The One Question No One So Far Can Answer

[OKTexas]

Mistake, hardly. I've already have gotten everything I hoped for from Trump. He kept the bitch out of the WH and appointed an apparently good justice who is not a hard left ideologue. Mission accomplished.

.

So you don't care that Trump is a serial lying, delusional megalomaniac, that will raise your taxes, and bankrupt the country.

From what I've seen he will zero out my federal income taxes. He can't even do that or anything else without congress. So no, I don't care.

.

 

[whitehall]

The short answer is that everybody can answer it. Why do lefties assume that they have the inside info when the democrat party lost every election that counts in the last decade?

 

[Care4all]

Well, obviously the FBI, when they added the Trump campaign to their Russian investigation, did so, because of possible criminal or espionage activity, no? I said possible...something in their investigation lead them to add or include them...

AS I WAS TOLD BY ALL REPUBLICANS two years ago when the FBI opened their Clinton email server investigation, the FBI doesn't investigate unless there is a possible crime being committed...

ONLY the FBI Counter intelligence division and Comey, would know the laws that were POSSIBLY broken, since they are all on the hush, hush, and are not leaking.

We can guess...accessories to cyber theft, or accessories to the distribution and dissemination of stolen goods etc....

But more than likely, it's the possibility of something much deeper than those two things that brought the FBI in to pulling the Trump Campaign in to their investigation is my thought....may not be connected to the stolen email part of the investigation at all...they've testified in hearings the stolen emails was not even the tip of the iceberg on what they systematically did to interfere....

Plus, there are the Russian/Ukrainian money laundering connections to the campaign manager, Paul Manafort that may have nothing to do with the stolen emails and Flynn's troubling situation may not have anything to do with the stolen emails....but still be connected to the Russians or even possibly the Kremlin...

You're living in a fantasy world. The only crimes committed were unmasking the names of American citizens and leaking that information to the press. Those are genuine crimes that were irrefutably committed.

Also, the term "connected" is virtually meaningless. It has about the same significance as saying everyone is connected to Kevin Bacon by six degrees.

Unmasking requests is not leaking and it was ALREADY investigated by the Republicans in the House Intelligence Committee and they found the unmasking was all legal and necessary and not unusual by Susan Rice.

LEAKING classified information to people not cleared to receive it is illegal, and should be investigated when it happens!

You are delusional. They haven't found the names of the people who unmasked, and they haven't found the source of the leaks. No one said unmasking is leaking, but both can be illegal, and it sure looks like the person who did the unmasking was also involved in the leaking.

No one has found that the unmasking was legal or necessary except a gang of delusional snowflakes.

what ''unmasking'' are you talking about?

How can you claim "Republicans in the House Intelligence Committee and they found the unmasking was all legal and necessary and not unusual by Susan Rice" if you don't even know what unmasking I'm talking about?

huh? I mntioned Rice, because she is who the Republicans were going BONKERS over on the 'unmasking',

THEN YOUR NEXT POST you said this

You are delusional. They haven't found the names of the people who unmasked,

So i am asking you, who in the world or what in the world are you talking about if not Susan Rice...?

As far as ''finding people who unmasked'' it is easy peasy, all intelligence agencies have the paper requests for unmasking...easy to get anyone's name that requested the unmasking of someone.

 

[OKTexas]

I've posed this hypothetical question to a couple of members and so far no one seems up to the task of providing an answer. So now I'm posing it the whole board.

Ok, here's a hypothetical scenario. Let's say a Trump associate spoke to a Russian representative. The Russian told him we have some really bad shit on the hildabitch and the representative said wow, it would sure help us if you released it on Tuesday and they did exactly that.

Tell me, what specific law would have been broken? Don't give me an opinion, quote the law.

Any takers?

.

Mine good colleague...

Have you not yet grown tired of making excuses for your Mistaken Vote?

I would have thought that the Embarrassment Factor by itself would have been enough to put you right off your lunch by now.

