Follow along with the video below to see how to install our site as a web app on your home screen.
Note: This feature currently requires accessing the site using the built-in Safari browser.
Who are you speaking of when you say "we"? Do you represent some group or organization in an official capacity or are you just speaking for yourself? Explain why a special prosecutor or Congressional committee are obligated to provide you with classified or secret data? Do you believe it is normal or routine for these folks to provide this kind of data during an ongoing investigation to the general public or anonymous message board posters?All we have are statements from the media. We have no actual evidence of collusion or hacking.It has been provided numerous times in this thread. You just deny it is evidence. How many times does it have to be posted? How many links do you need? You are really demanding "smoking gun" evidence. Smoking gun evidence is rare and cases are prosecuted without that kind of evidence every day. Smoking gun evidence can be a subjective term. An email or communications intercept revealing an attempt or agreement to brief Russian sources by a campaign official may be considered smoking gun evidence. That is what Manafort is accused of doing and what it appears the prosecutor has evidence to prove.What evidence is his base refusing to acknowledge? Please, provide the evidence in question.Trump's base will refuse to acknowledge evidence, no matter what. Like he said, he could shoot someone in Times Square and it would not make a difference to his base. His base will not be on the grand jury or the trial juries of his associates. Rational people will probably be on those juries. Rational people will recognize evidence when they see it.
If you are sitting on a jury and the prosecutor shows evidence of an agreement or attempt to an agreement to meet with and brief or disclose campaign strategic information to a foreign government that is suspected of trying to interfere with an election it is fair to assume that that evidence will influence your judgement that collusion or an attempt at collusion has occurred. Hence, the information provided by the prosecutor is evidence.
The email was never shown, it was merely stated that one existed. That's not evidence. If it is, I can tell you that I have an email from Hillary praising Satan.
No evidence was shown, it was merely stated that it exists, which isn't the same thing. If you have the email, feel free to show it to me.
How about you explain why the data, which totally exists by the way, is secret when the media is allowed to parade the investigation out in the open. As stated in the video, it's a nothing sandwich, the media has no evidence, and the investigation has turned up nothing. It's all about ratings.Who are you speaking of when you say "we"? Do you represent some group or organization in an official capacity or are you just speaking for yourself? Explain why a special prosecutor or Congressional committee are obligated to provide you with classified or secret data? Do you believe it is normal or routine for these folks to provide this kind of data during an ongoing investigation to the general public or anonymous message board posters?All we have are statements from the media. We have no actual evidence of collusion or hacking.It has been provided numerous times in this thread. You just deny it is evidence. How many times does it have to be posted? How many links do you need? You are really demanding "smoking gun" evidence. Smoking gun evidence is rare and cases are prosecuted without that kind of evidence every day. Smoking gun evidence can be a subjective term. An email or communications intercept revealing an attempt or agreement to brief Russian sources by a campaign official may be considered smoking gun evidence. That is what Manafort is accused of doing and what it appears the prosecutor has evidence to prove.What evidence is his base refusing to acknowledge? Please, provide the evidence in question.Trump's base will refuse to acknowledge evidence, no matter what. Like he said, he could shoot someone in Times Square and it would not make a difference to his base. His base will not be on the grand jury or the trial juries of his associates. Rational people will probably be on those juries. Rational people will recognize evidence when they see it.
If you are sitting on a jury and the prosecutor shows evidence of an agreement or attempt to an agreement to meet with and brief or disclose campaign strategic information to a foreign government that is suspected of trying to interfere with an election it is fair to assume that that evidence will influence your judgement that collusion or an attempt at collusion has occurred. Hence, the information provided by the prosecutor is evidence.
The email was never shown, it was merely stated that one existed. That's not evidence. If it is, I can tell you that I have an email from Hillary praising Satan.
No evidence was shown, it was merely stated that it exists, which isn't the same thing. If you have the email, feel free to show it to me.
