Quote:

---

Originally posted by JEWELSTAITEFAN:
Still No Evidence, a day before Memo Release?

---

Quote:

---

Originally posted by second:

Quote:

---

Originally posted by JEWELSTAITEFAN:
Still No Evidence, a day before Memo Release?

---

We'd have evidence if lawyers would stop filing all evidence under a confidential seal, leaving GOP Congressmen perfectly free to manufacture their own fake "evidence" exonerating Trump.

All three attorneys representing Rick Gates, a former associate of President Donald Trump, abruptly dumped him Thursday, putting a mysterious spin on the investigation into Russian election meddling.

Gates and his business associate Paul Manafort were the first two people to be indicted in special prosecutor Robert Mueller’s probe into possible collusion between Trump’s campaign and Russia.

On Thursday afternoon, Gates’ three lawyers — Shanlon Wu, Walter Mack and Annemarie McAvoy — informed U.S. District Judge Amy Berman that they’re no longer representing him, effective “immediately.”

The lawyers’ brief filing noted that they wished to withdraw “for reasons set forth in Exhibit 1” — which they noted had been filed under a confidential seal.

Gates, who worked on the Trump campaign, and Manafort, who served as the campaign’s manager, were slammed with a laundry list of federal charges in October.

www.nydailynews.com/news/politics/lawyers-ex-trump-associate-rick-gate
s-mysteriously-drop-article-1.3793675

---

Quote:

---

Originally posted by JEWELSTAITEFAN:

What did that one study find? That the average American citizen commits 3 felony violations every single day, largely unaware.

---

Quote:

---

Originally posted by second:

Quote:

---

Originally posted by JEWELSTAITEFAN:
What did that one study find? That the average American citizen commits 3 felony violations every single day, largely unaware.

---

Show me that study you found because I'm curious if you've got a real study or if this is only Rush Limbaugh plus Alex Jones giving you a blowjob and you are in ecstasy. www.infowars.com

---

Quote:

---

Originally posted by SIGNYM:
What I heard on NPR was the concept that maybe Mueller's investigation won't uncover anything "illegal" on Trump's part, but that Trump's behavior might represent a "political" problem.

Well. Mueller was handed a bag of shit to investigate. He's doing the best he can to make the rumors/ allegations into something significant, but in reality there's no "there" there, so he's poking his nose into anything he can find. If the worst he can find is Trump being "politically incorrect" ... well, that's not an indictable offense. Demonstrating "collusion" or anything like it is an impossibility. Probably same with "obstruction of justice".

What the NPR reporting sounds like to me is back-peddling/ goalpost moving/ reduction in expectations.

---

Quote:

---

Originally posted by JEWELSTAITEFAN:

Quote:

---

Originally posted by second:

Quote:

---

Originally posted by JEWELSTAITEFAN:
What did that one study find? That the average American citizen commits 3 felony violations every single day, largely unaware.

---

Show me that study you found because I'm curious if you've got a real study or if this is only Rush Limbaugh plus Alex Jones giving you a blowjob and you are in ecstasy. www.infowars.com

---

Try reading the book "Three Felonies a Day" by Harvey Silverglate, from 2009.
Read it and get back to us with the answer. As I recall, Harvey gives entertaining interviews.

I believe that "decriminalize the common man" is the call.

I don't know from Alex Jones, and am not sure if Rush covered it. But since Rush is the purveyor of facts and truth, I wouldn't be surprised if he did cover it, like 8 or 9 years ago. At that time I was in a radio market devoid of such illumination, so would not have heard him.

---

Quote:

---

Originally posted by second:

Quote:

---

Originally posted by JEWELSTAITEFAN:

Still No Evidence, a day before Memo Release?

---

We'd have evidence if lawyers would stop filing all evidence under a confidential seal, leaving GOP Congressmen perfectly free to manufacture their own fake "evidence" exonerating Trump.

---

Bingo SECOND


T

Quote:

---

Originally posted by SIGNYM:
The FBI needs to be investigated for its deliberately shoddy "investigation" of the Hillary server, where they violated literally every investigative procedure.