Mistake, hardly. I've already have gotten everything I hoped for from Trump. He kept the bitch out of the WH and appointed an apparently good justice who is not a hard left ideologue. Mission accomplished.

.

I hear what you're saying about Shrillary...

Still, this Amateur-Hour. haphazard style of governance is a very high price to pay for a couple of modest Wins in a SEA of broken campaign promises, corruption and arrogance. It is going to get us into big trouble sooner rather than later, unless they invoke the 25th or move to impeach and convict.

And I've said this multiple times, feel free to check, if he really steps on it he'll be the easiest president in history to impeach and remove. That said you have no evidence of corruption and feel free to point to a promise he's completely backed away from.

.

 

[Care4all]

That is incorrect. Clapper came out to clear that confusion.

James Clapper on collusion between Russia, Trump aides: There could be evidence

(CNN) Former Director of National Intelligence James Clapper told MSNBC'S Andrea Mitchell on Friday that there could be evidence of collusion between Russia and President Donald Trump's 2016 campaign -- a statement that comes on the heels of an apparent public threat Trump made this morning to fired FBI Director James Comey, tweeting that Comey had better hope their conversations have not been taped.
There was no evidence that rose to that level, at that time, that found its way in to the intelligence community assessment, which we had pretty high confidence in," the former director of national intelligence said of collusion between Trump campaign aides and Russians, referring also to the US intelligence assessment that Russia tried to influence the presidential election in favor of Trump. "That's not to say there wasn't evidence, but not that met that threshold."

Well then maybe you'll believe one of the biggest Trump detractors in the country who's seen all the evidence to date.

Dianne Feinstein: ‘no evidence’ of collusion between Russia and Trump during 2016 campaign

Sen. Dianne Feinstein, D-Calif., told CNN’s Wolf Blitzer on Wednesday that she has seen no evidence thus far showing collusion between associates of President Donald Trump and the Russian government during the presidential campaign.

“Do you have evidence that there was, in fact, collusion between Trump associates and Russia during the campaign?” Blitzer asked Feinstein, noting that she and her colleagues on the Senate Intelligence Committee were recently briefed on the subject at the CIA headquarters.

“Not at this time,” Feinstein responded.

“Well, that’s a pretty precise answer,” Blitzer said.

Dianne Feinstein: ‘no evidence’ of collusion between Russia and Trump during 2016 campaign

.

Look at the dates between those 2 links.

My point was Clapper left the government on Jan 20, Feinstein has been in every briefing from Comey that Clapper would have not been privy to.

if the FBI can't tell us due to their on going investigation and not wanting to spoil their leads, why would you think Feinstein would show the FBI's hand?

Feinstein didn't go into any details, all she said is she hasn't seen any evidence of collusion to this point. She is in a position to have the most up to date info. Also both she and Grasslley have said Comey said Trump himself is not a target in the investigation.

.

no, she did NOT SAY to this point...

she said, NOT AT THIS TIME, which I read as, she can not tell us, at this time....

the investigation is going on still, what info she and grassly has is classified and they can not disclose it at this time....thy ARE GETTING CLASSIFIED briefings...how could you even expect them to leak classified information to us?

 

[oreo]

Well, obviously the FBI, when they added the Trump campaign to their Russian investigation, did so, because of possible criminal or espionage activity, no? I said possible...something in their investigation lead them to add or include them...

AS I WAS TOLD BY ALL REPUBLICANS two years ago when the FBI opened their Clinton email server investigation, the FBI doesn't investigate unless there is a possible crime being committed...

ONLY the FBI Counter intelligence division and Comey, would know the laws that were POSSIBLY broken, since they are all on the hush, hush, and are not leaking.

We can guess...accessories to cyber theft, or accessories to the distribution and dissemination of stolen goods etc....

But more than likely, it's the possibility of something much deeper than those two things that brought the FBI in to pulling the Trump Campaign in to their investigation is my thought....may not be connected to the stolen email part of the investigation at all...they've testified in hearings the stolen emails was not even the tip of the iceberg on what they systematically did to interfere....

