Wray Resigned - Great news the first of many skunks to go

I know nothing about Wray, other than he appears to have some peer respect and is a capable person. Kash Patel is a joke. He is not a serious enough person for such a demanding role.

Congrats to Mike, Plum, Draad, DA etc in trying to enlighten half bakes like STAVASS and dense Denise, poor blobbie etc.

The poor clowns are in for a torrid 2025 as the Trump Admin starts to declassify material and go after demonrat criminals. 

Much is already known thanks to the now dominant alternate media. But there are going to be huge bombshells coming out that will shake the world.

I saw on X a claim  that there are Diddy sex tapes showing Hussein Obummer with minors. So let's see what comes out.

Prominent people are sweating bullets now. The tide of public opinion has turned. But the public ain't seen nothing yet. The full extent of the treason committed against the American people by the Uniparty Globalists is going to be revealed like never before. 

The America People increasingly are aware their country has not being governed in their interest. They are far more ready to examine the evidence. The Previously MSM is circling the toilet. 

Clowns like sharktwit, Rooitwit, Dense Denise, poor Blobbrain and the hapless nutter StavAss are going to get their long snouts rubbed in it day by day week by week. HAHAHAHAHAHA. 

SB

Lets explain somethig to you which you did not follow:- Wray is a peron who used his poition to protect political criiminals  -  even wen the banks informed  the FBI that the Bidens werr laundering money he refused to invstigate their reports,   

His conduct was outlined in the scandals I quoted above,    He was on epson who thought he ws above the law and that when he lies under aoth in the Senate adn House he would be saved by the criminals he protect,   He was and is probably best described as a clever bureaucratic crook.   

I posted a number of cases where he as openly lying to the House and  Senate about things and en fel back on the phrase he invented  that he cannot commend on issues relating to current  investigations knowing full well that the FBI did not investigate  anuthingand ever did.   

Ia;ways believe that is he function of bureaucrats to serve the contry and the epeople f he country - when you serve politicians  and escaily crooked ones - you are betraying your country and its people.   That is what Wray did and that is why he should go.

The problem for Wray is he did nt serve he people of the USA and he served corrupt shit like B iden, elosi and Schiff.,    The majority of people in the USA lost teir respect fr the FBI as a result.   As a result the FBI is for instance  not allowed to even speak to the guy being accused of tying to assasinate Trump.  I the past two years strings of FBI agents seeing that the institution has gone rogue startd to leak documents to the Senators and House members, 

Wray frquently tried to lie himself out of tight situaion and he sis likel tos pend ea in jail for lying under oath,   He made a bd for himself and must now suffer the conequences,   Biden is likel to try and pardon him - but it is not going to pardon him when lthe crime was lying uderoath to Congress,

As an example - both Wra and Mayorkas was summoned to answer questions ithe Sente about murder of people in the USA by illegal muigrants and bth the two decided to ignore the summons,   That alnne shows he regaded himsef as being above te law and is any time even a more serious crie than lying under oath  whena nsewring questions.   In view of the major scandals he was involved in Trump obviously g ave him the option t resign by annoncing noination of Patel - who peviously served in the white houde in a senior position hen Trump was President.    The Senators  who dealt wit him bfore egard him as onest and nit abelieving in the FBI playing political game like thy did since 2011.   The Snors claimed he is vey efficient and 100%  trustworthy and he wil be confirmed as FBI head,

So we wil see what rot Patel will uncover when he became FBI Dirrector.   Thee are already reports of destroying of thousands of documents Wray and his cabal is tryng to destroy,   Wr ay kne that those ocumens are going to lead to his jail sentence an some FBI agents are trying to make sre that copies of incriminating documents are not destroyedm    What Wray fears most is ending up in jail and has been trying all ot o prvent Trump from inning the eelction and the rsult is that Wr ay will end up in jail,   I am in a way sory he ent rogue and now ends up bein g forced to resign or being fired,     If  did is work honestly e uld not hve been in the positin he is now.   

Look at the following two videos that is part of the sit Wray caused:-

 . https://www.foxnews.com/video/6342410704112

He lied about th so-called Molotove coccktails when confronted,   Nobody was arrested or charge on that issuel      

,https://www.google.com/search?q=Senator+Hawley+Questioning+Wray&sca_esv=8f1ce1ec8e583385&rlz=1C1YTUH_enZA1068ZA1070&ei=MItcZ-awBOrXhbIPjvaYiAM&start=20&sa=N&sstk=ATObxK6FuOLcD494OcThwh0synePFL9xCUuEx2uJ0GKBgM0cfdtwdQN8terxwhToLR2awGylGUPt6fVtj5p9Vz0Pu8Swwd76C6v3FNF621IG5aNwcSGBTv6gpT396uJr85cb&ved=2ahUKEwjmiNnWvaWKAxXqa0EAHQ47BjE4ChDy0wN6BAgJEAc&biw=1121&bih=689&dpr=1#fpstate=ive&vld=cid:13baffb0,vid:kO15IPtVl9g,st:0

