Worthless Loser
Blackpilled
My opinions aren't changing. No need to continue this.
RUSSIA/РОССИЯ THREAD—ASSANGE CHRGD W/ SPYING—DJT IMPEACHED TWICE-US TREASURY SANCTS KILIMNIK AS RUSSIAN AGNT
- Thread starter ☑︎#VoteDemocrat
- Start date
choc_cardigan
Squad
Thanks for your concern...
Slow news day. 
I'm guessing news will be a bit slower for the remainder of the year, unless something huge is in the works. We got spoiled this summer
Major news dropping every single week, and at times every day of the week :bpbanderas:
Now let's let Mueller do his work :umadmueller:
I'm guessing news will be a bit slower for the remainder of the year, unless something huge is in the works. We got spoiled this summer
Major news dropping every single week, and at times every day of the week :bpbanderas:
Now let's let Mueller do his work :umadmueller:
fukk all that noise....in the northeast.....Slow news day.
I'm guessing news will be a bit slower for the remainder of the year, unless something huge is in the works. We got spoiled this summer
Major news dropping every single week, and at times every day of the week :bpbanderas:
Now let's let Mueller do his work :umadmueller:
"We take summers off cause we love winter beef"
LOL, for real though, the news cycle will not slow down until Trumps finished, everybody is on his neck, and now that he is threatening the press, the press is gonna go harder, they are like the IC, it's gonna get a lot worse for this clown.
So far, to my knowledge, there has been no explanation as to what type of coverage these plans may provide
I find the “across the state lines” idea ridiculous. What type of network would be in plan with an out of state network?
Looking at shrinking (Obamacare) networks, with virtually no specialist hospitals in network, one can only dread the prospects of an “out of state” network. Competition for no benefits.
It's gonna get tied up in the courts anyway
I find the “across the state lines” idea ridiculous. What type of network would be in plan with an out of state network?
Looking at shrinking (Obamacare) networks, with virtually no specialist hospitals in network, one can only dread the prospects of an “out of state” network. Competition for no benefits.
It's gonna get tied up in the courts anyway
Roger Stone playing tough...we got the tapes homey. Ya mans was Assange's go-between. We posted the tweets. You're fukked.
http://www.cnn.com/2017/10/12/politics/roger-stone-house-intelligence-committee-subpoena/index.html
Stone faces subpoena threat over Assange contact
(CNN)The leaders of the House intelligence committee are warning that President Donald Trump associate Roger Stone will be slapped with a subpoena Friday if he does not reveal the name of his intermediary with WikiLeaks founder Julian Assange.
"We'll give it until tomorrow," Rep. Mike Conaway, the Texas Republican who is running the House panel's Russia investigation, told CNN Thursday.
Asked if the panel would subpoena Stone if he did not disclose the name by Friday, Conaway said: "Yes. We'll take the next steps. Hope we don't have to."
California Rep. Adam Schiff, the committee's top Democrat told CNN: "We have agreed to subpoena him if he doesn't provide the information. ... We'll see whether he's willing to comply or whether we'll have to use a compulsory process."
Grant Smith, a Stone attorney, said: "We are working to comply by the deadline set by the committee. Everything has been collegial and professional. There has been no threat of a subpoena."
Stone, who has known Trump for 40 years, testified before the House intelligence committee in a closed session last month.
Investigators asked questions about his contacts with the Russian hacker Guccifer 2.0 during the election season, something that described as an innocuous and meaningless exchange over Twitter. US intelligence community said the name Guccifer 2.0 was used by Russian intelligence to disseminate stolen emails.
And he insisted he did not collude or coordinate with Russians as part of an effort to meddle in the campaign.
But after the hearing, Stone told reporters that he answered all of the committee's questions but one: his "intermediary" to Assange.
Stone said his conversation with the intermediary was off-the-record and with a journalist, and he would honor the agreement to protect the journalist's identity. But he added that he planned to go back to the intermediary and ask to release him from the off-the-record agreement.
"I'm not going to burn somebody I spoke to off the record," Stone said. "If he releases me, if he allows me to release it, I would be happy to give it to the committee. I'm actually going to try to do that."
Conaway said Thursday that the name "will help eliminate any questions people might have, and it just helps support the story."
"If we've got that name, then we can just evaluate what he said as a result of what he said, I think that will be helpful to the investigation," Conaway said.
In his opening statement for the hearing, Stone denied any direct contact with Assange and attacked Schiff for suggesting he did when former FBI Director James Comey testified in March.
"On June 12, 2016, WikiLeaks' publisher Julian Assange, announced that he was in possession of Clinton DNC emails. I learned this by reading it on Twitter," Stone said.
"I asked a journalist who I knew had interviewed Assange to independently confirm this report, and he subsequently did," Stone wrote. "This journalist assured me that WikiLeaks would release this information in October and continued to assure me of this throughout the balance of August and all of September. This information proved to be correct."
"I have referred publicly to this journalist as an, 'intermediary,' 'go-between' and 'mutual friend.' All of these monikers are equally true," Stone added.
During the presidential campaign, Stone appeared to predict on a few occasions that WikiLeaks would release damaging information about Democratic presidential nominee Hillary Clinton, including saying that it would soon be Clinton campaign chairman John Podesta's "time in the barrel."
Stone denied that he had any advance knowledge that WikiLeaks would release Podesta's emails, however, saying it was a reference to his own investigation into Podesta.
http://www.cnn.com/2017/10/12/politics/roger-stone-house-intelligence-committee-subpoena/index.html
Stone faces subpoena threat over Assange contact
(CNN)The leaders of the House intelligence committee are warning that President Donald Trump associate Roger Stone will be slapped with a subpoena Friday if he does not reveal the name of his intermediary with WikiLeaks founder Julian Assange.
