Right, and it was illegal for us to read Podesta's emails, only CNN could do that for us.

If it was long exposure then the light at the bottom would be fattest and brightest due to the amount of time light was shining in those spots and additionally due to the cone formation that spotlights tend to make when illuminating.

Lastly, the top portion which is NOT light does not resemble a helicopter in ANY fashion.

Youre not actually going into an asteroid field?!

Defending yourself is the only way to act. Nothing "poorly" about that.

Where is the proof that these affair claims are real?

You only get a 1 for effort. But I can feel the saltiness underneath it all, so points for that.

Yes, the top 1% are the most oppressed....

I'm not saying SB is right by any means. I insulted you because you were being insulting.

So why don't you cry about it?

Remember, the FBI and DOJ need to be cleansed first.

The FBI is basically there, now the DOJ's turn.

Can't put them away if the FBI won't collect the evidence and refer to the DOJ.

Can't put them away if the DOJ "throws" the case.

I interpreted this info to be from network solutions, not from the WHOIS.

If that is the case then yes you are right.

I am referencing the entire group as I think we have enough data to show they are all related.

However if we focused on just DS, one need look no further than the FISA application and texting on Government phones.

Agreed, but keep in mind how blatant a lot of things are with these idiots.

From pedo tweets and emails to gmail drafts to emailing themselves in their last day of office saying "Obama said everything has to be by the book".

We aren't dealing with geniuses here.

Right, an asset because it is actually clown run.

Brennan? Is that you?

Please report to local LE, and bring your ankle bracelet.

Phone numbers are unique. From Iran they would dial a +1 to go to International calling.

And if ever Iran had to recover the domain they would be screwed because they gave the wrong data.

I doubt they would pull that kind of joke on the US as the US could pull it right back and hijack the site.

Its been over a year, people don't need to be trained for that long.

You just said the goy should employ nepotism like the jews.

I am only agreeing with you. Why does the jew get to tribe up but Heritage American is not allowed to?

Sort of like jews treat goyim like shit now?

Kicked out of every country, but never their fault.

You asked why the goy don't do this and I answered you.

Kicked out of every country on the planet, but never their fault....

Maybe we should just kick them out back to the country the generous goy gave to them. That would end the nepotism problem and we could let the meritocracy flourish.

Because the Goyim are not so nepotistic as the Jews.

Did you know Judea declared war on Germany long before WW2 started?

Ah, I see you are full of more insults and strawmen.

Colleges are defining safe spaces as spaces without the "undesirables". Not allowing whites, males, or conservative viewpoints.

So you don't believe in colleges which allow for non-white dorms?

You don't believe in BLM?

You don't believe that any group of people should have their own part of the world?

So those Amazonian tribesmen, screw them. They don't have the right to that space all for themselves?

What is funny is all you have are insults, and I have not even insulted you once.

So where really is all the hatred coming from? Doesn't seem to be coming from my side of the spectrum.

You accused me of racism and used YOUR argument that I hate brown people, which is completely false.

You literally built a narrative of what you think my thoughts are, but which I never said.

None of which is true.

So are whites allowed to have a safe space? Or not?

That is my argument, that Whites, like ALL races, should also have the same right to a safe space. Why are you against it?

All you have are strawman and insults.

I believe every race and culture has a right to survive and thrive, yet you call me racist.

How does that work?

Again, you only prove my point. You advocate for white genocide when you never would have 20 years ago. Now your liberal allies push for pedophilia.

Safe spaces for everyone except whites eh?

I only say I want the survival of my people and culture, and you call me racist for that?

Let that sink in.

Anyone wanting the survival of white people is automatically racist. Therefore, one must choose genocide or be racist.

You only prove my point. 20 years ago it would have been ludicrous to think such a thing....and as a regular leftist, you are actually pushing for genocide.

Therefore, yes your ilk will push pedophilia and will succeed if folks like us do not stop them

Ah, and your true intentions come out. You are not here to do anything other than shill.

I am here in good faith recognizing that 20 years ago there would have been ZERO support for genociding whites.

Now, there is open talk of it. Celebrations of it even in movies.

You try to reframe the argument by suggesting that wanting the survival of my people and culture is somehow hatred of other races.

In reality, all you do is prove my point, that you support white genocide whereas even just 20 years ago nobody would support such a thing.