The FBI also needs to be investigated for its biased FISA warrant affidavit.

There should be at least one Special Prosecutor if not two, handling these investigations.

---

According to our very own Russian troll everybody but Trump should be investigated. Up yours troll

Tick tock
T

Quote:

---

Originally posted by JEWELSTAITEFAN:

Quote:

---

Originally posted by SIGNYM:
What I heard on NPR was the concept that maybe Mueller's investigation won't uncover anything "illegal" on Trump's part, but that Trump's behavior might represent a "political" problem.

Well. Mueller was handed a bag of shit to investigate. He's doing the best he can to make the rumors/ allegations into something significant, but in reality there's no "there" there, so he's poking his nose into anything he can find. If the worst he can find is Trump being "politically incorrect" ... well, that's not an indictable offense. Demonstrating "collusion" or anything like it is an impossibility. Probably same with "obstruction of justice".

What the NPR reporting sounds like to me is back-peddling/ goalpost moving/ reduction in expectations.

---

I was thinking Malicious Persecution was a crime. Throw Mueller in prison. Along with Hilliary, McCabe, Comey.

---

Yep, without a trial right JSf. Here is all the proof needed to show you don't give two shits about the rule of law. You're just a troll.

Same with Jack. He's trying to figure out what to charge them with before the investigation has even finished. He too is just another troll.


T

Quote:

---

Is John Brennan the Mastermind Behind Russiagate?
The report (“The Dossier”) that claims that Donald Trump colluded with Russia, was paid for by the DNC and Hillary Clinton campaign.

The company that claims that Russia hacked DNC computer servers, was paid by the DNC and Hillary Clinton campaign.

The FBI’s counterintelligence probe into Trump’s alleged connections to Russia was launched on the basis of information gathered from a report that was paid for by the DNC and Hillary Clinton campaign.

The surveillance of a Trump campaign member (Carter Page) was approved by a FISA court on the basis of information from a report that was paid for by the DNC and Hillary Clinton campaign.

The Intelligence Community Analysis or ICA was (largely or partially) based on information from a report that was paid for by the DNC and Hillary Clinton campaign. (more on this below)

The information that was leaked to the media alleging Russia hacking or collusion can be traced back to claims that were made in a report that was paid for by the DNC and Hillary Clinton campaign.

The entire Russia-gate investigation rests on the “unverified and salacious” information from a dossier that was paid for by the DNC and Hillary Clinton Campaign. Here’s how Stephen Cohen sums it up in a recent article at The Nation:

“Steele’s dossier… was the foundational document of the Russiagate narrative…from the time its installments began to be leaked to the American media in the summer of 2016, to the US “Intelligence Community Assessment” of January 2017….the dossier and subsequent ICA report remain the underlying sources for proponents of the Russiagate narrative of “Trump-Putin collision.” (“Russia gate or Intel-gate?”, The Nation)

There’s just one problem with Cohen’s statement, we don’t really know the extent to which the dossier was used in the creation of the Intelligence Community Assessment. (The ICA was the IC’s flagship analysis that was supposed to provide ironclad proof of Russian meddling in the 2016 elections.) According to some reports, the contribution was significant. Check out this excerpt from an article at Business Insider:

“Intelligence officials purposefully omitted the dossier from the public intelligence report they released in January about Russia’s election interference because they didn’t want to reveal which details they had corroborated, according to CNN.” (“Mueller reportedly interviewed the author of the Trump-Russia dossier — here’s what it alleges, and how it aligned with reality”, Business Insider)

Bottom line: Despite the denials of former-CIA Director John Brennan, the dossier may have been used in the ICA.