The investigation is turning up new data every day, hence, the topic of this thread. Just because you don't like the evidence turning up doesn't mean it is not evidence.How about you explain why the data, which totally exists by the way, is secret when the media is allowed to parade the investigation out in the open. As stated in the video, it's a nothing sandwich, the media has no evidence, and the investigation has turned up nothing. It's all about ratings.Who are you speaking of when you say "we"? Do you represent some group or organization in an official capacity or are you just speaking for yourself? Explain why a special prosecutor or Congressional committee are obligated to provide you with classified or secret data? Do you believe it is normal or routine for these folks to provide this kind of data during an ongoing investigation to the general public or anonymous message board posters?All we have are statements from the media. We have no actual evidence of collusion or hacking.It has been provided numerous times in this thread. You just deny it is evidence. How many times does it have to be posted? How many links do you need? You are really demanding "smoking gun" evidence. Smoking gun evidence is rare and cases are prosecuted without that kind of evidence every day. Smoking gun evidence can be a subjective term. An email or communications intercept revealing an attempt or agreement to brief Russian sources by a campaign official may be considered smoking gun evidence. That is what Manafort is accused of doing and what it appears the prosecutor has evidence to prove.What evidence is his base refusing to acknowledge? Please, provide the evidence in question.Trump's base will refuse to acknowledge evidence, no matter what. Like he said, he could shoot someone in Times Square and it would not make a difference to his base. His base will not be on the grand jury or the trial juries of his associates. Rational people will probably be on those juries. Rational people will recognize evidence when they see it.
If you are sitting on a jury and the prosecutor shows evidence of an agreement or attempt to an agreement to meet with and brief or disclose campaign strategic information to a foreign government that is suspected of trying to interfere with an election it is fair to assume that that evidence will influence your judgement that collusion or an attempt at collusion has occurred. Hence, the information provided by the prosecutor is evidence.
The email was never shown, it was merely stated that one existed. That's not evidence. If it is, I can tell you that I have an email from Hillary praising Satan.
No evidence was shown, it was merely stated that it exists, which isn't the same thing. If you have the email, feel free to show it to me.
yet when it comes to Hillary Clinton that same poster says there is no need for evidence she is guilty LOLThe investigation is turning up new data every day, hence, the topic of this thread. Just because you don't like the evidence turning up doesn't mean it is not evidence.
no, he said NO prosecutor would take the case because she or anyone under the same circumstance, would NOT BE FOUND GUILTY, and they would not waste their time and tax payer's money to charge a person that would be found not guilty....Lack of indictment is not lack of guilt, and in fact, Comey personally stated that she was guilty, but no prosecutor would take the case.You could not even get an indictment on Hillary you Fuck head LOL[
And here I thought everyone had seen the emails. I guess it's hard to read them with your head so far up your rectum, though. Make sure you come up for air.
you have that Orange Goof up your Pussy you stupid Bitch...your pwussy reeks of Orangutan
Mueller demands phone records from meeting where Trump ‘personally dictated’ Don Jr’s misleading statement
Make sure you come up for air.
These nasty wing nuts have spent 25 years and literally a 100 million dollars trying to get Hillary Clinton and they have yet to achieve even an indictment but read her post ...the Idiot declares that there is no need for evidence against Hillary because the moron says "everybody knows she is guilty of something" ....no, he said NO prosecutor would take the case because she or anyone under the same circumstance, would NOT BE FOUND GUILTY, and they would not waste their time and tax payer's money to charge a person that would be found not guilty....
when a prosecutor KNOWS the person will not be found guilty of a crime in a court of law,
IT MEANS THERE WAS NO CRIME, she was guilty of....
Nice twist and turn on your part to interpret what he said in to her being guilty.
And do you have the emails that you claim made Hillary a crook...you claimed it, so you must have read them somewhere....? What were they, can you post them.
"Probable cause" is proven using evidence. And your idea that anyone beside the grand juries and the investigation teams should be in possession of evidence is absurd and makes you look ridiculous.Concerns may secure warrants - PROBABLE cause, the belief that there MIGHT be something illegal going on. As I pointed out, though, the wire-taps were STOPPED because a LACK of evidence.I said the FBI took its comcerns to the Obama administration. Yes, that can include evidence. And clearly they had evidence, because they secured warrants.
Snowflakes / Seditious Dems are STILL left with NO EVIDENCE of a crime and NO EVIDENCE of any Trump engaging in that NON-EXISTENT crime.
Fail.
As a matter of fact, I haven't called you any names, only proven you wrong, because you know, it's easy.Yeah calling you names like your Orange Nasty does ...you like it ?...you call me names and you will whine just like you are whining now ...do try to be Alpha eh LOLOooh, calling names.That definitely reinforces whatever point you're trying to make, and certainly doesn't make you look like a desperate shill.
you look like a desperate Trump Rube to me ....
