Well TSD's, the transcript is out.

[phrodeau]

http://granitegrok.com/wp-content/uploads/Russia-Russia-Russia.jpg

I want answers. Got any?

 

[Adre]

My ignore list is finally crawling out of bed..

Tonto prefers the conversation and company of boring sycophants like Kantardy.

 

[Adre]

While we’re investigating public officials’ children, could be time to focus on the progeny of Trump.

 

[Kantarii]

Amazing Coincidence That Nancy Pelosi's Son Also Has Business Connections With Ukraine.

https://apple.news/AkZ2qS146T3u4FDQKNL0BsA

If you’re wondering why Nancy Pelosi is laying low as the effervescent maelstrom of corruption and influence peddling descends upon Joe Biden’s hairplugs, we may have the answer. She has a son of her own involved in oil importing from Ukraine. He even used his Mom to promote his business.

———

This wouldn’t surprise me at all if it’s true.

 

[SpeareChucker]

Democrats have the right to get rich off of politics.

Republicans already have silver spoons, ergo
the playing field must be leveled.

 

[SgtSpiderMan]

While we’re investigating public officials’ children, could be time to focus on the progeny of Trump.

[Spamming, bumping multiple threads in order to flood the forum, posting same content to multiple locations, or screen-stretching to disrupt the forum is prohibited per our forum guidelines.]

 

[HisArpy]

No he didn't..and I've posted numerous times where collusion came from.. The Washington Examiner.


You really are an idiot.

dudly, MUELLER HIMSELF said it in his report.


From THIS LINKY:

http://edition.cnn.com/TRANSCRIPTS/1907/24/cnr.01.html

Which is a readout of the EXACT TRANSCRIPT OF THE MUELLER HEARING before Congress -

[Congressman) COLLINS: If no, on page 180 of Volume 1 of your report, you wrote, "As defined in legal dictionaries, collusion is largely synonymous with conspiracy as that crime is set forth in the general federal conspiracy statute, 18 USC 371."

MUELLER: Yes (ph).

...

COLLINS: This is from your report.

MUELLER: Correct, and I -- I -- I -- I leave it with the report.

COLLINS: So the report says yes, they are synonymous.

MUELLER: Yes.

COLLINS: Hopefully, for finally, out of your own report, we can put to bed the collusion and conspiracy.

If you keep insisting on saying otherwise after this, YOU'RE A FUCKING IDIOT.

 

[Kantarii]

Democrats have the right to get rich off of politics.

Republicans already have silver spoons, ergo
the playing field must be leveled.

Entitlement from the Left?

 

[Kantarii]

dudly, MUELLER HIMSELF said it in his report.


From THIS LINKY:

http://edition.cnn.com/TRANSCRIPTS/1907/24/cnr.01.html

Which is a readout of the EXACT TRANSCRIPT OF THE MUELLER HEARING before Congress -



If you keep insisting on saying otherwise after this, YOU'RE A FUCKING IDIOT.

What was he before saying this?
Inquiring minds

 

[HisArpy]

What was he before saying this?
Inquiring minds

He's trying to say that Mueller didn't investigate "Collusion" even though that's the word the MSM was using despite everyone pointing out at the time that there's NO CRIME OF COLLUSION. (Yes, jockstrap boi, I can post links for that too if you try that dodge again.)

Basically, jockystrap is trying to rewrite history by ducking reality and facts. Which is not unheard of from his side of the political divide.

It's like they can't remember more than 1 thing at a time.

You can tell them:

Roses are red.
Violets are blue.
Jockstraps cause crotch rot.
And itch like hell too.


And their response will be something like "jockstraps don't cause crotchrot, they cause fungal infections."

Then you ask: "But what about Roses and Violets?"
Them: "No one fucking cares if Rose and Violet get crotchrot."

I will say that their intense focus on being simpleminded must take a hell of a lot of energy.

 

[cowslinger64]

Here ya go dudly... from the ACTUAL report, NOT from his testimony.




I'm gonna save you a massive headache and highlight the relevant parts from THE ACTUAL REPORT.

THIS IS PAGE 180


1. Potential Coordination: Conspiracy and Collusion
As an initial matter, this Office evaluated potentially criminal conduct that involved the
collective action of multiple individuals not under the rubric of “collusionn,” but through the lens
of conspiracy law. In so doing, the Office recognized that the word “collud[e]” appears in the
Acting Attorney General’s August 2, 2017 memorandum; it has frequently been invoked in public
reporting; and it is sometimes referenced in antitrust law, see, e.g., Brooke Group v. Brown &
Williamson Tobacco Corp., 509 U.S. 209, 227 (1993). But collusion is not a specific offense or
theory of liability found in the U.S. Code; nor is it a term of art in federal criminal law. To the
contrary, even as defined in legal dictionaries, collusion is largely synonymous with conspiracy as
that crime is set forth in the general federal conspiracy statute, 18 U.S.C. § 371. See Black’s Law
Dictionary 321 (10th ed. 2014) (collusion is “[a]n agreement to defraud another or to do or obtain
something forbidden by law”); 1 Alexander Burrill, A Law Dictionary and Glossary 311 (1871)
(“An agreement between two or more persons to defraud another by the forms of law, or to employ
such forms as means of accomplishing some unlawful object.”); 1 Bouvier’s Law Dictionary 352


PAGE 181


For that reason, this Office’s focus in resolving the question of joint criminal liability was
on conspiracy as defined in federal law, not the commonly discussed term “collusion.”

