Durham: Five Witnesses Connected to the Clinton Campaign’s False Russian Claims Have Refused to Cooperate

Special Counsel John Durham continues to drop bombshells in filings in the prosecution of former Clinton campaign lawyer Michael Sussmann. Just last week, Durham defeated an effort by Sussmann to dismiss the charges.  He is now moving to give immunity to a key witness while revealing that the claims made by the Clinton campaign were viewed by the CIA as “not technically plausible” and “user created.” He also revealed that at least five of the former Clinton campaign contractors/researchers have invoked the Fifth Amendment and refused to cooperate in fear that they might incriminate themselves in criminal conduct. Finally, Durham offers further details on the involvement of Clinton campaign general counsel Marc Elias and former British spy Christopher Steele in the alleged false claims.

Recently, Durham revealed extremely damaging evidence against Sussmann. However, this is the first full description of the Clinton associates refusing to cooperate under the Fifth Amendment. Durham noted that he gave immunity to an individual identified only as “Research 2.” He then noted that this was made necessary by the refusal to cooperate by key Clinton associates:
“The only witness currently immunized by the government, Researcher-2, was conferred with that status on July 28, 2021 – over a month prior to the defendant’s Indictment in this matter. And the Government immunized Researcher-2 because, among other reasons, at least five other witnesses who conducted work relating to the Russian Bank-1 allegations invoked (or indicated their intent to invoke) their right against self-incrimination. The Government therefore pursued Researcher-2’s immunity in order to uncover otherwise-unavailable facts underlying the opposition research project that Tech Executive-1 and others carried out in advance of the defendant’s meeting with the FBI.”
[Emphasis added] For his part, Sussmann and the Clinton associates have sought to use attorney-client privilege to keep evidence from Durham.
Durham also detailed how the false Russian collusion claims related to Alfa Bank involved Clinton General Counsel Marc Elias and Christopher Steele. Indeed, the new requested immunized testimony would come from a Tech executive who allegedly can share information on meetings with Elias and Steele.
The Alfa Bank hoax and Sussmann’s efforts paralleled the work of his partner Elias at the law firm Perkins Coie in pushing the Steele Dossier in a separate debunked collusion claim.  The Federal Election Commission recently fined the Clinton Campaign and the DNC for hiding the funding of the dossier as a legal cost by Elias at Perkins Coie.
“Durham notes that both the CIA and FBI were sent on an effective wild goose chase by the Clinton campaign. He notes that the government found the allegations to be manufactured and not even technically possible.  He refers to the CIA in the following passage:
Agency-2 concluded in early 2017 that the Russian Bank-1 data and Russian Phone Provider-1 data was not “technically plausible,” did not “withstand technical scrutiny,” “contained gaps,” “conflicted with [itself],” and was “user created and not machine/tool generated.”
This dovetails with the statements of the Clinton associates themselves who were worried about the lack of support for the Russian collusion claims.  “Researcher 1” features prominently in those exchanges.

According to Durham, the Alfa Bank allegation fell apart even before Sussmann delivered it to the FBI. The indictment details how an unnamed “tech executive” allegedly used his authority at multiple internet companies to help develop the ridiculous claim. (The executive reportedly later claimed that he was promised a top cyber security job in the Clinton administration). Notably, there were many who expressed misgivings not only within the companies working on the secret project but also among unnamed “university researchers” who repeatedly said the argument was bogus.

The researchers were told they should not be looking for proof but just enough to “give the base of a very useful narrative.” The researchers argued, according to the indictment, that anyone familiar with analyzing internet traffic “would poke several holes” in that narrative, noting that what they saw likely “was not a secret communications channel with Russian Bank-1, but ‘a red herring,’” according to the indictment.

“Researcher-1” repeated these doubts, the indictment says, and asked, “How do we plan to defend against the criticism that this is not spoofed traffic we are observing? There is no answer to that. Let’s assume again that they are not smart enough to refute our ‘best case scenario.’ You do realize that we will have to expose every trick we have in our bag to even make a very weak association.”

“Researcher-1” allegedly further warned, “We cannot technically make any claims that would fly public scrutiny. The only thing that drives us at this point is that we just do not like [Trump]. This will not fly in eyes of public scrutiny. Folks, I am afraid we have tunnel vision. Time to regroup?”

It appears that the “time to regroup” has passed with the issuance of immunity deals to compel testimony.

Here is the filing:

US-v-Sussmann-04162022-US-Filing

429 thoughts on “Durham: Five Witnesses Connected to the Clinton Campaign’s False Russian Claims Have Refused to Cooperate”

    1. Sussmann hasn’t been locked up so far.

      Time will tell whether the jury convicts or exonerates him.

  1. Jen Psaki is the worst lying liar POS arrogant condescending lying POS press secretary ever. When will she be personally sued for slander? She deserves to be mocked into oblivion. What a god awful POS she is.

      1. Whatever your drug of choice is, you need to stop. Both Ms. Sanders and Ms. McEnany were honest and courteous. In your addled brain, because of your allegiance to the dem Nazi party and inability to actually experience anyone telling the truth, you would stick up for Ginger Goebbels.

        1. SMH that the only way that you can imagine someone having a different opinion than you is if they’re drugged.

          1. It is entirely correct to assume you are drugged or a lamebrain to make such a statement. You could have defended Psaki, but you didn’t. Instead, you tried to tear others down. That is a dishonest approach to an honest statement made by another. That is the type of approach taken by a dishonest person.

              1. It is entirely correct to assume you are drugged or a lamebrain to make such a statement. You could have defended Psaki, but you didn’t. Instead, you tried to tear others down. That is a dishonest approach to an honest statement made by another. That is the type of approach taken by a dishonest person.

                1. Anonymous the Stupid, aka Meyer the Troll Liar, you continue to troll by projecting your own faults onto others.

                  1. Anonymous the Stupid, you keep thinking that tearing another down causes you to rise up. Maybe that is what happens. You are a pervert.

                    1. No, Anonymous the Stupid, I was talking about this statement: “Psaki’s not nearly as bad as Sarah Huckabee Sanders or Kayleigh McEnany.” Instead of using an intellectually stupid argument of tearing another down, the comment could have built Psaki up. That would be difficult because she was bad, but that is the honest way.

                    2. The “pervert” Anonymous the Stupid you commented on is you, also known as Meyer the Troll Liar.

                    3. It’s your choice, Anonymous the Stupid, you can try and tear down Turley or anyone else, but all you do is make yourself look like a fool.

      2. Psaki is an excellent Party apparatchik, steadfastly committed to the DNC narratives_until they fall apart in the face of undeniable truths.

  2. Did you Trump disciples catch Turley’s little disclaimer: “Finally, Durham offers further details on the involvement of Clinton campaign general counsel Marc Elias and former British spy Christopher Steele in the ALLEGED false claims.” Turley blathers on and on, in large font, all caps and highlighting as if the claims were not merely “alleged”. As usual, this is fodder for the disciples, and it’s working, too. All a distraction to set off the actual, proven misdeeds of Trump his disciples and those members of Congress who actively participated in the Jan 6th insurrection. Turley is part of the Fox scheme to make Durham’s work sound really, really important because it’s an election year, because the truth about Trump’s crimes are the real headlines, and they’re bad and factual, not “alleged”, and because, as has been well-proven, the disciples will believe anything alt-right media tells them. Turley’s officially just part of alt-right media.

