Peter Strzok and Implicit Bias

[Dric902]

22 minutes ago, Boogieman said:

He admitted that it was a crime.   So who should we believe?  You or him?  lol

I confessed to killing Kennedy earlier. Should I hide from the cops?

I confessed as much as he did

 

y’all are reading whatever you want to into something that requires legal grounds to procecute. 

“But, of course” is not evidence

”you just know” is not probable cause

”he is a weasely little pile of ****, cock bite, penis leech, ************” yeah, he is. But that’s isn’t illegal. 

[Boogieman]

29 minutes ago, Dric902 said:

I confessed to killing Kennedy earlier. Should I hide from the cops?

I confessed as much as he did

 

y’all are reading whatever you want to into something that requires legal grounds to procecute. 

“But, of course” is not evidence

”you just know” is not probable cause

”he is a weasely little pile of ****, cock bite, penis leech, ************” yeah, he is. But that’s isn’t illegal. 

So you feel entitled to decide whether or not his admission of guilt is relevant?  How Obama of you.  lol

[Dric902]

You caught me, damn

my name is Ivan. And I do this for a living.

i go to online forums because that is the greatest threat to the globalist Illuminati cabal that i represent. We are attempting to undermine the great and blessed Trump as he is the biggest threat to the cause of undermining the judicial system of the Constitution. We are trying to make you ineffective by demanding that proof be required for a criminal conviction.

the trumpets are the blinding light of ‘conviction by degree of trumpiness”.

 We must change this trend or the Jesuit Globalist agenda of super duper way above top secret planning will never be fulfilled. 

Curse you for your discovery that our ultimate mission is the demanding of criminal acts being actually committed before execution of political assholes. 

Your tweets and texts are completely and justifiably admissible in court as confessions of the intent to commit the act of not likening the person your investigating.

Damn, we almost had you there.

internet lawyers are the greatest opponents for the globalist plan of world domination. 

Damn you all, damn you all to hell

/Sarc

Edited July 15, 2018 by Dric902

[Boogieman]

Seems that you are deflecting from the absolute fact that Strzok has admitted to being in violation of the law.

[fortyofforty]

9 hours ago, Dric902 said:

Do you have any evidence that his political opinion influenced his investigation? (Not “come on, you just know’)

he was not the subject of his own investigation. So yes he was.

i don’t see Hillary at all, I didn’t vote for her, didn’t donate to her, didn’t root for her, have never voted for any Democrat in my entire life.

do you prosecute people for their political opinion in your dreams?

Is not liking Trump a crime in your dream world? 

Do you execute somebody for making faces at congressmen?

I’m guessing yes

 

in this world you must have evidence to prove a crime was committed.

Not a text, not a tweet, not an opinion, not an “admission””confession” or or even Probable Cause to text something. 

And you have the same protections if a democrook wins at some point in the future. The legal system will not let you prosecute someone cause he is an *******, even a Democrat *******.

Only common sense and logic.  Those are standards every juror is expected to apply when evaluating criminal activity, in case you don't realize that.

So, we have one candidate from one party treated one way, and another candidate from another party treated another way.

If you have any ability to reason, you would realize and be forced to admit that treating one candidate differently violates the equal protection clause of the Fourteenth Amendment.  But, of course, you know that.

[fortyofforty]

For the record, an INVESTIGATOR does not decide whether or not charges are brought in every criminal case except one that I've ever seen.  Just one.  After all those years of paying attention.  One case.

An "investigator" investigates, prepares all the evidence (including and especially exculpatory) and presents it to a prosecutor.  The prosecutor can bring a case, or can refer the matter to a Grand Jury.  The Grand Jury can decide if there is sufficient evidence to charge someone with a crime.

Except in one case.  No, in one case, the INVESTIGATORS did not just investigate, they acted as judge and jury, and you'd have us believe it is perfectly normal.

[Dric902]

2 hours ago, fortyofforty said:

Only common sense and logic.  Those are standards every juror is expected to apply when evaluating criminal activity, in case you don't realize that.