Plus, there are the Russian/Ukrainian money laundering connections to the campaign manager, Paul Manafort that may have nothing to do with the stolen emails and Flynn's troubling situation may not have anything to do with the stolen emails....but still be connected to the Russians or even possibly the Kremlin...

You're living in a fantasy world. The only crimes committed were unmasking the names of American citizens and leaking that information to the press. Those are genuine crimes that were irrefutably committed.

Also, the term "connected" is virtually meaningless. It has about the same significance as saying everyone is connected to Kevin Bacon by six degrees.

We will honor the people who out traitors to this country--and I don't really give a rat's ass who does it. They will be the Hero's not the villians.


Analysis | 5 times Donald Trump’s team denied contact with Russia
utm_term=.dd85be1f3321

More Trump advisers disclose meeting with Russia's ambassador - CNNPolitics.com
Comey says FBI began investigation into Russia meddling in July



Trump aides were in constant touch with senior Russian officials during campaign - CNNPolitics.com

Flynn reportedly lied to FBI about sanctions talk with Russian envoy
Flynn was paid to lobby for Turkey while attending Trump intel briefings: report
Michael Flynn received more than $33,000 from Russian TV
Michael Flynn targeted by grand jury subpoenas, sources confirm

Jeff Sessions spoke twice with Russian envoy during presidential campaign: Department of Justice
Did AG Sessions violate his recusal by advising on the decision to fire Comey?

Trump fires FBI director James Comey - CNNPolitics.com

So, Wikileaks is your knight in shining armour I take it? After all, they outted the traitor Clinton.

You know there are classes for people with reading comprehension issues. But to get through all this you'll need more than a 6th grade education--and will need to have an attention span that lasts longer than a gnat.

Wikileaks didn't attack Donald Trump--they went directly after Hillary Clinton. And Wikileaks has nothing to do with the information coming out on Trump right now. This is coming from intelligence sources, whom have been investigating Trump & his surrogates since last July, and from testimony from Flynn and Sessions who BOTH lied. Flynn to the FBI, Sessions under oath to congress.

It's you TRUMP SUPPORTERS that have been real fans of Wikileaks. You cannot deny it, you were cheering Wikileaks on through-out the campaign season, and it's something no one is going to forget.

Julian Assange, Wikileaks founder who has been holed up in the Ecuador Embassy in London for the last 4 YEARS--with UK Police surrounding him, avoiding extradition back to the United States for what he did to G.W. Bush.
Why is Julian Assange still inside the embassy of Ecuador?

Now they really want Julian Assange because he just dumped thousands of Classified CIA documents--basically telling terrorists how we catch them.
Analyst says WikiLeaks dump 'devastating' for CIA - CNNPolitics.com

Trumps CIA pick--Pompeo, just stated that Wikileaks--is a hostile foreign actor of this nation.
CIA Director Blasts WikiLeaks as ‘Hostile Intelligence Service’


But TRUMP AND HIS SUPPORTERS LOVE WIKILEAKS and the proof is right here.

 

[OKTexas]

Well then maybe you'll believe one of the biggest Trump detractors in the country who's seen all the evidence to date.

Dianne Feinstein: ‘no evidence’ of collusion between Russia and Trump during 2016 campaign

Sen. Dianne Feinstein, D-Calif., told CNN’s Wolf Blitzer on Wednesday that she has seen no evidence thus far showing collusion between associates of President Donald Trump and the Russian government during the presidential campaign.

“Do you have evidence that there was, in fact, collusion between Trump associates and Russia during the campaign?” Blitzer asked Feinstein, noting that she and her colleagues on the Senate Intelligence Committee were recently briefed on the subject at the CIA headquarters.

“Not at this time,” Feinstein responded.

“Well, that’s a pretty precise answer,” Blitzer said.