    1. Just curious about one thing…..have you shared your insights with Merrick Garland?

      He can pull the plug on Durham at any time, and should, if Durham’s hypotheses point to nothing but a ” distraction to set off(off-set?) the actual, proven misdeeds of Trump(,) his disciples(,) and those members of Congress who actively participated in the Jan(.) 6th insurrection.” In allowing Durham to go forward, Attorney General Garland does not agree with your theories. I wholeheartedly concur with Mr. Garland. I cannot help but wonder if the five Clinton associates invoking their guarantees against self-incrimination do as well.

    2. Guess you skipped the part where Turley mentioned Durham has a cooperating witness rolling over on Sussmann and the Clinton campaign. They’re all toast along with Joffe.

      Now go home and watch Maddow.

      1. Guess you missed the part where Sussmann’s lawyers get to cross-examine that witness and call their own witnesses, and you have no interest in waiting for the jury to reach a conclusion.

    3. Natacha your comment cancels itself. If you are correct, why are people refusing to testify? Since the evidence is neck deep against Trump, wouldnt the witnesses literally be tripping over themselves to testify? It would quicken Trumps defeat and ruin chances in 2024, as well as vindicate people like yourself. And, since you are so sure, where is Adam Schiff with his ironclad evidence he kept screaming about for 2.5 years but never produced? Wouldnt this be the perfect time? Where is that evidence?

    4. You seem to think alleged means false.

      It does not, and has been apparent from both Durham and Turley – the claims are a mere jury vote of guilty away from proved.

      The only doubt is whether a DC jury will go rogue.

      It is unlikely we have seen all of Durham’s evidence – but we have seen more than enough.

      Unlike Woke prosecutors – we can likely trust Durham’s briefs – he is unlikely to receive the judicial admonishments that Mueller received in NY to quit making claims without providing any evidence.

      It is not likely Durham faked Sussman’s tweets or emails. It is unlikely he has edited FBI or CIA memo’s to invert their meaning.
      It is unlikely Durham has violated the rules of professional conduct.

      Unlike woke left prosecutors Durham would be prosecuted and/or disbarred for having a coma in the wrong place in his petitions.

      I would note that all documents submitted to the court require the Attorney to “verify” them – essentially to assert under potential legal penalty the truth of the claims and evidence made.
      The standard of care is not as high as for testimony – and it is rare to see courts discipline attorneys for some egregious violations – never the less,
      Attorney’s are not supposed to make claims they can not prove in court briefs.

      It USED to be a standard of journalism that all reporting of prosecution was “alleged” until after a verdict.

      That is much less consistent today.

      Turley is merely applying a standard of real journalism.

      Regardless alleged does not mean what you think it does.

      Durham’s fundimental problem is NOT the quality of his evidence – it is the poor quality and political bias of DC juries.

      Further I doubt this is going to a jury. I strongly suspect Durham’s goal is to “flip” Sussman.

      Sussman put himself into a legally precarious position.

      Sussman is the attorney who was KNOWINGLY feeding false claims to the FBI, State Dept, and CIA.

      But he is not the driving force.

      1. Durham hasn’t charged Sussmann with knowingly making material false claims to the “State Dept, and CIA,” and the sole false claim Durham alleged Sussmann made to the FBI is that Sussmann wasn’t there on behalf of a client.

        I look forward to the Judge’s rulings on all of the motions in limine and to the trial.

        Your belief that the attorneys cannot jointly find an unbiased jury in a city of almost 700,000 people suggests that you’re biased against Washingtonians.

        1. “Your belief that the attorneys cannot jointly find an unbiased jury in a city of almost 700,000 people suggests that you’re biased against Washingtonians.”

          ATS, for one whose claim to fame, is he knows math, you don’t seem to know it very well. Statistically, where there is a high bias rate, getting a jury pool randomly that isn’t biased is low. With such random selection, the attorney will run out of his limited peremptory challenges.

            1. Anonymous the Stupid, I guess you have proven the point that as much as you brag about your math skills you don’t use math very well in your normal life.

              You can’t answer the following.
              “Statistically, where there is a high bias rate, getting a jury pool randomly that isn’t biased is low. With such random selection, the attorney will run out of his limited peremptory challenges.”

              1. You are the one and only Anonymous the Stupid (ATS), also known as Meyer the Troll Liar.

                “You can’t answer the following.”

                You didn’t ask a question, Stupid, so there is nothing to “answer.”

                You further demonstrate your Stupidity by repeating a claim where you invoked a fallacy known as begging the question, arguing from your assumption “there is a high bias rate.”

                1. The question was implicit. In other words explain your ignorance.

                  Here is the original post that you had no effective reply to. Instead you provided juvenile insult.

                  Anonymous the Stupid writes: “Your belief that the attorneys cannot jointly find an unbiased jury in a city of almost 700,000 people suggests that you’re biased against Washingtonians.”

                  Meyer writes: ATS, for one whose claim to fame, is he knows math, you don’t seem to know it very well. Statistically, where there is a high bias rate, getting a jury pool randomly that isn’t biased is low. With such random selection, the attorney will run out of his limited peremptory challenges.

                  Come on Brandon, let’s hear how you defend what you said.

                  1. You are the one and only Anonymous the Stupid (ATS), also known as Meyer the Troll Liar, and I already pointed out the fallacy that you invoked. In response, you troll, as you are wont to do.

                    1. Anonymous the stupid, you are a liar. You are so embarrassed by your lack of commonsense that you have resorted to lying. I am waiting for you to prove the fallacy.

                      (“Statistically, where there is a high bias rate, getting a jury pool randomly that isn’t biased is low. With such random selection, the attorney will run out of his limited peremptory challenges.”)

                    2. You are the one and only Anonymous the Stupid (ATS), also known as Meyer the Troll Liar, and I already proved that you invoked a fallacy known as begging the question, when you argued from the assumption “there is a high bias rate” (your starting assumption).

                    3. No one begged the question Anonymous the Stupid. You didn’t have an answer and now recognize how stupid you were to fight such a losing battle based on insults. Here is the initial statement to John Say and my reply. Maybe you are so Stupid you still can’t see the flaw in your comment.

                      “Your belief that the attorneys cannot jointly find an unbiased jury in a city of almost 700,000 people suggests that you’re biased against Washingtonians.”

                      ATS, for one whose claim to fame, is he knows math, you don’t seem to know it very well. Statistically, where there is a high bias rate, getting a jury pool randomly that isn’t biased is low. With such random selection, the attorney will run out of his limited peremptory challenges.

                    4. You are the one and only Anonymous the Stupid (ATS), also known as Meyer the Troll Liar, and *you* begged the question by ASSuming “there is a high bias rate.” Your choice to repeat your fallacious argument only underscores why you’re Anonymous the Stupid.

                    5. Anonymous the Stupid, for someone who claims to correct his mistakes, you want to make sure that everyone knows you are a liar. There is no begging the question. There was a dumb statement by you and my answer. Here it is again for everyone to see. We now all know that you believe 2 + 2 = 5

                      “Your belief that the attorneys cannot jointly find an unbiased jury in a city of almost 700,000 people suggests that you’re biased against Washingtonians.”