In the last two weeks, documents have been released that have exposed the weak underpinnings of the Russia investigation while at the same time revealing serious abuses by senior-level officials at the DOJ and FBI. The so called Nunes memo was the first to point out these abuses, but it was the 8-page “criminal referral” authored by Senate Judiciary Committee Chairman Chuck Grassley and Senator Lindsey Graham that gave credence to the claims. Here’s a blurb from the document:

“It appears the FBI relied on admittedly uncorroborated information, funded by and obtained for Secretary Clinton’s presidential campaign, in order to conduct surveillance of an associate of the opposing presidential candidate. It did so based on Mr. Steele’s personal credibility and presumably having faith in his process of obtaining the information. But there is substantial evidence suggesting that Mr. Steele materially misled the FBI about a key aspect of his dossier efforts, one which bears on his credibility.”

There it is. The FBI made a “concerted effort to conceal information from the court” in order to get a warrant to spy on a member of a rival political campaign. So –at the very least– there was an effort, on the part of the FBI and high-ranking officials at the Department of Justice, to improperly spy on members of the Trump team. And there’s more. The FBI failed to mention that the dossier was paid for by the Hillary campaign and the DNC, or that the dossier’s author Christopher Steele had seeded articles in the media that were being used to support the dossier’s credibility (before the FISA court), or that, according to the FBI’s own analysts, the dossier was “only minimally corroborated”, or that Steele was a ferocious partisan who harbored a strong animus towards Trump. All of these were omitted in the FISA application which is why the FBI was able to deceive the judge. It’s worth noting that intentionally deceiving a federal judge is a felony.

---

Quote:

---

Originally posted by SIGNYM:
When is it "collusion" versus a "change in policy towards Russia" that people have voted for?

Trump made no secret of his desire to reach better relations with Russia; in fact, it was part of his campaign platform.

So, was it a secret?

Not so much.

Also, there has to be a "quid pro quo". I can't find any direct benefit that Trump would have gotten out of this.

So once again, a whole lotta nothing from "ole crazy eyes" Schiff.

Quote:

---

Is John Brennan the Mastermind Behind Russiagate?
The report (“The Dossier”) that claims that Donald Trump colluded with Russia, was paid for by the DNC and Hillary Clinton campaign.

The company that claims that Russia hacked DNC computer servers, was paid by the DNC and Hillary Clinton campaign.

The FBI’s counterintelligence probe into Trump’s alleged connections to Russia was launched on the basis of information gathered from a report that was paid for by the DNC and Hillary Clinton campaign.

The surveillance of a Trump campaign member (Carter Page) was approved by a FISA court on the basis of information from a report that was paid for by the DNC and Hillary Clinton campaign.

The Intelligence Community Analysis or ICA was (largely or partially) based on information from a report that was paid for by the DNC and Hillary Clinton campaign. (more on this below)

The information that was leaked to the media alleging Russia hacking or collusion can be traced back to claims that were made in a report that was paid for by the DNC and Hillary Clinton campaign.

The entire Russia-gate investigation rests on the “unverified and salacious” information from a dossier that was paid for by the DNC and Hillary Clinton Campaign. Here’s how Stephen Cohen sums it up in a recent article at The Nation:

“Steele’s dossier… was the foundational document of the Russiagate narrative…from the time its installments began to be leaked to the American media in the summer of 2016, to the US “Intelligence Community Assessment” of January 2017….the dossier and subsequent ICA report remain the underlying sources for proponents of the Russiagate narrative of “Trump-Putin collision.” (“Russia gate or Intel-gate?”, The Nation)

There’s just one problem with Cohen’s statement, we don’t really know the extent to which the dossier was used in the creation of the Intelligence Community Assessment. (The ICA was the IC’s flagship analysis that was supposed to provide ironclad proof of Russian meddling in the 2016 elections.) According to some reports, the contribution was significant. Check out this excerpt from an article at Business Insider:

“Intelligence officials purposefully omitted the dossier from the public intelligence report they released in January about Russia’s election interference because they didn’t want to reveal which details they had corroborated, according to CNN.” (“Mueller reportedly interviewed the author of the Trump-Russia dossier — here’s what it alleges, and how it aligned with reality”, Business Insider)

Bottom line: Despite the denials of former-CIA Director John Brennan, the dossier may have been used in the ICA.

