Gary Johnson said:

---

I'll defer to the tech experts and FBI that say this is SOP and the information turned over was complete.

The DNC was the victim of a crime, not under investigation for a crime, and had no obligation to shut down operations and turn over their hardware in the middle of a campaign.


Further, I have no idea if cloud servers would be confiscated in a criminal investigation(child pron in your example), but since these are private 3rd parties the DNC couldn't have stopped the FBI from doing it.

---

A crime was committed though. A hacking of the DNC servers. So in my personal opinion the FBI is slack in investigating in this instance. If there is not an active intrusion, you won't get much information from sniffing packets going to/from the server(s).

Also without the physical copies of the drives anything deleted by the hackers would not show on the "copy".

And another thing. It is ridiculously easy to create a Fail-Safe failover for the servers so that you could get the actual physical server/drives. Nobody would notice when it went to the backup internal/external.

So again. If the FBI was truly interested in the truth, they did a horrible job in my opinion.

FireAg said:

---

You ever gonna be willing to put a wager on:

1) How this whole impeachment thing works out?

and

2) Who will be elected as POTUS in November, 2020?

I'll hang up and listen...

---

I'll match the wager and donate same to the prevailing party's charity of choice.

The key is they were the victim and this is SOP by all accounts. The DNC couldn't have stopped the confiscation of 3rd party cloud servers. They had to "wipe and reinstall" to boot the hackers out to continue operations as quickly as possible.

Quote:

---

Third-party platforms including Google, Twitter and the link-shortening service Bitly were convenient and reliable for Russian hackers, but they could also be subpoenaed. Mueller's team did exactly that, reconstructing how, when, and how frequently Russian intelligence officers communicated with WikiLeaks, which they used as an outlet for the stolen material

---

The working theory is the DNC discovered the hacks then framed the GRU with falsified forensics? Preposterous for the reasons linked above, there was 3rd party forensic corroboration outside of DNC control. Implausible on motivation and capability.

MetoliusAg said:

---

Quote:

---

Says the guy who thinks Barr should be tried for treason for elucidating on the Unitary Executive theory that basically no serious legal scholar disagrees with from an historical and precedent perspective.

---

You're telling a falsehood. I've never said that about Barr. His speech was replete with conspiracy theories, historical, factual, and legal errors, and logical fallacies. But clearly a poorly-reasoned speech is no reason to try him for treason.

---

It was a bit of hyperbole on my part, but you did elaborate with some rather ominous words that he "better watch himself." So you clearly implied he's borderline guilty of something.

Also, you have been hiding from that thread all week and haven't provided an ounce of evidence or reasoning to support your asinine take. Probably because you know deep down inside that you are completely full of Schiff and any attempt to back up your take will make you look stupid.

FireAg said:

---

You ever gonna be willing to put a wager on:

1) How this whole impeachment thing works out?

and

2) Who will be elected as POTUS in November, 2020?

I'll hang up and listen...

---

1. I have no idea
2. I have no idea

Unpopular opinions: Trump extorted Ukraine and Epstein probably killed himself.

Wildcat said:

---

Watching you continue to polish this turd of an impeachment inquiry is high entertainment.

---

And he still doesn't know what extort means!

Verb: obtaining something of value via threat.

*attempted* extortion. After Trump was caught he got punked by Zelensky.

Gary Johnson said:

---

FireAg said:

---

You ever gonna be willing to put a wager on:

1) How this whole impeachment thing works out?

and

2) Who will be elected as POTUS in November, 2020?

I'll hang up and listen...

---

1. I have no idea
2. I have no idea

Unpopular opinions: Trump extorted Ukraine and Epstein probably killed himself.

---

So you don't have the balls...got it...

You don't even buy into the nonsense that you post because if you did, you'd stand behind it and call your shot, especially since you're so convinced that a crime has taken place...

But no, you run and hide when challenged to put your money where your mouth is...

You're not the only lib poster on here that acts like that...

Just making sure we got that on the record...

What does making predictions about highly uncertain events have to do with "balls"? The republicans have already indicated they won't impeach before we've even seen the documents or testimony from Trump, Mulvaney, Bolton, etc.

Gary Johnson said:

---

What does making predictions about highly uncertain events have to do with "balls"? The republicans have already indicated they won't impeach before we've even seen the documents or testimony from Trump, Mulvaney, Bolton, etc.

---

So you agree it is a foregone conclusion that 1) he will not be removed from office and 2) he will be re-elected...

Heck I'm surprised he knows how to use a dictionary.

Gary Johnson said:

---

Verb: obtaining something of value via threat.

*attempted* extortion. After Trump was caught he got punked by Zelensky.

---

Assisting/opening a criminal investigation is not something of value.

Something of value has a legal definition you continue to ignore.

Gary Johnson said:

---

What does making predictions about highly uncertain events have to do with "balls"? The republicans have already indicated they won't impeach before we've even seen the documents or testimony from Trump, Mulvaney, Bolton, etc.

---

Dems are ready to impeach before even seeing documents or testimony from Burisma or Hunter Biden.

They also haven't heard from bigfoot, the server, Alf, or anybody else with zero knowledge of the matter.

Coincidence? I think not.

Gary Johnson said:

---

They also haven't heard from bigfoot, the server, Alf, or anybody else with zero knowledge of the matter.

Coincidence? I think not.

---

Burisma and Hunter Biden certainly know if pursuing an investigation was in the national interest.

You know the thing your entire fever dream needs to not be true.

hbtheduce said:

---

Gary Johnson said:

---

Verb: obtaining something of value via threat.