"We'll give it until tomorrow," Rep. Mike Conaway, the Texas Republican who is running the House panel's Russia investigation, told CNN Thursday.
Asked if the panel would subpoena Stone if he did not disclose the name by Friday, Conaway said: "Yes. We'll take the next steps. Hope we don't have to."
California Rep. Adam Schiff, the committee's top Democrat told CNN: "We have agreed to subpoena him if he doesn't provide the information. ... We'll see whether he's willing to comply or whether we'll have to use a compulsory process."
Grant Smith, a Stone attorney, said: "We are working to comply by the deadline set by the committee. Everything has been collegial and professional. There has been no threat of a subpoena."
Stone, who has known Trump for 40 years, testified before the House intelligence committee in a closed session last month.
Investigators asked questions about his contacts with the Russian hacker Guccifer 2.0 during the election season, something that described as an innocuous and meaningless exchange over Twitter. US intelligence community said the name Guccifer 2.0 was used by Russian intelligence to disseminate stolen emails.
And he insisted he did not collude or coordinate with Russians as part of an effort to meddle in the campaign.
But after the hearing, Stone told reporters that he answered all of the committee's questions but one: his "intermediary" to Assange.
Stone said his conversation with the intermediary was off-the-record and with a journalist, and he would honor the agreement to protect the journalist's identity. But he added that he planned to go back to the intermediary and ask to release him from the off-the-record agreement.
"I'm not going to burn somebody I spoke to off the record," Stone said. "If he releases me, if he allows me to release it, I would be happy to give it to the committee. I'm actually going to try to do that."
Conaway said Thursday that the name "will help eliminate any questions people might have, and it just helps support the story."
"If we've got that name, then we can just evaluate what he said as a result of what he said, I think that will be helpful to the investigation," Conaway said.
In his opening statement for the hearing, Stone denied any direct contact with Assange and attacked Schiff for suggesting he did when former FBI Director James Comey testified in March.
"On June 12, 2016, WikiLeaks' publisher Julian Assange, announced that he was in possession of Clinton DNC emails. I learned this by reading it on Twitter," Stone said.
"I asked a journalist who I knew had interviewed Assange to independently confirm this report, and he subsequently did," Stone wrote. "This journalist assured me that WikiLeaks would release this information in October and continued to assure me of this throughout the balance of August and all of September. This information proved to be correct."
"I have referred publicly to this journalist as an, 'intermediary,' 'go-between' and 'mutual friend.' All of these monikers are equally true," Stone added.
During the presidential campaign, Stone appeared to predict on a few occasions that WikiLeaks would release damaging information about Democratic presidential nominee Hillary Clinton, including saying that it would soon be Clinton campaign chairman John Podesta's "time in the barrel."
Stone denied that he had any advance knowledge that WikiLeaks would release Podesta's emails, however, saying it was a reference to his own investigation into Podesta.
I dunno what some of y'all don't understand. If they were forced to tomorrow, they could end this shyt. At the least easy obstruction of justice just by his twitter shyt........at the worst treason or conspiracy to commit treason. Keep in the mind, this is just the shyt that we know. E-mails of Manafort attempting to commit treason have leaked to the press. Trump Jr, Kush Kush and Manafort had e-mails leaked to the press that shows them colluding with a foreign government. Again, this is the shyt we know.
Add in the Corker interview from earlier this week, saying that the senate GOP don't fukk with him, at all. You get a bleek picture.
The worst lawyers in the world would be able to prove criminal shyt just from whats been leaked to the media. To think Trump is anything but supremely fukked, is insane.
Add in the Corker interview from earlier this week, saying that the senate GOP don't fukk with him, at all. You get a bleek picture.
The worst lawyers in the world would be able to prove criminal shyt just from whats been leaked to the media. To think Trump is anything but supremely fukked, is insane.
Triipe
All Star
shyt was Facebook really created by Russia to
big money tings going on. insane is the only word that comes to mind
No.shyt was Facebook really created by Russia to
Again, yall bytch about me highlighting whats important but keep asking dumb questions. (@Leasy dont get offended, but it is what it is at this point. You're either with it, or not. That goes for everyone who keeps asking for summaries. This shyt ain't easy for me either.)
Read this and catch up:
Russian Firm Buys a Stake in Facebook
In 2009, Facebook was broke.
And they had trouble raising money.
This is before the IPO.
ANNNND they refused to open their books.
Open people that lended to them were shady oligarch types and exclusive bankers who sold private shares.
Last edited:
If it was that easy it would've already happened.
The problem isn't whether or not they can prove Trump did anything illegal. In reality the problem is politics. There aren't enough people in power that actually want to get rid of him. The GOP base still loves Trump and because of that Republicans aren't going to impeach him for fear of pissing them off. Unless Trump actually loses popularity with his base they won't do anything.
Definitely nah to the first part. If you get arrested with 10 bricks in January 2016 you can probably stretch the trial out til Jan 17, This is international political crimes+ a bunch of other shyt.
To the second part, I don't agree. The corker interview is evidence, his support among people who identify as R's is dropping. Couldn't disagree more.
From the polls I've seen, Trump is more popular with Republican voters than the GOP.
Trump might be losing support among Republican politicians, but not so much with his voters. And GOP politicians aren't going to risk the wrath of their base, even if they don't like Trump personally. I don't really know why (other than pure
) but Trump's base is extremely loyal.