence of collusion. You're simply parroting the words of Bill Barr's short memo. If you want to play semantics, I'll actually help you out since you don't seem to know much on the topic.

There was not enough evidence to establish CONSPIRACY...that's the actual crime (collusion is not a crime by statute), which you don't seem to get. But, collusion does seem to have taken place:

"while the investigation identified numerous links between individuals with ties to the Russian government and individuals associated with the Trump Campaign, the evidence was not sufficient to support criminal charges. Among other things, the evidence was not sufficient to charge any Campaign official as an unregistered agent of the Russian government or other Russian principal."

"the investigation established that several individuals affiliated with the Trump campaign lied to the Office, and to the Congress, about their interactions with Russian-affiliated individuals and related matters. Those lies materially impaired the investigation of Russian election interference." - Mueller Report, Volume 1, Page 9

"several U.S. persons connected to the Campaign made false statements about those contacts and took other steps to obstruct the Office's investigation and those of Congress. This Office has therefore charged some of those individuals with making false statements and obstructing justice." - Mueller Report, Volume 1, Page 10

 

So, yeah, I believe the investigation was with merit.

Collusion was there (that's your fixation, not mine, you brought that into this conversation - not me), the ability to convict on conspiracy simply could not be met (due to obstruction). I'll post a few more examples tomorrow for ya, Lurch...

 

 

  • Thanks 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

6 hours ago, DownSouth said:

 

 

There was no actual determination of "no collusion" in the sense you seem to think there was.  In fact, there's quite a bit of evidence of collusion.

Actually in FACT .....the results of the investigation showed "no collusion"....

Anyone with "sense" can understand what that means...

Why you can't even accept the truth of what occurred is ? 

6 hours ago, DownSouth said:

 

 

Collusion was there (that's your fixation, not mine, you brought that into this conversation - not me), the ability to convict on conspiracy simply could not be met (due to obstruction). I'll post a few more examples .......

 

 

Yeah you post away all day there....

Still won't change the final results of the investigation....

which was NO COLLUSION 🤣

 

C'mon... sing it with the whole class

giphy.gif

you forget the words?

 

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

18 hours ago, Troll said:

Actually in FACT .....the results of the investigation showed "no collusion"....

Anyone with "sense" can understand what that means...

Why you can't even accept the truth of what occurred is ? 

Yeah you post away all day there....

Still won't change the final results of the investigation....

which was NO COLLUSION 🤣

 

 

 

 

 

 

Anyone with sense read the report. You should too, especially pages 35-50, it's incredibly interesting; those pages summarize the Russian hacking and hand-off to Wikileaks effort. The investigation was so detailed they even identified the 2 GRU Military units responsible for the operation. If you enjoy spycraft and black ops kind of military stuff, you'll find it informative. The info on those pages, to me, made the investigation worthwhile. All you seem to care about is "no collusion" but there is far more there that was useful and important to document. Further, there was a ton of links beteen the campaign and Russian officials (gov. and non gov.); to say there was nothing there is completely false. Conspiracy could not be proven; that does not mean the relationship as deemed appropriate, ethical, or even legal (they simply could not prove illegality). Based on your shallow understanding of the topic, I don't expect a reasoned response - doesn't seem you're capable.

Here's some of the findings from the report (from Volume 1 only; Volume 2 is about Obstruction), that lead me to value it...you'll simply keep up the same old "no collusion" silliness, which is about the same as dipping your toe into the ocean and calling yourself a deep sea diver. 

 

In addition, a different foreign government informed the FBI that, 10 days after meeting with Mifsud in late April 2016, Papadopoulos suggested that the Trump Campaign had received indications from the Russian government that it could assist the Campaign through the anonymous release of information that would be damaging to Hillary Clinton – Volume 1, Pg. 93

several U.S. persons connected to the Campaign made false statements about those contacts and took other steps to obstruct the Office's investigation and those of Congress. This Office has therefore charged some of those individuals with making false statements and obstructing justice." Volume 1, Page 180

 

On July 27, 2016, Unit 26165 targeted email accounts connected to candidate Clinton’s personal office . Earlier that day, candidate Trump made public statements that included the following: “Russia, if you’re listening, I hope you’re able to find the 30,000 emails that are missing – Volume 1, Pg. 49

Within approximately five hours of Trump’s statement, GRU officers targeted for the first time Clinton’s personal office. After candidate Trump’s remarks, Unit 26165 created and sent malicious links targeting 15 email PP accounts – V1, P49

 