In the last two weeks, documents have been released that have exposed the weak underpinnings of the Russia investigation while at the same time revealing serious abuses by senior-level officials at the DOJ and FBI. The so called Nunes memo was the first to point out these abuses, but it was the 8-page “criminal referral” authored by Senate Judiciary Committee Chairman Chuck Grassley and Senator Lindsey Graham that gave credence to the claims. Here’s a blurb from the document:

“It appears the FBI relied on admittedly uncorroborated information, funded by and obtained for Secretary Clinton’s presidential campaign, in order to conduct surveillance of an associate of the opposing presidential candidate. It did so based on Mr. Steele’s personal credibility and presumably having faith in his process of obtaining the information. But there is substantial evidence suggesting that Mr. Steele materially misled the FBI about a key aspect of his dossier efforts, one which bears on his credibility.”

There it is. The FBI made a “concerted effort to conceal information from the court” in order to get a warrant to spy on a member of a rival political campaign. So –at the very least– there was an effort, on the part of the FBI and high-ranking officials at the Department of Justice, to improperly spy on members of the Trump team. And there’s more. The FBI failed to mention that the dossier was paid for by the Hillary campaign and the DNC, or that the dossier’s author Christopher Steele had seeded articles in the media that were being used to support the dossier’s credibility (before the FISA court), or that, according to the FBI’s own analysts, the dossier was “only minimally corroborated”, or that Steele was a ferocious partisan who harbored a strong animus towards Trump. All of these were omitted in the FISA application which is why the FBI was able to deceive the judge. It’s worth noting that intentionally deceiving a federal judge is a felony.

---

MORE AT http://www.unz.com/mwhitney/is-john-brennan-the-mastermind-behind-russ
iagate/

---

Quote:

---

Originally posted by second:

Quote:

---

Originally posted by JEWELSTAITEFAN:

Quote:

---

Originally posted by second:

Quote:

---

Originally posted by JEWELSTAITEFAN:
What did that one study find? That the average American citizen commits 3 felony violations every single day, largely unaware.

---

Show me that study you found because I'm curious if you've got a real study or if this is only Rush Limbaugh plus Alex Jones giving you a blowjob and you are in ecstasy. www.infowars.com

---

Try reading the book "Three Felonies a Day" by Harvey Silverglate, from 2009.
Read it and get back to us with the answer. As I recall, Harvey gives entertaining interviews.

I believe that "decriminalize the common man" is the call.

I don't know from Alex Jones, and am not sure if Rush covered it. But since Rush is the purveyor of facts and truth, I wouldn't be surprised if he did cover it, like 8 or 9 years ago. At that time I was in a radio market devoid of such illumination, so would not have heard him.

---

I got the book at https://thepiratebay.org/search/Harvey%20Silverglate/0/99/0
JewelStaiteFan

Page 255-256 The statutes enacted by the Congress were not sufficiently all-encompassing and onerous for the taste of federal prosecutors. So they have proceeded to do precisely what former Attorney General Robert Jackson, in 1940, warned his U.S. attorneys against: “pick people that he thinks he should get” and “then search the law books…to pin some offense on him.

The book is simply pointing to prosecutors that needed their dumb asses fired, exactly the same as cops who stop cars based on a hunch, kill the driver, then drop a throw-down gun to make the innocent look guilty.

---

Quote:

---

Originally posted by SIGNYM:
Also, there has to be a "quid pro quo". I can't find any direct benefit that Trump would have gotten out of this.

---

Quote:

---

Originally posted by SIGNYM:
When is it "collusion" versus a "change in policy towards Russia" that people have voted for?

---

This is why you're to stupid and dishonest to engage in conversation on the Trump, Russia investagation. It's conspiracy dummy not collusion that is a crime. Something you've been told countless times now.

Conspiracy is what is being investigated. Only trolls are insisting on posting about this as though collusion is what Trump is being investigated for.

