Every election is stolen?

[Boges]

4 minutes ago, WestCanMan said:

Wasn't he locked up in a deep, dark hole at that time? 

17 FBI officers raided his home before dawn with fully automatic weapons pointed at him. They brought CNN along to film it all. How could he possibly be out of jail already on that date? Did they arrest him like that for no reason? 

https://www.nytimes.com/2020/07/10/us/politics/trump-roger-stone-clemency.html

Quote

WASHINGTON — President Trump commuted the sentence of his longtime friend Roger J. Stone Jr. on seven felony crimes on Friday, using the power of his office to spare a former campaign adviser days before Mr. Stone was to report to a federal prison to serve a 40-month term.

 

[robosmith]

42 minutes ago, impartialobserver said:

Let's get this out in the open.. of all posters on this forum and any other.. I believe in conspiracy theories the least. However, lets also be honest and state that you do not have the full information set. You were not at very voting precinct and did not see every ballot (paper or electronic).. you are relying on information collected by someone else. 

Right. But the DEFAULT is the certified vote count sans STRONG EVIDENCE of FRAUD.

[robosmith]

45 minutes ago, WestCanMan said:

Huh?

Did I get a post in before the OP, dumbass?

1) Of course you guessed wrong, as usual

2) You're the one who just got busted for trying to imply that "a bipartisan committee agreed that Russians interfered in the election" meant "a bipartisan committee agreed that Trump colluded with Russia". You are in no position to make accusations right now.

That falls under the general heading of "Now it has escalated to political parties trying to criminalize the questioning of election results". Real banana republic shiznit. 

Jack Smith is NEITHER a "politial Party," NOR "trying to criminalize the questioning of election results." Duh

It was Trump's criminal ACTIONS which did that.

 

[reason10]

31 minutes ago, robosmith said:

Jack Smith is NEITHER a "politial Party," NOR "trying to criminalize the questioning of election results." Duh

It was Trump's criminal ACTIONS which did that.

 

Trump committed NO criminal actions. It is not illegal to win an election, make a bunch of puzzies cry and then win  reelection, only to have the counting STOPPED on Election Night. Jack Smith is a liar and a traitor. He should be disbarred for abuse of process and malicious prosecution.

We're living in a banana republic Adolf.

Sieg Heil.

Edited August 17, 2023 by reason10

[robosmith]

6 minutes ago, reason10 said:

Trump committed NO criminal actions. It is not illegal to win an election, make a bunch of puzzies cry and then win  reelection, only to have the counting STOPPED on Election Night. Jack Smith is a liar and a traitor. He should be disbarred for abuse of process and malicious prosecution.

We're living in a banana republic Adolf.

Sieg Heil.

When you have no proof of voter fraud, ALL YOU HAVE is the certified vote count.

And you have ZERO evidence for your RANT. LMAO

[WestCanMan]

2 hours ago, Boges said:

In the way Trump did yeah. 

Look what Roger Stone was up to before the election was even called. 

 

You know that the subtitles on that video don't jive with what he's saying at all, right? 

[West]

3 hours ago, robosmith said:

They CLEARLY FOUND that the Trump campaign and MANAGER MANAFORT did collude with Russians.

Ironically that makes YOU the "disingenuous little f'ing weasel" here. Duh

No they did not. 

[West]

3 minutes ago, WestCanMan said:

You know that the subtitles on that video don't jive with what he's saying at all, right? 

Wikileaks is now Russia. 

Russia was just a diversion from the shady stuff uncovered about the Clinton campaign

[WestCanMan]

3 hours ago, robosmith said:

They CLEARLY FOUND that the Trump campaign and MANAGER MANAFORT did collude with Russians.

Ironically that makes YOU the "disingenuous little f'ing weasel" here. Duh

You idi0t. They found no such thing. 

Not one single American has ever been convicted on a crime involving collusion. Not one. 

The closest that the FBI ever came was arresting people for non-related items and then trying to coerce false testimony from them by offering reduced sentences. 

