The Republican party is willing to go down with Trump

[Hutch Starskey]

A typo does not make an idiot. Got anything of substance to add, loser?

LOL! yep, you look stupid. Congrats.

The investigation should proceed on and if there is any wrong doing then the people involved need to be prosecuted. Until then we wait, loser.

Great. That has not a thing to do with my conversation with the other poster, loser.

Good for you idiot!

What's your point, dope?

Already made already made.

So, no point then. Just trolling nonsense.

Loser.

 

[Hutch Starskey]

WTF are talking about?

hacking the DNC server jack.

Who says anyone needed to look at the server to determine who was at fault?

they claimed it was hacked. right? do you need me to get the quote from the indictment you presented?

Yes it was hacked, dope. My question was, who says anyone needed to look at the server to determine who was at fault?

The indictment outlined the crime with fairly complete detail. Obviously they were able to determine that without the server.

There's absolutely no evidence that it was hacked other than the word of some DNC politicians. The FBI never examined it. How does anyone know whether it was hacked?

You dumbass snowflakes keep claiming it was hacked, but you have yet to provide a shred a proof.

"Obviously they were able to determine that without the server?" How?

There's absolutely no evidence that it was hacked other than the word of some DNC politicians. The FBI never examined it. How does anyone know whether it was hacked?

Sure, dope. Trumps own handpicked appointees who were confirmed by Republicans all work for the DNC.

You mofos have taken dumb to a whole new level.

"Obviously they were able to determine that without the server?" How?

Good question. They obviously did though, dope. You should investigate that and report back to us.

 

[Papageorgio]

LOL! yep, you look stupid. Congrats.

The investigation should proceed on and if there is any wrong doing then the people involved need to be prosecuted. Until then we wait, loser.

Great. That has not a thing to do with my conversation with the other poster, loser.

Good for you idiot!

What's your point, dope?

Already made already made.

So, no point then. Just trolling nonsense.

Loser.

The fact you don't get it makes you the loser, but nice try nutter.

 

[jc456]

hacking the DNC server jack.

Who says anyone needed to look at the server to determine who was at fault?

they claimed it was hacked. right? do you need me to get the quote from the indictment you presented?

Yes it was hacked, dope. My question was, who says anyone needed to look at the server to determine who was at fault?

The indictment outlined the crime with fairly complete detail. Obviously they were able to determine that without the server.

There's absolutely no evidence that it was hacked other than the word of some DNC politicians. The FBI never examined it. How does anyone know whether it was hacked?

You dumbass snowflakes keep claiming it was hacked, but you have yet to provide a shred a proof.

"Obviously they were able to determine that without the server?" How?

There's absolutely no evidence that it was hacked other than the word of some DNC politicians. The FBI never examined it. How does anyone know whether it was hacked?

Sure, dope. Trumps own handpicked appointees who were confirmed by Republicans all work for the DNC.

You mofos have taken dumb to a whole new level.

"Obviously they were able to determine that without the server?" How?

Good question. They obviously did though, dope. You should investigate that and report back to us.

Why is there still an investigation if everyone already knows what happened?

 

[bripat9643]

hacking the DNC server jack.

Who says anyone needed to look at the server to determine who was at fault?

they claimed it was hacked. right? do you need me to get the quote from the indictment you presented?

Yes it was hacked, dope. My question was, who says anyone needed to look at the server to determine who was at fault?

The indictment outlined the crime with fairly complete detail. Obviously they were able to determine that without the server.

There's absolutely no evidence that it was hacked other than the word of some DNC politicians. The FBI never examined it. How does anyone know whether it was hacked?

You dumbass snowflakes keep claiming it was hacked, but you have yet to provide a shred a proof.

"Obviously they were able to determine that without the server?" How?

https://int.nyt.com/data/documenthe...f?action=click&module=Intentional&pgtype=Arti

There's no evidence in that document, dumbass.

 

[bripat9643]

hacking the DNC server jack.

Who says anyone needed to look at the server to determine who was at fault?

they claimed it was hacked. right? do you need me to get the quote from the indictment you presented?

Yes it was hacked, dope. My question was, who says anyone needed to look at the server to determine who was at fault?

The indictment outlined the crime with fairly complete detail. Obviously they were able to determine that without the server.

There's absolutely no evidence that it was hacked other than the word of some DNC politicians. The FBI never examined it. How does anyone know whether it was hacked?

You dumbass snowflakes keep claiming it was hacked, but you have yet to provide a shred a proof.

"Obviously they were able to determine that without the server?" How?

There's absolutely no evidence that it was hacked other than the word of some DNC politicians. The FBI never examined it. How does anyone know whether it was hacked?

Sure, dope. Trumps own handpicked appointees who were confirmed by Republicans all work for the DNC.

You mofos have taken dumb to a whole new level.

How does that prove the server was hacked? Just admit there isn't a shred of evidence.

"Obviously they were able to determine that without the server?" How?

Good question. They obviously did though, dope. You should investigate that and report back to us.