According to Gates, by the late summer of 2016, the Trump Campaign was planning a press strategy, a communications campaign, and messaging based on the possible release of Clinton emails by WikiLeaks. - V1, P54

On October 3, 2016, WikiLeaks sent another direct message to Trump Jr., asking “you guys” to help disseminate a link alleging candidate Clinton had advocated using a drone to target Julian Assange. Trump Jr. responded that he already “had done so,” - V1, P60

 

On October 12, 2016, WikiLeaks wrote again that it was “great to see you and your dad talking about our publications. Strongly suggest your dad tweets this link if he mentions us wlsearch.tk.”257 WikiLeaks wrote that the link would help Trump in “digging through” leaked emails and stated, “we just released Podesta emails Part 4.”258 Two days later, Trump Jr. publicly tweeted the wlsearch.tk link. - V1, P60

Immediately upon his return to London from that trip, Mifsud told Papadopoulos that the Russian government had “dirt” on Hillary Clinton - Volume 1, Pg. 5

some associated with the Trump Campaign—deleted relevant communications or communicated during the relevant period using applications that feature encryption or that do not provide for long-term retention of data or communications records. Volume 1, page 10

 

The GRU was also in contact through the Guccifer 2.0 persona with a former Trump Campaign member – Vol, P44 (heavily redacted)

September 19, 2016. Based on information about Assange’s computer and its possible operating system, this date may be when the GRU staged the stolen Podesta emails for transfer to WikiLeaks - V1, P47

"According to Gates, by the late summer of 2016, the Trump Campaign was planning a press strategy, a communications campaign, and messaging based on the possible release of Clinton emails by WikiLeaks. REDACTION: Harm to Ongoing Matter while Trump and Gates were driving to LaGuardia Airport. REDACTION: Harm to Ongoing Matter, shortly after the call candidate Trump told Gates that more releases of damaging information would be coming." Volume 1, Page 54

 

"The Office identified multiple contacts – 'links', in the words of the Appointment Order – between Trump Campaign officials and individuals with ties to the Russian government." Volume 1, Pg. 66

Over the next several weeks, Papadopoulos and Timofeev had multiple conversations over Skype and email about setting “the groundwork” for a “potential” meeting between the Campaign and Russian government officials - V1, P88

“[t]he Russian ministry of foreign affairs” had contacted him and asked whether, if Mr. Trump could not travel to Russia, a campaign representative such as Papadopoulos could attend meetings.478 Papadopoulos told Lewandowski that he was “willing to make the trip off the record if it’s in the interest of Mr. Trump and the campaign to meet specific people - V1, P90

 

  • Thanks 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

4 hours ago, DownSouth said:

Anyone with sense read the report. You should too, especially pages 35-50, it's incredibly interesting; those pages summarize the Russian hacking and hand-off to Wikileaks effort. The investigation was so detailed they even identified the 2 GRU Military units responsible for the operation. If you enjoy spycraft and black ops kind of military stuff, you'll find it informative. The info on those pages, to me, made the investigation worthwhile. All you seem to care about is "no collusion" but there is far more there that was useful and important to document. Further, there was a ton of links beteen the campaign and Russian officials (gov. and non gov.); to say there was nothing there is completely false. Conspiracy could not be proven; that does not mean the relationship as deemed appropriate, ethical, or even legal (they simply could not prove illegality). Based on your shallow understanding of the topic, I don't expect a reasoned response - doesn't seem you're capable.

Here's some of the findings from the report (from Volume 1 only; Volume 2 is about Obstruction), that lead me to value it...you'll simply keep up the same old "no collusion" silliness, which is about the same as dipping your toe into the ocean and calling yourself a deep sea diver. 

 

In addition, a different foreign government informed the FBI that, 10 days after meeting with Mifsud in late April 2016, Papadopoulos suggested that the Trump Campaign had received indications from the Russian government that it could assist the Campaign through the anonymous release of information that would be damaging to Hillary Clinton – Volume 1, Pg. 93

several U.S. persons connected to the Campaign made false statements about those contacts and took other steps to obstruct the Office's investigation and those of Congress. This Office has therefore charged some of those individuals with making false statements and obstructing justice." Volume 1, Page 180

 

On July 27, 2016, Unit 26165 targeted email accounts connected to candidate Clinton’s personal office . Earlier that day, candidate Trump made public statements that included the following: “Russia, if you’re listening, I hope you’re able to find the 30,000 emails that are missing – Volume 1, Pg. 49