[robosmith]

17 minutes ago, WestCanMan said:

You idi0t. They found no such thing. 

Not one single American has ever been convicted on a crime involving collusion. Not one. 

The closest that the FBI ever came was arresting people for non-related items and then trying to coerce false testimony from them by offering reduced sentences. 

"Collusion" between MANFORT and Russian agent Kilimnik was detailed in the BIPARTISAN Senate Intel Committee report posted here for the Nth time. 

It was not charged as illegal foreign campaign aid, because Trump gutted the FEC after he took office. Duh.

[impartialobserver]

3 hours ago, robosmith said:

Right. But the DEFAULT is the certified vote count sans STRONG EVIDENCE of FRAUD.

Both sides do not have the full information set. You are relying on the certified vote count without question. They are doing the opposite... by default viewing it as damaged/rigged with no actual primary information to disprove it. Primary would be the actual ballots.. not a summary or total. 

[West]

27 minutes ago, robosmith said:

"Collusion" between MANFORT and Russian agent Kilimnik was detailed in the BIPARTISAN Senate Intel Committee report posted here for the Nth time. 

It was not charged as illegal foreign campaign aid, because Trump gutted the FEC after he took office. Duh.

2016 called and they want their conspiracy theory back. 

You've moved on and had 4 or 5 doozies since then

[robosmith]

1 hour ago, impartialobserver said:

Both sides do not have the full information set. You are relying on the certified vote count without question. They are doing the opposite... by default viewing it as damaged/rigged with no actual primary information to disprove it. Primary would be the actual ballots.. not a summary or total. 

Right. The DEFAULT is the certified vote count without evidence it is wrong.

Any other default is CORRUPTION.

[robosmith]

1 hour ago, West said:

2016 called and they want their conspiracy theory back. 

You've moved on and had 4 or 5 doozies since then

NO moving on here. Total consistency despite your denial.

The Senate Intel Committee report to which I referred (and has been posted here ad nauseum) was about 2020.

AKA didn't exist in 2016. You are confused as usual.

[WestCanMan]

1 hour ago, robosmith said:

"Collusion" between MANFORT and Russian agent Kilimnik was detailed in the BIPARTISAN Senate Intel Committee report posted here for the Nth time. 

No it is not. 

What is detailed there is not 'collusion' by President Trump.

It's unusual, but you don't know why Manafort shared polling data.

Maybe he wanted to be a campaign manager for someone else and he was trying to show how good of a job he was doing. He is a campaign manager, after all. Maybe he wanted a loan and he was trying to show that Trump might win, so he'd be getting some bonus money. 

Fact is, you don't have a f'ing clue, you're just running your idi0t mouth as usual. It's quite possible, or quite likely even, that the FBI know exactly why Manafort showed Kisliak that data and they aren't releasing it because that one teensy nugget of info is literally all they have to justify their show trial, the millions of dollars spent on it, all of the Trump administrations' wasted time, all the FBI's lies, all of the FBI's false accusations, and all of the FBI's known crimes. 

[robosmith]

1 minute ago, WestCanMan said:

No it is not. 

What is detailed there is not 'collusion' by President Trump.

It is collusion by his campaign MANAGER on HIS BEHALF.

Mob bosses seldom get THIER HANDS DIRTY. Duh.

1 minute ago, WestCanMan said:

It's unusual, but you don't know why Manafort shared polling data.

I have a really good idea WHY: the Russian IRA needed polling data to more effectively target their trolls and bots. ?

1 minute ago, WestCanMan said:

Maybe he wanted to be a campaign manager for someone else and he was trying to show how good of a job he was doing. He is a campaign manager, after all. Maybe he wanted a loan and he was trying to show that Trump might win, so he'd be getting some bonus money. 

Or maybe he wanted HELP with his CAMPAIGN and THEY needed CAMPAIGN data to HELP. 

1 minute ago, WestCanMan said:

Fact is, you don't have a f'ing clue, you're just running your idi0t mouth as usual.

No that would be YOU. I have LOGIC which is much STRONGER than your SPECULATION. 