No, they obviouly didn't. Your naive gullibility doesn't constitute proof.

 

[WTP]

Who says anyone needed to look at the server to determine who was at fault?

they claimed it was hacked. right? do you need me to get the quote from the indictment you presented?

Yes it was hacked, dope. My question was, who says anyone needed to look at the server to determine who was at fault?

The indictment outlined the crime with fairly complete detail. Obviously they were able to determine that without the server.

There's absolutely no evidence that it was hacked other than the word of some DNC politicians. The FBI never examined it. How does anyone know whether it was hacked?

You dumbass snowflakes keep claiming it was hacked, but you have yet to provide a shred a proof.

"Obviously they were able to determine that without the server?" How?

https://int.nyt.com/data/documenthe...f?action=click&module=Intentional&pgtype=Arti

There's no evidence in that document, dumbass.

Explain to us all how this is not evidence, or you are lying;

COUNT ONE (Conspiracy to Commit an Offense Against the United States) 1. In or around 2016, the Russian Federation (“Russia”) operated a military intelligence agency called the Main Intelligence Directorate of the General Staff (“GRU”). The GRU had multiple units, including. Units 26165 and 74455, engaged in cyber operations that involved the staged releases of documents stolen through computer intrusions. These units conducted largescale cyber operations to interfere with the 2016 US. presidential election.

 

[bripat9643]

they claimed it was hacked. right? do you need me to get the quote from the indictment you presented?

Yes it was hacked, dope. My question was, who says anyone needed to look at the server to determine who was at fault?

The indictment outlined the crime with fairly complete detail. Obviously they were able to determine that without the server.

There's absolutely no evidence that it was hacked other than the word of some DNC politicians. The FBI never examined it. How does anyone know whether it was hacked?

You dumbass snowflakes keep claiming it was hacked, but you have yet to provide a shred a proof.

"Obviously they were able to determine that without the server?" How?

https://int.nyt.com/data/documenthe...f?action=click&module=Intentional&pgtype=Arti

There's no evidence in that document, dumbass.

Explain to us all how this is not evidence, or you are lying;

COUNT ONE (Conspiracy to Commit an Offense Against the United States) 1. In or around 2016, the Russian Federation (“Russia”) operated a military intelligence agency called the Main Intelligence Directorate of the General Staff (“GRU”). The GRU had multiple units, including. Units 26165 and 74455, engaged in cyber operations that involved the staged releases of documents stolen through computer intrusions. These units conducted largescale cyber operations to interfere with the 2016 US. presidential election.

What does that have to do with the DNC server? They didn't examine the server, so any claims made about it are speculation, not facts.

 

[jc456]

they claimed it was hacked. right? do you need me to get the quote from the indictment you presented?

Yes it was hacked, dope. My question was, who says anyone needed to look at the server to determine who was at fault?

The indictment outlined the crime with fairly complete detail. Obviously they were able to determine that without the server.

There's absolutely no evidence that it was hacked other than the word of some DNC politicians. The FBI never examined it. How does anyone know whether it was hacked?

You dumbass snowflakes keep claiming it was hacked, but you have yet to provide a shred a proof.

"Obviously they were able to determine that without the server?" How?

https://int.nyt.com/data/documenthe...f?action=click&module=Intentional&pgtype=Arti

There's no evidence in that document, dumbass.

Explain to us all how this is not evidence, or you are lying;

COUNT ONE (Conspiracy to Commit an Offense Against the United States) 1. In or around 2016, the Russian Federation (“Russia”) operated a military intelligence agency called the Main Intelligence Directorate of the General Staff (“GRU”). The GRU had multiple units, including. Units 26165 and 74455, engaged in cyber operations that involved the staged releases of documents stolen through computer intrusions. These units conducted largescale cyber operations to interfere with the 2016 US. presidential election.

That doesn’t say they hacked anything. It said releasing documents. Why aren’t they allowed to do that? How is that a crime?

 

[Hutch Starskey]

Great. That has not a thing to do with my conversation with the other poster, loser.

Good for you idiot!

What's your point, dope?

Already made already made.

So, no point then. Just trolling nonsense.

Loser.

The fact you don't get it makes you the loser, but nice try nutter.

Still nothing?

Loser.

 

[Hutch Starskey]

Who says anyone needed to look at the server to determine who was at fault?

they claimed it was hacked. right? do you need me to get the quote from the indictment you presented?

Yes it was hacked, dope. My question was, who says anyone needed to look at the server to determine who was at fault?

The indictment outlined the crime with fairly complete detail. Obviously they were able to determine that without the server.

There's absolutely no evidence that it was hacked other than the word of some DNC politicians. The FBI never examined it. How does anyone know whether it was hacked?

You dumbass snowflakes keep claiming it was hacked, but you have yet to provide a shred a proof.

"Obviously they were able to determine that without the server?" How?

There's absolutely no evidence that it was hacked other than the word of some DNC politicians. The FBI never examined it. How does anyone know whether it was hacked?