                      ATS, for one whose claim to fame, is he knows math, you don’t seem to know it very well. Statistically, where there is a high bias rate, getting a jury pool randomly that isn’t biased is low. With such random selection, the attorney will run out of his limited peremptory challenges.

                    6. You are the one and only Anonymous the Stupid (ATS), also known as Meyer the Troll Liar, and you are continuing to beg the question by ASSuming “there is a high bias rate.”

                      Apparently you’d rather Stupidly repeat a fallacious argument instead of learning from your mistake, and it’s no surprise that you Troll by Lying “you believe 2 + 2 = 5.”

                    7. Now you are proving yourself even more stupid by showing us you can’t even write your own replies.

    5. Nutacha

      I would note that aside from possibly some court room drama, and possibly alot of piling on and maybe some additional convictions.
      This is all already over – atleast as far as rational people.
      Durham has done what the FBI should have done, what Mueller should have done and actually looked at the roots of the evidence regarding Russian Collusion.
      And he has exposed the fact that it was all MADE UP.

      The alpha bank nonsense NEVER was conequential – but what we now know is that the actual evidence was not merely poor it was manufactured.
      Durham has found th same with the Steele Dossier – the allegations in it did not come from double agents in the kremlin – it was gossip from people in the DNC.
      Let me repeat – it is not just that the evidence was WRONG, it is that it was MADE UP.
      This is also why the FBI’s lack of candor to the FISA court was so important.
      The FBI failed to disclose that the allegations were sourced from the Clinton campaign – thus hidding from the court the possibility that the FBI was being sold a bill of goods for political purposes.

      I do not like LIARS – like those affiliated with Clinton – but Unlike some of her other misconduct – political lies are not crimes.

      I take odds with Durham prosecuting for 18 USC 1001 – I do not think lying to a government agent should be a crime – reprehensible, but not a crime.

      Bu SPECIFIC types of lies ARE already crimes. Knowingly False reports of crimes – are crimes themself.

      Sussman provided faked evidence to the FBI.

      The HFA campaign’s conduct was dispicable, but not illegal – except to the extent others were involved in conspiring to report a false crime to the FBI.

      That said the REAL problem is within the government.

      The FBI should have investigated the credibility of the allegations FIRST.

      Further the FBI clearly knew the information was coming from the Clinton campaign – despite Sussman’s lie – quickly.
      This BTW DOES Bolster Sussman’s defense. 18 USC 1001 requires that the lie misdirect the investigation.

      Sussman’s lie WAS material – but the FBI quickly KNEW he was lying – so the lie had no cost.

      That makes the conduct of the FBI relevant – they were being lied to, they knew they were being lied to, and instead of investigating the evidence they were given, they investigated the false allegations being made.

      From very early on the problem was NOT Sussman’s lie. It was the Government’s complicity

      Long before Rod Rosenstein appointed Mueller – DOJ and FBI Knew this was a HOAX.

      By winking and nodding and knowingly buying the HOAX they made themselves co-conspirators.

      Government agents persuing fraudulent claims IS abuse of power, it IS a crime.

      1. “This is all already over – atleast as far as rational people.”

        No, it isn’t.

        The judge hasn’t even ruled on the motions in limine.

        “Sussman provided faked evidence to the FBI. ”

        Durham hasn’t charged Sussmann with that, and I doubt you have evidence of it (even if you believe that the researchers’ interpretation of the evidence was mistaken, that doesn’t imply that the evidence itself was “faked”).

  3. @Frank

    I don’t think they are talking about the death penalty.
    Its more an issue of ‘suicide’ or killed during a robbery gone bad…

    Something about the high mortality rate of those who are in a position to cross the Clintons…

    W.R.T treason… the death penalty is still on the books.
    The reality is that its not a likely outcome based on the past 30+ yrs of charges / convictions.

  4. John Say has torn Jeff Silberman apart and made him look like a little boy who just stole a cookie from the cookie jar.

    John did this in several posts, to which Jeff provided inane responses that were laughable.

    I will repost some of what John said for Jeff’s sake since it is worth remembering.

    Jeff: “You are not very knowledgeable.
    “Birtherism” was concocted by Clinton Crony Sydney Blumenthal.
    As was the Ukraine corruption allegations against Biden.”

    Other lefties might want to take note of this as well.

    Jeff, “You say Trumpism is “irrational” – but you do not define “Trumpism.”
    MAGA, or Trumpism if you prefer acording to a BBC evaluation of Trump policies is:
    Ending the ‘reliance’ on China and protecting US manufacturing
    ‘America First’ and reasserting US sovereignty
    Building the wall and curbing immigration
    Lower drug costs, terminate the Affordable Care Act
    Promoting US energy
    Database to trace police misbehaviour
    Defending the Second Amendment
    Whether you agree or disagree – these are not irrational.”
    Jeff, you can send your check to Turley. He will forward it to his teaching assistant and tutor.

    Way to go, John!

    1. I find it completely beyond belief the number of political conflicts in the US that Hillary is at the bottom of.

      The Birther thing was an attempt to hurt Obama in the 2008 democratic primary. It had little impact there.
      But it had more strength among republicans in the general and Trump took ownership of it after the election.

      But Obama was so angry about it that he refused to all Clinton crony Sydney Blumenthal a position in the administration.

      As the Clinton Bathroom basement email server came to light – Sydney Blumenthall was one of the major outside of govenrmnt people Clinton was emailing classified information.

      Blumenthal also sold the Biden Ukraine corruption to the NYT – in an effort to knock Biden out of the 2016 election – and that worked.

      But it still came back to haunt democrats later.

      Hillary is evil. She will do evil and what appear to be stupid things to most of us – and get away with it to take out competitors.
      Even in her own party.

      Hillary is litterally the author of many of the right wing conspiracy theories she complains about.

  5. The leaders at DOJ and FBI tried to overthrow the elected President of the US, they should get the death penalty

      1. “Anyone who wants the state killing citizens without a trial is unAmerican.”
        ******************************
        Well a “penalty” implies a trial of some description but for arguments sake, how and when would you conduct a trial for those armed, confederate, US citizens charging up to the copse of trees on Cementery Ridge on July 3, 1863 swords drawn and Richmond armory muskets blazing?

        1. Particular States availed themselves of the constitutional freedom of secession.

          Please cite any section of the Constitution which prohibits and denies secession.

          Those States must have seceded and the U.S. Army must have withdrawn from sovereign foreign soil. Period. End of event.

          Abraham Lincoln must have been impeached and convicted for multiple manifest violations of the U.S. Constitution, including, but not limited to, abuse of power and misuse of the U.S. Army.

      2. When one says “death Penalty” – there is a presumption that there was a trial in which they were easily found guilty.

        Regardless, the problem with the post is that the death penalty would only apply to treason in time of war.

        Otherwise the author is correct – there must be consequences.

        Absolutely a trial – though not in DC – somewhere where a fair trial is actually possible.

        1. Your belief that a fair trial is not possible in a city of almost 700,000 people does not reflect well on you.

          1. Are you sure that’s right? It seems to me that it reflects badly on that city of 700,000 persons of a largely parasitic nature.

