OldTimeAFLGuy Posted October 26, 2019 Share Posted October 26, 2019 2 hours ago, Nanker said: ...yes there are significant issues there...... 2 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Nanker Posted October 26, 2019 Share Posted October 26, 2019 2 hours ago, Gary Busey said: Good morning wanky 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Deranged Rhino Posted October 26, 2019 Share Posted October 26, 2019 2 2 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Deranged Rhino Posted October 27, 2019 Share Posted October 27, 2019 Oh boy... She was banging McCabe too. 1 3 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
keepthefaith Posted October 27, 2019 Share Posted October 27, 2019 7 minutes ago, Deranged Rhino said: Oh boy... She was banging McCabe too. Really? That will be interesting if the story is affirmed. 2 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Deranged Rhino Posted October 27, 2019 Share Posted October 27, 2019 Just now, keepthefaith said: Really? That will be interesting if the story is affirmed. I've heard that rumored for awhile, but never anything to substantiate it (and still haven't). We'll see what OAN rolls out to back it up. 2 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
3rdnlng Posted October 28, 2019 Share Posted October 28, 2019 A throuple? 2 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
DC Tom Posted October 28, 2019 Share Posted October 28, 2019 1 hour ago, Deranged Rhino said: Oh boy... She was banging McCabe too. At this point, I'm most inclined to believe she was a Russian agent than anyone else involved in this whole mess. (Yes, I would. Cute, slutty brunette with obvious low standards? Where've you been all my life, baby?) 1 2 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
B-Man Posted October 28, 2019 Share Posted October 28, 2019 50 minutes ago, DC Tom said: At this point, I'm most inclined to believe she was a Russian agent than anyone else involved in this whole mess. (Yes, I would. Cute, slutty brunette with obvious low standards? Where've you been all my life, baby?) 2 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Hedge Posted October 28, 2019 Share Posted October 28, 2019 4 hours ago, Deranged Rhino said: Oh boy... She was banging McCabe too. Original tweet was deleted after this: 3 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Deranged Rhino Posted October 28, 2019 Share Posted October 28, 2019 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Deranged Rhino Posted October 28, 2019 Share Posted October 28, 2019 45 just retweeted this... 2 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Deranged Rhino Posted October 29, 2019 Share Posted October 29, 2019 1 2 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Buffalo_Gal Posted October 29, 2019 Share Posted October 29, 2019 (edited) 53 minutes ago, Deranged Rhino said: I am trying to figure out why the government hasn't dismissed the charges. Clearly someone is now feeding Sidney Powell's team information, although every time I see something released it is always the prosecution delaying or obfuscating. Who is in charge of this prosecution? Does Barr have no say in this? Or is this playing out this way for a reason? Prosecutorial misconduct? all the info coming out twice? I am trying to figure out an end-game for the US Government that covers them in glory, and there does not appear to be one. So, why is this continuing? And whose decision is it to continually withhold evidence from the Flynn trial? I understood the first several years of bad faith by the prosecution, but I do not understand "why" at this point. Edited October 29, 2019 by Buffalo_Gal 1 3 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Nanker Posted October 29, 2019 Share Posted October 29, 2019 1 hour ago, Buffalo_Gal said: I am trying to figure out why the government hasn't dismissed the charges. Clearly someone is now feeding Sidney Powell's team information, although every time I see something released it is always the prosecution delaying or obfuscating. Who is in charge of this prosecution? Does Barr have no say in this? Or is this playing out this way for a reason? Prosecutorial misconduct? all the info coming out twice? I am trying to figure out an end-game for the US Government that covers them in glory, and there does not appear to be one. So, why is this continuing? And whose decision is it to continually withhold evidence from the Flynn trial? I understood the first several years of bad faith by the prosecution, but I do not understand "why" at this point. Agreed. It's been the most painful slow-roll I think I've ever seen. There's a missing piece here. It doesn't add up well. Perhaps the Persecution's team is also under investigation. Maybe the judge is dragging his feet because he's seeing the misconduct - which he presided over (as judge) and needs to carefully couch the end result (throwing out the charges - most likely in my view) so he doesn't appear too hasty in accepting Flynn's guilty plea. (I know he "begged" him not to but at the time Flynn was being extorted to the fullest extent of the law.) Could he not have accepted Flynn's plea and sent the case directly to trial - and the government's mis-deed would have been uncovered months ago instead of coming out in the sentencing phase and only after Flynn fired his legal team and hired a lawyer with some grasp of the overall situation? 2 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
DC Tom Posted October 29, 2019 Share Posted October 29, 2019 2 hours ago, Buffalo_Gal said: I am trying to figure out why the government hasn't dismissed the charges. Clearly someone is now feeding Sidney Powell's team information, although every time I see something released it is always the prosecution delaying or obfuscating. Who is in charge of this prosecution? Does Barr have no say in this? Or is this playing out this way for a reason? Prosecutorial misconduct? all the info coming out twice? I am trying to figure out an end-game for the US Government that covers them in glory, and there does not appear to be one. So, why is this continuing? And whose decision is it to continually withhold evidence from the Flynn trial? I understood the first several years of bad faith by the prosecution, but I do not understand "why" at this point. Probably hoping Trump gets impeached and they can quietly resolve this behind the resulting uproar. 3 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
