US Election 2020

[Cunt]

I remembered that the charges were dismissed with prejudice. You said they weren't, they were.

I think 'with prejudice' means something special. I don't remember what it is. Don't think it's all that relevant either. I'm going to call a Biden and look at the collusion photo evidence again.

...

Yup. As I said before. Not with a stolen dick.

[laklak]

"With prejudice" means it's a final judgement, the case cannot be refiled or raised again by the plaintiff.

[Joe]

I remembered that the charges were dismissed with prejudice. You said they weren't, they were.

Nope, you're wrong again and trying to change the subject as usual.

The charges against the Russians who helped Trump's campaign are still on the books, the Mueller Report still says what it says, and you obviously never read it.

You know how I know that? You keep talking about collusion.

[Joe]

"With prejudice" means it's a final judgement, the case cannot be refiled or raised again by the plaintiff.

Yeah, I explained that to him but he forgot.

[Cunt]

Oh, I could have sworn I recalled 'dismissed with prejudice', because I looked up 'with prejudice' in that context, then failed to retain that bit of info.
I must have been thinking of this...

The charges against three Russian “bot” farms and 13 individuals in Mueller’s so-called Russian collusion case were dropped with prejudice on Monday.

It's ok Joe. I get that you might have missed these charges being dropped, or why.

I remembered that the charges were dismissed with prejudice. You said they weren't, they were.

Nope, you're wrong again and trying to change the subject as usual.

The charges against the Russians who helped Trump's campaign are still on the books, the Mueller Report still says what it says, and you obviously never read it.

You know how I know that? You keep talking about collusion.

So these charges, which were dropped with prejudice (to prevent Russians obtaining 'discovery') are something else?

"With prejudice" means it's a final judgement, the case cannot be refiled or raised again by the plaintiff.

Yeah, I explained that to him but he forgot.

You may have explained it, but I looked it up, too. Didn't stick either time, because it is irrelevant to my life.

Except that you keep insisting I didn't read 'their charges were dismissed with prejudice', even when I gave you a link..


It's ok, Mueller probably just didn't know he would have to face 'discovery' when the charges were filed. Those pesky russians should have just ignored the accusations, rather than lawyering up and calling the bluff.

Lets see what Flynn has to say. Since his charges were also dismissed, I think he gets a turn now.

https://twitter.com/FieldofFight/status ... 7094199303


He's already being rather...forward...

[Joe]

Oh, I could have sworn I recalled 'dismissed with prejudice', because I looked up 'with prejudice' in that context, then failed to retain that bit of info.
I must have been thinking of this...

The charges against three Russian “bot” farms and 13 individuals in Mueller’s so-called Russian collusion case were dropped with prejudice on Monday.

It's ok Joe. I get that you might have missed these charges being dropped, or why.

I remembered that the charges were dismissed with prejudice. You said they weren't, they were.

Nope, you're wrong again and trying to change the subject as usual.

The charges against the Russians who helped Trump's campaign are still on the books, the Mueller Report still says what it says, and you obviously never read it.

You know how I know that? You keep talking about collusion.

So these charges, which were dropped with prejudice (to prevent Russians obtaining 'discovery') are something else?

"With prejudice" means it's a final judgement, the case cannot be refiled or raised again by the plaintiff.

Yeah, I explained that to him but he forgot.

You may have explained it, but I looked it up, too. Didn't stick either time, because it is irrelevant to my life.

Except that you keep insisting I didn't read 'their charges were dismissed with prejudice', even when I gave you a link..


It's ok, Mueller probably just didn't know he would have to face 'discovery' when the charges were filed. Those pesky russians should have just ignored the accusations, rather than lawyering up and calling the bluff.

Lets see what Flynn has to say. Since his charges were also dismissed, I think he gets a turn now.

https://twitter.com/FieldofFight/status ... 7094199303


He's already being rather...forward...

Now Cunt, I showed you the DOJ filing that says the charges against the individual Russians weren't dropped. I read your link and the writer did say they were dropped, but why should I believe the Fake News over the Department of Justice? Here it is again.