    1. they should get the death penalty

      He didn’t say kill, Death penalty is the sentencing phase of a trial.

  6. Durham should also look into the Joe Nacchio case, the former CEO of Qwest Communications. In this case Nacchio told the Washington Post that he believes he was sent to prison, for years, by the U.S. Department of Justice.

    In other words, according to Nacchio’s account, Durham’s own colleagues at DOJ trumped up charges and sent Nacchio to prison. Nacchio claims the DOJ coerced him to commit felonies and Nacchio refused to break the law. When this event supposedly happened there was no wartime emergency authority. DOJ was required to obtain permission from judges by obtaining judicial-warrants.

  7. I guess JeffSilberman told them to lawyer up. And it’s all the fault of Trump and Trumpists.

  8. “He also revealed that at least five of the former Clinton campaign contractors/researchers have invoked the Fifth Amendment and refused to cooperate in fear that they might incriminate themselves in criminal conduct.”

    Or maybe they’re worried about being suicided.

    1. I’m glad you posted this. Sussmann can use this video in his defense, and HRC and the DNC too! Awesome!

      1. You haven’t sipped the Kool-ade, you have obviously been guzzling it by the barrel.
        Your corrupt to it’s very core Communist Democrat party has reached the lowest approval rating in the history of American politics.
        IMHO, with the current microscope on election fraud, it won’t be as easy for your corrupt Communist party to blatantly steal the midterms as it was in the last election.
        Pedo Joe had less than 2000 people attend all of his campaign rallies combined, yet we are to believe that he received more votes than both Hillary and Barry Sotero did when they ran for president,? Only a complete and total moron could possibly believe that to be true..
        Our installed corrupt senile President said during one of his scarcely attended rallies that the “The Democrat party has organized the most sophisticated and extensive voter FRAUD organization that America has ever seen”, we saw it live time on election night being implemented.
        And lets not forget what Barry “The Destroyer” said about pedo Joe “Never underestimate Joe’s ability to EFF things up”

        1. Biden doesn’t need the 2022 midterms. He’s going to do his best to start WWIII. That will change the subject. Democrats don’t care about burning the world down, as long as they can rule over the ashes.

      2. How exactly would this be useful to Sussman ?

        Carlson interviewed someone looking to address problems of low testosterone.

        I did not see Carlson endorse anything – except that the issue was worth investigating.

        Even the guest – atleast in the clip was not endorsing a specific treatment. just discussing some things he was looking into.

        This clip is close to meaningless. The gist is Carlson interviewed someone who may or may not know something about addressing low testosterone and Carlson was not openly hostile.

        There does not appear to be some hidden deeper meaning.

      1. you missed the reason why he posted it. He has undescended nutz which is why he became a trans, and now regrets the transition, so he is considering transitioning back to grow the nutz he wished he had had.

        Joke from the 1990s:

        Why does Hillary Clinton wear pants while in the White House?
        So that no one can see her test1cles hanging lower than Bill’s

    2. That’s very interesting and totally irrelevant to the topic. Keep on trolling though.

      1. Why answer this person? These kind of people want any kind of attention they can get. They disappear sooner or later when you ignore them.

  9. Right wing news alert:

    The Navajo Nation has once again rejected official recognition of same-sex marriage.

    “Navajo same-sex marriage bill voted down at first of several hearings”
    https://sourcenm.com/2022/04/15/navajo-same-sex-marriage-bill-voted-down-at-first-of-several-hearings/

    The Navajo Nation is a homophobic, racist, ethnocentric, misogynist cis-gendered state. It’s not all their fault, though: that’s the form of government progressives have imposed on them. One is still mystified when white liberals proclaim their love for such a conservative, misogynist, cisgendered, homophobic, racist group. OTOH, progressives wield unlimited power to impose their policy preferences on American Indians, via the BIA and numerous other programs.

    1. They know it’s simply perversion. There is a reason moral codes are made in society; they aren’t just stupid rules and it’s not about bigotry or being homophobic. Morals are for the survival of the race. Perversion is non-survival, no future for the race. This is common sense to the majority. The current depravity is just a stupid sideline to lessen birth rates while the major efforts to do that and get rid of the population has been ongoing for 2 years (though it’s been ongoing for decades). It’s a psych program. I’ll just leave that here….

  10. Feel the hate Just one of many examples:

    “The Dim lieacrats at work. Absolute enemies of the Republic.”

    Hans Frank would be proud.

  11. Monument says:

    “Looking forward to the facts coming out.”

    Facts? Do you actually think the Left and Right will evermore agree on the facts? That’s wishful thinking because we can’t.

    If we could just suspend our judgment until both sides have been heard in a court of law subject to the rules of evidence and before an impartial jury, we will determine the facts as best as humanly possible. We have to rely upon this time-honored process to establish facts. If we do not accept the verdict of juries, we are finished as a unified country.

    I have always stated that I will accept ANY AND ALL findings a jury makes- civil or criminal. We know that Trump may not. We know that Turley certainly will. That much we DO know as a matter of fact.

    1. JEFF:

      Monument Colorado is the Blog Stooge.

      He is also Thinkthrough, James, Hullbobby, Feldman, Ralph Chappell, Margot Ballhere, Mistress Addams, Alma Carman, Pblinca and many, many more.

      There is no satisfaction in debating the Blog Stooge. Because he has no intention of taking part in a genuine exchange. Instead Monument Colorado will melt away and Thinkthrough responds. And if you’re foolish enough to answer Thinkthrough, James will reply. That’s how the con works: ‘A different puppet comes back each time ignoring any points you’ve made’. Consequently you’re reduced to punching clouds. Which seems hilarious to the Blog Stooge.

      1. I don’t know who you are either. I tend not to engage the anonymous. Should Musk take over Twitter, I read that he was toying with the idea of eliminating anonymity so that the public square would be less of a cesspool. Even Turley has acknowledged the problem of anonymity:

        “We do allow comments as well as anonymity, which some sites have disallowed. It is a curious thing how anonymity will unleash vile and dark impulses in people. Yet, anonymity is part of free speech and, while we have discussed eliminating anonymous comments due to abuses, we are trying to preserve this important element to free speech. It is possible to be anonymous but not obnoxious.”

        It is *possible* to be anonymous but not obnoxious; however, vile and dark impulses have overtaken this blog. I don’t know to whom Turley is referring when he states that “we have discussed eliminating anonymous comments due to abuses.” Apparently, the “we” does not include us. To my knowledge, Turley has never discussed anything with his contributors in public. It’s a one-way street. Perhaps, when Turley says “we,” he means only us- not him personally.

        In any event, *we* should discuss topic again. You know where I stand.

        1. Darren,

          I blame you for not barring this individual encouraging my suicide. Are you going to take action or not?

        2. JEFF, get a clue. We’re all Anonymous ‘because’ of the Blog Stooge. Any name used by any liberal here is going to be smeared every which way by the Blog Stooge.

          1. Turley has stated:

            “Indeed, we value different perspectives and do not want to add another “echo chamber” to the Internet where we each repeat or amplify certain views. However, the Turley blog was created with a strong commitment to civility, a position that distinguishes us from many other sites. We do not tolerate personal attacks or bullying.”

