All_Pro_Bills Posted August 26, 2022 Posted August 26, 2022 (edited) 7 minutes ago, Westside said: You got him now!!!!! 😂😂😂😂 The smoking gun! Now lets play name that crime. Today's topic. Potential crimes that can be associated with the act of having your picture taken with a 33 year old woman. Fire up the engines on those Blackhawks and load up the SWAT teams! Edited August 26, 2022 by All_Pro_Bills 1
BillStime Posted August 26, 2022 Posted August 26, 2022 5 minutes ago, Westside said: You got him now!!!!! 😂😂😂😂 Oh I do? lmao - idiots
Tenhigh Posted August 26, 2022 Posted August 26, 2022 33 minutes ago, BillStime said: Oh I do? lmao - idiots What were you like Pre-Trump? 1
Tiberius Posted August 26, 2022 Posted August 26, 2022 1 hour ago, BillStime said: Plot thickens What a mess Gees, what could she find at Mar a logo? Got treason? What a mess!!
Buffalo_Stampede Posted August 26, 2022 Posted August 26, 2022 You know how you destroy a free country? Turn the people against the government, the media, and the elections. I’m not saying the goal is to destroy the country but that’s exactly what would destroy the country.
Doc Posted August 26, 2022 Posted August 26, 2022 1 hour ago, Tenhigh said: What were you like Pre-Trump? Still dumb, but not as deranged.
Tiberius Posted August 26, 2022 Posted August 26, 2022 What was Trump doing with all those secret documents? What a treasonable mess!
All_Pro_Bills Posted August 26, 2022 Posted August 26, 2022 1 minute ago, Tiberius said: What was Trump doing with all those secret documents? What a treasonable mess! The same thing all previous Presidents were doing. 1
Nineforty Posted August 26, 2022 Posted August 26, 2022 19 minutes ago, DRsGhost said: you are a ***** idiot. 1
Doc Posted August 26, 2022 Posted August 26, 2022 34 minutes ago, DRsGhost said: That's worse than I thought it would look. I expected a bunch of "Whereas'."
All_Pro_Bills Posted August 26, 2022 Posted August 26, 2022 11 minutes ago, Doc said: That's worse than I thought it would look. I expected a bunch of "Whereas'." What we learned from the released affidavit is the people at the DOJ have a large supply of black marker pens and they're not afraid to use them. 1
BillStime Posted August 27, 2022 Posted August 27, 2022 On 5/19/2022 at 2:51 PM, DRsGhost said: In keeping on topic let's go back and look at Durham's first guilty plea. Kevin Clinesmith, the FBI attorney who altered evidence and lied to FISA court in order to keep spying on Carter Page and by extension the Trump orbit. Not so insignificant when you have a lawyer at our most powerful law enforcement agency fabricating evidence in order to spy on private citizens. But thats just me. Let's go back and look at how this was covered in two media outlets. The headline here states the facts. And this one kind of leaves out that he lied to a friggin FISA court. Burying the lede indeed. Additionally, what he altered was an email from the CIA confirming that Carter Page WAS a CIA informant to instead read that Carter Page WAS NOT a CIA informant so that they could lie to the FISA court to keep spying on him. Finally, if you read the Axios article this was their "bottom line" No evidence of political bias was found in the IG report. This is a laughable conclusion that was the mantra sung by nearly the entire media. In the 17 "serious performance failures" that the IG found, that weren't political mind you, its amazing that every single one of them went against Trump and instead were "errors" that allowed the investigation to move forward. If these were simply process errors that had no political motivation, shouldn't at least one or two gone the other way? I recommend everyone read the IG report. At minimum the executive summary. https://oig.justice.gov/reports/review-four-fisa-applications-and-other-aspects-fbis-crossfire-hurricane-investigation Guess who else was surveilling Carter Page?
Albwan Posted August 27, 2022 Posted August 27, 2022 https://threadreaderapp.com/thread/1563212486093942784.html I’ve gone through the redacted affidavit a couple of times now. Including Attachments. I’m not impressed. There are so many concerning issues it is hard to know where to start. I’ll try. SEE IT: DOJ's Redacted Affidavit for FBI's Trump Raid - Todd Starnes toddstarnes.com/politics/see-i… 1–it does not appear to include any exculpatory evidence or mitigating facts. While it includes a letter from Trump’s lawyers it doesn’t acknowledge potential advice of counsel defenses or even that they may lack authority to bring such a case against a former POTUS 2-It has no factual evidence attributable to the mens rea requirement —which is the burden the Gov’t must meet showing criminal intent of the target. If it’s in there it is redacted. 3-The affidavit is filled with conclusory statements “there is probable cause” is stated authoritatively but without any reference to whom the PC applies nor to sufficient facts supporting such PC It is surprising that Reinhart signed this given that the overwhelming tenor of the unredacted facts are a civil dispute over which documents can or cannot be retained versus sent to NARA. Criminal Intent appears nowhere in the affidavit. 4–(My Favorite part) The focus of the facts is less on if FPOTUS may or may not be able to possess but whether docs are in a secure, designated room. No mention that the whole place is secured by the Secret Service. 5-There does not appear to be PC to search the safe. The safe is also not listed on places to search nor described in the factual justifications. 6-There is no set of facts revealed to show that the target transported, removed, destroyed, altered or instructed others to do so Re: classified docs. 7-The affidavit instructs the judge of the applicable law but withholds any mention of court decisions re a POTUS’ unfettered ability to declassify and fails to inform the Court that a FPOTUS may fall outside the criminal statute. 8–Shockingly, it admits that the FBI searched through boxes of documents that NARA had recovered, and did so pursuant to their “criminal investigation” but did not use a Taint Team to ensure they were not reviewing privileged documents. 9-The brief reference to the article citing Kash Patel’s statements that documents were declassified should have given the judge pause that this is not a criminal case and that requisite Mens Rea would be impossible to establish against the target. Sounds like truth unlike the lefties butthurt emotions. leftists don't care at all for - facts. That's why no one believes any of this propaganda anymore except the highly brainwashed deranged halfwits. 1
Recommended Posts