Julio3000
<B>A Chip Off the Old Rock</B>
Wait, when did we learn that the Russians didn't do it?
HRC
- Thread starter 57Brave
- Start date
Wait, when did we learn that the Russians didn't do it?
sturg33
I
LOL... well I guess Hilary hasn't said it so...
But if we were to believe Assange, and he's been incredibly accurate, the Russians have nothing to do with it. Matter of fact, it looks like it's US members who did the leak in order to stop Clinton
But sure... let's keep blaming the Russians.
bravesnumberone
Well-known member
What still amazes me is how many people think whether the Russians did it or not is even the point.
weso1
<B>Clique Leader</B>
That argument would be stronger if the same dems who are grumping about the FBI now weren't praising the FBI earlier last month.
goldfly
<B>if my thought dreams could be seen</B>
unless wikileaks changed their way of giving them info or i totally misunderstood one of their press conferences they were having at 4am or so
they don't know who dumps info to them or not in their "dump box" or whatever they call it. so they can try to protect all parties involved
they don't know who dumps info to them or not in their "dump box" or whatever they call it. so they can try to protect all parties involved
cajunrevenge
Well-known member
https://twitter.com/BretBaier/status/793963871929331712
I said sources described an "avalanche of evidence" in case & barring obstruction they'd likely continue 2 push to try to get an indictment"
I said sources described an "avalanche of evidence" in case & barring obstruction they'd likely continue 2 push to try to get an indictment"
cajunrevenge
Well-known member
[video]https://streamable.com/3xi1[/video]
H y p o c r i t . . . . . . .
H y p o c r i t . . . . . . .
Oklahomahawk
Boras' Client
That's probably Bernie clapping back there in the background...
Julio3000
<B>A Chip Off the Old Rock</B>
I think that the Hillary camp piling on call me is pretty unfair, although I think that some of the criticism is warranted. Comey was in a tough spot, because he knew that the info would be leaked and the appearance of it would potentially be worse were it released after the election. It's a tough call, and I understand his decision.
The leak in the fox article above is straight up bull****, though. Not that it's necessarily wrong on substance, but only time can tell that, and its timing is such that I can't help but look askance at it. Also, the bit about obstruction is a clever little poison pill. So two anonymous and obviously partisan sources said that if there are no indictments, it's because the investigation was obstructed? That's awfully convenient, and I'm not gonna give it too much credence until somebody shows their work.
The leak in the fox article above is straight up bull****, though. Not that it's necessarily wrong on substance, but only time can tell that, and its timing is such that I can't help but look askance at it. Also, the bit about obstruction is a clever little poison pill. So two anonymous and obviously partisan sources said that if there are no indictments, it's because the investigation was obstructed? That's awfully convenient, and I'm not gonna give it too much credence until somebody shows their work.
50PoundHead
Hessmania Forever
Comey was in a really tough spot. No question about that. I'm not a conspiracy guy and I don't think there is one here, but there's certainly enough fodder for those who like to spin those webs to do so.
Oklahomahawk
Boras' Client
Julio3000
<B>A Chip Off the Old Rock</B>
Anyone want to make an avatar bet with me over whether there are going to be any indictments?
weso1
<B>Clique Leader</B>
No, because there will be obstruction.
I do.
Julio3000
<B>A Chip Off the Old Rock</B>
Exactly! See how easy this is?
Julio3000
<B>A Chip Off the Old Rock</B>
Cool, I'm in. If there's a criminal indictment from DoJ in the Clinton Foundation case of any Clinton, Clinton staffer, or Foundation employee, based on the pay-for-play allegations in the article linked by weso within an agreed upon period of time, you win. If there are no indictments during said term, I win. We'll renegotiate terms if a special prosecutor is appointed.
What about if the FBI makes a move unilaterally, such as (officially) announcing they believe there is a strong case for calling a grand jury with a _clear_ inference being that the DOJ is playing sides by not doing so?
Can we expand the scope beyond Clinton Foundation to State Department e-mails and the conspiratorial angle of the WJC and Epstein connection?
I would also be open to changing my avatar if any solid information is ever produced that links Wikileaks to DJT/Russian Federation.
I'm open to the term being 1 month from tomorrow, with the term of the avatar change being for a period of 3 months.