            Yet his worst fears have materialized. His experiment with anonymity has failed miserably. Why doesn’t he change his civility rule and insist upon verified identities?

            Despite his professed “strong commitment to civility,” by tolerating these constant and unending personal attacks, Turley has failed to uphold his commitment. His site sadly has degenerated into an “echo chamber” no different from many others.

              1. I knew this was in the works for years who in their right mind would ever think that Trump would be a Russian agent are you kidding me? This isn’t some Tom Clancy book. Use common sense people, it was all a made up scandle to take away from Hillary’s corruption. Mark my words she will end up in jail sooner later.

                  1. Who in their right mind could ever believe that a candidate for the US Presidency, behind in the polls, would conspire with agents of a hostile foreign government to spread lies about his opponent in key districts in some key swing states, calculated to sway the Electoral College, and deliver a win, despite losing the popular vote? Who in their right mind would believe that a US President would publicly side against his own intelligence officials and in favor of a murderous dictator, or lobby to get a hostile foreign government re-instated into the G-7? Who in their right mind would believe that a US President would withhold aid appropriated by Congress to help a struggling democracy, in exchange for ginning up fake evidence against his opponent? Who in their right mind would believe that a failed former US President would praise a sociopathic mass murderer as “smart, savvy genius” for invading a peaceful democratic country whose sovereignty the mass murderer refuses to acknowledge? Who in their right mind could ever believe that a US President would trash the EU and NATO because the mass murdering psychopath who helped him cheat his way into office is threatened by the prospect of democracy on his doorstep, or that this person would muse about removing the US from NATO?

                    Here’s some serious food for thought: Volodomyr Zelenskyy would be dead now if Trump could have cheated his way back into office in 2020, and Trump would not only do nothing about it, like he refused to even criticize MBS for murdering US-based journalist Jamal Khashoggi, he would probably praise him for ridding the world of a troublemaker.

                    And, you don’t see that Trump is a Russian asset?

                    1. I said he’s an asset, correcting the person who said “agent.” Do you understand the difference?

                    2. I guess the whole part about the government lying about the Russian collusion from day one escaped you. The fact that Trump was not colluding with the Russians also escaped you.

                      Trump is less of a Russian asset than Biden is. He is definitely less of a Chinese asset than Biden is.

                    3. No one in their right mind would – because it is just a collection of self evidently false left wing conspiracy theories.

                    4. All true – in an alternate universe.

                      Meanwhile in the Real world – you know earth – the repeated conspiracies to destroy democracy, undermine elections are all from the LEFT.

                    5. Lets see Zelensky survived quite well while Trump was president. Ukraine was invaded – while Obama was president and Biden was extorting them to line his sons pockets. It was invaded with Biden as president. But from 2017-2021 Russia did not invade anyone.

                      In fact the whole world seemed to be slowly headed towards peaceful slumber – until Biden was elected.

                1. The entire Collusion Delusion thing was absurd from the start.

                  While Trump fawned stupidly over Putin too many times,

                  There was and has never been any sane possibility that Putin would choose to favor Trump whose platform was openly hostile to Russian interests.

          2. Weren’t the Federalist and anti Federalist papers written with pseudonyms ie anonymous. That just means your comments must stand on their own merits. I feel a pseudonym use today on platforms where many people use the same moniker is a problem only the platform management can fix.

      2. Monument Colo.. I’m from 3 miles up the hill in Palmer lake and I know Blog stooge be is B just one B of the idiots in monument. It’s in the water

    2. Right. Accept every single jury verdict everywhere at all times. Real wisdom there. That means all the people applying their lawyer Benavides and tech savvy to getting jury verdicts overturned because they found that DNA evidence proved the victims of those very wrong prosecutions and lazy and dunb detective work, those innocent victims should accept every jury verdict?

      Maybe you also think that we should accept the official (proved wrong) Gulf of Tonkin lie, the unproven Battleship Maine war drumbeat that caused war fever against Spain, or WMDs in Iraq, that a magic bullet zig-zagged inside JFK’s he a d? So you must also think the US Senate, acting as jury in the first anti-Trump impeachment, rejecting the equivalent of conviction, you think they did wrong by doing it again?

          1. Spanky,

            Even you can discern the difference between a convicted defendant merely claiming he is innocent as opposed to an Innocence Project exonerating him with newly discovered evidence before an impartial judge.

        1. Generally overturned jury verdists are jury verdicts in a court of law.

          We are not discussing jury verdicts of dancing with the stars.

            1. Good evening Jeff.

              I see you’ve met John Say. He is not Meyer, but you will likely find him to be as big a waste of time.

              Unrelated, you might be interested in this NYT article reporting that federal Judge Amy Totenberg “cleared the way on Monday for a group of Georgia voters to move forward with legal efforts seeking to disqualify Representative Marjorie Taylor Greene from running for re-election to Congress, citing her role in the Jan. 6, 2021, attack on the Capitol.”
              https://web.archive.org/web/20220419020024/https://www.nytimes.com/2022/04/18/us/politics/marjorie-taylor-greene-jan-6.html

              1. Anonymous,

                Yes, I had forgotten that I had put John Say on my “ignore list” as I have Meyer. He had been absent from this blog for a while. They are very similar in their obtuseness. One can only shake one’s head in disbelief in trying to hold a conversation with either.

                Thanks for the link. I hope that some of my posts are as informative to you as yours are to me.

                1. Yes, but what you shake is a very small head filled with vitriol against anyone who disagrees with you. That includes Professor Turley, who you suck up to and later denigrate.

                  Please, don’t discuss anything with people you disagree with. Almost the entire blog is fed up with your baby talk.

    3. Since O.J. has been cleared in a court of law we should all help him in his search to find the killer.

      1. Most blacks believe O.J. was framed just like most Trumpists believe the election was rigged.

        1. OJ was framed. That does not mean he did not do it. Overall the OJ verdicts were right – he was not found guilty criminally beyond a reasonable doubt and he was found more likely than not responsible civilly.

          Your logic skills are incredibly poor.

    4. Jeff, thanks. As of this time there are over 225 comments so I guess Turley has stuck a nerve. But I agree let’s wait to see how this turns out in the courts, The ” Clinton People” have every right to plead the 5th. As did those on ” Trumps” side”. As of right now ” established facts ” are at minimum. I know this is a legal blog( mostly), and all have the right to put forth their opinions. But there is a system for sorting out right and wrong. The courts. And I am sure one side will be greatly disappointed in the outcome.
      Then, let the fireworks begin.

      1. I agree, Paul. Why waste our breath before all the facts are in and the arguments litigated? There will be plenty of time to shout at each other after the verdicts are rendered.

        You betting on the NBA? Got any tips??

        1. No Jeff, Only bet on football. There was a time when I would bet on which droplet would reach the bottom of the window first. Those days are long gone. Don’t want to pay for a divorce.
          And I fully anticipate a lot of shouting.

          1. Paul,

            Everyone wants the perfect marriage. The perfect marriage is like the perfect crime. The trick is not getting caught….

