NY GRAND JURY VOTES TO INDICT TRUMP

[TheBardo]

Originally Posted by Duik [You must be logged in to view images. Log in or Register.]

Simple question.
Does tRump have a gun, you beaut harvard trained defense team, begging to represent him?
I mean surely defending an obviously innocent former president would be cream and a strawberry on top for a law firms reputation.
I hate it when people waste cream.

Could you try rephrasing in coerent way?

[TheBardo]

is ooloo a troll or the dumbest man to ever live

[unsunghero]

Originally Posted by TheBardo [You must be logged in to view images. Log in or Register.]

This forum was a sewer, you're morning the loss of a shithole. What the fuck is wrong with you.

Sewer to a graveyard

Pick your poison [You must be logged in to view images. Log in or Register.]

[Homesteaded]

Originally Posted by Botten [You must be logged in to view images. Log in or Register.]

And horrendous scandals on the GOP side are not uncommon looking back at Nixon, Bush and now Trump.

You do realize that what Obama/Hillary did in 2016 blows Watergate out of the...water, right?

[Duik]

Originally Posted by TheBardo [You must be logged in to view images. Log in or Register.]

Could you try rephrasing in coerent way?

I believe it was completely coerent. It had fully shared erent.
But, once more for the dimwitted.
Trump is innocent, should be easy to get him off (i dunno, maybe ask Stormy) all lawyer firms would want a famous, innocent former president as a client.
None appear to be clambering forward.
Discuss why, coherently this time please.

[Botten]

Originally Posted by Homesteaded [You must be logged in to view images. Log in or Register.]

You do realize that what Obama/Hillary did in 2016 blows Watergate out of the...water, right?

You mean this?

WASHINGTON (Reuters) - The U.S. Justice Department has ended its probe into whether Obama administration officials improperly “unmasked” associates of President Donald Trump mentioned in intelligence reports, two congressional sources said on Wednesday.

It found no wrongdoing, one of the sources said.

Furthermore-

No evidence has been found that legal surveillance, as part of Crossfire Hurricane, was at the direction of Obama, Obama administration political officials or improper deep state influence, or that the Steele dossier was used to launched the Russia probe, or that the surveillance was designed to surveil the Trump campaign and Trump White House transition team for political purposes.

Specific actions undertaken by the FBI that have been highlighted include the use of an informant who met with Trump advisors Sam Clovis, George Papadopoulos, and Carter Page, as well as obtaining a FISA warrant to legally surveil Carter Page after he left the Trump campaign.

The Inspector General report on the Crossfire Hurricane investigation did not find evidence that "political bias or improper motivation influenced the FBI's decision to seek FISA authority on Carter Page", but did point out serious inconsistencies and improper procedures that were followed with regard to the obtaining of the warrants.

Trump has claimed that as part of Crossfire Hurricane, his "wires" at Trump Tower were wiretapped. This was refuted by Trump's own Justice Department. In addition, Trump has claimed that after the Crossfire Hurricane investigation recorded Michael Flynn's conversations with Russian ambassador Sergey Kislyak, Flynn was improperly "unmasked". This was also refuted by the Trump Justice Department.

But you know what was found Manafort came to the Trump campaign with deep ties to Russian figures, and was the only non-Trump-family member from the campaign team to participate in the June 2016 Trump Tower meeting with a Russian lawyer, which was set up on the promise of obtaining incriminating information about Hillary Clinton.

Yeah so I stand by what I said, GOP is the party of horrendous scandals looking back at Nixon, Bush and now Trump.

Oh aussenseiter, if it was done in the WH it was most likely done in Mar-a-lago especially when the boxes of secret documents were moved to a bathroom.

[Lune]

Originally Posted by Homesteaded [You must be logged in to view images. Log in or Register.]

You do realize that what Obama/Hillary did in 2016 blows Watergate out of the...water, right?

Westboro Baptist Church: The Political Party

That you feel a sense of loss over a subforum full of hatred should tell you something.

[Ooloo]

Originally Posted by TheBardo [You must be logged in to view images. Log in or Register.]

is ooloo a troll or the dumbest man to ever live

I'm a person talking on an internet discussion forum about my opinions, which are different than your opinions. It's gonna be okay.

[Ooloo]

Originally Posted by Lune [You must be logged in to view images. Log in or Register.]

Westboro Baptist Church: The Political Party

That you feel a sense of loss over a subforum full of hatred should tell you something.

Hate-speech is an ill-defined term. Definitions are supposed to be precise and specific, not full of a bunch of "and\or's". I would agree that running around hurling slurs is totally useless and that type of thing deserves to be banned. But that is hardly the only thing people consider "hateful" enough to ban.

I'd love for somebody to simply post an example of a sentence that is critical of, say, trans ideology, but wouldn't be considered "hate speech" by a typical activist. I'd argue it literally can't be done.

The problem with the term is that it's extremely elastic and can include nearly any opinion that is divergent at all. It ends up functioning as a defacto means of just shutting up anyone you don't like, while also allowing the censor to say "Hey I support free speech, but not hate speech!". Such a person has never read a history book, I'd argue.

[Sadre Spinegnawer]

Originally Posted by aussenseiter [You must be logged in to view images. Log in or Register.]

But I also think you did it on purpose. [You must be logged in to view images. Log in or Register.]

The higher the fewer