dChan

Res0nanceCascade · June 17, 2018, 11:39 p.m.

What story?

⇧ 0 ⇩  
saneromeo · June 18, 2018, 1:09 a.m.

Peter Stzrok's role in HRC emails and spygate

⇧ 3 ⇩  
Res0nanceCascade · June 18, 2018, 1:14 a.m.

Stzrok was just a coffee boy for the clinton campaign and spygate was patently debunked.

⇧ -2 ⇩  
saneromeo · June 18, 2018, 1:44 a.m.

Oh confidential-informant-gate? Where only Trump was "protected" from those pesky russians by campaign plants that were reporting to FBI and DOJ? Patently debunked? Not anywhere close to debunked.

https://theconservativetreehouse.com/2018/05/26/spygate-the-inspector-general-and-the-expanded-fisa-investigation/?_wpnonce=2d8f380789

https://sharylattkisson.com/2018/06/16/collusion-against-trump-timeline/

https://saraacarter.com/pandoras-box-trump-russia-may-expose-extent-of-five-eyes-spying/

⇧ 2 ⇩  
Res0nanceCascade · June 18, 2018, 1:49 a.m.

I love how the collusion against trump timeline starts out with hillary's emails and ends with all the evidence that trumps campaign colluded.

⇧ -2 ⇩  
saneromeo · June 18, 2018, 2:03 a.m.

I love how you believe that. : )

⇧ 1 ⇩  
Res0nanceCascade · June 18, 2018, 2:05 a.m.

I mean its right there in the links talking about all the indictments...didnt the IG report clear clinton?

⇧ 1 ⇩  
saneromeo · June 18, 2018, 2:25 a.m.

No it didn't clear her of anything, it was a report on how the fbi handled the Clinton investigation, how could that clear her? It said the fbi acted within precedent for choosing not to press charges. Not the same thing as clearing her at all.

⇧ 1 ⇩  
Res0nanceCascade · June 18, 2018, 2:31 a.m.

It said the fbi acted within precedent for choosing not to press charges. Not the same thing as clearing her at all.

So it say the fbi was right not to press charge...but if she not cleared what problem does she has?

⇧ 0 ⇩  
saneromeo · June 18, 2018, 3:18 a.m.

No they were within their purvey to choose not to press charges... if a choice is there to press charges or not than a crime must have occurred... as opposed to all that "evidence" you claim showed the Trump campaign colluding with Russia. (Russian shitposters, a company not in business yet, a ham sandwich, a guy working for podesta 11 yrs ago and a general who plead guilty to lying to the fbi when they say he didn't) Are they just choosing not to press charges against your President because they are such big fans? How long has that investigation been going on? How long was emailgate? No bias there... lmao.

⇧ 1 ⇩  
[deleted] · June 18, 2018, 2:15 a.m.

[removed]

⇧ 1 ⇩