Pamela Gellar Banned from Twitter

[colfax_m]

i thought you read it more than anyone else? and you don't know that? too fking funny.

If you think it says this, provide the quote. Thanks.

 

[jc456]

Then post the part that claims Trump guilty

Why?

because you can't. that's why. I'm laughing. you making all these accusations and getting beaten down like an old banana peel.

I never made that accusation.

You’re beating a strawman.

then post it. it's quite simple, it's either in the report or not.

 

[JusticeHammer]

At this point I just laugh. The purge continues. Must be hard for the left to live in so much fear of opposing opinions...

Decent folks don't like dangerous nutjobs who insist on yelling "Fire" in a crowded theater... metaphorically speaking. No great loss.

Decent folks never vote Dem.

Republican rural voters are the salt of the earth. Too bad they are all brainwashed functional morons at this point.

The brainwashed ones are idiots like you who think demscum, especially biden, are for America. Talk about morons, look in the mirror scumbag.

 

[jc456]

i thought you read it more than anyone else? and you don't know that? too fking funny.

If you think it says this, provide the quote. Thanks.

provide what quote?

 

[SC Patriot]

More leftwing censorship...if they all fear our words maybe its because we are right and they know it....

BULLSEYE. They don't give a damn about this country. They want totalitarianism because they're sheep.

Nah.

They just like free stuff...and they like to feel good when the more successful are forced to pay for the free stuff for the people they "support" that need the free stuff.

Of course, when the well is dry and they government turn to those that feel good about having others pay for the free stuff and ask those that tfeel good and never had to give for the free stuff, to ante in and [ay their fair share..... then they will complain.

Until then....."give it to the poor, the children, the sick, the elderly....just dont touch my wallet"...

Seen it many times

 

[colfax_m]

More leftwing censorship...if they all fear our words maybe its because we are right and they know it....

No. You’re not right. You’re very wrong and your inability to understand that can and has lead to violence.

Im using “you” not in a personal sense but the way you used it, to refer to all your tribe.

 

[colfax_m]

i thought you read it more than anyone else? and you don't know that? too fking funny.

If you think it says this, provide the quote. Thanks.

provide what quote?

Lord, you really suck at following the conversation. Please stop interjecting without having any idea what you’re talking about.

 

[colfax_m]

then post it. it's quite simple, it's either in the report or not.

it’s not.

 

[SC Patriot]

i thought you read it more than anyone else? and you don't know that? too fking funny.

If you think it says this, provide the quote. Thanks.

provide what quote?

How is it that the man who claims to have read more of the Mueller report than anyone else is unaware that in the hearing Mueller stated that his team found no evidence that any American colluded with Russia during the campaign.
How is that possible?

 

[Rambunctious]

More leftwing censorship...if they all fear our words maybe its because we are right and they know it....

No. You’re not right. You’re very wrong and your inability to understand that can and has lead to violence.

Im using “you” not in a personal sense but the way you used it, to refer to all your tribe.

I would fight for your right to say anything you wanted to say regardless how dumb I think it may be....anywhere at anytime as long as you didn't start a panic...like fire in a dark theater...if some people think your words could be dangerous all the more worth fighting for...

 

[SC Patriot]

More leftwing censorship...if they all fear our words maybe its because we are right and they know it....

No. You’re not right. You’re very wrong and your inability to understand that can and has lead to violence.

Im using “you” not in a personal sense but the way you used it, to refer to all your tribe.

I would fight for your right to say anything you wanted to say regardless how dumb I think it may be....anywhere at anytime as long as you didn't start a panic...like fire in a dark theater...if some people think your words could be dangerous all the more worth fighting for...

Unless, of course, the really is a fire in a dark theatre.

Then what does one do?

Walk out and not say a word?

 

[colfax_m]

How is it that the man who claims to have read more of the Mueller report than anyone else is unaware that in the hearing Mueller stated that his team found no evidence that any American colluded with Russia during the campaign.
How is that possible?

Wait, wait, wait, wait.

That's not what you said earlier. Let's go to the tape.

Fact: Mueller stated in his report that no American Citizen colluded with Russia during the campaign of 2016

There's a difference between saying that something didn't happen and saying you didn't find evidence that something happened. Big difference. Don't think I won't notice if you make such a big change in your assertions.

 

[jc456]

i thought you read it more than anyone else? and you don't know that? too fking funny.

If you think it says this, provide the quote. Thanks.

here you go..Page 81.

The Office also did not charge any campaign official or associate with a conspiracy under Section 371 's defraud clause. That clause criminalizes participating in an agreement to obstruct a lawful function of the U.S. government or its agencies through deceitful or dishon est means. See Dennis v. United States, 384 U.S. 855, 861 (1966); Hammerschmidt v. United States, 265 U.S . 182, 188 (1924); see also United States v. Concord Mgmt. & Consulting LLC, 34 7 F. Supp. 3d 38, 46 (D.D .C.2018). The investigation did not establish any agreement among Campaign officialsor between such officials and Russia-linked individuals-to interfere with or obstruct a lawful function of a government agency during the campaign or transition period. And , as discussed in Volume I, Section V.A , supra, the investigation did not identify evidence that any Campaign official or associate knowingly and intentionally participated in the conspiracy to defraud that the Office charged , namely, the active-measures conspiracy described in Volume I, Section II, supra . Accordingly, the Office did not charge any Campaign associate or other U.S. person with conspiracy to defraud the United States based on the Russia-relat ed contact s described in Section IV above.

now I know, you'll deny the report and that's the funny part.