Dianne Feinstein: ‘no evidence’ of collusion between Russia and Trump during 2016 campaign

.

Look at the dates between those 2 links.

My point was Clapper left the government on Jan 20, Feinstein has been in every briefing from Comey that Clapper would have not been privy to.

if the FBI can't tell us due to their on going investigation and not wanting to spoil their leads, why would you think Feinstein would show the FBI's hand?

Feinstein didn't go into any details, all she said is she hasn't seen any evidence of collusion to this point. She is in a position to have the most up to date info. Also both she and Grasslley have said Comey said Trump himself is not a target in the investigation.

.

no, she did NOT SAY to this point...

she said, NOT AT THIS TIME, which I read as, she can not tell us, at this time....

the investigation is going on still, what info she and grassly has is classified and they can not disclose it at this time....thy ARE GETTING CLASSIFIED briefings...how could you even expect them to leak classified information to us?

You might want to read the question she was responding to again.

.

 

[Wry Catcher]

Frankly hold all officials to a high standard of honesty... it didn't help that Obama and Hillary had low standards in those regards

I've posed this hypothetical question to a couple of members and so far no one seems up to the task of providing an answer. So now I'm posing it the whole board.

Ok, here's a hypothetical scenario. Let's say a Trump associate spoke to a Russian representative. The Russian told him we have some really bad shit on the hildabitch and the representative said wow, it would sure help us if you released it on Tuesday and they did exactly that.

Tell me, what specific law would have been broken? Don't give me an opinion, quote the law.

Any takers?

.

Collusion with a foreign adversary to interfere into an American election is TREASON. It doesn't matter who contacted who first. Any other campaign would have refused to talk with a Foreign adversary, much less accept information from them.

Where is that evidence of collusion?

No evidence - Deputy AG said it, AG said it, Clapper said it, it only exist in butthurt leftist heads that can't get over the fact they lost the elections fair and square.

You want collusion of interfering with the elections? Here is one, collusion between Democrats and leftist media.

Do you think before you post, or only emote?

Q. What evidence is there of collusion?

A. Evidence is the product of an investigation, as most everyone but you seem to understand.

An allegation wherein a mob yells in unison, "Lock her Up" is not what anyone is now doing; the effort by the Senate Minority Leader is to put a flashlight on the question: Did Trump or his surrogates collude with the Russian Government to win his election?

If evidence of collusion is product of an investigation, how can you talk about collusion if there hasn't been an investigation?

You've caught him caught up in his own contradiction. That's the story of this whole faux scandal.

You really are stupid. The investigation is on going, if they discover collusion, it is the product, i.e., the result of the investigation. How fucking stupid are you to not comprehend such a simple explanation.

 

[Ame®icano]

"Russia if you're listening, we'd like to see Hillary's emails"
*cue email dump*

Liar.

That's not what he said.

Your post says "Trump asks Russia to hack Hillary's e-mails" Which is actually worse than his description.

I have no control over Youtube titles. If you actually listen what he said, it's definitely not what you quoted.

not word for word. The meaning and intention is exactly what I quoted.
Too literal to function?

Your interpretation of his words doesn't mean shit.

Her server was already bleachbit cleaned in possession of the FBI. Even if he asked them to hack it, and he did not, that wasn't possible.

 

[Ame®icano]

Ok, here's a hypothetical scenario. Let's say a Trump associate spoke to a Russian representative. The Russian told him we have some really bad shit on the hildabitch and the representative said wow, it would sure help us if you released it on Tuesday and they did exactly that.

Tell me, what specific law would have been broken? Don't give me an opinion, quote the law.

1) the really bad shit is presumed to be something obtained illegally by electronic or other means. 18 U.S. Code § 2511 - Interception and disclosure of wire, oral, or electronic communications prohibited. BUT not in violation of that law because it was only intercepted but not disclosed

Followed by the associate urging them to complete the crime, which would be a violation of 18 U.S. Code § 371 - Conspiracy to commit offense or to defraud United States

So where is the evidence that anyone in the Trump administration broke these laws?