Whatd id Wray pay for using the Government plain to go on vaxcation.  Easy answer - what he paid was what a first clss seat cost on  on a normal flight.    The ohe part was that he should use he plane for official business travelling - not for going on holiday.   Above the law conclusivel provedd

The Kremlin has praised the US president-elect Donald Trump’s criticism of Ukrainian strikes with US missiles deep into Russian territory and said the position was fully in line with Moscow’s own position. Trump criticised Ukraine’s use of US-supplied missiles in a Time magazine interview published on Thursday. The Kremlin spokesperson, Dmitry Peskov, said Trump’s statement was in line with “our vision of the causes of escalation … It appeals to us.”

https://www.theguardian.com/world/2024/dec/13/ukraine-war-briefing-nato-warns-that-putin-wants-to-wipe-ukraine-off-the-map

Nato secretary general Mark Rutte says people should gird themselves for the prospect that Russia might try to use ‘swarms of drones’ in Europe. What we know on day 1,024

Now we have the BS  turning away from Stav lies.   Lets get this straight - he only peopele colluding with  Putin in he 2016 election was Clinton and her Campaign Manager  John Podest - since appointed by Biden in a posh  WH job where he can steal more than usual from he Government.   

Wrten docmention obtained from Podesta's computer indicated that he had a small company in Boston in which he invested $32 million - bu t that comany was expanded by Rosatrom - a stat te-owned Russian comapny,    Aside from that Podesta  received a gift of 75 000 shares from a Comapny linked o the Russian Government in 2013.   He was appoined by Obama  in a WH job and had tio declare is assets.   The 75 000 shares he receied Podsta transferred  to a company his daughter registered in  Vermont.   About his Boston company investment bty the Rusians  he declared nothng.   He resigned from his WH job to become manager of Clinton's elecion campaign in 2016.

However, Podesta was a corrupt idiot so when Clinon started off her allegations aout Rssian Colusion Podesta  being already bribed by the Russians got worried and sent an e-mail to Clinton expressing his fear of using the Hoax in the campaign having been bribed  by the Russians himself,    So  Clinto's answer was he needs not worry since she has "direct access into Putin's inner sanctum",  

Why was the two idiots guilty and idiotic the same time.   

*    When the FBI politely asked :Cliton to present he laptop t thm for rher ispection she destroyed her kaotop and destroyed the main drive as well - on its own a criminal offence; and 

*     Podesta was proved an idiot - who used the word "Password" as his entry code and then a scoundrel got into the computer and duplicated the main board info.   That ended up the documents got to Wikileas and ended up in the USA where the  FBI got hold of the documents as well.   

As to be expected  the FBI refused to invesigate the cirrupt relationship between he Clintons', Podesta and the Rssians.    What was worse they worked together with the Clinton campaign by spreading lies about the Russian  links to the 2016 Democratic Party campaign.

                 -,                   

We had long debates about that here where members were adamant that he said injecting bleach was a possible solution. Because, of course the only disinfectant is bleach!?

Its irrelevant that they're disinfectants other than bleach, not only are the two terms often used interchangeably but injecting any kind of disinfectant will either make a person seriously ill or kill them.

Secondly, there was nothing stupid about anything he said. It was stupid if you interpreted it in a stupid way. I'll dumb it down for you.

Not stupid...really?  If it was not stupid then why when Trump asked that question to Dr Blix did she react the way she did. A reaction of immense discomfort (something she confirmed in an interview later). If it wasn't stupid, why did disinfectant manufacturers feel the need to issue warnings that their products where not to be used on the human body. And finally while the rate of accidental poisonings with household disinfectants was on the rise before Trump made his comments a notable spike in the rate of them occurred after he made his comments. Yeah not stupid, sure.

Its difficult to know whether people can be that thick they genuinely don't believe those comments were not stupid or that they are so invested into protecting Trump that they just accept whatever counter argument the right wing throws out knowing full well its absolute bullshit. Are they gaslighting or they have just be gaslighted themselves.

--> On no collusion between the Trump Campaign and Russia: • “The investigation did not establish that members of the Trump Campaign conspired or coordinated with the Russian government in its election interference activities.” (Page 2, Volume I)

Perhaps my English sucks but that statement appears rather categorical. And let's remember how many people were interviewed and how thorough the investigation was.

Now in fairness I don't expect you to keep a recording of my posts, but I have posted on this forum several times that the Mueller investigation found no evidence of collusion. That does not mean the Mueller report did not raise any other questions.

--> On obstruction of justice: • “While this report does not conclude that the President committed a crime, it also does not exonerate him.” (Page 8, Volume)

This is directly talking about whether or not Trump, his associates or campaign members obstructed the investigation NOT whether he colluded with Russia.