keepthefaith Posted October 29, 2019 Share Posted October 29, 2019 2 hours ago, Buffalo_Gal said: I am trying to figure out why the government hasn't dismissed the charges. Clearly someone is now feeding Sidney Powell's team information, although every time I see something released it is always the prosecution delaying or obfuscating. Who is in charge of this prosecution? Does Barr have no say in this? Or is this playing out this way for a reason? Prosecutorial misconduct? all the info coming out twice? I am trying to figure out an end-game for the US Government that covers them in glory, and there does not appear to be one. So, why is this continuing? And whose decision is it to continually withhold evidence from the Flynn trial? I understood the first several years of bad faith by the prosecution, but I do not understand "why" at this point. Maybe it's important for the DOJ to avoid any appearance of partisanship. If the charges against Flynn are to be dropped, they want to make absolutely sure they are on very solid ground. 1 2 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Foxx Posted October 29, 2019 Share Posted October 29, 2019 3 hours ago, Buffalo_Gal said: I am trying to figure out why the government hasn't dismissed the charges. Clearly someone is now feeding Sidney Powell's team information, although every time I see something released it is always the prosecution delaying or obfuscating. Who is in charge of this prosecution? Does Barr have no say in this? Or is this playing out this way for a reason? Prosecutorial misconduct? all the info coming out twice? I am trying to figure out an end-game for the US Government that covers them in glory, and there does not appear to be one. So, why is this continuing? And whose decision is it to continually withhold evidence from the Flynn trial? I understood the first several years of bad faith by the prosecution, but I do not understand "why" at this point. to the bolded, this has been my question for some time as well. who exactly is prosecuting this case? it would stand to reason that Barr would have oversight of it. it would also stand to reason if Barr is who he appears to be, he would want to see justice served. unless we are wrong here, some things just don't add up. 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Deranged Rhino Posted October 29, 2019 Share Posted October 29, 2019 Gar-Bear, spectacularly wrong again... as expected: 1 2 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Foxx Posted October 30, 2019 Share Posted October 30, 2019 https://twitter.com/RealSLokhova/status/1189335854902370304 3 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Deranged Rhino Posted October 30, 2019 Share Posted October 30, 2019 3 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
DC Tom Posted October 30, 2019 Share Posted October 30, 2019 36 minutes ago, Deranged Rhino said: It's not treason. It's fraud. Massive, and criminal. But not treason. 2 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Gary M Posted October 30, 2019 Share Posted October 30, 2019 4 minutes ago, DC Tom said: It's not treason. It's fraud. Massive, and criminal. But not treason. What if it can be proved this was done in attempt to oust the POTUS? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
DC Tom Posted October 30, 2019 Share Posted October 30, 2019 36 minutes ago, Gary M said: What if it can be proved this was done in attempt to oust the POTUS? Treason is levying war against, or giving aid and comfort to, enemies of the United States. Falsifying criminal evidence is neither. 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
GG Posted October 30, 2019 Share Posted October 30, 2019 6 minutes ago, DC Tom said: Treason is levying war against, or giving aid and comfort to, enemies of the United States. Falsifying criminal evidence is neither. What if you engage with foreign governments to commit that fraud? 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
TakeYouToTasker Posted October 30, 2019 Share Posted October 30, 2019 5 minutes ago, DC Tom said: Treason is levying war against, or giving aid and comfort to, enemies of the United States. Falsifying criminal evidence is neither. That would depend, I would think, on the purpose of falsifying the criminal evidence. A coup attempt, soft or otherwise, is an attempt to overthrow the legitimate government of the United States. This act, especially if done in concert with other nations, would be considered an act of war. It wouldn’t even matter who those actions were taken at the behest of, as enemies can be both foreign and domestic. 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
DC Tom Posted October 30, 2019 Share Posted October 30, 2019 34 minutes ago, GG said: What if you engage with foreign governments to commit that fraud? 32 minutes ago, TakeYouToTasker said: That would depend, I would think, on the purpose of falsifying the criminal evidence. A coup attempt, soft or otherwise, is an attempt to overthrow the legitimate government of the United States. This act, especially if done in concert with other nations, would be considered an act of war. It wouldn’t even matter who those actions were taken at the behest of, as enemies can be both foreign and domestic. "Levying war against, or giving aid and comfort to an enemy of the United States." Fraud, even in conspiracy with foreign governments, is neither levying war nor giving aid and comfort to an enemy. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