On the other hand, there is irrefutable evidence that people in the Obama administration broke laws against unmasking American citizens and then leaking that information to the press.

trump himself, on live tv, asked for russia to hack hillary's emails. I think that falls under "urging them to complete the crime" conspiracy.

Wrong, he simply asked, if they had them to release them, big difference. The server at that point had already been taken off line and wiped, there was nothing to hack. They were never released BTW. If Russia has them they were probably holding them for use against the bitch in case she won.

.

If they were going to hold them incase she won why were they released upon trumpies request?

Are you talking about HIllary's server or DNC server? Do you know which one is "phished"?

 

[Ame®icano]

I've posed this hypothetical question to a couple of members and so far no one seems up to the task of providing an answer. So now I'm posing it the whole board.

Ok, here's a hypothetical scenario. Let's say a Trump associate spoke to a Russian representative. The Russian told him we have some really bad shit on the hildabitch and the representative said wow, it would sure help us if you released it on Tuesday and they did exactly that.

Tell me, what specific law would have been broken? Don't give me an opinion, quote the law.

Any takers?

.

Collusion with a foreign adversary to interfere into an American election is TREASON. It doesn't matter who contacted who first. Any other campaign would have refused to talk with a Foreign adversary, much less accept information from them.

Where is that evidence of collusion?

No evidence - Deputy AG said it, AG said it, Clapper said it, it only exist in butthurt leftist heads that can't get over the fact they lost the elections fair and square.

You want collusion of interfering with the elections? Here is one, collusion between Democrats and leftist media.

Do you think before you post, or only emote?

Q. What evidence is there of collusion?

A. Evidence is the product of an investigation, as most everyone but you seem to understand.

An allegation wherein a mob yells in unison, "Lock her Up" is not what anyone is now doing; the effort by the Senate Minority Leader is to put a flashlight on the question: Did Trump or his surrogates collude with the Russian Government to win his election?

If evidence of collusion is product of an investigation, how can you talk about collusion if there hasn't been an investigation?

LOL, are you tying to be funny?

It seems you got the point. Why don't you answer than?

 

[Ame®icano]

Everybody who quoted Clapper saying he cleared Trump, post your apology here.

No one ever said that, so why would they post an apology for saying it?

You grow more stupid with each post, he just said it, and you quoted it in your post.

No evidence ... Clapper said it

He claimed Clapper said there was no evidence. Clapper said he hadn't seen any, not that there wasn't any.

Who said Clapper cleared Trump?

Trump said it in one of his tweets--LOL Clapper stated during the hearing last week he knew of no collusion--but yesterday clarifing himself--he stated in "his prior position he would not have been privy to any information regarding the investigation and what evidence was coming in." In fact he didn't even know that Trump and his campaign was under investigation since last July.

"James Klapper told MSNBC'S Andrea Mitchell on Friday that there could be evidence of collusion between Russia and President Donald Trump's 2016 campaign -- a statement that comes on the heels of an apparent public threat Trump made this morning to fired FBI Director James Comey, tweeting that Comey had better hope their conversations have not been taped."
James Clapper on collusion between Russia, Trump aides: There could be evidence - CNNPolitics.com

It seems you don't believe what Clapper actually said in the video provided, but to CNN's interpretation of what he said.

 

[bripat9643]

You're living in a fantasy world. The only crimes committed were unmasking the names of American citizens and leaking that information to the press. Those are genuine crimes that were irrefutably committed.

Also, the term "connected" is virtually meaningless. It has about the same significance as saying everyone is connected to Kevin Bacon by six degrees.

Unmasking requests is not leaking and it was ALREADY investigated by the Republicans in the House Intelligence Committee and they found the unmasking was all legal and necessary and not unusual by Susan Rice.

LEAKING classified information to people not cleared to receive it is illegal, and should be investigated when it happens!