Within approximately five hours of Trump’s statement, GRU officers targeted for the first time Clinton’s personal office. After candidate Trump’s remarks, Unit 26165 created and sent malicious links targeting 15 email PP accounts – V1, P49

 

According to Gates, by the late summer of 2016, the Trump Campaign was planning a press strategy, a communications campaign, and messaging based on the possible release of Clinton emails by WikiLeaks. - V1, P54

On October 3, 2016, WikiLeaks sent another direct message to Trump Jr., asking “you guys” to help disseminate a link alleging candidate Clinton had advocated using a drone to target Julian Assange. Trump Jr. responded that he already “had done so,” - V1, P60

 

On October 12, 2016, WikiLeaks wrote again that it was “great to see you and your dad talking about our publications. Strongly suggest your dad tweets this link if he mentions us wlsearch.tk.”257 WikiLeaks wrote that the link would help Trump in “digging through” leaked emails and stated, “we just released Podesta emails Part 4.”258 Two days later, Trump Jr. publicly tweeted the wlsearch.tk link. - V1, P60

Immediately upon his return to London from that trip, Mifsud told Papadopoulos that the Russian government had “dirt” on Hillary Clinton - Volume 1, Pg. 5

some associated with the Trump Campaign—deleted relevant communications or communicated during the relevant period using applications that feature encryption or that do not provide for long-term retention of data or communications records. Volume 1, page 10

 

The GRU was also in contact through the Guccifer 2.0 persona with a former Trump Campaign member – Vol, P44 (heavily redacted)

September 19, 2016. Based on information about Assange’s computer and its possible operating system, this date may be when the GRU staged the stolen Podesta emails for transfer to WikiLeaks - V1, P47

"According to Gates, by the late summer of 2016, the Trump Campaign was planning a press strategy, a communications campaign, and messaging based on the possible release of Clinton emails by WikiLeaks. REDACTION: Harm to Ongoing Matter while Trump and Gates were driving to LaGuardia Airport. REDACTION: Harm to Ongoing Matter, shortly after the call candidate Trump told Gates that more releases of damaging information would be coming." Volume 1, Page 54

 

"The Office identified multiple contacts – 'links', in the words of the Appointment Order – between Trump Campaign officials and individuals with ties to the Russian government." Volume 1, Pg. 66

Over the next several weeks, Papadopoulos and Timofeev had multiple conversations over Skype and email about setting “the groundwork” for a “potential” meeting between the Campaign and Russian government officials - V1, P88

“[t]he Russian ministry of foreign affairs” had contacted him and asked whether, if Mr. Trump could not travel to Russia, a campaign representative such as Papadopoulos could attend meetings.478 Papadopoulos told Lewandowski that he was “willing to make the trip off the record if it’s in the interest of Mr. Trump and the campaign to meet specific people - V1, P90

 

DNR ....too long

Two word end result....

You forget ?

C'mon you can say it....

Mueller did  .....

after his much more thorough investigation than yours....

giphy.gif

giphy.gif

giphy.gif

 

 

C'mon... sing it with the whole class

giphy.gif

you forget the words?

 

 

PS:  LOOKS 👀 like twitter just banned your buddy Q,  and have already removed (censored) thousand of accounts for just mentioning the term.....must be a happy day for you 🤣....maybe you can, i dunno, petition to get that key removed from your keyboard too LOL.

 

 

  • Confused 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

3 hours ago, Slotback Right said:

Portland Mayor joins protesters near federal buildings, and gets tear gassed by the feds. I love it. To add insult to injury, the protesters heckled him, and demanded that he resign.

 

He was berated by Marxist fukwits and watched them set fire to buildings, yet still blamed Trump.

Liberalism truly is a mental disorder.

 

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 minute ago, GardenStateBaller said:

The rioting and looting going on in states like WA, OR and IL is irrelevant and meaningless in the big scheme of things. If anything, these unlawful actions will force out the shitty, enabling politicians. 

Hopefully. But in terms of November means nothing

Link to comment
Share on other sites

On 7/25/2020 at 10:34 AM, GardenStateBaller said:

Seattle PD has given up. 

 

I'm no lawyer, but I believe Chief Best just intentionally fucked over the city council. Every person she sent that to now has written proof that the council is guilty of dereliction of duty, and proof that they were informed of the dangers and probable consequences of their policy. I would be looking into suing them for any and all damages, and maybe $ Millions more than that, who knows.

Chief Carmen Best is impressing me. Bigly.

  • Like 3
  • Thumbs Down 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    • No registered users viewing this page.
×
×
  • Create New...