Durham: Perkins Coie Allies Connected to Hillary Clinton’s 2016 Campaign Spied on Trump’s Internet Traffic While Trump Was President

[Skylar]

Mueller also stated that there wasn't "sufficient evidence". Do you know what that means to the legal community?

Mueller stated that there was insufficient evidence of Obstruction of Justice?

Mueller never said this. I think you're quoting your imaginary Mueller Report, and not the real one.

https://www.justice.gov/storage/report_volume2.pdf

Try again. Might I suggest page 182 for a crash course on why you have no idea what you're talking about.

 

[BWK]

Wait, so now you are attacking the source? Funny

Post #1469? Prove it, or once again we are proving what a liar you are.

 

[AzogtheDefiler]

More accurately, you jumped into the middle of a conversation that didn't involve you.....and then demanded that I change the topic.

No.

Seriously? I was in this thread long before you, leftist.

 

[BWK]

Wait, so now you are attacking the source? Funny

Special Counsel John Durham released a new filing Friday that says the Clinton campaign paid a tech firm that “exploited” access to the servers at Trump Tower and later at the White House in an attempt to link former President Donald Trump to Russia. Show us the linked source.

 

[BWK]

You mean the process charge of obstruction of justice? LOL...yeah, not Russian collusion, which was the primary objective of the investigation.

You are conflating two completely different things. The obstruction charge would have never even been on the table without the investigation. They gotta get him for something, right?

Obstruction of justice is not a process charge. Try again.

 

[BWK]

You guys now that Kash Patel, is the former aide to Devin Nunes who wrote the Nunes Memo, yes?

This is not an impartial source. Patel has been lamenting about how unfair everyone has been to Trump for half a decade.

Patel is a lackey.

 

[Skylar]

Seriously? I was in this thread long before you, leftist.

A little self centered, no? You get that you're not the only one having a conversation in this thread, yes?

You jumped into an exchange you weren't a part of.......and then bizarrely tried to change the topic.

No thank you.

 

[BWK]

If the jury finds otherwise will you leave this site forever? Yes or no? Also please post your law credentials as Durham clearly disagrees. Thanks in advance.

Dude, you post the most childish, retarded shit. Get lost. Goddamn, it's embarrassing.

 

[BWK]

Mueller stated that there was insufficient evidence of Obstruction of Justice?

Mueller never said this. I think you're quoting your imaginary Mueller Report, and not the real one.

https://www.justice.gov/storage/report_volume2.pdf

Try again. Might I suggest page 182 for a crash course on why you have no idea what you're talking about.

DBA won't be here much longer, and that other one posts like some ignorant, childish, kid.

 

[AzogtheDefiler]

A little self centered, no? You get that you're not the only one having a conversation in this thread, yes?

You jumped into an exchange you weren't a part of.......and then bizarrely tried to change the topic.

No thank you.

You need help

 

[BWK]

A little self centered, no? You get that you're not the only one having a conversation in this thread, yes?

You jumped into an exchange you weren't a part of.......and then bizarrely tried to change the topic.

No thank you.

Trolling is the name, distraction is the game.

 

[AzogtheDefiler]

Dude, you post the most childish, retarded shit. Get lost. Goddamn, it's embarrassing.

I accept your surrender. You post bullshit and never back it up. Any idiot can copy and paste from biased sources, dude.

 

[AzogtheDefiler]

Trolling is the name, distraction is the game.

Talking about yourself again, idiot. Did China do everything right? Moron

 

[colfax_m]

seems funny that all the garbage on the left is bullshit garbage.

all the garbage on the right is a perfect example of why the entire right is garbage.

pretty fucked up, dude.

I can’t remember the last time you said something interesting.

This post above is barely coherent.

 

[colfax_m]

ROFL! Of course they are legitimate.

If they were legitimate, the arguments wouldn’t have been laughed out of court.

But they weren’t.

