Boogieman Posted July 16, 2018 Share Posted July 16, 2018 18 minutes ago, Dric902 said: Must be the double post thing, and the lack of reading comprehension I vote for a nap Nope. Something I learned from Trey Gowdy. Keep asking the same question over and over. When they try to change the subject...ask the same question. Deflection...ask the same question. Lies...ask the same question. Eventually you will either fold or run away. Either way the American people win. So here it goes again. 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. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Dric902 Posted July 16, 2018 Share Posted July 16, 2018 A....text....tweet...or...correspondence......is....not....an....admission....of.....anything.......in....court...and.....hasn’t....been...for....a...century.....or....so Gowdy would know that and not make an ass of himself asking the same worthless question. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Boogieman Posted July 17, 2018 Share Posted July 17, 2018 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. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
fortyofforty Posted July 17, 2018 Author Share Posted July 17, 2018 Wow, when the Never Trumper, Hillary Humper wants to deflect, he just keeps deflecting. So, when was the case against Hillary--outlined in great detail by James Comey--presented to a Grand Jury? When was the evidence presented to a United States Attorney? When was Hillary's secret server seized and mirrored, so it could be analysed? When was Hillary's lawyer's office raided and all hidden emails and records seized? When was Hillary treated like every other person found to have been grossly negligent extremely careless in handling classified information? Kristian Saucier. Just two words. Kristian Saucier. Equal treatment under the law. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Dric902 Posted July 17, 2018 Share Posted July 17, 2018 The base has been identified Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Boogieman Posted July 17, 2018 Share Posted July 17, 2018 11 minutes ago, Dric902 said: The base has been identified So what does this, or any of your ad hominem attacks, 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 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
fortyofforty Posted July 17, 2018 Author Share Posted July 17, 2018 17 minutes ago, Boogieman said: So what does this, or any of your ad hominem attacks, 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. She won't answer any of our legitimate questions. That, as I said, merely proves our point. Strzok violated policy, and likely, the law in his actions. Comey, likewise, violated policy and the law. Yet, neither has been prosecuted. Nor has Hillary Clinton. She still won't answer why. I'm done trying to be logical with her. She won't answer because she can't answer without looking even more foolish than she already has. 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Dric902 Posted July 17, 2018 Share Posted July 17, 2018 Rules of evidence are a bitch, ain’t they Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Boogieman Posted July 17, 2018 Share Posted July 17, 2018 33 minutes ago, Dric902 said: Rules of evidence are a bitch, ain’t they Like the evidence that Strzok committed at least one crime? You remember...the crime he fully admitted to? Did you even bother to watch the hearings? Well did you? Did you or did you not actually watch the hearings? I ask because you just keep repeating the drivel that CNN and MSNBC are spoon feeding the ill informed. Not the actual and verifiable facts. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
fortyofforty Posted July 17, 2018 Author Share Posted July 17, 2018 Logic, common sense and the law is a bitch, ain't dey? 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
fortyofforty Posted July 17, 2018 Author Share Posted July 17, 2018 Deflection and obfuscation. Nothing but deflection and obfuscation. Again, the point is proved by the lack of any answers. Thanks for that. 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
crockett Posted July 17, 2018 Share Posted July 17, 2018 SHE?! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Dric902 Posted July 17, 2018 Share Posted July 17, 2018 (edited) Texts, tweets, correspondence are not admissions, not confessions, not admissible in court. say it all you want, but he didnt admit anything actionable in a court of law. He did not admit, he did not admit, he did not admit, he did not admit. To anything that could bring charges, indictment, grand juries, prosecution, conviction, or sentencing. The protections of our legal system cut both ways, you have the same requirements for prosecution. Be thankful And you are making a fool of yourself. and I’m done watching you do it Edited July 17, 2018 by Dric902 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Boogieman Posted July 17, 2018 Share Posted July 17, 2018 So even though he fully admitted to committing at least one crime you insist he didn't? Are you saying that he is lying? Because giving false testimony before Congress is a crime. BOOYAH Did you even bother to watch the hearings? Well did you? Did you or did you not actually watch the hearings? I ask because you just keep repeating the drivel that CNN and MSNBC are spoon feeding the ill informed. Not the actual and verifiable facts. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Dric902 Posted July 17, 2018 Share Posted July 17, 2018 Are you really this ******* thick. he lied through his teeth, he is in DC. What the **** do you think he did. he can admit to any ******* thing he wants to in a goddamn text.......it is not ******* admissible in ******* court you moron. A congressional hearing is not a ******* trial, they have no, repeat, no ******* thing to do but bitch and get camera time. im done, be an idiot . Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Boogieman Posted July 17, 2018 Share Posted July 17, 2018 3 hours ago, Dric902 said: Are you really this ******* thick. he lied through his teeth, he is in DC. What the **** do you think he did. he can admit to any ******* thing he wants to in a goddamn text.......it is not ******* admissible in ******* court you moron. A congressional hearing is not a ******* trial, they have no, repeat, no ******* thing to do but bitch and get camera time. im done, be an idiot . Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