row_33 Posted October 30, 2019 Share Posted October 30, 2019 (edited) 54 minutes ago, GG said: What if you engage with foreign governments to commit that fraud? you bring forth the real evidence and allow for the D to respond, and you weigh it, case by case Edited October 30, 2019 by row_33 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Deranged Rhino Posted October 30, 2019 Share Posted October 30, 2019 1 1 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Dr. Who Posted October 30, 2019 Share Posted October 30, 2019 4 hours ago, DC Tom said: Treason is levying war against, or giving aid and comfort to, enemies of the United States. Falsifying criminal evidence is neither. Ahh, my view, giving aid and comfort to Dems qualifies. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
TakeYouToTasker Posted October 31, 2019 Share Posted October 31, 2019 5 hours ago, DC Tom said: "Levying war against, or giving aid and comfort to an enemy of the United States." Fraud, even in conspiracy with foreign governments, is neither levying war nor giving aid and comfort to an enemy. If the fraud is part and parcel to an attempt to overthrow the government via coup, yes, it is. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
DC Tom Posted October 31, 2019 Share Posted October 31, 2019 17 minutes ago, TakeYouToTasker said: If the fraud is part and parcel to an attempt to overthrow the government via coup, yes, it is. Are we at war? Is someone giving an enemy aix and comfort? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Cinga Posted October 31, 2019 Share Posted October 31, 2019 6 minutes ago, DC Tom said: Are we at war? Is someone giving an enemy aix and comfort? "Levying war against, or giving aid and comfort to an enemy of the United States." Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
DC Tom Posted October 31, 2019 Share Posted October 31, 2019 45 minutes ago, Cinga said: "Levying war against, or giving aid and comfort to an enemy of the United States." No ***** *****, buckwheat. That's why those are two questions above. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
4merper4mer Posted October 31, 2019 Share Posted October 31, 2019 6 hours ago, DC Tom said: "Levying war against, or giving aid and comfort to an enemy of the United States." Fraud, even in conspiracy with foreign governments, is neither levying war nor giving aid and comfort to an enemy. Page gave comfort to Strzrok and he is an enemy of the US. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
DC Tom Posted October 31, 2019 Share Posted October 31, 2019 4 minutes ago, 4merper4mer said: Page gave comfort to Strzrok and he is an enemy of the US. Actually, I rather get the vibe from Strzrzzrzok that discomfort is his particular kink. 1 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
TakeYouToTasker Posted October 31, 2019 Share Posted October 31, 2019 (edited) 1 hour ago, DC Tom said: Are we at war? Is someone giving an enemy aix and comfort? Acts of war can precipitate declarations against the aggressor. That fact does not mitigate the true act of treason. Edited October 31, 2019 by TakeYouToTasker 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
GaryPinC Posted October 31, 2019 Share Posted October 31, 2019 7 hours ago, TakeYouToTasker said: Acts of war can precipitate declarations against the aggressor. That fact does not mitigate the true act of treason. https://www.google.com/url?sa=t&source=web&rct=j&url=https://www.nbcnews.com/think/amp/ncna848651&ved=2ahUKEwjz2YyKpsblAhVFPK0KHVw7BakQFjAUegQIBRAB&usg=AOvVaw2YDt1ND1JMMCZcJdg010Z0&cf=1 Which enemy have they adhered to?Keeping in mind an enemy is a sovereign we are at war with. Who's the enemy within who is committing acts of war to overthrow the country and change our form of government? You want to argue it is a coup, fine. But treason is just plain stupid, on par with the far left's TDS. I daresay the people you feel are treasonous would argue they have acted out of a sense of loyalty to their country, Trump's behavior unbefitting a US President and therefore anti-American. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
TakeYouToTasker Posted October 31, 2019 Share Posted October 31, 2019 (edited) 1 hour ago, GaryPinC said: https://www.google.com/url?sa=t&source=web&rct=j&url=https://www.nbcnews.com/think/amp/ncna848651&ved=2ahUKEwjz2YyKpsblAhVFPK0KHVw7BakQFjAUegQIBRAB&usg=AOvVaw2YDt1ND1JMMCZcJdg010Z0&cf=1 Which enemy have they adhered to?Keeping in mind an enemy is a sovereign we are at war with. Who's the enemy within who is committing acts of war to overthrow the country and change our form of government? You want to argue it is a coup, fine. But treason is just plain stupid, on par with the far left's TDS. I daresay the people you feel are treasonous would argue they have acted out of a sense of loyalty to their country, Trump's behavior unbefitting a US President and therefore anti-American. Any sovereign nation collaborating would be committing an act of war. In this case England, Italy, France, Australia, and several others. Committing an act of war defines them as an enemy. However, enemies can be both foreign *or* domestic. Let’s take a step back. What actions would one have to take to be considered a domestic enemy? The attempted overthrow of the legitimate government wouldn’t rise to those standards? Also, it does not matter if they thought they were justified because they *really, really, really* disliked the guy who won. That’s not justification. That’s motive. Edited October 31, 2019 by TakeYouToTasker 2 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Tiberius Posted October 31, 2019 Share Posted October 31, 2019 Just now, TakeYouToTasker said: Any sovereign nation collaborating would be committing an act of war. In this case England, Italy, France, Australia, and several others. Committing an act of war defines than as an enemy. However, enemies can be both foreign *or* domestic. Let’s take a step back. What actions would one have to take to be considered a domestic enemy? The attempted overthrow of the legitimate government wouldn’t rise to those standards? Also, it does not matter if they thought they were justified because they *really, really, really* disliked the guy who won. That’s not justification. That’s motive. So did Russia commit an act of war in 2016? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts