REAL Russia collusion thread (A critical thinkers realty)

Garmel said:
He's caught lying in black and white right here. He's guilty. Look at the bolded part.

FPjNqIDXMAEromN
Click to expand...


Sure, if they can prove he was actually there on the behalf of the Clinton campaign. Doesn't really matter to me though. Even if found guilty he is looking at a few months of probation. I know the short bus people would high step if he is convicted but it would be like the left high stepping after Flynns conviction as if it proved Russian collusion.
 
Garmel said:
From an FBI doing rather dubious activities I might add.

"Conspiracy against the US" can mean a lot of things and it doesn't necessarily mean treason. https://www.vox.com/2018/9/14/17860410/conspiracy-against-the-united-states-paul-manafort-plea
Click to expand...


The conspiracy against the US charge is a tax related charge. I used it to mock the short bus people here who purposely leave out context to make something look a certain way.



Also, if the FBI did something wrong to get those convictions they would have had a legal justification to get them thrown out. Instead they had to rely on pardons. I love the mental gymnastics you go through to justify these peoples criminal convictions.
 
cajunrevenge said:
The conspiracy against the US charge is a tax related charge. I used it to mock the short bus people here who purposely leave out context to make something look a certain way.



Also, if the FBI did something wrong to get those convictions they would have had a legal justification to get them thrown out. Instead they had to rely on pardons. I love the mental gymnastics you go through to justify these peoples criminal convictions.
Click to expand...

Yeah, a lawyer in their service committed fraud to get FISA warrants and Strzok calling for sedition against the president of the USA. Why don't you quit being an MSM bot and start thinking for yourself?

What the FBI did to get convictions was simple. Financially break the people to get them to plead or interview them and accuse them of lying when they didn't lie. Hard to get anything overturned when you're broke. When we tried to get justice for Flynn look what happened. You people cheered on Sullivan's despicable acts.

Manafort seems to be the only real criminal and what they got him for was tax and fraud, not Russia.

Mr. All for Justice became a bootlicker and doesn't even realize it. Talk about being on the short bus.
 
Last edited:
  • Like
Reactions: Jaw
Clinesmith fudges an email to get the 4th renewal of the warrant for Carter Paige. No convictions happened because of something they found on that. You tell me what you think changes if that 4th renewal was rejected. It has no impact on the investigation. That's why Clinesmith got probation. Only thing it amounted to was a minor violation of Paiges rights. If you want to argue that violations of civil rights should never be considered minor then you wiykd be preaching to the choir.


As for Strozk. Who cares. If he did anything criminal he would have been prosecuted. Nothing about what he said in any way taints the convictions.


I want you to understand that all these years I have complained about the cops little thethe was always there fo deep throat their boots. Specifically said he could never imagine why an innocent person would plead guilty. Now here we are. If it happened as you claim then why isnt any Republican trying to change anything for the next person in that situation? I think there would be plenty of support from the left if you wanted to change policies ability to bully people into pleading guilty. But no, you just want your side to not be treated that way. **** everyone else. I am sire you are a man of consistency though. If Sussman runs kit of money and pleads guilty I am sure you will be right there telling us how its not a real conviction because he ran out of money.


Interesting that you admit Manafort was a criminal. For those paying attention rather than rewriting history. If there was collusion with Russia most people think it was Russia with/via Manafort and not Trump directly colluding with Russia. He didnt offer to work as campaign manager for free for no reason.
 
Last edited:
cajunrevenge said:
Clinesmith fudges an email to get the 4th renewal of the warrant for Carter Paige. No convictions happened because of something they found on that. You tell me what you think changes if that 4th renewal was rejected. It has no impact on the investigation. That's why Clinesmith got probation. Only thing it amounted to was a minor violation of Paiges rights. If you want to argue that violations of civil rights should never be considered minor then you wiykd be preaching to the choir.


As for Strozk. Who cares. If he did anything criminal he would have been prosecuted. Nothing about what he said in any way taints the convictions.


I want you to understand that all these years I have complained about the cops little thethe was always there fo deep throat their boots. Specifically said he could never imagine why an innocent person would plead guilty. Now here we are. If it happened as you claim then why isnt any Republican trying to change anything for the next person in that situation? I think there would be plenty of support from the left if you wanted to change policies ability to bully people into pleading guilty. But no, you just want your side to not be treated that way. **** everyone else. I am sire you are a man of consistency though. If Sussman runs kit of money and pleads guilty I am sure you will be right there telling us how its not a real conviction because he ran out of money.


Interesting that you admit Manafort was a criminal. For those paying attention rather than rewriting history. If there was collusion with Russia most people think it was Russia with/via Manafort and not Trump directly colluding with Russia. He didnt offer to work as campaign manager for free for no reason.
Click to expand...

https://thehill.com/regulation/cour...-in-first-criminal-case-stemming-from-durham/

"On Tuesday, Clinesmith admitted to altering an email that said former Trump campaign adviser Carter Page was not a source for the CIA, even though Page had had a relationship with the agency. That in turn allowed intelligence agencies to renew a warrant to monitor Page for potentially working with foreign powers".