That Orange Clown is going down by Mueller
I can't like or dislike the evidence, because there isn't any. Of course, I see nothing needs to be shown to you for you to instantly believe it, and I know our government can appreciate gullible people, so it's nothing against you.The investigation is turning up new data every day, hence, the topic of this thread. Just because you don't like the evidence turning up doesn't mean it is not evidence.How about you explain why the data, which totally exists by the way, is secret when the media is allowed to parade the investigation out in the open. As stated in the video, it's a nothing sandwich, the media has no evidence, and the investigation has turned up nothing. It's all about ratings.Who are you speaking of when you say "we"? Do you represent some group or organization in an official capacity or are you just speaking for yourself? Explain why a special prosecutor or Congressional committee are obligated to provide you with classified or secret data? Do you believe it is normal or routine for these folks to provide this kind of data during an ongoing investigation to the general public or anonymous message board posters?All we have are statements from the media. We have no actual evidence of collusion or hacking.It has been provided numerous times in this thread. You just deny it is evidence. How many times does it have to be posted? How many links do you need? You are really demanding "smoking gun" evidence. Smoking gun evidence is rare and cases are prosecuted without that kind of evidence every day. Smoking gun evidence can be a subjective term. An email or communications intercept revealing an attempt or agreement to brief Russian sources by a campaign official may be considered smoking gun evidence. That is what Manafort is accused of doing and what it appears the prosecutor has evidence to prove.What evidence is his base refusing to acknowledge? Please, provide the evidence in question.
If you are sitting on a jury and the prosecutor shows evidence of an agreement or attempt to an agreement to meet with and brief or disclose campaign strategic information to a foreign government that is suspected of trying to interfere with an election it is fair to assume that that evidence will influence your judgement that collusion or an attempt at collusion has occurred. Hence, the information provided by the prosecutor is evidence.
The email was never shown, it was merely stated that one existed. That's not evidence. If it is, I can tell you that I have an email from Hillary praising Satan.
No evidence was shown, it was merely stated that it exists, which isn't the same thing. If you have the email, feel free to show it to me.
No, no, he definitely detailed how guilty she is. So, would you say she's an incompetent buffoon, or was acting maliciously?no, he said NO prosecutor would take the case because she or anyone under the same circumstance, would NOT BE FOUND GUILTY, and they would not waste their time and tax payer's money to charge a person that would be found not guilty....Lack of indictment is not lack of guilt, and in fact, Comey personally stated that she was guilty, but no prosecutor would take the case.You could not even get an indictment on Hillary you Fuck head LOL[
And here I thought everyone had seen the emails. I guess it's hard to read them with your head so far up your rectum, though. Make sure you come up for air.
you have that Orange Goof up your Pussy you stupid Bitch
Mueller demands phone records from meeting where Trump ‘personally dictated’ Don Jr’s misleading statement
Make sure you come up for air.
when a prosecutor KNOWS the person will not be found guilty of a crime in a court of law,
IT MEANS THERE WAS NO CRIME, she was guilty of....
Nice twist and turn on your part to interpret what he said in to her being guilty.
And do you have the emails that you claim made Hillary a crook...you claimed it, so you must have read them somewhere....? What were they, can you post them.
Would you please stop the misogynistic attacks on the poster simply because she's a woman?hey Pussy Reeking BitchAll we have are statements from the media. We have no actual evidence of collusion or hacking.
The email was never shown, it was merely stated that one existed. That's not evidence. If it is, I can tell you that I have an email from Hillary praising Satan.
No evidence was shown, it was merely stated that it exists, which isn't the same thing. If you have the email, feel free to show it to me.can you show evidence of Clinton Crimes you Fuck face LOL
Mueller has bombarded White House with requests for documents
Mueller has bombarded White House with requests for documents
Looks American Patriot Steve McGarrett is gonna have to put you in timeout like I did you before around a month ago. Stop spamming the threads. I'm on you!Fuck you don't throw down the Politically correct woman card on me you piece of shit; Right wing stool clown ...you all hand it out but start whining when you get it ...do you realize you are an asshole ? ...well I am here to school you in the fact that you are an asshole ....You sound like a 12 year old, pimple ridden, little jerk ----
Grow the fuck up. If you can't have an adult conversation, they just shut the hell up.
It wasn't me that voted for that Orange Orangutan..it was total assholes like you and that other bitch..............