            1. Thanks for the advice Jeff. But things have changed. Don’t have as much ” disposable income” as I did when I owned my company. Lot’s of ” undisclosed income” if you catch my drift. I would hand over my paycheck ( no direct deposit) every week. But I could ” expense” other things. Hope the statute of limitations has run out.

              1. In my experience, a woman does not care how much you earn, they only care how much you spend! The happiest two days in a man’s life is the day he got married and the day he gets divorced.

    1. You are the one and only Anonymous the Stupid (ATS), aka Meyer the Troll Liar.

      One of your favorite ways of trolling is by pretending to know what someone else will do in the future, attributing a negative future act to that person.

  12. Meanwhile..

    In An Alternative Universe..

    The Question Is Still..

    WHAT ABOUT HILLARY..?!

    The person asking this question is a constipated nerd, of course. His voice is shrill. He is stuck in a 2016 time warp where Trump’s total assault on democracy has yet to unfold.

    Facts mean nothing. Trump’s complete lack of political experience is somehow an asset. His ‘genius’ as a businessman should be clearly obvious. Never mind the bankruptcies! Only baby-killing liberals care that Trump almost lost his father’s fortune. It takes a true business ‘genius’ to solicit Russian investors and marry Russian-speaking wives.

    1. Facts mean nothing. Trump’s complete lack of political experience is somehow an asset
      He kept Russia out of Ukraine.
      But 4 years of peace and prosperity. Answers on the southern border, progress in the Mid East using the Abraham accords, prove that a man the sets and achieves goals is far superior to politicians. Think what he could have done if the establishment Republicans would have fought rather than roll over for the Dem coup

        1. Do you know what the word coup means? Alternatively do you change the definition when coup is used in Jan 6?

          1. I like how you guys call January 6th a coup as if the plan was for the guy wearing buffalo horns to become the speaker of the house. Or that the US didn’t have the resources to forcibly remove a flashmob that carried no weapons. No one but the brainwashed NY Times cultists truly believe it was a coup attempt.

            1. A self-coup, not a coup, and the acts weren’t limited to Jan. 6.

              Mike Pence has already spoken of how Trump and Eastman conspired to get him to obstruct the vote count leading up to Jan. 6, though he didn’t refer to it using the phrase “conspiracy to obstruct the vote count.”

              Yes, people had weapons on J6. Multiple people have already been convicted of carrying and/or using weapons that day. Only people who’ve chosen to remain ignorant of the facts assert things like “carried no weapons.”

              1. Mike Pence did not call it a coup. Don’t lie.

                Mike Pence did what he thought was proper and legal. Trump did what he thought was correct and lawful. Neither did anything legally wrong, whether I agree or disagree with either of them.

                You are being deceitful again in trying to link Pence and Trump together to prove a coup took place. Aside from being Stupid, that is a lie.

                Jan6 might actually be part of a conspiracy created by Democrats. Some people did bad things, but the rule of law was not applied to Jan 6 where only those seemingly in favor of Trump were arrested. Those supporting the Democrat position were not arrested.

                You constantly conflate the entry into the Capitol building with guns. That is a lie. No one entered the Capitol building with a gun, and the only one murdered was a tiny unarmed woman with her arms and legs spread apart. That to animals was no big deal.

                Now Anonymous the Stupid will start his word parsing. He will want to define weapons to say weapons were taken into the Capitol building. But, in the past, he said guns were taken into the Capitol building. He is trying to lie. Anything can be a weapon, even ATS’s shoelaces, but this liar has to lie. When he is finished with word parsing the word weapon, he will turn to the Capitol and say there is a difference between the Capitol building and the wider Capitol grounds. He is being deceptive as his initial comments had to do only with the Capitol building. People protest all the time on Capitol grounds. What he will forget is the sight of the Capitol Police letting the protestors into the building.

                Anonymous the Stupid has a very selective memory that pushes his view of the world. His selective process is nothing more than a lie compounded by his deceit.

                1. “Mike Pence did not call it a coup. Don’t lie.”

                  I didn’t claim that Pence called it a coup. I haven’t lied.

                  You’re simply doing your usual trolling where you pretend that someone said or did something they didn’t do and attack your own straw man. This is why your nickname is Meyer the Troll Liar.

                  “Neither [Pence nor Trump] did anything legally wrong”

                  I didn’t say that Pence did something legally wrong. I said “Mike Pence has already spoken of how Trump and Eastman conspired to get him to obstruct the vote count leading up to Jan. 6, though he didn’t refer to it using the phrase “conspiracy to obstruct the vote count.”

                  Judge Carter disagrees with you that Trump didn’t do anything wrong: “the Court finds it more likely than not that President Trump corruptly attempted to obstruct the Joint Session of Congress on January 6, 2021. … the evidence demonstrates that President Trump likely attempted to obstruct the Joint Session of Congress on January 6, 2021. … The Court discussed above how the evidence shows that President Trump likely knew that the electoral count plan was illegal. President Trump continuing to push that plan despite being aware of its illegality constituted obstruction by “dishonest” means under § 371. The evidence also demonstrates that Dr. Eastman likely knew that the plan was unlawful. … Based on the evidence, the Court finds that it is more likely than not that President Trump and Dr. Eastman dishonestly conspired to obstruct the Joint Session of Congress on January 6, 2021.

                  Unlike the personal opinions that people post here, Judge Carter’s legal ruling is legally significant: “the memo likely furthered the crimes of obstruction of an official proceeding and conspiracy to defraud the United States, it is subject to the crime-fraud exception and the Court ORDERS it to be disclosed.” Eastman has chosen to abide by the ruling and has already turned over that memo and the other 100 documents that Judge Carter ordered him to turn over to the J6 Committee.

                  “You constantly conflate the entry into the Capitol building with guns. That is a lie.”

                  I didn’t claim that anyone entered “into the Capitol building with guns.”

                  You’re simply doing your usual trolling where you pretend that someone said or did something they didn’t do and attack your own straw man. This is why your nickname is Meyer the Troll Liar.

                  My actual claim, “Yes, people had weapons on J6. Multiple people have already been convicted of carrying and/or using weapons that day” is true. You can see all of the weapons charges here, by doing a text search on “weapon”: https://www.justice.gov/usao-dc/capitol-breach-cases

                  You continue to project your own faults onto others when you say “His selective process is nothing more than a lie compounded by his deceit.”

                  That’s YOU, Meyer the Troll Liar.

                  1. “I didn’t claim that Pence called it a coup. ”

                    Anonymous the Stupid, if you wish to use deceit to make your point, be ready to be called a liar. You like to place things in close proximity to make people believe things that you know aren’t true. When answering a question about what a coup is, don’t add superfluous statements to confuse the reader.

                    You lie all the time. The question was: “Do you know what the word coup means?”

                    The next thing we know, you respond by talking about Mike Pence. You are deliberately being deceitful, and because of that, I said, “Don’t lie.”

                    If you don’t like it, don’t be deceitful and don’t lie. Stop covering your intentions with a lot of other stuff. Answer the question or don’t answer at all.

                    “I am not interested in what Judge Carter did. He stretched his powers and made a statement that a decent judge should have never made. He showed his biases. In his mind, justice is not blind. He acted like a low-life Democrat instead of a judge.