 

[colfax_m]

I would fight for your right to say anything you wanted to say regardless how dumb I think it may be....anywhere at anytime as long as you didn't start a panic...like fire in a dark theater...if some people think your words could be dangerous all the more worth fighting for...

Alright. Can I come to your front lawn and post a sign that says "Rambunctious is a jerk"?

After all, I'm allowed to speak anywhere at any time. So I chose to exercise my speech in your front lawn.

 

[jc456]

How is it that the man who claims to have read more of the Mueller report than anyone else is unaware that in the hearing Mueller stated that his team found no evidence that any American colluded with Russia during the campaign.
How is that possible?

Wait, wait, wait, wait.

That's not what you said earlier. Let's go to the tape.

Fact: Mueller stated in his report that no American Citizen colluded with Russia during the campaign of 2016

There's a difference between saying that something didn't happen and saying you didn't find evidence that something happened. Big difference. Don't think I won't notice if you make such a big change in your assertions.

if you have no evidence, it didn't happen that's why. just you denying the context of the report. too fking funny.

 

[colfax_m]

i thought you read it more than anyone else? and you don't know that? too fking funny.

If you think it says this, provide the quote. Thanks.

here you go..Page 81.

The Office also did not charge any campaign official or associate with a conspiracy under Section 371 's defraud clause. That clause criminalizes participating in an agreement to obstruct a lawful function of the U.S. government or its agencies through deceitful or dishon est means. See Dennis v. United States, 384 U.S. 855, 861 (1966); Hammerschmidt v. United States, 265 U.S . 182, 188 (1924); see also United States v. Concord Mgmt. & Consulting LLC, 34 7 F. Supp. 3d 38, 46 (D.D .C.2018). The investigation did not establish any agreement among Campaign officialsor between such officials and Russia-linked individuals-to interfere with or obstruct a lawful function of a government agency during the campaign or transition period. And , as discussed in Volume I, Section V.A , supra, the investigation did not identify evidence that any Campaign official or associate knowingly and intentionally participated in the conspiracy to defraud that the Office charged , namely, the active-measures conspiracy described in Volume I, Section II, supra . Accordingly, the Office did not charge any Campaign associate or other U.S. person with conspiracy to defraud the United States based on the Russia-relat ed contact s described in Section IV above.

now I know, you'll deny the report and that's the funny part.

That does not say what the previous poster claimed.

 

[jc456]

I would fight for your right to say anything you wanted to say regardless how dumb I think it may be....anywhere at anytime as long as you didn't start a panic...like fire in a dark theater...if some people think your words could be dangerous all the more worth fighting for...

Alright. Can I come to your front lawn and post a sign that says "Rambunctious is a jerk"?

After all, I'm allowed to speak anywhere at any time. So I chose to exercise my speech in your front lawn.

if he has a no trespassing sign or no solicitor sign, then no. you don't.

 

[jc456]

i thought you read it more than anyone else? and you don't know that? too fking funny.

If you think it says this, provide the quote. Thanks.

here you go..Page 81.

The Office also did not charge any campaign official or associate with a conspiracy under Section 371 's defraud clause. That clause criminalizes participating in an agreement to obstruct a lawful function of the U.S. government or its agencies through deceitful or dishon est means. See Dennis v. United States, 384 U.S. 855, 861 (1966); Hammerschmidt v. United States, 265 U.S . 182, 188 (1924); see also United States v. Concord Mgmt. & Consulting LLC, 34 7 F. Supp. 3d 38, 46 (D.D .C.2018). The investigation did not establish any agreement among Campaign officialsor between such officials and Russia-linked individuals-to interfere with or obstruct a lawful function of a government agency during the campaign or transition period. And , as discussed in Volume I, Section V.A , supra, the investigation did not identify evidence that any Campaign official or associate knowingly and intentionally participated in the conspiracy to defraud that the Office charged , namely, the active-measures conspiracy described in Volume I, Section II, supra . Accordingly, the Office did not charge any Campaign associate or other U.S. person with conspiracy to defraud the United States based on the Russia-relat ed contact s described in Section IV above.

now I know, you'll deny the report and that's the funny part.

That does not say what the previous poster claimed.

yes it does. nice try though, that's a red herring by you.

 

[SC Patriot]

How is it that the man who claims to have read more of the Mueller report than anyone else is unaware that in the hearing Mueller stated that his team found no evidence that any American colluded with Russia during the campaign.
How is that possible?

Wait, wait, wait, wait.

That's not what you said earlier. Let's go to the tape.

Fact: Mueller stated in his report that no American Citizen colluded with Russia during the campaign of 2016

There's a difference between saying that something didn't happen and saying you didn't find evidence that something happened. Big difference. Don't think I won't notice if you make such a big change in your assertions.

Give me a freaking break.

Fine. Freaking text on here....point being made and people like you want exact terminology.....

So, for your pleasure......

How could Mueller state he did not find EVIDENCE of an American Citizen colluding with Russia if he did not know who Fusion GPS was?

You know...... don't answer.

The fact that you just spent an hour playing that freaking game and wasting my time gives me reason to write you off.

Cya.

 

[jc456]

More leftwing censorship...if they all fear our words maybe its because we are right and they know it....

BULLSEYE. They don't give a damn about this country. They want totalitarianism because they're sheep.

Nah.

They just like free stuff...and they like to feel good when the more successful are forced to pay for the free stuff for the people they "support" that need the free stuff.

Of course, when the well is dry and they government turn to those that feel good about having others pay for the free stuff and ask those that tfeel good and never had to give for the free stuff, to ante in and [ay their fair share..... then they will complain.

Until then....."give it to the poor, the children, the sick, the elderly....just dont touch my wallet"...

Seen it many times

they're all lazy fks.