Quote: @pumpf said:
@ SFVikeFan said:
@ pumpf said:
@ KingBash said:
You know what, Fox News'ers? Here's a very good place to get some of your information:
twitter.com/SethAbramson/status/1118631217212067841 <<<<< This site for some reason won't let me post Twitter, so copy and paste.
An accomplished author who's followed this more closely than probably anybody. I've followed his daily feed since the day Trump fired Comey.
Don't say we haven't tried to show you the truth.
Well, Barr was an accomplished public servant for decades before becoming AG. He was well-respected by everyone as a fair, tough guy who was not beholden to anyone. But as soon as he said something that people didn't like, suddenly he became a "Trump stooge". Can anyone find any evidence of Barr being corrupt- or partisan- prior to him becoming AG?
My point is: is Seth Abramson really worth following- as an unbiased source of truth? Or is he just someone that tells people what they want to hear?
Did you forget you already adked that question and had it answered before?
Barr is completely biased. He was already involved in one Presidenttial cover-up during Iran contra affair. That should have automatically disqualified him or at the least recused himself.
https://news.vice.com/en_us/article/pajd...-up-before
On top of that, Barr sent Trump attorneys a 20 page memo declaring a President can't be indicted for obstruction of justice a year ago. Trump read it, loved it, fired his own hand picked AG Sessions and hired Barr because of thst memo.
Barr exonerated Trump without ever seen one piece of evidence or the Mueller report. How the fuck he wasn't forced to recuse himself from the investigation after that memo is beyond fucked up.
Complete banana republic at work.
Your link said that Barr was ACCUSED of it. Well whoop-dee-do. People get ACCUSED of things all the time. People here accuse me of being a racist. I can accuse you of being a martian. Accusations don't really mean anything (unless there are multiple, on-going such accusations; then it's possible that with all that smoke there is some fire). One biased article, citing an ACCUSATION is not proof of anything. Hillary has been ACCUSED of all kinds of things. And there is alot more evidence pointing to her guilt in those things... than in Barr being guilty of acting improperly... or Trump colluding with Russia for that matter.
So, no: he wasn't "involved". He was accused. Do you have anything more than that one accusation? From what I can see, that is the only possible blemish on the guy's career. Hardly a career, partisan hack. But, again: he didn't tell people what they wanted to hear... so now he's Hitler.
And you completely ignore how he got his job - by writing a 20 page memo that exonerated Trump before he ever saw any evidence. That's why Trump fired Sessions and hired Barr, because Barr already promised to shield him against obstruction charges.
But ither than that, yeah he had no bias. LMAO
Jesus Pumpf, your selective blindness along with A1 is staggering.
No point in discussing evidence in plain sight when you choose to pretend to not use common sense.
End of Page 1 / Start of Page 2 of the MUELLER report:
Quote:Although the investigation established that the Russian government perceived it would benefit from a Trump presidency and worked to secure that outcome, and that the Campaign expected it would benefit electorally from information stolen and released through Russian efforts, the investigation did not establish that members of the Trump Campaign conspired or coordinated with the Russian government in its election interference activities.
Quote: @A1Janitor said:
@ SFVikeFan said:
@ pumpf said:
@ KingBash said:
You know what, Fox News'ers? Here's a very good place to get some of your information:
twitter.com/SethAbramson/status/1118631217212067841 <<<<< This site for some reason won't let me post Twitter, so copy and paste.
An accomplished author who's followed this more closely than probably anybody. I've followed his daily feed since the day Trump fired Comey.
Don't say we haven't tried to show you the truth.
Well, Barr was an accomplished public servant for decades before becoming AG. He was well-respected by everyone as a fair, tough guy who was not beholden to anyone. But as soon as he said something that people didn't like, suddenly he became a "Trump stooge". Can anyone find any evidence of Barr being corrupt- or partisan- prior to him becoming AG?
My point is: is Seth Abramson really worth following- as an unbiased source of truth? Or is he just someone that tells people what they want to hear?
Did you forget you already adked that question and had it answered before?
Barr is completely biased. He was already involved in one Presidenttial cover-up during Iran contra affair. That should have automatically disqualified him or at the least recused himself.
https://news.vice.com/en_us/article/pajd...-up-before
On top of that, Barr sent Trump attorneys a 20 page memo declaring a President can't be indicted for obstruction of justice a year ago. Trump read it, loved it, fired his own hand picked AG Sessions and hired Barr because of thst memo.
Barr exonerated Trump without ever seen one piece of evidence or the Mueller report. How the fuck he wasn't forced to recuse himself from the investigation after that memo is beyond fucked up.
Complete banana republic at work.
LMAO
Mueller exonerated Trump on collusion ... the basis of this hoax!
Nothing!
BOOM!
You're a joke.