View attachment 150615
The Russia
Investigation Is
Zeroing in on
Trump's Actions in Office
North Korean leader responds to Trump: I will surely and definitely tame the mentally deranged U.S. dotardwith fire
Fuck you don't throw down the Politically correct woman card on me you piece of shit; Right wing stool clown ...you all hand it out but start whining when you get it ...do you realize you are an asshole ? ...well I am here to school you in the fact that you are an asshole ....You sound like a 12 year old, pimple ridden, little jerk ----
Grow the fuck up. If you can't have an adult conversation, they just shut the hell up.
It wasn't me that voted for that Orange Orangutan..it was total assholes like you and that other bitch..............
View attachment 150615
The Russia
Investigation Is
Zeroing in on
Trump's Actions in Office
North Korean leader responds to Trump: I will surely and definitely tame the mentally deranged U.S. dotard
Trump's base will refuse to acknowledge evidence, no matter what. Like he said, he could shoot someone in Times Square and it would not make a difference to his base. His base will not be on the grand jury or the trial juries of his associates. Rational people will probably be on those juries. Rational people will recognize evidence when they see it.
With news that Trump campaign manager is going to be indicted, revelations of secret meetings between trump officials and Russians, meetings the trump team members consistently lied about, it looks apparent that the evidence of interference and collusion is mounting to form an airtight case being prepared by Special Prosecutor Mueller.
vox.com/2017/9/18/16330978/paul-manafort-wiretap-indictment
Never heard of an airtight case that has no evidence whatsoever, but the whole Russia thing has basically been blind faith the entire time, so the leftists believing it never needed evidence.
Old partisan misinformed edited propaganda videos are not going to silence or take the place of genuine tangible, provable evidence in a judicial setting. Videos like that are not evidence and can't/won't be shown in grand jury hearings and courtrooms during trials. Their purpose is to influence the gullible into believing a partisan viewpoint.
So, you're admitting that what you think is evidence supporting the Russia myth right now wouldn't hold up in a court setting. That's a good start.
No, but really, there's zero evidence of tampering with those videos, and you can't cite a single inconsistency with them. You're just upset that the people carrying the myth admitted it was just that, a myth. No amount of video tampering would have made those a final product, there would be skips in the video where words needed to be edited out, and in order for something to be taken out of context, he'd have had to omit the beginning of each video. As much as you'd like it to stop being so, in order to fit your false narrative, video evidence is still the strongest form of evidence, and that's what we have right here.
You are distorting my comments and talking pure trash and misinformation to defend your propaganda videos.
Evidence to prove wrongdoing in the Trump Campaign/Russian investigation is mounting and building. Much effort is now being focused on New York state charges that are out of the reach of trump pardons.
The posting you request has been posted a bunch of times, some as recently as yesterday. Posts numbers 213, 218, are the posts made recently.Trump's base will refuse to acknowledge evidence, no matter what. Like he said, he could shoot someone in Times Square and it would not make a difference to his base. His base will not be on the grand jury or the trial juries of his associates. Rational people will probably be on those juries. Rational people will recognize evidence when they see it.
What evidence? You can point to none that's not speculation on someone else's part that you just borrow and post. In YOUR own words, what's specific evidence did you see that means Russia installed Trump? Because that is what you are saying. So what was Maniforts part in all that?
With news that Trump campaign manager is going to be indicted, revelations of secret meetings between trump officials and Russians, meetings the trump team members consistently lied about, it looks apparent that the evidence of interference and collusion is mounting to form an airtight case being prepared by Special Prosecutor Mueller.
vox.com/2017/9/18/16330978/paul-manafort-wiretap-indictment
Never heard of an airtight case that has no evidence whatsoever, but the whole Russia thing has basically been blind faith the entire time, so the leftists believing it never needed evidence.
Old partisan misinformed edited propaganda videos are not going to silence or take the place of genuine tangible, provable evidence in a judicial setting. Videos like that are not evidence and can't/won't be shown in grand jury hearings and courtrooms during trials. Their purpose is to influence the gullible into believing a partisan viewpoint.
So, you're admitting that what you think is evidence supporting the Russia myth right now wouldn't hold up in a court setting. That's a good start.
No, but really, there's zero evidence of tampering with those videos, and you can't cite a single inconsistency with them. You're just upset that the people carrying the myth admitted it was just that, a myth. No amount of video tampering would have made those a final product, there would be skips in the video where words needed to be edited out, and in order for something to be taken out of context, he'd have had to omit the beginning of each video. As much as you'd like it to stop being so, in order to fit your false narrative, video evidence is still the strongest form of evidence, and that's what we have right here.