 

[cowslinger64]

HERE IS THE ORIGINATION OF THE WORD COLLUSION



https://www.lawfareblog.com/where-heck-did-term-collusion-come



Try educating yourself and not running your big mouth without any basis in reality, dudly.



Btw... try having the balls to admit, for the very first time, that you are wrong.


I doubt you do

 

[Kantarii]

He's trying to say that Mueller didn't investigate "Collusion" even though that's the word the MSM was using despite everyone pointing out at the time that there's NO CRIME OF COLLUSION. (Yes, jockstrap boi, I can post links for that too if you try that dodge again.)

Basically, jockystrap is trying to rewrite history by ducking reality and facts. Which is not unheard of from his side of the political divide.

It's like they can't remember more than 1 thing at a time.

You can tell them:

Roses are red.
Violets are blue.
Jockstraps cause crotch rot.
And itch like hell too.


And their response will be something like "jockstraps don't cause crotchrot, they cause fungal infections."

Then you ask: "But what about Roses and Violets?"
Them: "No one fucking cares if Rose and Violet get crotchrot."

I will say that their intense focus on being simpleminded must take a hell of a lot of energy.

I knew there was a reason I put his ass on iggie.

 

[cowslinger64]

I knew there was a reason I put his ass on iggie.

There is a reason, you're an idiot and never have a single intelligent thing to add or to prove any of your points.





You even just missed where hisderpy got his ass handed to him in a big way, once again.

 

[Adre]

There is a reason, you're an idiot and never have a single intelligent thing to add or to prove any of your points.





You even just missed where hisderpy got his ass handed to him in a big way, once again.

But he’s a wonderful lapdog for the BroPatrol.

 

[cowslinger64]

But he’s a wonderful lapdog for the BroPatrol.

Just like queball used to be.. He could be another of the aspieboys alts.. I'd like to think he's too stupid to be a real person.



If I'm wrong about collusion.. I need to be shown. I don't see derpy doing it.

 

[HisArpy]

Here ya go dudly... from the ACTUAL report, NOT from his testimony.




I'm gonna save you a massive headache and highlight the relevant parts from THE ACTUAL REPORT.

THIS IS PAGE 180


1. Potential Coordination: Conspiracy and Collusion
As an initial matter, this Office evaluated potentially criminal conduct that involved the
collective action of multiple individuals not under the rubric of “collusionn,” but through the lens
of conspiracy law. In so doing, the Office recognized that the word “collud[e]” appears in the
Acting Attorney General’s August 2, 2017 memorandum; it has frequently been invoked in public
reporting; and it is sometimes referenced in antitrust law, see, e.g., Brooke Group v. Brown &
Williamson Tobacco Corp., 509 U.S. 209, 227 (1993). But collusion is not a specific offense or
theory of liability found in the U.S. Code; nor is it a term of art in federal criminal law. To the
contrary, even as defined in legal dictionaries, collusion is largely synonymous with conspiracy as
that crime is set forth in the general federal conspiracy statute, 18 U.S.C. § 371. See Black’s Law
Dictionary 321 (10th ed. 2014) (collusion is “[a]n agreement to defraud another or to do or obtain
something forbidden by law”); 1 Alexander Burrill, A Law Dictionary and Glossary 311 (1871)
(“An agreement between two or more persons to defraud another by the forms of law, or to employ
such forms as means of accomplishing some unlawful object.”); 1 Bouvier’s Law Dictionary 352


PAGE 181


For that reason, this Office’s focus in resolving the question of joint criminal liability was
on conspiracy as defined in federal law, not the commonly discussed term “collusion.”

You Do realize (or at least I hope you realize) that you just confirmed what I posted. Mueller specifically said in his report that he investigated "conspiracy" and not "collusion", even though the 2 terms are synonymous, because "collusion" isn't a crime.

Which is what everyone has been fucking telling you for the past 3 years.

Which is what I JUST FUCKING TOLD YOU. Go back and READ what I fucking wrote if you don't believe me.