 

[Skylar]

DBA won't be here much longer, and that other one posts like some ignorant, childish, kid.

The problem with discussing these issues with most of the folks here is that they really don't know what they're talking about.

Me, I haven't take the time to do a deep, deep dive into Durham's report. I've picked a couple of pieces like possibly applicable law, statutes of limitations and the like. But I'm not randomly making shit up about the report. I'm absolutely cherry picking what I'll discuss based on what I actually know. Which isn't a ton at the moment.

These hapless souls will wax eloquently about what the Mueller Report does and doesn't have in it......while never having read a single page from any volume.

 

[colfax_m]

Well, that's just silly since you lie on the Internet all the time.

So you don’t believe everything you read on the internet, I take it.

Good move.

Why would you believe the crazy crap on the internet about a stolen election?

 

[Skylar]

So you don’t believe everything you read on the internet, I take it.

Good move.

Why would you believe the crazy crap on the internet about a stolen election?

Its an excellent question. For example......according to the Big Liars, what is the ACTUAL vote tally, supported by what evidence? And if they don't know, how do they know that Trump won?

They have no real answer. And yet they believe.

 

[SweetTea]

Mueller never said that.

For starters, you are just flat out wrong. Straight from the horse's mouth.



Secondly, maybe you didn't realize that unredacted pages of the Mueller report were released related to Trump, Jr.? I guess MSNBC didn't report that. Just so you wouldn't have a complaint about the source, I have linked to the pages themselves along with an article from no so right-wing Yahoo referencing to the unredacted pages that were released in response to the Freedom of Information Act. Keep in mind, even though these pages were focused on Trump, Jr. they state that there was not sufficient(insufficient) evidence to support criminal charges against the Trump campaign. That includes Donald Trump himself as he was most certainly part of the campaign.

Second, while the investigation identified numerous links between individuals with ties to the Russian government and individuals associated with the Trump Campaign, the evidence was not sufficient to support criminal charges. Among other things, the evidence was not sufficient to charge any Campaign official as an unregistered agent of the Russian government or other Russian principal. And our evidence about the June 9, 2016 meeting and WikiLeaks’s releases of hacked materials was not sufficient to charge a criminal campaign-finance violation. Further, the evidence was not sufficient to charge that any member of the Trump Campaign conspired with representatives of the Russian government to interfere in the 2016 election.

DocumentCloud

A New Version Of The Mueller Report Reveals That Mueller Declined To Charge Donald Trump Jr. And Roger Stone With Computer Crimes

 

[Skylar]

For starters, you are just flat out wrong. Straight from the horse's mouth.



Secondly, maybe you didn't realize that unredacted pages of the Mueller report were released related to Trump, Jr.? I guess MSNBC didn't report that. Just so you wouldn't have a complaint about the source, I have linked to the pages themselves along with an article from no so right-wing Yahoo referencing to the unredacted pages that were released in response to the Freedom of Information Act. Keep in mind, even though these pages were focused on Trump, Jr. they state that there was not sufficient(insufficient) evidence to support criminal charges against the Trump campaign. That includes Donald Trump himself as he was most certainly part of the campaign.

Second, while the investigation identified numerous links between individuals with ties to the Russian government and individuals associated with the Trump Campaign, the evidence was not sufficient to support criminal charges. Among other things, the evidence was not sufficient to charge any Campaign official as an unregistered agent of the Russian government or other Russian principal. And our evidence about the June 9, 2016 meeting and WikiLeaks’s releases of hacked materials was not sufficient to charge a criminal campaign-finance violation. Further, the evidence was not sufficient to charge that any member of the Trump Campaign conspired with representatives of the Russian government to interfere in the 2016 election.

DocumentCloud

A New Version Of The Mueller Report Reveals That Mueller Declined To Charge Donald Trump Jr. And Roger Stone With Computer Crimes

Ah, the goal posts move. Russian Election Interference.

We're talking about Obstruction of Justice. Volume 2 of the Mueller report.