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

[AntonToo]

The crime occurred during the campaign in 2016.

Wrong, wrong again.

Want to try again?

 

[Skylar]

Your conception of "evidence" means convictions for every illegal vote. As I told you previously, go fuck yourself. That isn't "imploding." That's just ignoring an hysterical Karen.

Yes, let's got there.

Nope. I'll happily accept specific evidence that proves your claim that every vote after 2AM on November 4th was fraudulent.

Your problem...is that you can't back up your claim. Worse, you insist its impossible to factually establish your claim.

But you're gonna demand proof from other folks?

If not for double standards, you'd have none at all.

 

[HereWeGoAgain]

Treason has no statute of limitations.

Those particular crimes do from what I've read.
I posted a link about it but I'm not going to go back and find it when there's 59 pages.

 

[Skylar]

Those particular crimes do from what I've read.
I posted a link about it but I'm not going to go back and find it when there's 59 pages.

I think the statute of limitations for unauthorized access of electronics is 2 years? Or 5?

Either way, its kinda moot now.

 

[BlueGin]

Dickhead.

How did you guys manage to get another password sharing troll (Skylar) to come out of hiding? I’m impressed.

 

[AzogtheDefiler]

It would be better if you admitted to lying because now it's just proof you're an idioit.

Durham never said anything about it being nefarious. And if he did, that's Durham's interpretation. A particularly dastardly one too because he's casting aspersions about the behavior of people who aren't being charged with anything and have no chance to defend themselves in a court of law against his accusations. He does us the favor by not naming the person, but that's clearly not really working.

When did I fucking use the word “nefarious”? You have your stupid head up your idiot ass. You lying fuck.

 

[AzogtheDefiler]

I think

Your posts show otherwise. You are uniformed on this matter.

 

[Skylar]

How did you guys manage to get another password sharing troll (Skylar) to come out of hiding? I’m impressed.

Password sharing? Is that some new conspiracy among your ilk?

I'm a bit out of the loop on the terms you crazy kids use.

 

[Skylar]

Your posts show otherwise. You are uniformed on this matter.

I'm rubber, you're glue, Azog.

 

[BlueGin]

Keep in mind she has also had extensive plastic surgery like her mother to try to look more like a Clinton.

View attachment 601975
View attachment 601977



The only one who still really looks like his real self is Bill. This is what being married to Hillary can do to a man.


View attachment 601983View attachment 601985
View attachment 601986

Bill looks horrific. Ugh…

 

[AzogtheDefiler]

I'm rubber, you're glue, Azog.

Rubber is smarter than you. As is glue, Skylar.

 

[Skylar]

Rubber is smarter than you. As is glue, Skylar.

or....18 U.S. Code § 1030 generally limits civil liability to 2 years from the date of discovery....with criminal liability limited to 5 years of commission.

18 U.S. Code § 1030 - Fraud and related activity in connection with computers

www.law.cornell.edu

Durham hasn't named the explicit statute he might try to charge under for the accessing of the DNS data (if any charges are coming), but 18 U.S. Code § 1030 is a likely candidate, given its focus on government systems. You'd have a harder time arguing that DNS info had a national security application especially as it relates to Trump Tower in 2016, but its possible.

But you were babbling about 'rubber'. Don't let me interrupt.

 

[AntonToo]

or....18 U.S. Code § 1030 generally limits civil liability to 2 years from the date of discovery....with criminal liability limited to 5 years of commission.

18 U.S. Code § 1030 - Fraud and related activity in connection with computers

www.law.cornell.edu

Durham hasn't named the explicit statute he might try to charge under for the accessing of the DNS data (if any charges are coming), but 18 U.S. Code § 1030 is a likely candidate, given its focus on government systems. You'd have a harder time arguing that DNS info had a national security application especially as it relates to Trump Tower in 2016, but its possible.

But you were babbling about 'rubber'. Don't let me interrupt.

Trump org sends a letter to Alpha bank, someone in mail processing sees the address on the letter to Russia and reports it to authorities.

What law was broken?

 

[dudmuck]

or....18 U.S. Code § 1030 generally limits civil liability to 2 years from the date of discovery....with criminal liability limited to 5 years of commission.

18 U.S. Code § 1030 - Fraud and related activity in connection with computers

www.law.cornell.edu

Durham hasn't named the explicit statute he might try to charge under for the accessing of the DNS data (if any charges are coming), but 18 U.S. Code § 1030 is a likely candidate, given its focus on government systems. You'd have a harder time arguing that DNS info had a national security application especially as it relates to Trump Tower in 2016, but its possible.

But you were babbling about 'rubber'. Don't let me interrupt.

you know what DNS info is? its just this:
$ host usmessageboard.com
usmessageboard.com has address 194.195.220.164
usmessageboard.com mail is handled by 0 mail.techpays.com.

how the hell do you charge a crime for doing something like that?

 

[Skylar]

you know what DNS info is? its just this:
$ host usmessageboard.com
usmessageboard.com has address 194.195.220.164
usmessageboard.com mail is handled by 0 mail.techpays.com.

how the hell do you charge a crime for doing something like that?

Given that the statute of limitations is 5 years, its kinda moot

 

[westwall]

or....18 U.S. Code § 1030 generally limits civil liability to 2 years from the date of discovery....with criminal liability limited to 5 years of commission.

18 U.S. Code § 1030 - Fraud and related activity in connection with computers

www.law.cornell.edu

Durham hasn't named the explicit statute he might try to charge under for the accessing of the DNS data (if any charges are coming), but 18 U.S. Code § 1030 is a likely candidate, given its focus on government systems. You'd have a harder time arguing that DNS info had a national security application especially as it relates to Trump Tower in 2016, but its possible.

But you were babbling about 'rubber'. Don't let me interrupt.

I think wiretapping the president is probably a tad more egregious.

 

[Skylar]

I think wiretapping the president is probably a tad more egregious.

Wiretapping? You may want to check what Durham is claiming again. They are speaking about the review of DNS data acquired by a university.

 

[dudmuck]

Given that the statute of limitations is 5 years, its kinda moot

also, the DNS data that Joffe collected was prior to Trump's inauguration. And Joffe had legitimate access that DNS traffic.

 

[AzogtheDefiler]

or....18 U.S. Code § 1030 generally limits civil liability to 2 years from the date of discovery....with criminal liability limited to 5 years of commission.

18 U.S. Code § 1030 - Fraud and related activity in connection with computers

www.law.cornell.edu

Durham hasn't named the explicit statute he might try to charge under for the accessing of the DNS data (if any charges are coming), but 18 U.S. Code § 1030 is a likely candidate, given its focus on government systems. You'd have a harder time arguing that DNS info had a national security application especially as it relates to Trump Tower in 2016, but its possible.

But you were babbling about 'rubber'. Don't let me interrupt.

OK

And? This is a civil case? Why can’t Durham just uncover the truth for all to see how corrupt HRCs attorneys were? You have an issue with this? Why?

 

[Skylar]

OK

And? This is a civil case? Why can’t Durham just uncover the truth for all to see how corrupt HRCs attorneys were? You have an issue with this? Why?

Since no charges related to the DNS access have been filed, its not anything yet.

If its civil, its possible that someone might be able to sue for damages....depending on when this was discovered. And any direct damages that can be established.

If its criminal, the statute of limitations has run out.

Neither of which ever called for executions.