So, we have one candidate from one party treated one way, and another candidate from another party treated another way.

If you have any ability to reason, you would realize and be forced to admit that treating one candidate differently violates the equal protection clause of the Fourteenth Amendment.  But, of course, you know that.

Who are these Angels that came down from heaven that work for the government?

a jury requires a trial, a trial requires a crime, a crime requires evidence of a crime.

Not an opinion.

but I bet it’s just the deep state swamp creatures that are out to get you.

[Dric902]

Some of you really, really need to get it into your skulls that you cannot charge anyone with a ‘crime of attitude”, “investigating while opinionated”, or “not voting for the winner”

we dont do political purges after elections, we don’t charge anybody with “not finding evidence that we want” or “you didn’t investigate hard enough”

 

you cannot charge, indict, prosecute, convict, execute political opponents. Unless you want to be Cuba, Venezuela, etc

we....don’t....do....that......on either side. 

Get over it.

We got the headlines, the poll numbers are trending to our side, the sound bites are being shown, it accomplished the goal.

jeez, some of you make Castro look like Mother Teresa

Edited July 15, 2018 by Dric902

[Dric902]

Ok, this is my last. Cause you all just keep spouting the same **** over and over and it’s getting boring.

Congressional Hearings are not for the public to hear from a witness. They are for the public to hear the politicians.

weasel faced boy is just today’s example. Tomorrow it will be somebody else. That’s why you have opening statements from each members, the ten minute long questions that are not questions requiring nothing but a reaction from the witness. If another member interrupts, or a witness tries to make a statement of their own, you can reclaim your time to make your point.

It’s all straw.

I’m not defending weasel boy any more than any other no name witness. I am defending a judicial system that requires evidence of criminal activity. Not forum opinion, not talking head opinion, not Hannity responses, not media evaluation. No judge is going to take online political forum opinion or survey the “experts” to render judgment.

 

just say it, go ahead you’ll feel better......Trump or Treason. Come on, go ahead. Trump/Treason is a sound judicial philosophy. 

you want to judge anybody on a sliding scale of trumpiness and render judgement on their motivations.

“We know that you are a weasely Hillary loving commie never trumper and could never ever act outside of your trump hate and Hillary love. The online survey says........guilty of stuff.

after consulting the sliding scale of trumpiness and after careful consideration of the top rated commentators.........hung by the neck until the wood chipper warms up. While we cry MAGAMAGAMAGA as the chunks fly”

when the left stereotype you as trump zombies and uneducated hicks.......don’t be surprised.

 

go on about yourselves now, I’m done

Edited July 15, 2018 by Dric902

[Boogieman]

4 hours ago, Dric902 said:

Ok, this is my last. Cause you all just keep spouting the same **** over and over and it’s getting boring.

Congressional Hearings are not for the public to hear from a witness. They are for the public to hear the politicians.

weasel faced boy is just today’s example. Tomorrow it will be somebody else. That’s why you have opening statements from each members, the ten minute long questions that are not questions requiring nothing but a reaction from the witness. If another member interrupts, or a witness tries to make a statement of their own, you can reclaim your time to make your point.

It’s all straw.

I’m not defending weasel boy any more than any other no name witness. I am defending a judicial system that requires evidence of criminal activity. Not forum opinion, not talking head opinion, not Hannity responses, not media evaluation. No judge is going to take online political forum opinion or survey the “experts” to render judgment.

 

just say it, go ahead you’ll feel better......Trump or Treason. Come on, go ahead. Trump/Treason is a sound judicial philosophy. 

you want to judge anybody on a sliding scale of trumpiness and render judgement on their motivations.

“We know that you are a weasely Hillary loving commie never trumper and could never ever act outside of your trump hate and Hillary love. The online survey says........guilty of stuff.

after consulting the sliding scale of trumpiness and after careful consideration of the top rated commentators.........hung by the neck until the wood chipper warms up. While we cry MAGAMAGAMAGA as the chunks fly”

when the left stereotype you as trump zombies and uneducated hicks.......don’t be surprised.