The United States will continue its efforts to apprehend the individual defendants and bring them before this Court to face the pending charges, but because substantial federal interests are no longer served by continuing with the proceedings against the Concord Defendants, the government moves, respectfully, to dismiss with prejudice Count One of the indictment as to them.

Me I'll go with the DOJ, but by all means believe the conservative talk show host who makes stories up.



So Cunt, do you have a link to a DOJ filing that says charges are dropped against the individual Russians, or you gonna go with the woman who wrote an opinion piece called Obama Waited Until 'Millions' Infected and 1000 Dead in U.S. Before Declaring H1N1 National Emergency ?

Oops!


Bet I can guess.

[Sean Hayden]

Who would even care if Muslim kids were given time to pray? We all know that school is only 8 hours because we need childcare so we can work.

I'm so tired of influential people having all the same problems as the worst of us! Bring on the meritocracy, please...

[Joe]

Beats me. I just wonder why I should believe someone who would make this crap up.

[Brian Peacock]

Trump's going to win because people who support victims of sexual abuse, are going to know the difference between Kavanaugh and Biden.

You should look up the Clarence Thomas hearing and then review your assessment.

[Cunt]

Bet I can guess.

The threat of prosecution was a bluff.

'with prejudice', as I remembered (correctly) from the article, was not relevant to me, as I pointed out.

The motion to dismiss is right there, after using the charges to show that Russia really WAS...something.

I think they were accused of pissing away a small amount of cash, trying to support or anti-support one candidate or another.

Later, Bloomberg, seeing how effective it was, spent many times as much, to support his...um...well I don't know yet, but since he spent SOOOOO much more money he must be a many-times greater threat. To something. Maybe Russians?


From that filing, it looks like they never meant to follow through. Nothing new to make them dismiss it, except having to back up their fluff.

[Joe]

Bet I can guess.

The threat of prosecution was a bluff.

'with prejudice', as I remembered (correctly) from the article, was not relevant to me, as I pointed out.

The motion to dismiss is right there, after using the charges to show that Russia really WAS...something.

I think they were accused of pissing away a small amount of cash, trying to support or anti-support one candidate or another.

Later, Bloomberg, seeing how effective it was, spent many times as much, to support his...um...well I don't know yet, but since he spent SOOOOO much more money he must be a many-times greater threat. To something. Maybe Russians?


From that filing, it looks like they never meant to follow through. Nothing new to make them dismiss it, except having to back up their fluff.

You believe, eh? Like you believed the lie that Tate lady wrote?

It's hard to take what you say seriously when you're so obviously clueless about Mueller's investigation.

[Brian Peacock]

Yeah, but what about that Democrat who said something or did something eh? You've got nothing to say about that have you? Ergo quid Moët.

[Joe]

Yeahbut Q say that ain't true. So there!

[Cunt]

You believe, eh? Like you believed the lie that Tate lady wrote?

It's hard to take what you say seriously when you're so obviously clueless about Mueller's investigation.

The DOJ backed off those charges. The Russians are laughing.

Mueller's investigation will be better understood shortly. When he presented it, to me it looked like there was nothing to it.

What are you believing from it? That a few ads by a bot farm are going to be significant to...something?

[Tero]

In April the senate committee concluded

https://www.cnn.com/2020/04/21/politics ... index.html

The committee has previously summarized its finding that the intelligence assessment was supported, but the 156-page report included new details -- and a lot of redactions -- on how the committee reached that conclusion. The report pushed back against the findings of House Intelligence Committee Republicans, who raised issues in 2018 with how the intelligence assessment was reached that Russian President Vladimir Putin was trying to help Trump.
The committee's bipartisan investigation into Russian election interference began more than three years ago. The committee has released four volumes and is finishing work on the final chapter, which will include the committee's investigation into contacts between members of Trump's team and Russian officials.
That volume is in its final editing stages, according to a source familiar with the matter, and is currently around 950 pages, including footnotes but not appendices.

Barr is just tinkering with little bits, like Flynn