Again irrelevant. A President should not obstruct an any investigation, regardless of whether he's later to be found innocent or guilty.

I hope we can agree that colluding with Russia to interfere in an election is by no means the same thing as not fully complying with the investigation into such.

Yes they are two different things, both of which if they occurred would be illegal.

The report found ZERO collusion. The report was uncertain whether Trump obstructed the investigation.

Those are the facts.

Now, again read that absolute bullshit that Star wrote above and ask yourself if you think he's being honest or if he's trying to use mental gymnastics in order to allow himself to continue sucking at the TDS teat.

Where are the mental gymnastics. Those were are all questions that rise from the Mueller report.

George Papadopoulos, Rick Gates, Paul Manafort, Michael Flynn, Alex van der Zwaan, Michael Cohen and Roger strone, where all either Trump associates or Trump campaign members (in Manafort's case he was the chair of Trump's presidential campaign) where charged and found guilty of crimes as a result of the Mueller investigation. 

What does it say about Trump's character that  so many people  he was either associated with or picked these people to run his Presidential candidate turned out to be criminals.

What does it say about Trump campaign that they knew about Russian interference and they expected to benefit from it. Shouldn't any political party in the United States call out election interference no matter who's benefiting from it. Shouldn't a political party come and out say, no we don't care if the interference is going to benefit us, we want no part of it, we want to win the election cleanly and fairly.

What does it say about Trump, that Russia and by extension its mass murdering authoritarian leader wanted Trump to win in 2016. It tells you that Putin thought Trump winning would benefit Putin.

What does it say about Trump supporters that they don't seem to care at all that Russian interference in the elections,  but will absolutely lose their shit when a Chinese spy balloon appears over the US and they moan on about the democratic president not protecting them from their enemies.

And when later events would come to light showing Russia has a pattern of election interference, again interfering with the 2024 US election and  the elections in Romania being the latest example, they never seem to care.

And the question about Trump potentially obstructing the investigation. No Trump supporters don't care about that. He's their team, we must circle the wagon.

But no the Trump free thinkers supporters club will mindlessly parrot "orange man bad" or "TDS" like the good little cult members they are.

...and let's remember that Putin came out directly in support of Harris.

Burning guessing we had better not ask questions about that, right?

Oh my poor simple child, if you believe Putin wanted Biden then Harris to win because of those ahem "public endorsements" well god love you.

In summary, Putin’s animosity toward Clinton stemmed from her criticisms of his regime, her support for democracy movements, and her tougher stance on Russia. In contrast, Trump’s rhetoric suggested a more conciliatory approach, aligning better with Putin’s strategic goals.

...but of course Star would attempt to sneak in that Putin wanted Trump to win, as some kind of circumstantial evidence in the case for Russia collusion.

Intellectual dishonesty or TDS? I guess they're the same thing.

I wasn't putting forward that it was circumstantial evidence in the case for Russian collusion, because regardless of whether or not the Trump campaign colluded with Russia, Russia was found to be interfering in the election and was favoring Trump in that interference. Given the nature of the Putin regime doesn't that make Trump supporters uncomfortable?

Putin wanted Trump to win because yes as you said it better aligned with his strategic goals, which was the undermining of his enemies in the west. Trump wasn't directly under Putin's control but Putin hoped Trump would be an agent of chaos who would undermine American democratic institutions and strain relations with the US's European partners and NATO and would in general be soft on Putin/Russian activities. Putin was partially right but probably hoped Trump would of done more damage, but hey Trump's second term is just around the corner.

Just one more thing - when the Democratic Party accuse the Republican Party of doing something you can be 100% sure they are doing  it themselves.   

It happened again over the last year in the election campaign.   They accused  Trump that he would do things and call the Republicans of being Fascist - but what theya ccude Trump of going to do of using  the Police and Courts to do  against PEOPLE they have done it themselves against their opponents,   The fake court cases against Trump  and opponents over the time of the Bidens regime they have been involved in themselves,     Keeping people  in jail for 4 years without charging them of any crime - they  have done themselves.   Spying illegaly on 278 000 people they have done themselves,     The above is exactly what they accuse Trump of,,    They had the audacity  to claim T rump would do - when they were doing it themselves to opponments.

'I know nothing about Wray....."

You don't have to, simple, just flip whatever bullshit Mike comes up with to get to the truth.

Stav

George Papadopoulos, Rick Gates, Paul Manafort, Michael Flynn, Alex van der Zwaan, Michael Cohen and Roger strone, where all either Trump associates or Trump campaign members (in Manafort's case he was the chair of Trump's presidential campaign) where charged and found guilty of crimes as a result of the Mueller investigation. 