 

go on about yourselves now, I’m done

So from what I can gather you haven't bothered to actually watch the hearings...right?   And you are just repeating what CNN and MSNBC are spoon feeding you...right?

[fortyofforty]

5 hours ago, Dric902 said:

Who are these Angels that came down from heaven that work for the government?

a jury requires a trial, a trial requires a crime, a crime requires evidence of a crime.

Not an opinion.

but I bet it’s just the deep state swamp creatures that are out to get you.

Actually, to correct you once more.....

A Petit Jury requires the allegation of a crime, presented at trial.  An allegation of a crime requires evidence of a crime, which I've provided here and which you can find on your own elsewhere if you choose not to read it here.  Jurors evaluate what they hear and determine guilt or innocence, based on evidence, logic and common sense.

Obstruction of justice.  Failure to safeguard classified material.  Pretty clear.  And pretty clearly brushed aside by political advocates and allies.  No impartial Grand Jury, that's for sure.

A Grand Jury requires facts to be presented, then jurors decide if it is likely a crime has been committed.  Jurors vote based on evidence, logic and common sense.  They can also ask questions of witnesses, to clarify points or satisfy curiosity.

Logic and reasoning are not your forte, clearly.  But I'll bet you must have other enduring qualities.  We haven't seen evidence of them here, but I'm willing to give you the benefit of the doubt.

[fortyofforty]

Amazing how someone can create his own private strawman, then take great pleasure in constantly battling him.  But if it makes you feel good about yourself, continue on.  It's all you've got, since logic and law have abandoned you.

[Dric902]

?

[fortyofforty]

I forget what the Grand Jury said about the actions of Hillary Clinton.  Did they vote to hand up indictments?  I also forget which witnesses appeared before that Grand Jury, before it voted.

???

[Dric902]

Who?

[fortyofforty]

12 hours ago, Dric902 said:

Who?

Thanks for proving my point.

Anything else?

[Dric902]

2 hours ago, fortyofforty said:

Thanks for proving my point.

Anything else?

Sure,

Nixon/Kennedy

Ford/Carter

Traitors, seditionistic globalist obstructionist, tax cheats, probably didn’t like puppies. 

Never sentenced to life without parole, hard labor, or wood chipper. 

Want more? James K. Polk was a globalist mason democrook who committed many crimes that the justice system turned a blind eye to. 

Wilson, Tyler, Harrison....all should have been executed. Washington was a little communist.

 

nobody is truly American, loving the stuff that America stands for (like puppies) as much as ........you.

.

[Boogieman]

39 minutes ago, Dric902 said:

Sure,

Nixon/Kennedy

Ford/Carter

Traitors, seditionistic globalist obstructionist, tax cheats, probably didn’t like puppies. 

Never sentenced to life without parole, hard labor, or wood chipper. 

Want more? James K. Polk was a globalist mason democrook who committed many crimes that the justice system turned a blind eye to. 

Wilson, Tyler, Harrison....all should have been executed. Washington was a little communist.

 

nobody is truly American, loving the stuff that America stands for (like puppies) as much as ........you.

.

So what does this have to do with Strzok admission of criminal activities?  Did you even bother to watch the hearings?  You just keep repeating the drivel that CNN and MSNBC are spoon feeding the ill informed.  Not the actual and verifiable facts.

[Sharp Stick]

Regardless of whether any crime(s) were committed or not, this guy, in an organization like the FBI, is a cancer and must be removed along with all who were involved in what he was doing. Their removal should be done in some sort of highly publicized way so that all Americans see it. In my opinion, its the only way the FBI can begin to regain any amount of credibility at all. I am not holding my breath; the fact that this has not already been done is telling about what the FBI really is.

[Dric902]

Ok, let’s look at this from a more recent example of manipulating the dupes in the base.

take a breath, calm down, relax. And understand that a text is not an admission of anything legally, ok?