Sure, dope. Trumps own handpicked appointees who were confirmed by Republicans all work for the DNC.

You mofos have taken dumb to a whole new level.

"Obviously they were able to determine that without the server?" How?

Good question. They obviously did though, dope. You should investigate that and report back to us.

Why is there still an investigation if everyone already knows what happened?

This discussion is about the server, retard.

 

[Hutch Starskey]

Who says anyone needed to look at the server to determine who was at fault?

they claimed it was hacked. right? do you need me to get the quote from the indictment you presented?

Yes it was hacked, dope. My question was, who says anyone needed to look at the server to determine who was at fault?

The indictment outlined the crime with fairly complete detail. Obviously they were able to determine that without the server.

There's absolutely no evidence that it was hacked other than the word of some DNC politicians. The FBI never examined it. How does anyone know whether it was hacked?

You dumbass snowflakes keep claiming it was hacked, but you have yet to provide a shred a proof.

"Obviously they were able to determine that without the server?" How?

There's absolutely no evidence that it was hacked other than the word of some DNC politicians. The FBI never examined it. How does anyone know whether it was hacked?

Sure, dope. Trumps own handpicked appointees who were confirmed by Republicans all work for the DNC.

You mofos have taken dumb to a whole new level.

How does that prove the server was hacked? Just admit there isn't a shred of evidence.

"Obviously they were able to determine that without the server?" How?

Good question. They obviously did though, dope. You should investigate that and report back to us.

No, they obviouly didn't. Your naive gullibility doesn't constitute proof.

Read the indictment, loser.

 

[Papageorgio]

Good for you idiot!

What's your point, dope?

Already made already made.

So, no point then. Just trolling nonsense.

Loser.

The fact you don't get it makes you the loser, but nice try nutter.

Still nothing?

Loser.

Still can’t accept the fact I handed you your miserable ass, what a dummy.

 

[Hutch Starskey]

What's your point, dope?

Already made already made.

So, no point then. Just trolling nonsense.

Loser.

The fact you don't get it makes you the loser, but nice try nutter.

Still nothing?

Loser.

Still can’t accept the fact I handed you your miserable ass, what a dummy.

You never said anything related to any discussion, dope.

You're a loser because you persist and a dope because you never made a point.

Carry on.

 

[Papageorgio]

Already made already made.

So, no point then. Just trolling nonsense.

Loser.

The fact you don't get it makes you the loser, but nice try nutter.

Still nothing?

Loser.

Still can’t accept the fact I handed you your miserable ass, what a dummy.

You never said anything related to any discussion, dope.

You're a loser because you persist and a dope because you never made a point.

Carry on.

You don’t get it do you. Thanks all you have is name calling.

 

[Dan Stubbs]

Where's your evidence Trump "actively" did a fucking thing with the Russians? I'm not interested in speculation or innuendo, show me hard evidence.


.

No evidence and 36 mil spent.

 

[Dan Stubbs]

So, no point then. Just trolling nonsense.

Loser.

The fact you don't get it makes you the loser, but nice try nutter.

Still nothing?

Loser.

Still can’t accept the fact I handed you your miserable ass, what a dummy.

You never said anything related to any discussion, dope.

You're a loser because you persist and a dope because you never made a point.

Carry on.

You don’t get it do you. Thanks all you have is name calling.

You just have to remember, Progressives resort to name calling and cursing when they are left with NOTHING to defend with. I in most cases just shut him off.

 

[edward37]

What's your point, dope?

Already made already made.

So, no point then. Just trolling nonsense.

Loser.

The fact you don't get it makes you the loser, but nice try nutter.

Still nothing?

Loser.

Still can’t accept the fact I handed you your miserable ass, what a dummy.

Will republicans believe any shit trump says? Can they be insulted forever ? yeah it could have been other people? who interfered with our election?? You buy that pubs?

 

[OKTexas]

Where's your evidence Trump "actively" did a fucking thing with the Russians? I'm not interested in speculation or innuendo, show me hard evidence.


.

No evidence and 36 mil spent.

And counting. From the hysteria demonstrated yesterday, brace yourself if Muellers final report says no collusion and no obstruction. Heads will explode all over the country.


.

 

[Papageorgio]

Already made already made.

So, no point then. Just trolling nonsense.

Loser.

The fact you don't get it makes you the loser, but nice try nutter.

Still nothing?

Loser.

Still can’t accept the fact I handed you your miserable ass, what a dummy.

Will republicans believe any shit trump says? Can they be insulted forever ? yeah it could have been other people? who interfered with our election?? You buy that pubs?

So you can write in complete sentences or form cohesive thought? Your posts are written like a five year old or a person that does not really know the English language.

I already stated that the Russians interfered with our elections, and what they did is wrong and I am all for sanctions and booting them out of their embassies in the United States, I also believe it is wrong for the United State to meddle in other nation’s elections. I am for the investigations and will wait until the investigation is concluded and the results are published and if Trump is guilty he needs to be punished. Not sure how to make it any clearer.