You are delusional. They haven't found the names of the people who unmasked, and they haven't found the source of the leaks. No one said unmasking is leaking, but both can be illegal, and it sure looks like the person who did the unmasking was also involved in the leaking.

No one has found that the unmasking was legal or necessary except a gang of delusional snowflakes.

what ''unmasking'' are you talking about?

How can you claim "Republicans in the House Intelligence Committee and they found the unmasking was all legal and necessary and not unusual by Susan Rice" if you don't even know what unmasking I'm talking about?

huh? I mntioned Rice, because she is who the Republicans were going BONKERS over on the 'unmasking',

THEN YOUR NEXT POST you said this

You are delusional. They haven't found the names of the people who unmasked,

So i am asking you, who in the world or what in the world are you talking about if not Susan Rice...?

As far as ''finding people who unmasked'' it is easy peasy, all intelligence agencies have the paper requests for unmasking...easy to get anyone's name that requested the unmasking of someone.

Yep, and the FBI under Comey has failed to do that yet. Comey refused to do it. That's another reason he's gone.

 

[Ame®icano]

No one ever said that, so why would they post an apology for saying it?

You grow more stupid with each post, he just said it, and you quoted it in your post.

No evidence ... Clapper said it

He claimed Clapper said there was no evidence. Clapper said he hadn't seen any, not that there wasn't any.

Who said Clapper cleared Trump?

Trump said it in one of his tweets--LOL Clapper stated during the hearing last week he knew of no collusion--but yesterday clarifing himself--he stated in "his prior position he would not have been privy to any information regarding the investigation and what evidence was coming in." In fact he didn't even know that Trump and his campaign was under investigation since last July.

"James Klapper told MSNBC'S Andrea Mitchell on Friday that there could be evidence of collusion between Russia and President Donald Trump's 2016 campaign -- a statement that comes on the heels of an apparent public threat Trump made this morning to fired FBI Director James Comey, tweeting that Comey had better hope their conversations have not been taped."
James Clapper on collusion between Russia, Trump aides: There could be evidence - CNNPolitics.com

Consider this from one of my earlier posts.

Well then maybe you'll believe one of the biggest Trump detractors in the country who's seen all the evidence to date.

Dianne Feinstein: ‘no evidence’ of collusion between Russia and Trump during 2016 campaign

Sen. Dianne Feinstein, D-Calif., told CNN’s Wolf Blitzer on Wednesday that she has seen no evidence thus far showing collusion between associates of President Donald Trump and the Russian government during the presidential campaign.

“Do you have evidence that there was, in fact, collusion between Trump associates and Russia during the campaign?” Blitzer asked Feinstein, noting that she and her colleagues on the Senate Intelligence Committee were recently briefed on the subject at the CIA headquarters.

“Not at this time,” Feinstein responded.

“Well, that’s a pretty precise answer,” Blitzer said.

Dianne Feinstein: ‘no evidence’ of collusion between Russia and Trump during 2016 campaign

.

To a snowflake "no evidence" means they just have to dig even harder and longer.

I don't mind digging. What I do mind is accusing of crime before evidence is found.

"We lost, and that's the crime."

 

[bripat9643]

You grow more stupid with each post, he just said it, and you quoted it in your post.

He claimed Clapper said there was no evidence. Clapper said he hadn't seen any, not that there wasn't any.

Who said Clapper cleared Trump?

Trump said it in one of his tweets--LOL Clapper stated during the hearing last week he knew of no collusion--but yesterday clarifing himself--he stated in "his prior position he would not have been privy to any information regarding the investigation and what evidence was coming in." In fact he didn't even know that Trump and his campaign was under investigation since last July.

"James Klapper told MSNBC'S Andrea Mitchell on Friday that there could be evidence of collusion between Russia and President Donald Trump's 2016 campaign -- a statement that comes on the heels of an apparent public threat Trump made this morning to fired FBI Director James Comey, tweeting that Comey had better hope their conversations have not been taped."
James Clapper on collusion between Russia, Trump aides: There could be evidence - CNNPolitics.com

Consider this from one of my earlier posts.