                    “likely attempted to obstruct”

                    What does that mean? Nothing. What is the proof? The judge was reading people’s minds and could not make a solid case. Therefore he used the phrase, ‘likely attempted to obstruct ‘

                    We have a lot of terrorists on watchlists. Perhaps because they are ‘likely to,’ we should suddenly violate their civil liberties and put them in jail. With that in mind, it seems you are ‘likely to’ assist terrorists in carrying out terrorism. Just like Judge Carter, I am reading your mind and determining, without basic facts, what is likely.

                    Judges deal in facts, not in the garbage you like to provide. Though you think his actions have legal significance, they don’t. They demonstrate bias and the reality that our judicial system is filled with judgers that do not understand the rule of law. You don’t either, and you prove that almost daily.

                    “I didn’t claim that anyone entered “into the Capitol building with guns.”

                    You did, and that caused a stir on the blog. You finally did your usual thing and said it wasn’t you and that when you were speaking, you were talking about the Capitol grounds even though the discussion had to do with people entering the Capitol building. You can quote all the statements you want, but the initial statements you made had context: the Capitol building.

                    Your default is to lie or blame someone else. Do you know why? Because you are Anonymous the Stupid.

                    1. You are the one and only Anonymous the Stupid, aka Meyer the Troll Liar, and your response is an excellent illustration of your trolling.

                    2. What is the matter, Anonymous the Stupid? Is the problem that you don’t like out of context innuendo? Don’t do it, and don’t lie. Do you not like the other person stepping on your turf of deceit? Don’t be deceitful, and don’t lie. I explained why I wrote what I did.

                      Your real problem is that you have no answer except your silly meaningless statement that you have made dozens of times. You hate being labeled though most people on the blog label themselves with an alias or name. You want to remain hidden. Do you know why? You are Anonymous the Stupid.

                    3. You are the one and only Anonymous the Stupid, aka Meyer the Troll Liar, and you are continuing to troll.

                      If you do not like being called out as a Troll Liar, then stop trolling and lying.

                    4. Anonymous the Stupid, I love when you call me out. It tells me I am hitting the target. Now you can continue being Stupid, deceitful and a liar.

                    5. Meyer the Troll Liar, aka the one and only Anonymous the Stupid, you are the stupid, deceitful liar here.

                      Given how often you project, apparently you’re telling me that I am hitting the target. You are a large target and so are easy to hit.

                    6. Anonymous the Stupid, I love when you copy what I write and prove you have no imagination. Let me give you something to think on even though in several attempts you couldn’t deal with it.

                      “I didn’t claim that Pence called it a coup. ”

                      Anonymous the Stupid, if you wish to use deceit to make your point, be ready to be called a liar. You like to place things in close proximity to make people believe things that you know aren’t true. When answering a question about what a coup is, don’t add superfluous statements to confuse the reader.

                      You lie all the time. The question was: “Do you know what the word coup means?”

                      The next thing we know, you respond by talking about Mike Pence. You are deliberately being deceitful, and because of that, I said, “Don’t lie.”

                      If you don’t like it, don’t be deceitful and don’t lie. Stop covering your intentions with a lot of other stuff. Answer the question or don’t answer at all.

                      “I am not interested in what Judge Carter did. He stretched his powers and made a statement that a decent judge should have never made. He showed his biases. In his mind, justice is not blind. He acted like a low-life Democrat instead of a judge.

                      “likely attempted to obstruct”

                      What does that mean? Nothing. What is the proof? The judge was reading people’s minds and could not make a solid case. Therefore he used the phrase, ‘likely attempted to obstruct ‘

                      We have a lot of terrorists on watchlists. Perhaps because they are ‘likely to,’ we should suddenly violate their civil liberties and put them in jail. With that in mind, it seems you are ‘likely to’ assist terrorists in carrying out terrorism. Just like Judge Carter, I am reading your mind and determining, without basic facts, what is likely.

                      Judges deal in facts, not in the garbage you like to provide. Though you think his actions have legal significance, they don’t. They demonstrate bias and the reality that our judicial system is filled with judgers that do not understand the rule of law. You don’t either, and you prove that almost daily.

                      “I didn’t claim that anyone entered “into the Capitol building with guns.”

                      You did, and that caused a stir on the blog. You finally did your usual thing and said it wasn’t you and that when you were speaking, you were talking about the Capitol grounds even though the discussion had to do with people entering the Capitol building. You can quote all the statements you want, but the initial statements you made had context: the Capitol building.

                      Your default is to lie or blame someone else. Do you know why? Because you are Anonymous the Stupid.

              2. a familiarity with history would help.

                Contra Pence’s “feelings” nothing suggested was unconstitutional.

                With EVERY election the slate of electors from some states are challenged.
                It happens all the time and several times with each election.

                there has been no successful challenge since the mid 19th century.
                In fact what actually happened int h harris/tilden election is very close to what Trump wanted.
                There were significant allegations of fraud – and because there were not secret ballots until late in the 19th century there with near certainty was significant fraud on both sides.

                An election commission was appointed by congress – Trump wanted audits. And that commission recommended that the candidate who lost the popular vote and had the lower number of electoral votes was the winner – and congress confirmed that.

                I would note the constitution does not require elections for the President. State legislators are responsible to determine how electors are determined. Nor does the presidential election clause have an override of state law by congress – though the one for representatives and senators does.

                Counting the electoral college votes – and that includes resolving challenges is constitutionally delegated to congress.
                That inherently means they are free to do as they please – as they did with Tilden/Harris – answerable only to the people in the next election.

                Absolutely Eastman/Trump were throwing a hail mary pass, but it was a perfectly constitutional one.

                Trying to make a claim that something that has already happened is unconstitutional is pure idiocy.

                BTW Pence was constitutionally obligated to preside over counting the electoral college votes.
                But nothing specifies exactly how he must do that. He is free to offer the votes of electors certified by the state executive first – or those by the legislature. If anything the constitution favors those certified by the legislature. There is absolutely nothing in the constitution involving state governors, secretaries of state or state courts in the presidential election. The constitution explicitly refers to the state legislature.

                We all know you do not like the actual language of the constitution.

                And that is fine. There is a process for changing it. We have done so over 2 dozen times.

                The constitution is not perfect – but it is the law of the land.
                And when we do not like it we change it by amendment.

                1. “Contra Pence’s “feelings” nothing suggested was unconstitutional. ”

                  Judge Carter disagrees with you, and his legal opinion matters, whereas yours has no legal import.

                  1. That doesn’t mean that Judge Carter didn’t act as an inappropriate ideologue. When convenient, you, Anonymous the Stupid, hide behind titles rather than the facts, truth and honesty. You are a giant waste of time.

                    1. You are the one and only Anonymous the Stupid, aka Meyer the Troll Liar.

                      It’s a fact that Judge Carter’s legal opinion matters, whereas John’s has no legal import.

                      It’s a fact that Judge Carter ruled: “the Court finds it more likely than not that President Trump corruptly attempted to obstruct the Joint Session of Congress on January 6, 2021. … The Court discussed above how the evidence shows that President Trump likely knew that the electoral count plan was illegal. President Trump continuing to push that plan despite being aware of its illegality constituted obstruction by “dishonest” means under § 371. The evidence also demonstrates that Dr. Eastman likely knew that the plan was unlawful. … Based on the evidence, the Court finds that it is more likely than not that President Trump and Dr. Eastman dishonestly conspired to obstruct the Joint Session of Congress on January 6, 2021. … the memo likely furthered the crimes of obstruction of an official proceeding and conspiracy to defraud the United States, it is subject to the crime-fraud exception and the Court ORDERS it to be disclosed.”