Lets look at the above statements on the issue and also the alignment f them with the Russians:-

Papadopoulos  - the FBI ried to link him to the Russians and failed totally - their was an approach made to  him when he was in the UK t hat turne o ut to be b a m yst erious Professor - who even promised him money to  provide the FBI with info on the Trump campaign and he acceped the money and deposited it in a bank accout in Greece.   When he returned to he USA they coud not find the money they paid him when they searched him at the airport when he returned to the USA as proof that eh was paid money  part of his personal collusion by the Russian.   The whole story turned sour and ears later  he money was sill in the account in Greece where h e deposited it,   The FBI obviously lost the bribe moey they paid to Papadopoulos,

Manafort    The act si hat Manafort was never charged with anything  relating to liaison with Russia.   What was in the Mueller report was that Manafort  had a business Partner in doing business in Ukraine.  Mueller menioned his partner - but never by name.  Mueller hd a good reason to not mention th name becase it was John Podesta - Clinton's 2016 campaign Manager.   Bu back tio the charge id against Manafort - it had nothing to do with the  Trump Election campaign - it ended up wih manafort be charged with  TAX EVASION/  That wa he charge tha t was laid and hat was why e ended up in jail.

Flynn    Flynn was nominated as head of he CI A in 2016 and wa already busy wih take-over procedures  when the FBI asked to see  him and Flynn was an idiot for not having a lawe present - ot realizing thta he was dealing with crooks.  After the interview Strzok wo did the inervoew together had to draw up a report on the discussins and found nothing to accuse  Flynn of.   Then Strzok did a revision - but could still find no criminality on the part of Flynn.   Strzok then send the report to his girlfriend who was a legal advisor of Obama and  she drew up a falsified report totally distorting what actually happened and send it back to the FBI.   That false report was handed to Mueller to lay charges against Flynn.  The case dragged on for years  and then the FBI threatened Flynn with charging his son with fake charges if he does not admit guilt.   At that stage Flynn appointed another lawyer to defend him.   She called fo exposure of all documents on he FBI Flynn file.   It came to the attenion of Barr and he called for Flynn's  file from the FBI,   What he found was scandalus abuse of injustice and he withdrew the charges against Flynn.    So flynn was neve guilty of nything.

Michel Cohen   -  He was a lawyer who were paid a retainer by the Trump Companies to deal with minor legal issues f the coanies wned by bthe rump family.     What he did in he 2016 election had nothing to do with any colusion.  Cohen ended up as being charged with fraud and he was jailed s a result,   A s i turned out ehs tole money from the Trump Companies himself as well.   What Bragg ca up woud be rown out by any  Federal Courts anway,

I did not bother to investigate the other names you mentined because he three you mentieoned arady prove BS in buckets.

I wasn't putting forward that it was circumstantial evidence in the case for Russian collusion, because regardless of whether or not the Trump campaign colluded with Russia, Russia was found to be interfering in the election and was favoring Trump in that interference. Given the nature of the Putin regime doesn't that make Trump supporters uncomfortable?

Putin wanted Trump to win because yes as you said it better aligned with his strategic goals, which was the undermining of his enemies in the west. Trump wasn't directly under Putin's control but Putin hoped Trump would be an agent of chaos who would undermine American democratic institutions and strain relations with the US's European partners and NATO and would in general be soft on Putin/Russian activities. Putin was partially right but probably hoped Trump would of done more damage, but hey Trump's second term is just around the corner.

Jus tell s please were  yu gt tha BS from.    Must be t he most distoretede BS ever .   Appretly sebody put adverts casting $41 000 on one of the media platforms  and ou call it being supprt by the Russians.    It was totally irrelevent when it came to such advcertisements and is likely to ahve seen by cvrtuaslly nobody.    $41 000 dolalrs in an elecion caapign is really ttoal BS spreading and  what wa much mre worrisome was theat the Federal Electio Committee fied $100 000 personally fr her invovlement in the payment and promotion of the Steele dossier in the 2016 election;

What you should realze s that the Iran Government spent $25 million on adverts to support Bidens's election campaign amongst Muslim residents in the USA,   Iran got a nice retur on their ivestment - within a week after his inauguration released ilegally $108 billion of frozen  Iran assets.     Now that was indeed eelction interference in 2020.

How much money is spent in U S elections on campaigns.in the USA/  In the 2024 donor provided $1,5 billion in funding of  the 2024 election and she spent that amount within 6 weeks with no real proof of where it went and  it elft teh DNC wit $20 milion in otstanding debts and heynow have problems to raise that money because he donors regar it as totally reckless spending of money.

 I do not know where  you go the rest of the shit from - there is zero proof  to support your staements and if heir is please provid the proof.   What is clear was that in an interviee wit ABC Putin s tated tha he has problms in nevgotiaing with Trump on all issues - because he always put the USA interests first and that was proven a number of times.    During the interviee he described Biden as a career politician with no idea of how to run any country.

That is why Putin openly support the Biden and Harris election campaigns - he loved to deal with shit leaders as they are to weak to really act against  him - his only meeting with Biden in October 2021 was a typical disaster when Biden did not know what was actually discussed and aftewatds avoided even talking on the phone with Putin.   Lets face facts Putin was right in one thing and that is that Biden turned anything he touched into shit. 