James Comey, remember him. The liberal commie Hillary loving trump hater who committed obstructiona and fomented sedition against the duly elected president of this great republic? Remember him?

 

nobody knew who he was, most Americans didn’t know him from Adam. He opened an investigation into Clinton emails.

 

Republican talking heads: What a great American example of justice, finally Hillary is gonna get it, here it comes, hurrah Comey!!!!!!!!’

democrooks: Republican plant, misogynistic, tool of Ryan and McConnel, fascist!!!!!!

Then when Comey comes out and says, nothing actionable, I can’t show intent (maybe he just needed a text huh) 

 

Republicans: traitor, treason, no need to prove intent, liberal plant, trump hater, totally swamp deep state creature!!!!!!

democraps: great American, totally exonerated, Republican plan failed, 

Then after Wieners laptop was checked he reopened the investigation of Hillary, just before the election.

 

Republicans: great American, slimy Hillary can’t hide, lock her up, lock her up, Justice will prevail.

democrooks: misogyny, republicans stealing the election, trump paid him, treason, traitor!!!!!

Comey closes investigation due to lack of any evidence, not text evidence, not tweet evidence, not email evidence.

 

Republicans; traitor, treason, liberal commie, Hillary plant, deep state swamp creature, drain the swamp, drain the swamp!!!!!!

democraps: exoneration, great American system of justice, totally cleared, fully investigated!!!!

Trump wins

 

Republicans: tried to get Hillary elected, trump hater, swamp, deep state!!!!

democrooks: stole the election for Trump, how much did Trump pay him, republicans take over the world!!!

Now he is hated by both sides

 

the media covers whatever gets rating and inflammatory headlines, the talking head commentators spout the party line, get rating, fire up the base.                                                          Do you really think that an investigation that has taken a year and a half is covered by the press completely? Does Hannity have the inside info? Do you really think the whole thing came down to yet another boogeyman conspiring to destroy the country as we know it, maybe a text can tell us.

we will not have access to all the evidence in any investigation for years. No matter what the talking heads say.

 

stop reacting like a dupe, stop being manipulated, think for yourself. Rules of evidence and the law exist to be very specific and factually based, not the emotions that can be stoked by politicians and media characters.

like Trump, vote for him.   Follow Trump, go ahead its fun most times.  Drooling, slavish, open mouthed, boogeyman hunting, deep state hating, swamp draining, Trump By God, fanatic.

 

Stalin called them useful idiots and it still hold true. 

(You can tell who they are by the ones that will claim I just compared Trump to Stalin)

 

.

 

 

 

 

 

Edited July 16, 2018 by Dric902

[Boogieman]

4 hours ago, Dric902 said:

Ok, let’s look at this from a more recent example of manipulating the dupes in the base.

take a breath, calm down, relax. And understand that a text is not an admission of anything legally, ok?

James Comey, remember him. The liberal commie Hillary loving trump hater who committed obstructiona and fomented sedition against the duly elected president of this great republic? Remember him?

 

nobody knew who he was, most Americans didn’t know him from Adam. He opened an investigation into Clinton emails.

 

Republican talking heads: What a great American example of justice, finally Hillary is gonna get it, here it comes, hurrah Comey!!!!!!!!’

democrooks: Republican plant, misogynistic, tool of Ryan and McConnel, fascist!!!!!!

Then when Comey comes out and says, nothing actionable, I can’t show intent (maybe he just needed a text huh) 

 

Republicans: traitor, treason, no need to prove intent, liberal plant, trump hater, totally swamp deep state creature!!!!!!

democraps: great American, totally exonerated, Republican plan failed, 

Then after Wieners laptop was checked he reopened the investigation of Hillary, just before the election.

 

Republicans: great American, slimy Hillary can’t hide, lock her up, lock her up, Justice will prevail.

democrooks: misogyny, republicans stealing the election, trump paid him, treason, traitor!!!!!