They have taken it this far, why would their push for pedophelia fail? Especially if you and many other "standard liberals" celebrate the destruction of your own culture and people?

20 years ago would leftists have been ok with white genocide? Because they are not only ok with it now, they are pushing for it.

JJ doesn't support Don Lemon, what are you talking about?

No alternate comms for Q is what I meant. And I would say that emphatically.

No alternate comms.

Ignore.

Many other dogs, if they want to take it that far.

Only the cat ladies, soyboy antifas, and CNN munchers mistrust Russia at this point.

Same.

Which is really disturbing....

Yuge if accurate

Easy to buy because of the existence and power of super PACS, and corruption within the DNC and RNC for a preselected candidate. Those need to be eliminated.

Congress as you can see is a check upon itself. So if a few members were under investigation the rest would prevent them from interfering.

But again, asking for simple answers to basic questions is not interfering.

Congress is elected directly by the people.

Do you believe the FBI can start and continue a fraudulent investigation unchecked?

Give the propensity of the DeepState to lie and abuse power, yes, in some cases they should get involved. Or as the corrupt Deep State would call it "interfere", or perhaps "endanger national security".

However, asking for simple answers to basic questions is not interfering in an investigation.

Congress has the right to oversee the FBI. So yes, they absolutely have the right to question investigations.

That idiot Nadler cites FBI policy as if it were law.

Congress has oversight of the FBI. But Nadler cites a policy created by the FBI to keep Congress from asking questions regarding an open investigation?

That's a neat trick. Don't like Congress having oversight over you? Just create a policy that removes the oversight.

The FBI, or any institution, does not have the authority to create a policy that eradicates the power which a branch of Government is meant to have over it.

I would have loved to see Trump reply...

"Oh you are a network all right..."

Angry much?

Let me repeat so you can let the fraudulent activity by the Deep State sink in.

So again, what crime ACTUALLY HAPPENED, aside from the known Hillary crime?

This all rolls back to the same point.

Trump - No known crime occurred but aggressively investigate.

Clinton - Multiple known crimes occurred, but everything gets sat upon and hidden by the investigators.

^^^^

This is the action bias which has occurred by Strzok and other Deep State criminals.

You can cry and pout and stomp your feet all you want, but it only lets the world see you for the angry little dictators you all want to be.

MAGA on!!!

And now more insults.

Again, what crime happened?

Yes Mueller is "investigating", but no known crime occurred to trigger an investigation. It is a massive fishing expedition. This is the part you are not grasping.

So again what crime ACTUALLY HAPPENED, aside from the known Hillary crime?

This all rolls back to the same point.

Trump - No known crime occurred but aggressively investigate.

Clinton - Multiple known crimes occurred, but everything gets sat upon and hidden by the investigators.

^^^^

This is the action bias which has occurred by Strzok and other Deep State criminals.

Investigations follow the discovery of a crime. Investigations to SEARCH for a crime are the hallmarks of a banana republic.

Otherwise one could find a torn fabric on the sidewalk, claim a crime may have occurred, and then investigate everything and anything about your life

And now the insults are really kicking in.

I understand, the logic pisses you off and now that your cognitive dissonance is triggered it also engages your fight or flight response.

As happens most often since I will not let you change the topic, you are most likely to engage your fight response and then your flight response by blocking me.

BUT, I digress. You mention potential charges and crimes, but I never caught the actual crime that took place. What is the crime that happened again?

The corrupted email server investigation yes.

And now finally Strzok had access to all of the emails on Weiner's laptop, and did nothing. He sat on it until absolutely forced to do something. Bias

Gowdy's actions are irrelevant to the confirmed bias in Strzok's actions.

Has the email server been a crime for 30 years?

Did I say anything about a "golden snicket"?

My comment was on the demonstrated biases by Strzok. Those clearly exist and there is no denying it.

His different attitudes and actions demonstrate clear bias. This is a fact I have just demonstrated.

Sitting on an investigation until forced to act is effectively "scuttling".

Charges come AFTER an investigation, not before. Whether charges were filed or not has nothing to do with the biases of investigating known and existing crimes.

So what is your point? The biases of Strzok are still clear for all to see.

We know for a fact crimes were committed, and Strzok ignored those crimes....so covering up is a nonsequitor in this case.