Here you go, Star...

Trump is a real estate guy...and how do you know he wasn't listening to a conversation about this, and then in a genuine way attempting to convey the principle to the public at a time when people desperately wanted transparency and answers?

"Hydrogen Peroxide (H?O?) has been experimentally explored for its potential to disinfect the lungs, particularly in highly diluted vaporized or aerosolized forms under controlled medical settings."

Now, would you inhale this or might they choose to pump the gas into your lungs...IE inject or pump it...in order to control the dose?

So tell me, is it dangerous speaking about an experimental treatment as a POTENTIAL solution to a problem?

...or is it more dangerous to intentionally misrepresent someone and spread false information during a time of crisis?

Why am I suddenly reminded of yelling "Fire!" in a crowded cinema?

It is actually ironic that the word you choose is dangerous.

"Again irrelevant. A President should not obstruct an any investigation, regardless of whether he's later to be found innocent or guilty."

More mental gymnastic shithousery. 

Obstructing justice and colluding Russia are not the same thing. 

But in either case...there were zero charges brought against Trump for either. 

Now, do you really want to open the guilt by association can of worms? Because I can promise you that what comes out of the Clinton and Biden can will be far more than you can handle.

All I'll say is, and this is common sense to most people, it is impossible to vet every single person that you associate yourself with. 

But the bottom line is all that matters, Tump never colluded with Russia and never obstructed justice...so anything else that follows is simply an exercise in face saving. 

So since you wanted to ask the question "What kind of person...?"

Lets look at what kicked off the investigation...and then ask ourselves "What kind of people..."

_______________________________________________________________________________

In April 2016, the law firm Perkins Coie, representing Hillary Clinton's 2016 presidential campaign and the Democratic National Committee (DNC), retained Fusion GPS, a research and intelligence firm, to conduct opposition research on then-presidential candidate Donald Trump. Fusion GPS subsequently hired Christopher Steele, a former British intelligence officer, to investigate potential connections between Trump and Russia, resulting in the compilation of the document known as the "Steele dossier."

Financial records indicate that the Clinton campaign paid Perkins Coie approximately $5.6 million in legal fees from June 2015 to December 2016, while the DNC paid the firm about $3.6 million for "legal and compliance consulting" during the same period. However, the specific amounts allocated to Fusion GPS for the dossier are not distinctly itemized in these payments.

In March 2022, the Federal Election Commission (FEC) fined the Clinton campaign $8,000 and the DNC $105,000 for misreporting the funding of the opposition research that led to the Steele dossier. The FEC concluded that these payments were incorrectly disclosed as legal services and consulting, rather than opposition research.

It's important to note that the Steele dossier was not the initial catalyst for the FBI's investigation into potential ties between the Trump campaign and Russia. The FBI's inquiry began prior to obtaining the dossier, based on separate information.

In summary, the Clinton campaign and the DNC, through Perkins Coie, funded Fusion GPS's research, which culminated in the Steele dossier. The misreporting of these expenditures led to FEC fines in 2022.

_____________________________________________________________________________

And then lets look at the FBI...and ask ourselves "What kind of corruption...?"

The FBI's surveillance of former Trump campaign adviser Carter Page during the 2016 election cycle involved several irregularities in the Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Act (FISA) application process. Key findings include:

1. Errors and Omissions in FISA Applications: The Department of Justice's Inspector General identified 17 significant inaccuracies and omissions in the FBI's FISA applications to surveil Carter Page. These included misrepresentations of Page's prior relationships with other government agencies and the omission of information that contradicted claims made in the applications.

   Wikipedia

2. Reliance on Unverified Information: The FBI heavily relied on the Steele dossier—a collection of reports by former British intelligence officer Christopher Steele—without fully verifying its contents. The applications did not disclose that the dossier was funded by political entities opposing Trump's candidacy.

   Wikipedia

3. Lack of Probable Cause: The Justice Department later admitted that two of the four FISA applications to surveil Carter Page lacked probable cause and should not have been issued.

   Heritage Foundation

4. Altering of Evidence: An FBI lawyer altered an email to misrepresent Page's relationship with another government agency, leading to a misstatement in the FISA applications.

   Wikipedia

These irregularities raised concerns about the FBI's adherence to protocols in politically sensitive investigations and led to calls for reforms in the FISA application process.

_____________________________________________________________________________

So lets recap...

1) The Dems failed to properly vet a dossier that they paid for, and then used it, along with some literally illegal actions by the FBI, to spy on the Trump campaign...which resulted in a massive smear, and long and costly investigation that found...

a) Trump never colluded with Russia and

b) Nobody on the Trump campaign colluded with Russia 

c) Trump never obstructed justice

...and here you are, after all these years, and after all the facts have come to light, still twisting your brain into so many shapes to try and justify your TDS.