Which is what you fucking just confirmed, while trying to spin it to mean something it's clearly not, just so you could believe something you said is true. When it isn't. Your belief to the contrary is so fucking stupid NO ONE can be that stupid and still have a heartbeat.

Be a man and admit it - you fucked yourself because you shot off your mouth again trying to show everyone what a big man you are. You're not. You're a cowardly little piss ant with no mental agility or ability and an internet connection where you can post shit to make yourself feel better while you hide in your closet.

 

[Conager]

He takes it a step further, he claims that Mueller never looked at any aspect of behavior by anyone in the Trump campaign working in concert with (or colloquially known as "colluding") the dreaded Rooskies.

He implies that ther *may* be collusion under a rock, somewhere, because Mueller (Weissman, really) was totally not charged with, or engaged in looking into "collusion."

Mueller was, he did, he found none. The fact that he reframed that to make it crystal clear is lost on Cowpattyslinger.

----------------------------------

Kind of the point of the latest manufactured poutrage that was literally the first thing Trump did the day of or the day after Mueller said, "Huh?? What is this Fusion GPS, of which you speak? Will there be green Jello in the cafeteria today? I like green Jello. . ."

They can now say, "You see?!! Trump totally has a pattern of COLLUDING with furr-inn leaders to steal elections that Dems would totally win if it wasn't for that dog and those meddling kids!"

Gives them a new endless investigation and a fig leaf for the old one.

 

[jp55665566]

The whole "collusion" angle is so funny 'cause who actually colluded with a foreign power in an attempt to corrupt an election? It's called the Steele Dossier, and it was arranged and paid for by Hillary Clinton/DNC.

 

[Conager]

Predictably, the usual suspects are ignoring the transcript of the call that gave this latest poutrage its impetus.

They always buy the narrative they are sold and nothing discovered when unpacking it changes the narrative.

The narrative has morphed, the way it always does when these nothing-burgers are chewed, digested and excreted into a steaming pile of cannibalistic cowslinger patties.

When it was clear there were no actual crimes (not that that stopped the Weissman probe from interfering with the 2018 election) the Washington Post opined:

Dec 6, 2017 https://www.washingtonpost.com/blogs/right-turn/wp/2017/12/06/the-president-doesnt-need-to-have-committed-a-crime-to-be-impeached/

That trial balloon did a Hindenburg, but was part of the push back to Nancy Pelosi who had said:

"When and if he breaks the law, that is when something like that would come up."

Newsweek seemed to have started the whole idea that you don't need a crime:

Aug 8, 2017 https://www.newsweek.com/you-dont-have-commit-crime-be-impeached-647926

In a week or two, the herd here will finally receive the new and improved talking points and quit mouthing the Trump and/or Giuliani have "admitted" their "guilt" of a crime (or crimes.)

They don't understand that that was the intermediary talking point that was designed to get people not to notice that the Whistleblower complaint did not line up with the actual phone call he was complaining about. The text from the Ambassador out of context were used to paint a narrative that is completely opposite of what the full context shows.

I've posted this before in an effort to get them up to speed so we can actually argue the current talking points instead of the week or two old ones:

September 25, 2019 NYT: https://www.nytimes.com/2019/09/25/opinion/trump-impeachment.htmlThe

NYT already gets that the whistleblower is not a whistleblower and no crimes were uncovered, but they are now, once again, maintaining that he should still be impeached, because reasons.

High crimes and misdemeanors are in fact whatever the house decides they are and the Senate agrees with. Since we already know the Senate doesn't agree with this nonsense that the house is espousing, let's not drag this out in another two-year-long just passed the next election cycle debacle probably to be headed behind the scenes by Weissman yet again. Although this time I think the Weissman role is being played by Brennan.

 

[Curmudgeonly]

I want answers. Got any?

Answers? Certainly, most of them.

What were the questions?

 

[cowslinger64]

You Do realize (or at least I hope you realize) that you just confirmed what I posted. Mueller specifically said in his report that he investigated "conspiracy" and not "collusion", even though the 2 terms are synonymous, because "collusion" isn't a crime.

Which is what everyone has been fucking telling you for the past 3 years.

Which is what I JUST FUCKING TOLD YOU. Go back and READ what I fucking wrote if you don't believe me.

Which is what you fucking just confirmed, while trying to spin it to mean something it's clearly not, just so you could believe something you said is true. When it isn't. Your belief to the contrary is so fucking stupid NO ONE can be that stupid and still have a heartbeat.

Be a man and admit it - you fucked yourself because you shot off your mouth again trying to show everyone what a big man you are. You're not. You're a cowardly little piss ant with no mental agility or ability and an internet connection where you can post shit to make yourself feel better while you hide in your closet.

Holy fuck. You really are the stupidest motherfucker on the planet.

Unbelievable.



You can ramble all you want dudly, but just like 4 not being less than three, you are brain-dead.