fortyofforty Posted July 17, 2018 Author Share Posted July 17, 2018 Facts is tough things, ain't they? 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Dric902 Posted July 17, 2018 Share Posted July 17, 2018 Facts are very specific and followed by proof. a text is neither. but you keep waiting for the cuffs to come out for him. Hold your breath even please Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Boogieman Posted July 17, 2018 Share Posted July 17, 2018 3 hours ago, Dric902 said: Facts are very specific and followed by proof. a text is neither. but you keep waiting for the cuffs to come out for him. Hold your breath even please So even though he fully admitted to committing at least one crime you insist he didn't? Are you saying that he is lying? Because giving false testimony before Congress is a crime. BOOYAH Did you even bother to watch the hearings? Well did you? Did you or did you not actually watch the hearings? I ask because you just keep repeating the drivel that CNN and MSNBC are spoon feeding the ill informed. Not the actual and verifiable facts. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
fortyofforty Posted July 17, 2018 Author Share Posted July 17, 2018 Facts is berry bitchy, fo sho. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Glocks4Freedom Posted July 18, 2018 Share Posted July 18, 2018 2 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Boogieman Posted July 18, 2018 Share Posted July 18, 2018 Seems like his whore is going to testify under immunity. Looks like somebody done somebody wrong. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Ricordo Posted July 18, 2018 Share Posted July 18, 2018 Fwiw, the Federal Rules of Evidence and electronic messages... http://www.fedbar.org/Hidden-Files/2015-Federal-Litigation-Conference-Materials/Session-5-Obtaining-and-Using-Electronic-Social-Media-Evidence.aspx?FT=.pdf 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
pipedreams Posted July 18, 2018 Share Posted July 18, 2018 13 hours ago, Boogieman said: Seems like his whore is going to testify under immunity. Looks like somebody done somebody wrong. I think she got used by Strzok and hope she tells everything she knows. The following I posted in another thread. This guy has is a real weasel and so was his father if the stories being reported are true. "Now we know that Strzok was really a CIA agent. He only held a ceremonial title in the Bureau, but was really operating under the leadership of the CIA, including Obama’s vindictive CIA director John Brennan. intellihub reports: “A sheep-dipped Peter Strzok has been covertly operating as the Section Chief of the Central Intelligence Agency’s Counterespionage Group during his secret 24 year tenure with the agency while masquerading as Deputy Assistant Director of the Federal Bureau of Investigation’s Counterintelligence Division where he was in charge of investigating Hillary Clinton’s use of a personal email server along with the investigation into Russian interference in the 2016 United States elections." https://bigleaguepolitics.com/bombshell-peter-strzok-was-cia-and-fbi-at-the-same-time/ https://www.intellihub.com/a-sheep-dipped-peter-strzok-works-for-both-the-fbi-and-cia-documents-reveal/ 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Boogieman Posted July 18, 2018 Share Posted July 18, 2018 6 minutes ago, pipedreams said: I think she got used by Strzok and hope she tells everything she knows. The following I posted in another thread. This guy has is a real weasel and so was his father if the stories being reported are true. "Now we know that Strzok was really a CIA agent. He only held a ceremonial title in the Bureau, but was really operating under the leadership of the CIA, including Obama’s vindictive CIA director John Brennan. intellihub reports: “A sheep-dipped Peter Strzok has been covertly operating as the Section Chief of the Central Intelligence Agency’s Counterespionage Group during his secret 24 year tenure with the agency while masquerading as Deputy Assistant Director of the Federal Bureau of Investigation’s Counterintelligence Division where he was in charge of investigating Hillary Clinton’s use of a personal email server along with the investigation into Russian interference in the 2016 United States elections." https://bigleaguepolitics.com/bombshell-peter-strzok-was-cia-and-fbi-at-the-same-time/ https://www.intellihub.com/a-sheep-dipped-peter-strzok-works-for-both-the-fbi-and-cia-documents-reveal/ Of course these stories will need verification before officially being ignored by the MSM. Strzok spent his entire time before Congress explaining that what he said was not what he meant. That while he was very clearly saying one thing that in reality he meant the complete opposite. In spite of all evidence to the contrary. Now his mistress is telling the truth. She says that they both meant exactly what they said. Her mysterious suicide is scheduled for later in the week. 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Create an account or sign in to comment
You need to be a member in order to leave a comment
Create an account
Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!
Register a new accountSign in
Already have an account? Sign in here.
Sign In Now