Conspiracy or collusion. Conspiracy describes two or more people secretly plotting an action, usually but not limited to a harmful or illegal action. Conspiring with the Russians for personal gain, in Trumps case to win an election and in return effect our Russia policy, would be illegal.

So, you've been told again. If you are to dense to comprehend the distinction between collusion and conspiracy, then you certainly can't opine on the topic of a Trump, Russia investigation. You don't have the cognitive ability to do so and make any sense. Which explains the bullshit you post. Comrade troll...

T

Quote:

---

Originally posted by THGRRI:

Same with Jack. He's trying to figure out what to charge them with before the investigation has even finished. He too is just another troll.

---

Quote:

---

Originally posted by JEWELSTAITEFAN:

AG Jackson would be so proud of Mueller, diligently working to prove Silverglate correct regarding how corrupt Mueller has become.

---

Quote:

---

Originally posted by JEWELSTAITEFAN:
This thread, once the reality counterpart to the witch-hunt thread, has also become overrun with trolls. Since their own vacant thread had about Zero traffic for a few weeks, they had to invade here.

---

Quote:

---

Originally posted by second:

Quote:

---

Originally posted by JEWELSTAITEFAN:
This thread, once the reality counterpart to the witch-hunt thread, has also become overrun with trolls. Since their own vacant thread had about Zero traffic for a few weeks, they had to invade here.

---

Since you disbelieve everything, you will be surprised when Trump self-destructs as did Richard Nixon. You never imagined Nixon was guilty until he announced it

---

Quote:

---

Originally posted by JEWELSTAITEFAN:

Quote:

---

Originally posted by second:

Quote:

---

Originally posted by JEWELSTAITEFAN:
This thread, once the reality counterpart to the witch-hunt thread, has also become overrun with trolls. Since their own vacant thread had about Zero traffic for a few weeks, they had to invade here.

---

Since you disbelieve everything, you will be surprised when Trump self-destructs as did Richard Nixon. You never imagined Nixon was guilty until he announced it

---

Rewriting history again? Why do you insist upon lying to Fans of Firefly? We may readily soak up SCIENCE FICTION, doesn't mean we gobble up Libtard Fiction.

Care to provide quote or cite where Nixon announced he was guilty?
No need to trot back out your other standby lie, that Nixon was one of the 2 Impeached Presidents. Those 2 were Democrats, racking up a total of 3 Impeachments.

---

Quote:

---

Originally posted by THGRRI:
Two things worth noting.

First, JSF is a lying sack of shit.

Second, Nixon clearly stated he did not have a majority in congress willing to back him, protect him. That was his reason for resigning.

263 days and 5 hours until the 2018 elections.

---

Quote:

---

Originally posted by second:

Quote:

---

Originally posted by JEWELSTAITEFAN:

Quote:

---

Originally posted by second:

Quote:

---

Originally posted by JEWELSTAITEFAN:
This thread, once the reality counterpart to the witch-hunt thread, has also become overrun with trolls. Since their own vacant thread had about Zero traffic for a few weeks, they had to invade here.

---

Since you disbelieve everything, you will be surprised when Trump self-destructs as did Richard Nixon. You never imagined Nixon was guilty until he announced it

---

Rewriting history again? Why do you insist upon lying to Fans of Firefly? We may readily soak up SCIENCE FICTION, doesn't mean we gobble up Libtard Fiction.

Care to provide quote or cite where Nixon announced he was guilty?
No need to trot back out your other standby lie, that Nixon was one of the 2 Impeached Presidents. Those 2 were Democrats, racking up a total of 3 Impeachments.

---

Is JewelStaiteFan wishing Nixon was explaining his innocence and he quit for no reason, you lying sack of shit?

Is JewelStaiteFan wishing Ford pardoned innocent Nixon for for no reason, you lying sack of shit?

---

Quote:

---

Originally posted by JEWELSTAITEFAN:

So, you clarify that Nixon did not announce that he was guilty.
And Ford also did not announce that Nixon was guilty.
Logic fail much?
You failed. Twice.