"Clinesmith, who has previously held that he altered the document by mistake, admitted to intentionally doing so in his plea."

Yeah, it was minor. lol. Where the hell do you get your sources from?

Strzok just said that we're going to get Trump and that we have an insurance plan to do it. Just because he might get away with it doesn't mean it wasn't criminal. He still might not escape because of Durham so who knows?

If Durham pulls the same nonsense as Mueller's team then I'll turn on him as well. So far Durham hasn't done any shady ****.

Please quit riding the short bus.
 
Yes, minor. I am talking about how the court and judges view it. If cops illegally search a persons car what do you think the court does? Charges the cops? Gives big payouts? No, they say there's really no damage spheres a coupon for a free happy meal. Now if the cops illegally search a car and the victim acts up and gets beaten then. Then the court would say there's damages. Or if the person was arrested and jailed because of the illegal search. Inhave been saying for years now that we need to not treat these violations of rights as minor just because the victim didnt act up or get jailed. If your side wants to add some more penalties for violating peoples rights I would be all for that. I imagine many Democrats would to. All these things your side complains about but they are doing nothing to legislate real accountability and penalties for law enforcement. You all just want your side not treated like everyone else. To that I say **** you. Fix it for everyone. If it happened to me I cant name a special prosecutor to go after the investigators. Even if a crime is committed by cops I am limited by the DA's willingness to prosecute.




Beyond that your boy would never have been President if not for controversial actions by the FBI. Hillart was the subject of an investigation for which she was never charged so by your standards that was a hoax. Unlike the Russia investigation I can actually show the effect it had on the election. She dropped from a 7 point lead to a 2 point lead nationally when the news dropped. And how did it drop? Republican James Comey sent a memo to Republican Devin Nunez who promptly leaked it to the media. When Comey was asked why he sent the Memo to Nunes he said the NY office of the FBI thought Hillary was the anti-christ and were going to leak it to the media anyways. But you dont want to talk about that do you. Your side has a fraction of the legitimate complaint Hillary does about the actions of the FBI.
 
cajunrevenge said:
Beyond that your boy would never have been President if not for controversial actions by the FBI. Hillart was the subject of an investigation for which she was never charged so by your standards that was a hoax. Unlike the Russia investigation I can actually show the effect it had on the election. She dropped from a 7 point lead to a 2 point lead nationally when the news dropped. And how did it drop? Republican James Comey sent a memo to Republican Devin Nunez who promptly leaked it to the media. When Comey was asked why he sent the Memo to Nunes he said the NY office of the FBI thought Hillary was the anti-christ and were going to leak it to the media anyways. But you dont want to talk about that do you. Your side has a fraction of the legitimate complaint Hillary does about the actions of the FBI.
Click to expand...

I don't want to talk about it? We've talked about this on several occasions. You can't complain of this when Hillary got away with 1) Destroying subpoenaed evidence 2) Had an illegal server.

She should have been charged and wasn't. The FBI didn't hate her that much it seems. The only reason the FBI did that little episode was because of the heat they had for letting her walk in the 1st place. The fact that you're using polls which are not entirely reliable in the first place shows your desperation to prove a point that's not there.
 
I will absolutely not hold Hillary to a different standard then you do Trump. If there's an investigation and it doesn't lead to charges it's a hoax. That's the Trump standard. So we have had the email server hoax, Benghazi hoax, whitewater hoax, Vince foster and seth rich hoaxes, Clinton foundation hoax etc. The email hoax most likely changed the election winner. According to little thethe that's a coup.



If you think Hillary should have been charged thats fine. I think Trump should have been charged for the Tryump university scam, or his various charity scams, or obstruction of justice of the Mueller investigation, or his tax/ insurance scheme, and hisnsoliciting election fraud in Georgia. The problem with most of these is you need to be able to show intent and prosecutors dont want to bring a case unless it's a slam dunk.



As for your other claims. There is no evidence she destroyed subpoenas evidence or that she ordered it. You can think it all you want but there has to be evidence. As for the polls they were 100% right nationally. Hillary was leading by 2% and won by 2.1%.
 
cajunrevenge said:
I will absolutely not hold Hillary to a different standard then you do Trump. If there's an investigation and it doesn't lead to charges it's a hoax. That's the Trump standard. So we have had the email server hoax, Benghazi hoax, whitewater hoax, Vince foster and seth rich hoaxes, Clinton foundation hoax etc. The email hoax most likely changed the election winner. According to little thethe that's a coup.



If you think Hillary should have been charged thats fine. I think Trump should have been charged for the Tryump university scam, or his various charity scams, or obstruction of justice of the Mueller investigation, or his tax/ insurance scheme, and hisnsoliciting election fraud in Georgia. The problem with most of these is you need to be able to show intent and prosecutors dont want to bring a case unless it's a slam dunk.



