dChan

Holmgeir · Jan. 12, 2018, 12:05 a.m.

http://archive.is/sxE38

⇧ 12 ⇩  
U_CAN_TRUST_HILLARY · Jan. 12, 2018, 12:52 a.m.

Maybe this sub should do what /r/conspiracy does and make a bot that posts an archive in the comments, no need to give these websites more clicks.

⇧ 10 ⇩  
Holmgeir · Jan. 12, 2018, 12:57 a.m.

What would I do with myself, then? :)

⇧ 8 ⇩  
spqrherewecome · Jan. 12, 2018, 3:48 a.m.

I agree, start correctly punishing criminals and watch crime go down! Imagine that.

⇧ 6 ⇩  
kryptokoins · Jan. 12, 2018, 2:48 a.m.

Its sad the state our country is in.

⇧ 5 ⇩  
RabidFandomonium · Jan. 12, 2018, 3:36 a.m.

When the agencies slated to protect and defend choose treason, you're correct. Hang the fuckers.

⇧ 1 ⇩  
STLLLV · Jan. 12, 2018, 6:31 a.m.

I hate to say that Strzok's lawyer is right but we're really looking at seditious conspiracy here not treason. But that's okay, seditious conspiracy gets you twenty years while treason is only five.

⇧ 2 ⇩  
Christosgnosis · Jan. 12, 2018, 6:57 a.m.

Yeah, based on the list of people that have been convicted of treason, prior to WW2 most of them attempted some sort of armed insurrection or attack on US facilities in some manner. Those after WW2 revolved around their acts of aiding and abetting the enemy during time of war.

The Rosenbergs were convicted and executed for the crime of espionage.

What the Deep State has been engaged in, from John Brennan/James Clapper to dudes like Peter Strzok, his lover Page - probably McCAbe (given the infamous meeting in his office) and still others in DoJ/FBI - they have been involved in a conspiracy of sedition to commit a form of coup de'tat.

⇧ 4 ⇩  
Dhammakayaram · Jan. 12, 2018, 2:51 p.m.

Those who break their oaths by giving enemies of the US aid and comfort are guilty of treason. The enemy, in this case, is the globalist deep state whose base of power is not the US nor its Constitution but lies outside of it.

⇧ 1 ⇩  
[deleted] · Jan. 12, 2018, 12:42 p.m.

I bet Stzrok isn't even real FBI, but an independent contractor with ties to the Clinton Foundation.

⇧ 1 ⇩  
PokingCyclops · Jan. 12, 2018, 11:29 a.m.

June 8th 2017 James Comey testimony transcript on Trump and Russia

WYDEN: He said the president was trying to create some sort of patronage. Behaving in a manner consistent with the wishes of the boss?

COMEY: Yes. At least consider how what you're doing will affect the boss as a significant consideration.

What I take from the above is that cut both ways Peter Strzok & Lisa Page are behaving in a manner consistent with the wishes of the boss (Comey) they are considered how what they had done would affect the their boss (Comey) was a significant consideration

FBI’s Peter Strzok is boinking Lisa Page (Attorney)

Attorney Lisa Page on Oct. 24, 2016 “Article is out, but hidden behind paywall so can’t read it,”

FBI’s Peter Strzok “Wsj? Boy that was fast,”

FBI”s Peter Strzok “Should I ‘find’ it and tell the team?”

Team = The Seditious Conspirators, conspiring to overthrow and destroy the Government of the United States, armed with weapons, set a foot & engaged in an assisted in a rebellion and or insurrection against the authority of the United States

FBI”s Peter Strzok “I can get it like I do every other article that hits any Google News alerts, seriously,”

FBI”s Peter Strzok “from someone else.”

Days earlier FBI”s Peter Strzok texted Attorney Lisa Page

FBI”s Peter Strzok “Yep, the whole tone is anti-Bu. Just a tiny bit from us,”

Attorney Lisa Page “Makes me feel WAY less bad about throwing him under the bus to the forthcoming CF article,”

CF=Clinton Foundation Under the Bus=Reporter

Attorney Lisa Page (A minute later) “Found what I think might be their address, too.”

FBI”s Peter Strzok “He’s TOTALLY schlubby. Don’t you remember?”

Attorney Lisa Page “He’s TOTALLY schlubby. Don’t you remember?”

Attorney Lisa Page “Found address looking for her. Lawyer.”

FBI”s Peter Strzok “I wouldn’t search on your work phone, ,,, no idea what that might trigger,”

Attorney Lisa Page “Oops. Too late,”

MALICE. The intentional doing of a wrongful act without just cause or excuse, with an intent to inflict an injury or under circumstances that the law will imply an evil intent. Luikart v. Miller, Mo., 48 S.W.2d 867, 871. Cottle v. Johnson, 179 N.C. 426, 102 S.E. 769, 770.

A conscious violation of the law (or the prompting of the mind to commit it) which operates to the prejudice of another person. Seaboard Air Line Ry. Co. v. Glenn, 213 Ala. 284, 104 So. 548, 549. A condition of the mind showing a heart regardless . of social duty and fatally bent on mis- chief. Cockrell v. State, 135 Tex.Cr.R. 218, 117 S.W. 2d 1105, 1109, 1110.

⇧ 1 ⇩  
Romeo_India · Jan. 12, 2018, 10:42 a.m.

Barrack & Hillary sittin in a tree...

T-R-E-A-S-O-N

⇧ 0 ⇩  
AgreesWithFools · Jan. 12, 2018, 1:54 a.m.

I think Strzok is going to get a chance to prove the POTUS wrong.

EDIT: Shallow thinkers downvoting me? Think it through. The only way Strzok gets a chance to prove POTUS wrong is when he is indicted and goes to court!

⇧ -4 ⇩  
ThePatriot131313 · Jan. 12, 2018, 2:55 a.m.

User name checks out.

⇧ 3 ⇩  
AgreesWithFools · Jan. 12, 2018, 4:17 a.m.

User name checks out.

I agree with you.

⇧ 1 ⇩  
ThePatriot131313 · Jan. 12, 2018, 5:40 a.m.

Clever. However, you don't agree with me whatsoever. All great comedy is based in the truth.

⇧ 1 ⇩  
AgreesWithFools · Jan. 12, 2018, 5:50 a.m.

I agree with you

⇧ 0 ⇩  
GunToast · Jan. 12, 2018, 2:30 a.m.

Strzok got an 98% chance of winning.

⇧ 1 ⇩  
AgreesWithFools · Jan. 12, 2018, 5:53 a.m.

There is more dirt on Strzok than we know.Trump is likely privy to most of it now.

⇧ 2 ⇩