Comey closes investigation due to lack of any evidence, not text evidence, not tweet evidence, not email evidence.

 

Republicans; traitor, treason, liberal commie, Hillary plant, deep state swamp creature, drain the swamp, drain the swamp!!!!!!

democraps: exoneration, great American system of justice, totally cleared, fully investigated!!!!

Trump wins

 

Republicans: tried to get Hillary elected, trump hater, swamp, deep state!!!!

democrooks: stole the election for Trump, how much did Trump pay him, republicans take over the world!!!

Now he is hated by both sides

 

the media covers whatever gets rating and inflammatory headlines, the talking head commentators spout the party line, get rating, fire up the base.                                                          Do you really think that an investigation that has taken a year and a half is covered by the press completely? Does Hannity have the inside info? Do you really think the whole thing came down to yet another boogeyman conspiring to destroy the country as we know it, maybe a text can tell us.

we will not have access to all the evidence in any investigation for years. No matter what the talking heads say.

 

stop reacting like a dupe, stop being manipulated, think for yourself. Rules of evidence and the law exist to be very specific and factually based, not the emotions that can be stoked by politicians and media characters.

like Trump, vote for him.   Follow Trump, go ahead its fun most times.  Drooling, slavish, open mouthed, boogeyman hunting, deep state hating, swamp draining, Trump By God, fanatic.

 

Stalin called them useful idiots and it still hold true. 

(You can tell who they are by the ones that will claim I just compared Trump to Stalin)

 

.

 

 

 

 

 

 

So what does this have to do with Strzok admission of criminal activities?  Did you even bother to watch the hearings?  You just keep repeating the drivel that CNN and MSNBC are spoon feeding the ill informed.  Not the actual and verifiable facts.

[Dric902]

Never watch MSNBC haven’t watched CNN since it was the only one

you keep asking, I keep not saying. Somehow it is important to you even though it has absolutely nothing to do with anything.

good example of filling in your own blanks. I don’t say and you decide that lack of evidence is evidence of lack and maintain that you know my viewing habits. No evidence whatsoever but not saying. So it must be true. That’s what we used to call........stupid, uninformed, rushing to judgement with no supporting evidence.

you keep repeating “admission, admitted, admitting” but never seem to understand that a text, tweet or even email is admissible as evidence of anything. Maybe PC to investigate but not..........evidence or an admission of anything.

 

 

[Boogieman]

18 minutes ago, Dric902 said:

Never watch MSNBC haven’t watched CNN since it was the only one

you keep asking, I keep not saying. Somehow it is important to you even though it has absolutely nothing to do with anything.

good example of filling in your own blanks. I don’t say and you decide that lack of evidence is evidence of lack and maintain that you know my viewing habits. No evidence whatsoever but not saying. So it must be true. That’s what we used to call........stupid, uninformed, rushing to judgement with no supporting evidence.

you keep repeating “admission, admitted, admitting” but never seem to understand that a text, tweet or even email is admissible as evidence of anything. Maybe PC to investigate but not..........evidence or an admission of anything.

 

 

So what does this have to do with Strzok admission of criminal activities?  Did you even bother to watch the hearings?  You just keep repeating the drivel that CNN and MSNBC are spoon feeding the ill informed.  Not the actual and verifiable facts.

[crockett]

Man, bitch slap each other or take a nap!

[Dric902]

2 hours ago, Boogieman said:

 

So what does this have to do with Strzok admission of criminal activities?  Did you even bother to watch the hearings?  You just keep repeating the drivel that CNN and MSNBC are spoon feeding the ill informed.  Not the actual and verifiable facts.

 

1 hour ago, Boogieman said:

So what does this have to do with Strzok admission of criminal activities?  Did you even bother to watch the hearings?  You just keep repeating the drivel that CNN and MSNBC are spoon feeding the ill informed.  Not the actual and verifiable facts.

Must be the double post thing, and the lack of reading comprehension 

 

 

I vote for a nap