As for your other claims. There is no evidence she destroyed subpoenas evidence or that she ordered it. You can think it all you want but there has to be evidence. As for the polls they were 100% right nationally. Hillary was leading by 2% and won by 2.1%.
Click to expand...

Wut? The polls were at nearly 4% for Hillary and the battleground state polls were completely blown. https://www.nytimes.com/2017/05/31/...y-key-state-polls-were-wrong-about-trump.html

Just as your claim that all of the election fraud is skewered toward republicans you're wrong again.

You still haven't figured out that most of the Trump investigations are politically motivated witch hunts. You also haven't figured out that the media sources you watch are manipulating you. Bless your heart.
 
Prepping yourself for a not guilty verdict I see. I knew from the start you wouldnt accept a verdict you dont like. I was also unaware there was a trial for Flynn, all so Dee is his plea bargain where he confessed to the crime under oath.....twice. But yeah, Sussman is getting special treatment..... the people convicted and then pardoned by someone they committed crimes trying to protect. Manafort literally had a short bus Trump tard on his jury.
 
cajunrevenge said:
Prepping yourself for a not guilty verdict I see. I knew from the start you wouldnt accept a verdict you dont like. I was also unaware there was a trial for Flynn, all so Dee is his plea bargain where he confessed to the crime under oath.....twice. But yeah, Sussman is getting special treatment..... the people convicted and then pardoned by someone they committed crimes trying to protect. Manafort literally had a short bus Trump tard on his jury.
Click to expand...

I'm actually using the opinion of a respected law scholar. You really rode the short bus as a kid, didn't you? Sturg is right about you.

You still haven't figured out Flynn plead guilty because his son was threatened and he was broke.

Alfa Bank scandal was a fraud and someone is guilty. Are you aware of anything or do you keep talking out of your ass for the hell of it?
 
Last edited:
Garmel said:
Wut? The polls were at nearly 4% for Hillary and the battleground state polls were completely blown. https://www.nytimes.com/2017/05/31/...y-key-state-polls-were-wrong-about-trump.html

Just as your claim that all of the election fraud is skewered toward republicans you're wrong again.

You still haven't figured out that most of the Trump investigations are politically motivated witch hunts. You also haven't figured out that the media sources you watch are manipulating you. Bless your heart.
Click to expand...

Hold up. Did you really say an investigation of a major political figure was political. Where the hell have you been. They are all political. I cant believe someone is going to accuse Hillary Clinton of being a part of a politically motivated investigation of a Republican. Seriously. Best case you can make is Hillary did to a Republican what Republicans have done to her for 30 years. It's literally been a GOP strategy to slander her because they knew she was eventually going to run for President. How freaking naive can you be. Wait. Dont answer that. You just did prove how naive you are.
 
cajunrevenge said:
Hold up. Did you really say an investigation of a major political figure was political. Where the hell have you been. They are all political. I cant believe someone is going to accuse Hillary Clinton of being a part of a politically motivated investigation of a Republican. Seriously. Best case you can make is Hillary did to a Republican what Republicans have done to her for 30 years. It's literally been a GOP strategy to slander her because they knew she was eventually going to run for President. How freaking naive can you be. Wait. Dont answer that. You just did prove how naive you are.
Click to expand...

I was actually responding to the part when you said the polls were accurate. I proved there they weren't. Nice misdirection though.
 
Garmel said:
I'm actually using the opinion of a respected law scholar. You really rode the short bus as a kid, didn't you? Sturg is right about you.

You still haven't figured out Flynn plead guilty because his son was threatened and he was broke.

Alfa Bank scandal was a fraud and someone is guilty. Are you aware of anything or do you keep talking out of ass for the hell of it?
Click to expand...

There's a lot of "respected" law scholars with opinions. Even Supreme court justices have ridiculous opinions too.


You would never in a million years accept running out of money as a reason for guilty plea by any Democrat. I will never concede that to you. There was and is so much potential to grift naive people like you out of money to help pay his legal defense. The dude practically had the AG working as his defense attorney. His son was threatened with criminal prosecution. That's perfectly legal.



As for Alfa bank, you seem to think the Alfa Bank story and Russian collusion is the same investigation. The FBI doubted they would be stupid enough to communicate using the Trump organization and the investigation was ended pretty quickly. That has nothing to do with the other investigation about Russua. This was just one allegation that was quickly debunked by the FBI. It was such a minor deal that I remember someone posting it in the Russia thread and it got like no responses and was never mentioned again. I would guess if you pulled people and asked if you heard about the link between Trump and Alfa bank before this Durham stuff recently only 5% or probably less would have said yes. It was the biggest non story at the time, so it's just hilarious how big of a deal some of you want to make when most people assumed there was nothing to it when there was no update after the initial report.
 
cajunrevenge said:
Sussman found not guilty. You guys fell for yet another politically motivated hoax. Sad how you keep falling for it.
Click to expand...

as you may suspect there is a wee bit of whining from the usual manly men on these boards today about the verdict

check out the other threads
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top