Because Barr wrote a 20 page memo that promised to shield Trump from obstruction charges before he was hired as AG, which led to Trump firing Sessions and hiring Barr because of that memo.
And Barr admitted he and Rosenstein disagreed on how they saw the obstruction incidents. Meaning Barr went to bat to defend Trump, Rosenstein disagreed.
As for "nothing " as you claim, Mueller left obstruction charges up to Congress, which you seem to have skipped over that part while enjoying your celebratory jerkoff.
I'd say you can't be this woefully blind and ignorant, but given your track record nothing shocks me about you anymore.
Barr confirmed IRA involvement in the hacking of the DNC.
Barr confirmed that these Russian actors contacted WikiLeaks about publishing hacked documents.
Barr stated that WikiLeaks act of accepting and publishing is not a crime.
He drew the line between the difference in a media outlet coordinating those hacks and simply accepting them.
... maybe we could have spent a good chunk of the day addressing this reality: Russians not connected to Trump , and with highly probable connections to the Russian Government, certainly were responsible (as documented) for the DNC hack and that two documents now assert that WikiLeaks was indeed contacted by this group.
I don't think anybody really cares... It was entertaining. We want an encore.
Quote: @A1Janitor said:
@ KingBash said:
@ A1Janitor said:
@ KingBash said:
@ A1Janitor said:
Lightly redacted!
How's it feel to lose what little credibility you had left?
https://www.justice.gov/storage/report.pdf
This is such a joke. Glad Barr has wasted taxpayer money to silence Mueller. And I'm glad you and the other Trumpers on this site enjoy it.
Tell me what was redacted that wasn’t legally required to be redacted.
Barr doesn’t care if Mueller testifies.
They will release an unredacted copy to Congress.
Again - it’s clear. No Russian collusion. Meaning the whole investigation was bullshit.
How would you behave if you were falsely accused of a crime that didn‘t occur. Not just a crime that you didn’t commit ... but a crime that never hapened. You and I would both fight back. That’s not obstruction.
Trump turned over 1.4 million pages of documents. Did not prohibit anyone from testifying. Did not refuse any request. About some alleged crime that did not occur.
Game over.
Nah. You're wrong. Unfortunately since you support Russia and crooked Trump, we'll never know.
Have a good Thursday!
EDIT: To your point in bold:
https://www.reuters.com/article/us-usa-trump-russia-cases-factbox/factbox-guilty-pleas-indictments-abound-in-trump-russia-probe-idUSKCN1RT1X3
God, I love being so right all the time.
Collusion.
Game over (but only because Trump supporters have emboldened a cheater).
LMAO So a Reuter’s article trump’s Mueller’s findings.
All that stuff wasn’t tied to Trump or russian collusion.
Kingbash has an inside angle with the FBI. He knows all.
Quote: @BlackMagic7 said:
Barr confirmed IRA involvement in the hacking of the DNC.
Barr confirmed that these Russian actors contacted WikiLeaks about publishing hacked documents.
Barr stated that WikiLeaks act of accepting and publishing is not a crime.
He drew the line between the difference in a media outlet coordinating those hacks and simply accepting them.
... maybe we could have spent a good chunk of the day addressing this reality: Russians not connected to Trump , and with highly probable connections to the Russian Government, certainly were responsible (as documented) for the DNC hack and that two documents now assert that WikiLeaks was indeed contacted by this group.
I don't think anybody really cares... It was entertaining. We want an encore.
But but but but wait! Havoc and A1 have proof that the DNC hacks were not done by the Russians! They had proof it was downloaded by someone at the DNC and couldn't possibly have been done remotely because of the download speeds! Because Havoc insisted the NSA even admitted it, because Havoc used to be an investigator and he knows all about this stuff.
*POOF*
And just like that, another GOP conspiracy theory disappears ...
Here's some highlights of just how many talking points Havoc got wrong:
1) "You are repeatedly being lied to and the media counts on you not to think with any depth or read the actual documents. For instance, Bob Mueller didn’t weigh in on obstruction" (Oh he did, he gave 10 points of obstruction but stated it's up to Congress to pursue charges)
2) "When the story broke on the DNC “hack, I assumed it true like most people. I traced what was publicly available in reports and it came back to the Ukraine." (Ummm .... nope, it came back as Russia)
3) " The NSA told every sophisticated person out there that the story was bullshit. "As Rogers would explain, the NSA had a concrete difference of opinion to all the other federal agencies. So at that point I knew, there was zero chance the DNC breach was a hack in the sense it was done remotely." (Zero evidence of this, just one rightwing conspiracy theory article that was re-blogged thousands of times and easily swallowed by the gullible)
4) That doesn’t mean I can tell you the Russians didn’t take the data, only that they did not remotely hack it as most of our country’s agencies were telling us. That was one of my first WTF moments where I just couldn’t reason why they were lying, but it turned out it was one of many instances of obvious lying. (LOL! No they weren't lying, you just didn't want to believe the truth because it didn't fit your dingbat conspiracy theory narrative).