Well then maybe you'll believe one of the biggest Trump detractors in the country who's seen all the evidence to date.

Dianne Feinstein: ‘no evidence’ of collusion between Russia and Trump during 2016 campaign

Sen. Dianne Feinstein, D-Calif., told CNN’s Wolf Blitzer on Wednesday that she has seen no evidence thus far showing collusion between associates of President Donald Trump and the Russian government during the presidential campaign.

“Do you have evidence that there was, in fact, collusion between Trump associates and Russia during the campaign?” Blitzer asked Feinstein, noting that she and her colleagues on the Senate Intelligence Committee were recently briefed on the subject at the CIA headquarters.

“Not at this time,” Feinstein responded.

“Well, that’s a pretty precise answer,” Blitzer said.

Dianne Feinstein: ‘no evidence’ of collusion between Russia and Trump during 2016 campaign

.

To a snowflake "no evidence" means they just have to dig even harder and longer.

I don't mind digging. What I do mind is accusing of crime before evidence is found.

"We lost, and that's the crime."

To a snowflake, it isn't proof that matters. It's the "seriousness of the charge." Unless you're a Dim of course, in which case it's "innocent until proven guilty."

 

[Ame®icano]

Please provide the specific statute that includes that please.

.

Treason is associated of happening during a time of war time--but the United States does consider cyber attacks to be the 21st century Act of War. So if there was collusion with anyone within the Trump campaign and Russia it would be considered Treason.
Calls Grow For Trump Campaign To Be Prosecuted For Treason If They Conspired With Russia

"Is associated of happening?" Is English your second language?

Russia is not America's enemy. If cyber attacks are an act of war, then why hasn't any country been bombed for doing it?

As always, you're totally full of shit.

Russia is, was and always be an enemy of America. Unless you are a traitor.

Horseshit. All you snowflakes loved the Soviet Union before it collapsed.

Think real hard Bri. Give us an example why do you think Russia is our friend?

Navy says Russian jet came within 20 feet of U.S. spy plane

How this headline back your point exactly?

 

[radical right]

You might want to read the question she was responding to again.

.

This is just like when they asked the head of the secret service if Obama was getting more death threats than Bush. He said the numbers were the same. Of course that was a complete lie, but one which any other answer would have compromised the integrity of their mission. He couldn't let the fact the secret service was being overwhelmed by a 400% increase become public. Feinstein couldn't admit she was shown the evidence.

 

[radical right]

Your interpretation of his words doesn't mean shit.

Her server was already bleachbit cleaned in possession of the FBI. Even if he asked them to hack it, and he did not, that wasn't possible.

That scenario doesn't help. If the Russians hacked the server, asking for the disclosure of the information was felony conspiracy to violate federal law.

 

[bripat9643]

If you read the scenario again you'll see that the Trump associate intercepted nothing and disclosed nothing, that was done by the other guy.

.

Hence the conspiracy violation 18 USC 371. Where all conspirators are guilty of the crimes performed by any one of them.

each shall be fined under this title or imprisoned not more than five years, or both.

Which Trump campaign member "conspired" with any hackers? Do you have any evidence of any of your sinister accusations?

 

[bripat9643]

And the MSM would take her side....not investigate. Clinton and the MSN would pronounce it an old story and move on.

Probably, just as the conservative media would cover it 24/7, just like Benghazi. We live in a grossly partisan and divided country and it is polluting our political system.

You mean one cable network would cover it? Yeah, that is exactly equivalent!

You mean the biggest news media cable network in our country? Yeah that one

The biggest cable news outlet Is still considerably smaller than ABC, CBS and NBC

So what? Start another conservative station then. It's a free country

That doesn't alter the fact that ABC, CBS and NBC are far bigger than FOX.