*attempted* extortion. After Trump was caught he got punked by Zelensky.

---

Assisting/opening a criminal investigation is not something of value.

Something of value has a legal definition you continue to ignore.

---

Let's try this for the hundredth time:

He wanted them to make it appear Ukraine independently uncovered criminal evidence against the Bidens. A publicity stunt scheduled for CNN, with a statement his team helped draft.

After he got caught: "I want nothing"

He knows exactly why Hunter is relevant.

And he giggled to himself all he wants but it looks highly likely HB will get subpoenaed.

Gary works in a cubicle but is an expert on American politics and legalese.

Yes, you have made your conspiracy theory very apparent.

Repost it 100 times.

It will change nothing and Trump will not be removed from office. You will still hate him and you'll have 5 more years to remind us everyday of that fact.

Guys named Gary.

Gary Johnson said:

---

hbtheduce said:

---

Gary Johnson said:

---

Verb: obtaining something of value via threat.

*attempted* extortion. After Trump was caught he got punked by Zelensky.

---

Assisting/opening a criminal investigation is not something of value.

Something of value has a legal definition you continue to ignore.

---

Let's try this for the hundredth time:

He wanted them to make it appear Ukraine independently uncovered criminal evidence against the Bidens. A publicity stunt scheduled for CNN, with a statement his team helped draft.

After he got caught: "I want nothing"

---

He tells Ukraine to work with Bill Barr. That's not "working independently" even if it appears to be.

But let's pretend your framing is correct. That still doesn't fit the legal definition of something of value.

Gary Johnson said:

---

hbtheduce said:

---

Gary Johnson said:

---

Verb: obtaining something of value via threat.

*attempted* extortion. After Trump was caught he got punked by Zelensky.

---

Assisting/opening a criminal investigation is not something of value.

Something of value has a legal definition you continue to ignore.

---

Let's try this for the hundredth time:

He wanted them to make it appear Ukraine independently uncovered criminal evidence against the Bidens. A publicity stunt scheduled for CNN, with a statement his team helped draft.

After he got caught: "I want nothing"

---

Gsry, Gary, Gary.......

Wrong. Nice conspiracy theory.

I love that liberals will spend 1/9 of their lives in complete misery solely because "not my President."

Guess what I did during the Obama years? Went about my business, earned MS and JD degrees, got married, had two kids, and excelled professionally.

Gary Johnson said:

---

hbtheduce said:

---

Gary Johnson said:

---

Verb: obtaining something of value via threat.

*attempted* extortion. After Trump was caught he got punked by Zelensky.

---

Assisting/opening a criminal investigation is not something of value.

Something of value has a legal definition you continue to ignore.

---

Let's try this for the hundredth time:

He wanted them to make it appear Ukraine independently uncovered criminal evidence against the Bidens. A publicity stunt scheduled for CNN, with a statement his team helped draft.

After he got caught: "I want nothing"

---

Biden was on video incriminating himself and you think they needed Trumps help figuring it out?

Pinche Abogado said:

---

Gary works in a cubicle but is an expert on American politics and legalese.

---

I can read words. It's an amazing rare talent.

Quote:

---

"You understood that in order to get that White House meeting that you wanted President Zelensky to have and that President Zelensky desperately wanted to have," Goldman said, "that Ukraine would have to initiate these two investigations. Is that right?"

"Well, they would have to announce that they were going to do it," Sondland replied.

"Right, because they -- because Giuliani and President Trump didn't actually care if they did them, right?" Goldman asked.

"I never heard, Mr. Goldman, anyone say that the investigations had to start or had to be completed," Sondland said. "The only thing I heard from Mr. Giuliani or otherwise was that they had to be announced in some form. And that form kept changing."

"Announced publicly?" Goldman asked.

"Announced publicly," Sondland replied.

---

And they didn't want anyone to know they pressured the Ukrainians in to it, because that's illegal. Which is why they abandoned the scheme after they got caught.

You mean like Biden?

"And son of a *****, he was fired."

Except it's not because we privately and public pressure other countries in matters of criminal investigations ALL THE TIME

Joe ****ing Biden secretly pressured Ukraine to fire a prosecutor. Was it illegal because the Obama administration did it in secret?

I just blocked him. Part of problem solved ...

tsuag10 said:

---

---

he must be texting from flip phone on 2G with only 1 bar. Just spit it out man!

Silent For Too Long said:

---

MetoliusAg said:

---

Quote:

---

Says the guy who thinks Barr should be tried for treason for elucidating on the Unitary Executive theory that basically no serious legal scholar disagrees with from an historical and precedent perspective.

---

You're telling a falsehood. I've never said that about Barr. His speech was replete with conspiracy theories, historical, factual, and legal errors, and logical fallacies. But clearly a poorly-reasoned speech is no reason to try him for treason.

---

It was a bit of hyperbole on my part, but you did elaborate with some rather ominous words that he "better watch himself." So you clearly implied he's borderline guilty of something.

Also, you have been hiding from that thread all week and haven't provided an ounce of evidence or reasoning to support your asinine take. Probably because you know deep down inside that you are completely full of Schiff and any attempt to back up your take will make you look stupid.

---

You got caught telling a blatant lie, and now you've shown you lack the integrity to admit it. Not surprised.

As for that thread, I posted my assessment of Barr's egregiously flawed essay / speech, because titan requested me to do. Haven't been back. Debunking the idiotic rightwing conspiracy theory gobbledygook in Barr's essay is easy enough to do. But what good would it do? Trumper LIV's have repeatedly demonstrated for the past 3 years that they disavow facts which don't line up with their conspiracy beliefs.