It's actually laughable and I stand by what i said...

I HAVE NEVER SEEN A BRAINWASHING VENTURE THIS SUCCESFUL IN ALL MY TIME.

...this very thread is direct evidence.

And here's how we seal the deal and prove that, despite your protestations, you're not even nearly as balanced as you believe you are...

Do you believe that what happened to Trump RE the above was illegal?

"Oh my poor simple child, if you believe Putin wanted Biden then Harris to win because of those ahem "public endorsements" well god love you."

No, I absolutely don't believe Putin was actually endorsing Karem-Allah.

Read between the lines if you can...

Years ago, RooiBalls and VisKop asked me to provide them with a clear image of a UFO. I did. 

...and shortly after that they were both giddy in replying that the picture was probably fake and that photos can't be trusted.

...are you connecting the dots?

"I wasn't putting forward that it was circumstantial evidence in the case for Russian collusion, because regardless of whether or not the Trump campaign colluded with Russia, Russia was found to be interfering in the election and was favoring Trump in that interference. Given the nature of the Putin regime doesn't that make Trump supporters uncomfortable?"

Bro, what the F does that even mean? Some kind of weird guilt trip?

...and how is it all relevant to a discussion around Trump colluding with Russia, if not being used as some very tedious circumstantial evidence?

Mental gymnastics mixed in with a bit of virtue signalling this time....lolz

It' s tough sticking to the facts when they aren't on your side, huh?

Pres

Whatever you said clashed with the "facts"  provided by The Guardian to people like Stav and must therefore be false.   

So BS reign supreme in  Stav's mind.   He comes up with the same BS all the time  despite that he was told previousl y  tha his statements represents BS.

Here you go, Star...

Trump is a real estate guy...and how do you know he wasn't listening to a conversation about this, and then in a genuine way attempting to convey the principle to the public at a time when people desperately wanted transparency and answers?

Doesn't matter what his intentions where, all his Covid press conferences did was make everything less clear as he fought with the experts.

"Hydrogen Peroxide (H?O?) has been experimentally explored for its potential to disinfect the lungs, particularly in highly diluted vaporized or aerosolized forms under controlled medical settings."

Now, would you inhale this or might they choose to pump the gas into your lungs...IE inject or pump it...in order to control the dose?

Does it not get embarrassing defending the indefensible. So this is another trick the Trump defenders do, they go look up some obscure experimental research that as I can see was conducted years after Trump's comments to say look he's not stupid. Yes was stupid because he specifically asked has injecting disinfectant into Covid patients been looked at, during a live televised press conference that was likely viewed by millions of people and would be widely reported on afterwards. The President of the United States can have considerably influence over large swathes of the US population, so what he said was incredibly stupid and also downright dangerous.

I also I notice you didn't acknowledge Dr Brix's reaction, the fact that disinfectant manufactures had to start issuing warning about their products to not be used on the human body nor the spike in accidental poisonings from household disinfectants after Trump's comments.

So tell me, is it dangerous speaking about an experimental treatment as a POTENTIAL solution to a problem?

He wasn't talking about that treatment and you know it ,but even if he was then absolute it would still have been dangerous, because when the President of the United States asks that question, it puts the idea into people's head that disinfectant can be used to treat illnesses.

...or is it more dangerous to intentionally misrepresent someone and spread false information during a time of crisis?

OMG that lack of awareness is insane. Trump is probably the biggest signal source of false information on the planet and here you are saying the problem is misinformation about Trump. Absolutely mental.

Obstructing justice and colluding Russia are not the same thing.

Strawman, did I say they where?

But in either case...there were zero charges brought against Trump for either.

I didn't say they where charges brought against Trump. But in my mind and in the mind of others the fact that Mueller investigation didn't get full co-operation and access too all communication records  leaves it an open question as to whether Trump or the Trump campaign did or did not collude.

Now, do you really want to open the guilt by association can of worms? Because I can promise you that what comes out of the Clinton and Biden can will be far more than you can handle.

ROFL, like what. Can we come back to this in 4 years time when a big fat nothing burger had been unearthed about Clinton and Biden.

All I'll say is, and this is common sense to most people, it is impossible to vet every single person that you associate yourself with.

This is a fair enough point but only to a degree. You could argue that if it was just or two people and you could argue that in the case of George Nader but the sheer amount of people charged indicates its more than just poor vetting. Some of the people charged where long time associates and appointed to very senior positions by Trump himself. And its not just associates of Trump from the 2016 Presidential Campaign team, we have other associates of Trump charged with crimes from other criminal cases and investigations into Trump or the Trump organization.

I have got in the habit of not reading Mike’s posts, they are long and totally biased. But I must admit he totally obliterates Anger’s long, rambling totally biased post above….worth a read actually.

Bro, what the F does that even mean? Some kind of weird guilt trip?