You are distorting my comments and talking pure trash and misinformation to defend your propaganda videos.
Evidence to prove wrongdoing in the Trump Campaign/Russian investigation is mounting and building. Much effort is now being focused on New York state charges that are out of the reach of trump pardons.
You are the only one distorting anything. And when you get tired of doing it with this username you switch to another and do it more, yet you can n all three of your incarnations fail to produce this ship sinking evidence. If the case is all sewn up, why ain't the perps walkin'? It's almost been longer then a year and nothing. Maybe you should hold your breath until charges are announced?
Never heard of an airtight case that has no evidence whatsoever, but the whole Russia thing has basically been blind faith the entire time, so the leftists believing it never needed evidence.
Old partisan misinformed edited propaganda videos are not going to silence or take the place of genuine tangible, provable evidence in a judicial setting. Videos like that are not evidence and can't/won't be shown in grand jury hearings and courtrooms during trials. Their purpose is to influence the gullible into believing a partisan viewpoint.
So, you're admitting that what you think is evidence supporting the Russia myth right now wouldn't hold up in a court setting. That's a good start.
No, but really, there's zero evidence of tampering with those videos, and you can't cite a single inconsistency with them. You're just upset that the people carrying the myth admitted it was just that, a myth. No amount of video tampering would have made those a final product, there would be skips in the video where words needed to be edited out, and in order for something to be taken out of context, he'd have had to omit the beginning of each video. As much as you'd like it to stop being so, in order to fit your false narrative, video evidence is still the strongest form of evidence, and that's what we have right here.
You are distorting my comments and talking pure trash and misinformation to defend your propaganda videos.
Evidence to prove wrongdoing in the Trump Campaign/Russian investigation is mounting and building. Much effort is now being focused on New York state charges that are out of the reach of trump pardons.
You are the only one distorting anything. And when you get tired of doing it with this username you switch to another and do it more, yet you can n all three of your incarnations fail to produce this ship sinking evidence. If the case is all sewn up, why ain't the perps walkin'? It's almost been longer then a year and nothing. Maybe you should hold your breath until charges are announced?
You just make stuff up without a shred of evidence to back up your allegations. The links I have provided aren't good enough for you. Even when requested to offer interpretations in my own words, I have done so. You, on the other hand, do not adhere to the same standards. You have accused me of having multiple usernames and using sock puppets, a clear violation of USMB rules. That makes you a liar if you can not back up your allegation.
That is your opinion. Too bad you do not have the ability or knowledge to articulate that opinion or challenge the data that has been presented to you.You just make stuff up without a shred of evidence to back up your allegations. The links I have provided aren't good enough for you. Even when requested to offer interpretations in my own words, I have done so. You, on the other hand, do not adhere to the same standards. You have accused me of having multiple usernames and using sock puppets, a clear violation of USMB rules. That makes you a liar if you can not back up your allegation.You are distorting my comments and talking pure trash and misinformation to defend your propaganda videos.So, you're admitting that what you think is evidence supporting the Russia myth right now wouldn't hold up in a court setting. That's a good start.Old partisan misinformed edited propaganda videos are not going to silence or take the place of genuine tangible, provable evidence in a judicial setting. Videos like that are not evidence and can't/won't be shown in grand jury hearings and courtrooms during trials. Their purpose is to influence the gullible into believing a partisan viewpoint.
No, but really, there's zero evidence of tampering with those videos, and you can't cite a single inconsistency with them. You're just upset that the people carrying the myth admitted it was just that, a myth. No amount of video tampering would have made those a final product, there would be skips in the video where words needed to be edited out, and in order for something to be taken out of context, he'd have had to omit the beginning of each video. As much as you'd like it to stop being so, in order to fit your false narrative, video evidence is still the strongest form of evidence, and that's what we have right here.
Evidence to prove wrongdoing in the Trump Campaign/Russian investigation is mounting and building. Much effort is now being focused on New York state charges that are out of the reach of trump pardons.
You are the only one distorting anything. And when you get tired of doing it with this username you switch to another and do it more, yet you can n all three of your incarnations fail to produce this ship sinking evidence. If the case is all sewn up, why ain't the perps walkin'? It's almost been longer then a year and nothing. Maybe you should hold your breath until charges are announced?
Oh. No evidence then.
