If this is your first visit, be sure to
check out the FAQ by clicking the
link above. You may have to register
before you can post: click the register link above to proceed. To start viewing messages,
select the forum that you want to visit from the selection below.
If you are having difficulty logging in, please REFRESH the page and clear your browser cache and try again.
If you still can't get logged in, please try using Microsoft Edge, Google Chrome, Firefox, Opera, or Safari to login. Also be sure you are using the latest version of your browser. Internet Explorer has not been updated in over seven years and will no longer work with the Forum software. Thanks
So a court ruling saying it's constitutional to put on money is lol cause the article says there's been no ruling against using the phrase? I'm confused.
Also. amusing and predictable that's all you take from the article.
But FAKE NUZE!!!!
Point is I quit reading after the first few sentences. It straight up lied about the facts. There was a decision of a court last week on the phrase In God We Trust on our money. the article lied to make it seem like Trump lied.
Now if an article about Trump's lies is going to start out by telling a lie to make it seem like Trump lies a lot, there is absolutely no point in reading the rest of the article.
I have a feeling that those specific 3000 emails that were directly reviewed were hand picked by the person heading that investigation, Peter Stzrok himself.
Just because the hackers successfully phished Podesta does not mean that enable to hack a private server. This isn't tv where you have some mystical black hat hacker that can get into any server within minutes.
Just because the hackers successfully phished Podesta does not mean that enable to hack a private server. This isn't tv where you have some mystical black hat hacker that can get into any server within minutes.
Comey said it was likely an 8th grader could have hacked Clinton's server and covered their tracks, there was absolutely no security.
Likewise, do you think Wiener's laptop was secured?
when Russia did it likely giving it to wikileaks the attitude is collusion with trump to influence the elections he's going down how dare he be involved in publishing hillarys emails etc etc
but when china is named as the hacker the attitude is nothing to see here move along this didn't happen Hillary was a saint and no one other then the Russians could have hacked those emails and these emails weren't hacked
Really? the defense is the chinese couldn't do what the Russians already did?
What's the evidence that China hacked her server other than the Daily Caller article which uses two anonymous sources? The IG report specifically states that there's no evidence the server was compromised. Are you aware of other evidence?
I know, I get that I could mute him. I am just generally opposed to it -- even though he copped out and ignored me like a coward for asking him his BCT ship date.
but, honestly, I feel like this is the descent on a long plane ride, I'm periodically waking up to haphazardly gauge how close we are to landing -- all while having a pretty good sense that the guy two rows ahead, who has assured everyone he isn't getting sick (Kapture), is primed to blow spectacular chunks all over the plane once it has finally landed (mueller conclusion). I guess I am kind of waiting for that melt down.
Tweet
Comment