---

Quote:

---

Originally posted by second:

Quote:

---

Originally posted by JEWELSTAITEFAN:
So, you clarify that Nixon did not announce that he was guilty.
And Ford also did not announce that Nixon was guilty.
Logic fail much?
You failed. Twice.

---

Incorrect, JewelStaiteFan, you stupid fucker. Nixon quite elegantly... waved goodbye forever.

And who can forget the greatest Nixon magic trick of all? Converting treason in 1968 into election day victory:
www.commondreams.org/views/2014/08/12/george-will-confirms-nixons-viet
nam-treason

---

Quote:

---

Originally posted by JEWELSTAITEFAN:

Quote:

---

Originally posted by second:

Quote:

---

Originally posted by JEWELSTAITEFAN:
So, you clarify that Nixon did not announce that he was guilty.
And Ford also did not announce that Nixon was guilty.
Logic fail much?
You failed. Twice.

---

Incorrect, JewelStaiteFan, you stupid fucker. Nixon quite elegantly... waved goodbye forever.

And who can forget the greatest Nixon magic trick of all? Converting treason in 1968 into election day victory:
www.commondreams.org/views/2014/08/12/george-will-confirms-nixons-viet
nam-treason

---

Can't get past your paywall. No idea what you are on about for 1968, when Nixon held no public office.

---

Quote:

---

Originally posted by 6IXSTRINGJACK:
lol. Another F Bomb by Second.

Somebody should start keeping score.

---

Quote:

---

Originally posted by 6IXSTRINGJACK:
lol. No you don't. Nobody believes you're rich, Second.

---

Quote:

---

Originally posted by 6IXSTRINGJACK:
Yeah. They do believe me. Who would lie about that?

It's easy to lie to everybody online and pretend your rich. Nobody believes you anymore.

Do Right, Be Right. :)

---

Quote:

---

Originally posted by 6IXSTRINGJACK:

Too bad you brought up every stupid and meaningless little thing along the way for the last 400+ days to detract from what might actually be a huge problem. Nobody wants to listen to you or the news anymore. Only the 2-3 million CNN/MSNBC nightly viewers even give a shit. The other 300+ million people in America are more concerned with what movies are coming out this weekend.

---

Quote:

---

Originally posted by 6IXSTRINGJACK:
lol

Do Right, Be Right. :)

---

Quote:

---

Originally posted by 6IXSTRINGJACK:
lol. No you don't. Nobody believes you're rich, Second.

But I've already got mine. I can work part time minimum wage for the rest of my life and I'll survive.


Maybe you're right about Trump. Too bad you brought up every stupid and meaningless little thing along the way for the last 400+ days to detract from what might actually be a huge problem. Nobody wants to listen to you or the news anymore. Only the 2-3 million CNN/MSNBC nightly viewers even give a shit. The other 300+ million people in America are more concerned with what movies are coming out this weekend.

Maybe pick your battles better next time, twerp.

Do Right, Be Right. :)

---

Quote:

---

Originally posted by second:

Quote:

---

Originally posted by 6IXSTRINGJACK:
Yeah. They do believe me. Who would lie about that?

It's easy to lie to everybody online and pretend your rich. Nobody believes you anymore.

Do Right, Be Right. :)

---

Can you believe what you wrote? Do you actually know what you wrote means?

Quote:

---

Originally posted by 6IXSTRINGJACK:

Too bad you brought up every stupid and meaningless little thing along the way for the last 400+ days to detract from what might actually be a huge problem. Nobody wants to listen to you or the news anymore. Only the 2-3 million CNN/MSNBC nightly viewers even give a shit. The other 300+ million people in America are more concerned with what movies are coming out this weekend.