...and how is it all relevant to a discussion around Trump colluding with Russia, if not being used as some very tedious circumstantial evidence?

ROFL I can just imagine the outrage you be on here screaming if the interference had been determined to be in the democrats favor.

So tell me if say for example a Presidential candidate was getting endorsements from say hard line communists that advocated for Stalinist policies, or the Klu Klux clan endorsed a Presidential candidate that wouldn't make you pause for a moment and question why are these types of people where endorsing that candidate.

Mental gymnastics mixed in with a bit of virtue signalling this time....lolz

It's tough sticking to the facts when they aren't on your side, huh?

LOL you're relationship to facts is like Mike's relationship with reality, virtually non existent.

 Stav

"Well the official findings could not prove the Trump campaign colluded with Russia so I've no issue with Trump facing no consequences for something that could not be proved and being free to pursue his political career, but the fact the Mueller report said they did not receive the full co-operation of the Trump campaign team nor access to all the communication records as well as receiving false testimony leaves a question mark in mind over whether Trump campaign did or did not collude with Russia, If the Mueller Report has said it got access to all the evidence and got the full co-operation of everyone in the Trump campaign and also had not suggested Trump tried to obstruct the investigation I would of considered Trump totally cleared, but they didn't hence my position, is that its an open question."

You are talikng sht again.   Mueller's team requested and got over 3 million documets during their investigation and Trump's  prvided all the documents they requested,    The WH acually moaned ey ad t use saff full tme to find and provide up to 30 000 documents. per week.     The term could find nothing  ad the remak was aimed at showing they did somethinng usful and encessary - while wasting millions in the process,    By te way the commenis was legal shit - nobody not even a [preosdent of e USA can exconerate anybody - the pardon function only relate to people already charged and sentenced.    There is not a single referene to "exconerate" iro  anybody who allegedly committrdd a crime.   It is non-existent in USA jurisprudence. 

What is happening under Biden is is not pardoning Hunter Biden - he tried to exonerate im - which will be cancelled by the Supree Court.   Mueller was confronted about the use of the word exconerate amd his comments was he knows that it is not an acceptable legal term and wanted to bring it to the attention of Barr by usng that term.    That excuse took the cake and  his evidence in the House collapse into shit.   The Democrats wanted to use Mueller's report to impeach Trump and it was at best an exerciise costing millions and producing nothing.

If their is a brainwased idiot comparable t you he mst be a genius BS  spreader like you.   None of the stories you routinely are based on fake media reports and without any proof whasoever.   You live in a make-believe world of ultra-leftist  dreams and as far  from east is from the  west.

By the way Harris what got support and endorsements from Russia and China as was seen in he state-controlled media in both countries,      DO YOU SUPPORT THAT AS WELL? 

In 2020  Biden sent Kerry to make a deal ith the Iran Governent - who spent millions in advertsig supporting Biden  in return Biden illegally unfroze $108 billion in frozen Iran money a week after his inaugiration.   The fact is that rn media and internet support was clear - the fact of unrozing of the $108 billion es uncovered during enate investigations.   

So both Biden and Harris did you  hat you referred to - so do you till believe what you wrote  above.  .

BB

I must  pea with  you not to demean yourself by coming  up with The Guardin  BS again.   

I have got in the habit of not reading Mike’s posts, they are long and totally biased. But I must admit he totally obliterates Anger’s long, rambling totally biased post above….worth a read actually.

Gotta love Moz's transparently pathetic attempts at trolling.

There's a podcast called "Call me daddy".

The woman that hosts it was asked if Kamala spent $100k on building the set for her interview on the podcast. The woman laughed and said she interviews Karen-Allah on the same set she interviews all her guests on and it's total value was nowhere near $100k.

Well, in the financial, Karem-Allah had $100k listed as expenses to build the set for the podcast.

So right there is some campaign fun fraud.

Nope...the host of that podcat did not interview Kamala on her normal set which is in Los Angeles. She compared her normal set to one that that was built for the interview in Washington DC.

I'm going give you the benefit of the doubt that you misread or misheard what she said.

But there was no campaign fraud. At most you could accuse Kamala of getting bad value for money.

...no I know you can wait to shout "whataboutism" but let's see if you can think past that and draw your own conclusion Bathini making.

But where is the Russia Collusion, Star?

Because that's what we're talking about...

Where did I say there definitively was collusion. I'm happy to acknowledge as I've done repeatedly the Mueller report said in its finding that they not able to prove collusion between the Trump campaign and Russia. But in my own personal opinion the fact that Mueller's team could not get access to all the relevant communications and witnesses gave false testimony is suspicious. To my mind while Trump is legally in the clear I don't consider the question definitively answered either way. But I'm not saying the Trump campaign definitely did collude. And what I absolutely dispute is that the investigation in the first place was a hoax or a political witch hunt. The Russian Hoax as its called its another bullshit narrative trotted out by the Trumpites.