 

1 minute ago, WestCanMan said:

It's quite possible, or quite likely even, that the FBI know exactly why Manafort showed Kisliak that data and they aren't releasing it because that one teensy nugget of info is literally all they have to justify their show trial, the millions of dollars spent on it, all of the Trump administrations' wasted time, all the FBI's lies, all of the FBI's false accusations, and all of the FBI's known crimes. 

Anything is "possible" in YOUR FANTASIES.

[West]

28 minutes ago, robosmith said:

NO moving on here. Total consistency despite your denial.

The Senate Intel Committee report to which I referred (and has been posted here ad nauseum) was about 2020.

AKA didn't exist in 2016. You are confused as usual.

They didn't conclude what you claim lol 

[robosmith]

6 minutes ago, West said:

They didn't conclude what you claim lol 

They did. Manafort provided PRIVATE POLLING DATA to Russian agent Kilimnik, who turned it over to Russian intelligence.

Exclusive: Paul Manafort admits he passed Trump campaign data to a suspected Russian asset

[West]

3 minutes ago, robosmith said:

They did. Manafort provided PRIVATE POLLING DATA to Russian agent Kilimnik, who turned it over to Russian intelligence.

Exclusive: Paul Manafort admits he passed Trump campaign data to a suspected Russian asset

Lol.. the guy was a businessman. 

And the information was already in the public domain. 

"the purpose of sending the polling data to Kilimnik was not to help elect Trump by aiding the Russians in their attempts to undermine the election but rather to lay the groundwork for future business deals."

Nice try tho

Edited August 17, 2023 by West

[robosmith]

29 minutes ago, West said:

Lol.. the guy was a businessman. 

And the information was already in the public domain. 

Bullshit. SOME of the data was public. 

29 minutes ago, West said:

"the purpose of sending the polling data to Kilimnik was not to help elect Trump by aiding the Russians in their attempts to undermine the election but rather to lay the groundwork for future business deals."

Nice try tho

And you're stupid enough to believe the DEFENSE from a LIAR? LMAO

Quote

In his interview with Insider, Manafort reiterated that at least some of the data was public. "The data that I shared with him was a combination of public information and stuff for the spring that was, it was old," he said. It's one of Manafort's primary lines of defense — that the data he funneled to Kilimnik was essentially worthless.

In fact, in an email seized by Mueller, Manafort ordered his deputy Rick Gates, just a few hours before the two men met with Kilimnik in person, to print out four pages of internal campaign-polling data showing Trump's city-by-city strength in 18 swing states. Contrary to Manafort's claim, the data was not from the spring. It was collected by the campaign in mid-July — two weeks before the meeting with Kilimnik. 

AKA, Manafort LIED to DEFEND his ACTIONS.

[West]

54 minutes ago, robosmith said:

Bullshit. SOME of the data was public. 

And you're stupid enough to believe the DEFENSE from a LIAR? LMAO

AKA, Manafort LIED to DEFEND his ACTIONS.

Your article is written by a leftist who omits key facts to lead you to an unsubstantiated opinion

[robosmith]

4 hours ago, West said:

Your article is written by a leftist who omits key facts to lead you to an unsubstantiated opinion

Your OPINION was written by a right wing nut job who has NO CREDIBILITY.

[West]

11 hours ago, robosmith said:

Your OPINION was written by a right wing nut job who has NO CREDIBILITY.

My opinion is now fact. 

Mueller investigated for several years and did not indict any us person on conspiracy or collusion with Russia. 

 

[impartialobserver]

the primary issue with most election fraud conspiracy theories is not just lack of primary evidence (actual ballots, names, addresses, etc.) but this unrealistic assumption that folks will work together in concert and not leak information. Everybody is an attention whore and so given enough time.. someone is going to spill the beans and yet they have not. 

[robosmith]

1 hour ago, West said:

My opinion is now fact. 

Mueller investigated for several years and did not indict any us person on conspiracy or collusion with Russia. 

 

Mueller was hamstrung by Republicans (Barr and Rosenstein) who oversaw his "investigation."