Now just out of curiosity, what happened to the Durham Report and the "Deep State?"

I gave you plenty of info to Google or DuckDuckgo and find the FISC orders on your own.

That's your problem, you demand to be spoon-fed your info; that's why so much of what your "know" is wrong. What ever happened to satisfying your own curiosity, or is it you have no curiosity when it comes to proofs of Obunghole's criminality?

You could just read my post #12, the link to the DNI and the first FISC order is right there.

It's not like you are ever going to read it, so why bother bullshitting us and peacocking, talking about links?




It’s against the rules to post content without A link



Do your own damned homework asshole
 
So he lied when he said there was no voter fraud?

The problem is that nothing Barr says can be trusted.

It's the same problem you run into, because you made lying a part of your character.

I'm going with the fact that all 50 states certified their results, even after unreasonable numbers of audits and recounts.

You were too much of a fucking pussy to show up on 1/6, so no one really believes you when you say the election was stolen today.

If it was, surely you would have done something about it because you're a patriot, right?
 
The Durham Report was promised as definitive proof that conspiracies and plot existed, and the "Deep State" was described as this entrenched entity, yet, today, nothing on either.

So what happened to them, or, are they just like the Big Lie, fabrications that exist only as innuendo in the right wing media?

Two years later.... AND NOTHING!!! Typical for Republicans.
 
They went into the Capital before he took the podium for his speech dumbass.

I guess you should tell them that. They told the police they were sent by Trump. Were they lying or stupid or both? You should be able to relate, doc.
 

Bill Barr - "There were a lot of rules put in place to make sure there was an adequate basis before our law enforcement agencies get involved in politic, you know, political surveillance. I'm not suggesting those rules were violated but I think it is important to look at that. I'm not talking about the FBI necessarily."

So basically, Barr said Trump was "spied" on legally. Hmmm....

It helps to listen the the entire answer.
 
The problem is that nothing Barr says can be trusted.

It's the same problem you run into, because you made lying a part of your character.

I'm going with the fact that all 50 states certified their results, even after unreasonable numbers of audits and recounts.

You were too much of a fucking pussy to show up on 1/6, so no one really believes you when you say the election was stolen today.

If it was, surely you would have done something about it because you're a patriot, right?
So there was election fraud then . :laugh:
 
Bill Barr - "There were a lot of rules put in place to make sure there was an adequate basis before our law enforcement agencies get involved in politic, you know, political surveillance. I'm not suggesting those rules were violated but I think it is important to look at that. I'm not talking about the FBI necessarily."

So basically, Barr said Trump was "spied" on legally. Hmmm....

It helps to listen the the entire answer.
"I think spying did occur." "but I think it is important to look at that"

That is what Durham was doing. He hasn't said either way. But is important to note there was no collusion so therefore no legit reason to spy.
 
"I think spying did occur." "but I think it is important to look at that"

That is what Durham was doing. He hasn't said either way. But is important to note there was no collusion so therefore no legit reason to spy.

But he doesn't know who or if anyone did spy? Hmmm.. seems rather wishy-washy. He isn't going to suggest anyone spied but he thinks spying occurred?

It's important to note that there was no investigation of whether or not collusion occurred. There was only an investigation to determine whether an illegal conspiracy occurred and they were unable to find enough evidence to provide a jury as to conspiracy but you have to note that Trump refused to testify under oath. Someone who may have colluded but refused to testify? I wonder why he did that.
 
But he doesn't know who or if anyone did spy? Hmmm.. seems rather wishy-washy. He isn't going to suggest anyone spied but he thinks spying occurred?

It's important to note that there was no investigation of whether or not collusion occurred. There was only an investigation to determine whether an illegal conspiracy occurred and they were unable to find enough evidence to provide a jury as to conspiracy but you have to note that Trump refused to testify under oath. Someone who may have colluded but refused to testify? I wonder why he did that.
what kind of garbage is this? WTF is "collusion occurred"
There was no conspiracy - that's what prosecutors look at- are you trying to still stick slime on Trump Co,
for something else.
"There were lots of Russians around" is that it? what then?
 
"I think spying did occur." "but I think it is important to look at that"

That is what Durham was doing. He hasn't said either way. But is important to note there was no collusion so therefore no legit reason to spy.

Nope. There was proper predicate to open an investigation. Every official agrees. So no one gives a fuck what you say doc.
 
what kind of garbage is this? WTF is "collusion occurred"
It's part of a simple English sentence. Is English your second language?

There was no conspiracy - that's what prosecutors look at- are you trying to still stick slime on Trump Co,
It's a simple fact. The Mueller report clearly states it did not look at collusion but only dealt with conspiracy. If facts slime Trump that is on Trump.
for something else.
Is English your second language or did you not take grammar in school?

"There were lots of Russians around" is that it? what then?
"I think it is important to look at that." It's interesting that the IG said it was important to investigate. The FBI said it was important to investigate. The FISA court said it was important to investigate. The Senate said it was important to investigate. The House thought it was important to investigate. But you think we should not investigate it?
 
what kind of garbage is this? WTF is "collusion occurred"

It occurred when Paul Manafort, when he was chair of Trump's campaign, gave confidential GOP polling data from Michigan and Wisconsin to Konstantin Kilimnik to give to Oleg Deripaska, who ran one of the troll farms.

You know, the thing you first said never happened, then said did happen but wasn't a big deal, then said did happen but you don't know why and don't want to venture a guess (even though you make guesses and assumptions of people's intention all the fucking time).
 
It's part of a simple English sentence. Is English your second language?

It's a simple fact. The Mueller report clearly states it did not look at collusion but only dealt with conspiracy. If facts slime Trump that is on Trump.
Is English your second language or did you not take grammar in school?

"I think it is important to look at that." It's interesting that the IG said it was important to investigate. The FBI said it was important to investigate. The FISA court said it was important to investigate. The Senate said it was important to investigate. The House thought it was important to investigate. But you think we should not investigate it?
investigate what> what are you saying ? a Mueller investigation was supposed to investigate collusion?
how do you do that? do you want Mueller to investigate innuendo and rumor?
how do you even define collusion?

Do you have any idea of the scope of the investigation? Witness were called, millions of documents looked at
and you still think there should be an investigation for collusion?

This si the dumbest stuff yet. lets investigate something that's not criminal - or if we don't then we can say Trump wasn't cleared of something we didnt investigate
 
Back
Top