5) "So with so much information here, I’ll try my best to fill things in for all of you. As stated above, it wasn’t a hack." (BOOM! LOLOLOLOL)
6) "Now ya’ll have a good idea of what is going on. TIME WILL SHOW YOU I'M BY AND LARGE RIGHT so I’ll wait for you to figure that out. Good luck, you’re going to need it to keep your mind intact as your understanding of reality continued to be obliterated. Take care"
By and large, you were so, so, so fucking wrong I'm crying here in laughter. You seriously operate in some bizarro world of upside-down, devoid of reality, and have so many intricate details of complete bullshit woven into your narrative to reinforce it as truth in your mind that I'm concerned for your mental health. Honestly dude, you sound seriously fucking unstable and if I were your family member I'd be making calls to therapists and mental hospitals.
This is why I can't take some of you people seriously because you are not grounded in reality. You read this goofball, conspiracy theory bullshit and you swallow it hook, line and sinker and you're so fucking convinced you're right because it's what you WANT to believe. So c'mon Havoc, c'mon over and man up to the fact you were hoodwinked despite all of your super in-depth research ... of reddit sites apparently. LMAO And really, all you ding dongs who agreed with him are just as bad.
I will say it again and again: Our greatest threat to democracy is the fact that we operate in two orbits of information: too many conservatives and Trump supporters operate in a world of illusion, a fantasy world of wholly fabricated conspiracy theory bullshit that they readily devour as gospel and truth, and blame the "mainstream media" for trying to deceive them.
Assange said the Russians were not involved in hacking. i believe him over anyone ties to this hoax.
Quote: @SFVikeFan said:
And you completely ignore how he got his job - by writing a 20 page memo that exonerated Trump before he ever saw any evidence. That's why Trump fired Sessions and hired Barr, because Barr already promised to shield him against obstruction charges.
But ither than that, yeah he had no bias. LMAO
Jesus Pumpf, your selective blindness along with A1 is staggering.
No point in discussing evidence in plain sight when you choose to pretend to not use common sense.
Correct me if I'm wrong... but Trump was trying to get rid of Sessions for a long time... wasn't he? So your characterization of this doesn't seem to be accurate. Now, it could be that Trump DID choose Barr because he believed that Barr would be the best AG for him. Unfortunately, you lost all credibility when you mis-characterized how it happened.
Of course, Trump wouldn't be the first president to pick an AG who was friendly to him... and who would defend him at all costs. Seems like we just had a guy like that not that long ago. I think his name was Eric Holder. And I don't remember you- or anyone else on "your side"- saying anything about it back then. That doesn't make it right when Trump does it. But it DOES mean that your "outrage" is selective and not really concerned about right-and-wrong... or what's best for America. By excusing other presidents... and barking about Trump... it really does come across as hypocritical, partisan, faux concern. Oh well... to each their own.
By the way, I'm still waiting for proof that- prior to all this Trump stuff- Barr was ever anything but a highly regarded public servant. Somehow- now, when he doesn't tell you what you want to hear- he's evil. Funny: you guys said the same thing about Mueller... when HE didn't deliver the goods you were looking for. I get the feeling that- if Mother Teresa said something to defend Trump, you'd call HER a partisan hack, too. At some point, your accusations lose all credibility... which might be why Trump is probably going to get re-elected (despite all the baggage). You guys have cried wolf so often... that even if you managed to get something right: no one would care anymore. It just makes me wonder what you guys are really hoping to accomplish? Is your hatred of Trump just virtue-signaling: showing how smart and compassionate and woke you are? Because if you're trying to get someone else elected, you're doing a really bad job of it.
Quote: @A1Janitor said:
Assange said the Russians were not involved in hacking. i believe him over anyone ties to this hoax.
Of course you do cupcake ... it's much easier to deny reality and live in your fantasy bubble world you've created where you get to choose what's real based on how you FEEL, not based on truth ... because now even William Barr, Trump's handpicked lackey for AG, is also part of your elaborate hoax.
I'm just amazed you're able to leave the house without velcro shoes, a helmet and a caretaker.
On a sidenote, this is why I despise Trump so much. He has completely mindfucked reasonable people to deny reality and live in this conspiracy theory world of "fake news", "false flags", "crisis actors" where a proven, serial liar is some champion of truth and everyone's out to get him. There's no reasoning with some of you no matter what facts, quotes or proof is given, you'll continue to deny it, because you're so completely brainwashed by the cult of Trump and you don't realize it.
If only you had a clue of how utterly fucking batshit crazy you sound ... you're cuckoo for cocoa puffs
LMAO
Mueller said there was no collusion.
Spon it anyway you want.
A confused San Francisco “man” calling me a snowflake. Beautiful.
|