Your personal opinion vs the weight of the biggest investigation into a President in modern times…..and the absolute commitment of major government departments to find a guilty verdict? Your problem is you can’t think out of the woke box.

Trump’s team talked to the Russians before the election….no crime.

Trump in a moment of hubris in a Covid briefing tried to turn the briefing into a think tank and speculated about using bleach….but clearly said it would have to be looked at.

Trump blessed the protest to contest the election results, but to imply this rabble could change anything by force  is conveniently naive.

Were some of those actions unwise….certainly. Was January 6 disqualifying. I believe so, but the electorate decided differently.

It’s pretty simple and no amount of internet search is going to change that. Politics is imperfect. One only needs look at what Joe Biden and Hillary Clinton did to understand that.

Bullshit  Stav

In the time  the Mueller investigation took place 0 the Muller team requested circa 3 million documents and all those were provided to them.   There were no cases where a request were bt cmplied with,     Mueller add a sentence  the  word "exconerate" a term not included in US Judicial Processes,    Nobody in the USA has the right to "exconerate" does not exists and sage the word resulted on im being made a fool of in the House Hearing  on the Mueller Report.   That led to his total embarrassment,    

So  your emphasis on what somebody who wrote the report  landed Mueller in a very embarrassing situation.   Incidentally I do not think Muekker himself wrote the report.   He did not know too many times to what members phrase their questions on and Mueller was clueless and the members had to provide the page number where it related question camwe from.      

Stav

Trump’s team talked to the Russians before the election

Who was involved and when did it happen?

Ah, I watched it again. Yeah, they built a cheap set.

But by your reasoning, anyone can spend any figure on anything and the excuse can simply be that they got ripped off.

I mean, really?

In your world, money laundering must be really easy hahaha

The point remains, if you look hard enough you'll always find irregularity and this is a good example.

By all mean's criticize it as a waste of money, but it doesn't necessarily mean it was fraud or an irregularity. I'm not even sure that figure actually has been confirmed but even if if that number is confirmed as accurate, on its own it doesn't prove anything.

Your personal opinion vs the weight of the biggest investigation into a President in modern times…..and the absolute commitment of major government departments to find a guilty verdict?

Personal opinion. Just as how its your personal opinion that there was an absolute commitment of a major government departments to find a guilty verdict. Perhaps they were just looking for the truth.

Your problem is you can’t think out of the woke box.

Your problem is you think woke is a thing.

Trump in a moment of hubris in a Covid briefing tried to turn the briefing into a think tank and speculated about using bleach….but clearly said it would have to be looked at.

It wasn't the moment to turn the briefing into a think tank. And don't use the word bleach or Plum will be on your case.

Trump blessed the protest to contest the election results, but to imply this rabble could change anything by force  is conveniently naive.

Yes that rabble was never going to succeed in change by force but that's not the point. It was still an attempt to prevent the democratic process and an incident that resulted in death and injuries that Trump at the very least indirectly incited.

Were some of those actions unwise….certainly. Was January 6 disqualifying. I believe so, but the electorate decided differently.

Unwise is far too kind a word, some of his actions w ere utterly disgraceful.

It’s pretty simple and no amount of internet search is going to change that. Politics is imperfect. One only needs look at what Joe Biden and Hillary Clinton did to understand that.

Of course politics is imperfect and there is plenty of genuine criticisms that can be put at the feet of those two, but neither of them tried to subvert the democratic process.

Utterly disgraceful…..perhaps but I never endorsed any of them ….but not as disgraceful and malignant as the Russia hoax, which had your full support

Evidence acceptable in a court of law is the missing ingredient. It was a hoax crafted for naive left wing anti Trumpers.

Mama Mia - you cannot  be as serious as papa pia.   There were three  investigations - the first on could find nothing and inserted a word that is not part of USA jurisprudenc,    However it is havng an extremely different opinion when  used by Democrats,   I want to refer you to the recent Special Council Hur's report on the Biden found at various centers - which Biden took with him the report indicated that Biden suffered from having a poor memory and mentally deficient so Hur  recmmended that legal action not be taken since they would rather see him ent to a asylum for mentall impared people,   

Democratic Members came up with imilar comments and that is that Hyr "excomerated"  Bden.  His only retort was did u fnd yjay word in my report,   I must codirm again the word concrned has no egl meaning at all in USA Jurisprudnce,  ,         

It was a hoax crafted for naive left wing anti Trumpers.

The "Russian Hoax" as it was called was simply a Trumpian narrative to attack the legitimacy of the investigations into Russian election interference and the links between Trump associates and Russia. The navie right wing Trumper's of course lapped i t up without question.

The ‘navie’ right….time to go to bed Anger , you’ve had a rough day.

Uh-oh back to the old time favourite weapon ....... Spellcheck.

Anyone up for grammar lessons on a rugby message board?