---

I think you placed your finger on why only 2-3 million are doing really well (20-30 million doing okay) in the US while the rest of Americans are fat, dumb and drunk. The losers think they are smart, but struggling in an unfair world which doesn't recognize their inherent worth. Except there are a million clues available to make their lives ten time more worthy, but they remain clueless. The losers smoke, drink, over-eat, borrow at high interest rates, incompetently perform their hated jobs, won't move to a better state, beat their children, etc., etc. and it doesn't matter how many public service messages the losers see, they never get the clue and they continue to fail and it is never their fault. It's those crooked politicians' fault, the same politicians that a majority of losers voted for. I believe you when you said you voted for Trump. How is that decision working out for you? It's great for me; maybe not so much for you. I didn't vote for Trump, by the way. There were thousands of clues that Trump would be no good for the job and 6ixStringJack ignored them all because it was too much information for him, calling the clues "stupid and meaningless little things".

---

Quote:

---

Originally posted by JEWELSTAITEFAN:

They have that many combined viewers?
I keep hearing that CNN, PMSNBC each have less than a million viewers.

---

Quote:

---

Originally posted by JEWELSTAITEFAN:

I wonder if this explains why the trolls have invaded this thread, burying the discussion amid their nonsense, while abandoning their desolate thread where they finally realized that they were the only navel gazers chattering to themselves in their echo chamber.

---

Quote:

---

Originally posted by JEWELSTAITEFAN:

. . . they finally realized that they were the only navel gazers chattering to themselves in their echo chamber.

---

Quote:

---

Originally posted by second:

Quote:

---

Originally posted by JEWELSTAITEFAN:

I wonder if this explains why the trolls have invaded this thread, burying the discussion amid their nonsense, while abandoning their desolate thread where they finally realized that they were the only navel gazers chattering to themselves in their echo chamber.

---

This afternoon's news:
Thirteen Russians criminally charged for interfering in US election, Mueller announces

All were charged with conspiracy to defraud the United States
Three charged with conspiracy to commit wire fraud and bank fraud
Five defendants charged with aggravated identity theft

www.theguardian.com/us-news/2018/feb/16/robert-mueller-russians-charge
d-election

Quote:

---

Originally posted by JEWELSTAITEFAN:

. . . they finally realized that they were the only navel gazers chattering to themselves in their echo chamber.

---

The echo is inside the hollow head of JewelStaiteFan. Be forthright, JSF, and claim no evidence and Mueller is witch-hunting Trump.

---

Quote:

---

Originally posted by second:

Quote:

---

Originally posted by JEWELSTAITEFAN:
I wonder if this explains why the trolls have invaded this thread, burying the discussion amid their nonsense, while abandoning their desolate thread where they finally realized that they were the only navel gazers chattering to themselves in their echo chamber.

---

This afternoon's news:
Thirteen Russians criminally charged for interfering in US election, Mueller announces

All were charged with conspiracy to defraud the United States
Three charged with conspiracy to commit wire fraud and bank fraud
Five defendants charged with aggravated identity theft

www.theguardian.com/us-news/2018/feb/16/robert-mueller-russians-charge
d-election

Quote:

---

Originally posted by JEWELSTAITEFAN:
. . . they finally realized that they were the only navel gazers chattering to themselves in their echo chamber.

---

The echo is inside the hollow head of JewelStaiteFan. Be forthright, JSF, and claim no evidence and Mueller is witch-hunting Trump.

---

Quote:

---

Originally posted by JEWELSTAITEFAN:

You use a lot of letters to say "still no evidence of Trump Collusion" but you do have a steady supply of Red Herrings.
But you still could have posted that nonsense in your desolate thread where nobody looks, instead of trolling and polluting these threads where the adults were talking.

---

Quote:

---

Originally posted by SIGNYM:

Although, I DO have to say that those who are (were?) convinced of "Russian hacking" and "Russian collusion" seem to be posting a contradictory message: On the one hand, they keep pointing to "evidence", and on the other hand they excuse it's lack by saying Well, what do you think Meuller is going to do? Release evidence as soon as he finds it?". You guys - pick one or the other, you can't credibly have both.
. . .
As you know, I have another thread of "evidence" against naughty Debbie W, and some of the other goings-on in DC. I'll bet if we knew everything about everything there, we'd throw everybody out.

---