The mar a Lago raid happened a day after a whistleblower came out with information. It’s easy to understand why it looks like pocket sand. Shisha!

If I remember correctly it was the IRS whistleblower that time.

This post was edited by YeeHaw on Aug 28 2023 11:28am

pretty comical level of speculation and semantics. 3 meetings spread out over several months between a staffer, doj member, and FBI agent.

in context with the press secretary's statement, they're not directing the investigation (supported by 3 infrequent meetings), and they're not briefed (which refers to daily or frequent rundowns). the only gotcha is "contact", which can be written off the same as briefings. there's not a daily status report connection on this specific matter. meanwhile the DOJ team is working daily on the case, but a meeting for 1 hour every month or so is COLLUSION.

and let's all have a good laugh at how this would be spun if in 2017 Donald Trump was contacting a taskforce in the DOJ building a case against Hillary Clinton. would the same presumption that he must be hands off with literally zero contact even be expected? we'd hear "he's their boss", "just because he gets an update doesnt mean its a set-up", "let see the evidence once it gets to court, she's not being hung".

to be clear, MAYBE joe is pulling strings, but the amount of evidence for that compared to the narratives people believe in is pretty funny. we're talking about a case in which trump openly admits to the actions he's being indicted for, and the only defense is "well they all do it". good, set a precedent on what happens when you steal classified information and refuse to return it so we can charge the next person too.

Maybe i would be onboard with what your saying if the intelligence agency didn’t collude to cover up the Hunter Biden laptop or have 52 members of the intelligence agency sign a document to be used for Joe Biden’s debate against trump. Where there is email documentation backing the accusations. I might also be obliged if the fbi wasn’t caught openly working to stop trump from being president in 2016. One would have to be in almost complete denial to follow your logic or just be a liar.

This post was edited by Landmine on Aug 28 2023 11:47am

Do you think they pre plan these so they have the right grand jury people on the right day for the right case. Then they tell the jurors “go!” Sleepy joe plans all this?

While in the background the alleged dementia patient stole the US election while not being able to speak a sentence and left ZERO proof
All while filtering billions through his son while shitting his pants and falling down or this was before he pooped himself ?

And on top of all this the AI prop has found a way to do the EXACT same thing as DJT but bribed his way out of charges all while in
Mumbling vegetable status. And having record manufacturing job returns and some near all time lows in employment numbers. Pretty sneaky vegetable I’d say.

LOL AT fbi 2016. a rogue group of agents planned to leak anti-HRC news the week of the election and Comey had to drop the info instead to get ahead of it.

"they've done corrupt things so that means what im saying is true and you're in denial if you disagree even though i have almost no evidence other than memba when they did bad before, so = true now"

lol. see my original tinfoil pic. you sound just like 9-11 truthers now, "so since we know in operation paperclip they imported nazis and lies about it".....

Oh god you went full retard. You can’t handle evidence so you cry what about. The sound of denial coming from your face.

I literally address all of the evidence you posted, i said it wasn't proof biden is innocent here but its just not proof he's a criminal mastermind like you're saying he is.

you cant handle that your "evidence" is mostly silly semantics that proves next to nothing and you're leaning on it like a crutch. then you resort to anecdotal half truths.

Yet, by making your statement you defend the department of justice based on anecdotal evidence and untested case theory.

This post was edited by Landmine on Aug 28 2023 12:21pm

Which statement is that? is it this one:

"you may be right, you may be wrong, but what you've posted isnt strong enough evidence to claim anyone who disagrees is a liar or delusional".

because thats what i did and said lol. you're just triggered because i hit you with the charlie from sunny pic.

democrats challenging the election is fine. but its "illegal for republicans to do it because "ThAtS A ThReAt To OuR dEmOcRaSy"



halp halp just got shut down quick throw up weak meme, buy some time