                      It’s also a fact that John Eastman has already complied with Judge Carter’s March 28 order to disclose that memo to the J6 Committee. (See the docketed April 5 Status Report.)

                      You dislike these legally significant truths.

                      Your insults only ever describe yourself.

                    2. Anonymous the Stupid, you are “more likely than not” to have been born the idiot you are today.

                      Judge Carter is ”more likely than not “ an ideologue.

                      You are a moral dunce.

                    3. You are the one and only Anonymous the Stupid, aka Meyer the Troll Liar, and your insults only ever describe yourself.

                    4. Once again, thank you Anonymous the Stupid for admitting that you have no answers left. You shot your gun and it is now empty. You are funny to look at.

            2. Logic is not the left’s forte – they do not even care about it.
              A claim need not make sense – it just has to be repeated often and loud enough.

              It was self evident from day one that Trump did not collude with Russia.
              Putin did not want him and Trump is not stupid enough to have taken incredible risks that with certainty would have been caught only to get the Russia IRA to post a tiny number of really stupid FB adds.

              Muellers claim that even though he found nothing it was possible is completely stupid.

              Whatever Roger Stone is, he is not an expert in trade craft. None of the people involved were low profile people who could slip off to a clandestine meeting in Prague leaving absolutely no clues.

              So we have people who could not have pulled this off, who would not have taken the risk, for whom the reward was tiny, and it would have been simpler to feed a bit more money to Cambridge analytics, and finally all this to purportedly work with Putin to elect a president he does not want.

              All of this was clear to any thinking person in October of 2016.

              The fact that so many in the left, the press, the FBI and DOJ did not grasp this SIMPLE fact is a horrible commentary on the ability of millions of left leaning americans to engage in critical thinking.

              To their credit – though it took time to become public – both Comey and the CIA were NOT that stupid.
              Brennan did push through the idiotic ISA that said otherwise. But that was after the fact and a political move not real intelligence.

              The same is true of J6.

              If the people at the capital wanted a coup – they would have come with guns. LOTS of them.

              What is SELF EVIDENT to all but morons, is that they came to protest, They did not expect to be locked out of the capital – and they should not have been.

              When Pelosi chose to lock the capital while in session – she created a situation that was going to get out of control – and she probably knew that. And she absolutely counted on the fact that these people would break into a space they should have been allowed in.
              And that they would not have brought enough weapons to prevail.

              I suspect she would have been even happier had they brought a few guns and killed a few capital police.
              But they did not. THEY were the ones Killed.

              We also forget that a significant portion of these people were active and retired police or military and their families.
              These are people who know weapons, know how to use them and know how to NOT use them.

              This is also why we need ALL the footage from the capital.
              It is near certain that we have seen ALL the worst – and that Pelosi is holding 14,000 ours of polite people parading through the capital.

              Nor given what we saw in Wisconsin with the FBI’s Whitmer kidnapping plot, the extent of FBI involvement in J6.

              I do not think it is that large – but somebody moved the baricades before protestors arrived and there were several people who were not charged at all who were actually inciting violence.

            1. ATS, your reliance on a substandard product is apropos for an illiterate person always commenting on the blog.

              The definition can clearly be seen in Merriam Webster and many other sources. That is not the problem you face. You have that devious tendency to alter the meaning of words based on whether those words are used in conjunction with Democrats or Republicans.

              To make things simple, what you say is a lie.

              1. You are the one and only Anonymous the Stupid (ATS), aka Meyer the Troll Liar.

                To make things simple, what *you* say is a lie, and one of your favorite forms of trolling is lying about the people you disagree with.

                1. ATS, you always rely on substandard products and research. You don’t even recognize the difference between facts and ideas being pushed by the media without proof. How stupid can you get.

                2. Can you articulate what you think S. Meyer has lied about ?

                  You know with Words, facts, in sentences that are something other than ad hominem ?

        2. Of course there was.

          As has been demonstrated repeatedly, the entire collusion delusion nonsense was a FRAUD, A HOAX,

          And it was used to attempt to remove a sitting president.

          But the Hunter Biden stuff is actually WORSE.
          It should be self evident by now that Trump’s request to Zelensky was “perfectly fine”.

          Yet, Democrats impeached Trump and tried to remove him for a legal and justified request.

    2. “Trump’s assault on Democracy” are the words of someone who has allowed leftist propaganda to replace independent thought. You can’t explain what that assault was, you just read a script.

      1. This country is a constitutional republic not a democracy.

        Regardless, the threat to democracy – is the left.
        You can not have democracy where you silence your oponents.

  13. “We are five days away from fundamentally transforming the United States of America.”

    – Barack Obama
    ______________

    “We will stop him.”

    – Peter Strzok to FBI paramour Lisa Page
    ___________________________________

    “[Obama] wants to know everything we’re doing.”

    – Lisa Page to FBI paramour Peter Strzok
    _________________________________

    The Obama Coup D’etat in America is the most egregious abuse of power and the most prodigious crime in American political history. The co-conspirators are:

    Kevin Clinesmith, Bill Taylor, Eric Ciaramella, Rosenstein, Mueller/Team, Andrew Weissmann,

    James Comey, Christopher Wray, McCabe, Strozk, Page, Laycock, Kadzic, Sally Yates,

    James Baker, Bruce Ohr, Nellie Ohr, Priestap, Kortan, Campbell, Sir Richard Dearlove,

    Christopher Steele, Simpson, Joseph Mifsud, Alexander Downer, Stefan “The Walrus” Halper,

    Azra Turk, Kerry, Hillary, Huma, Mills, Brennan, Gina Haspel, Clapper, Lerner, Farkas, Power,

    Lynch, Rice, Jarrett, Holder, Brazile, Sessions (patsy), Nadler, Schiff, Pelosi, Obama,

    Joe Biden, James E. Boasberg, Emmet Sullivan, Gen. Milley, George Soros, John McCain,

    Marc Elias, Igor Danchenko, Fiona Hill, Charles H. Dolan, Jake Sullivan, Strobe Talbot,

    Cody Shear, Victoria Nuland, Ray “Red Hat” Epps, Don Berlin, Kathy Ruemmler, Rodney Joffe,

    Paul Vixie, L. Jean Camp, Andrew Whitney et al.

    1. The Obama Coup D’etat in America

      The American Spring. Lest anyone feel discriminated, the Spring series was inclusive.

    2. Adam Kinzinger reportedly broke into tears after he read your post and began sobbing uncontrollably in particular when he saw the quote marks for Ray “Red Hat” Epps:

        1. @Anon…

          He’s out. He was rewarded by the IL Dems with his district going away. IL lost a seat and he was in it.

          -G

  14. The mainstream media (MSM) that deliberately and willfully omitted relevant and material facts and truth before the election are guilty of election tampering and electoral fraud, if not treason.

Leave a Reply