Today in Trump

[Kirkland Laing]

Can you explain exactly what the post you made has to do with the bet you made? How is pointing out that you posted random non bet-related conspiracy nonsense backing away from something?


And you owe those two fine organisations money Lyle. No weaseling out of the bet you made now. In a few days there'll be proof beyond a reasonable doubt that you lost the bet. You might as well pay up now.

It has plenty to do with the bet. It is further verification that Steele leaked intel to reporters who wrote stories and those stories were used to obtain the FISA warrants. ILLEGAL my man, ILLEGAL. You can call it a "conspiracy theory" until you're blue in the face it doesn't make it so...in fact I provided direct verifiable evidence you calling it "conspiracy nonsense" is a bit rich there moneybags.



I owe them absolutely NOTHING and I will owe them absolutely nothing. Let's see what the Mueller report actually contains....I foresee baseless allegations of dirty deeds, 0 evidence, and a lot of hurt feelings which will lead to people IMMEDIATELY wailing and crying for the full unredacted report......they can't believe they WON'T believe Trump has been right all along. Once you lot are done with that extinction burst then the weight of reality hopefully starts crashing down on you and you'll realize....yeah Comey did dirty, McCabe did dirty, Susan Rice, Samantha Power, Brennan, Clapper, Hillary, Obama.....all I need is 1 indictment and I'll get it.....go get your hustle on, earn my fucking money.

Here's the bet we made:

If you bet at least $100 I'll give you 10000 to 1 odds that I'm right and you're wrong and the Mueller report proves all the emails were hacked by Russia. And I'll pay the money directly to you. You can make a million dollars by betting a hundred if you really believe the Seth Rich thing.

Nothing about the Steele report, nothing about whether investigations were illegal or not (and the Mueller investigation was not). The bet is whether the Mueller report proves the emails were hacked by Russia and didn't become public via your Seth Rich conspiracy theory. As I've already pointed out, Mueller has charged various Russian government actors with their theft and thus has proof beyond a reasonable doubt that they stole them. Mueller also has documentary proof that even the people propagating the Seth Rich conspiracy theory knew it was a pack of lies.

[El Kabong]

Oh so the bet WAS different than the bet about Democrats being indicted

[Kirkland Laing]

On Friday the thirteenth October 1989, by happenstance the same day as the “Black Friday” market crash, news leaked of a legal memo authored by William Barr. He was then serving as head of the Justice Department’s Office of Legal Counsel (OLC). It is highly uncommon for any OLC memo to make headlines. This one did because it was issued in “unusual secrecy” and concluded that the FBI could forcibly abduct people in other countries without the consent of the foreign state. The headline also noted the implication of the legal opinion at that moment in time. It appeared to pave the way for abducting Panama’s leader, Gen. Manuel Noriega.
Members of Congress asked to see the full legal opinion. Barr refused, but said he would provide an account that “summarizes the principal conclusions.” Sound familiar? In March 2019, when Attorney General Barr was handed Robert Mueller’s final report, he wrote that he would “summarize the principal conclusions” of the special counsel’s report for the public.

[...]

When the OLC opinion was finally made public long after Barr left office, it was clear that Barr’s summary had failed to fully disclose the opinion’s principal conclusions. It is better to think of Barr’s summary as a redacted version of the full OLC opinion. That’s because the “summary” took the form of 13 pages of written testimony. The document was replete with quotations from court cases, legal citations, and the language of the OLC opinion itself. Despite its highly detailed analysis, this 13-page version omitted some of the most consequential and incendiary conclusions from the actual opinion. And there was evidently no justifiable reason for having withheld those parts from Congress or the public.

https://www.justsecurity.org/63635/b...-memo-in-1989/

After the first GOP special counsel sent to investigate Whitewater came up with nothing Barr sent another one and a pack of lawyers to start digging as fast as they could for something Bush 41 could throw at Clinton during the 1991 election campaign. Barr did this while he was Attorney General the first time by the way. He's not exactly an impartial actor in all this, he's been brought in to do a job.

[Kirkland Laing]

Oh so the bet WAS different than the bet about Democrats being indicted

That's the bet you made.

[El Kabong]

Oh so the bet WAS different than the bet about Democrats being indicted

That's the bet you made.

So now it's ONE of the bets I've made. Just to clarify

[El Kabong]

https://www.thenation.com/article/a-...ears-dnc-hack/

[Kirkland Laing]

Oh so the bet WAS different than the bet about Democrats being indicted

That's the bet you made.

So now it's ONE of the bets I've made. Just to clarify

Yes the other one is $20 on who is more broadly correct on how the Trump-Russia thing shakes out.

[Kirkland Laing]

https://twitter.com/nowthisnews/stat...85668001615872

[Gandalf]

Oh so the bet WAS different than the bet about Democrats being indicted

That's the bet you made.

So now it's ONE of the bets I've made. Just to clarify

Yes the other one is $20 on who is more broadly correct on how the Trump-Russia thing shakes out.

Kirkland, you sound like a man who needs a holiday. Fancy a week in Thailand with me?

[walrus]

Oh so the bet WAS different than the bet about Democrats being indicted

That's the bet you made.

So now it's ONE of the bets I've made. Just to clarify

Yes the other one is $20 on who is more broadly correct on how the Trump-Russia thing shakes out.

Kirk I’m surprised you don’t even acknowledge there may be something at least a little fishy with the launching of this investigation. So straight up you you in complete denial that there may be something a little curious with the beginning of this investigation and now that he has been cleared. I know you are still hanging on the obstruction thing and even saying still there is plenty of evidence of collusion but you don’t at lest think even in the biased mind of yours something odd happened to set it in motion. Don’t answer with a question as you like to as I’m honestly curiously

[El Kabong]

Here's the bet we made:

If you bet at least $100 I'll give you 10000 to 1 odds that I'm right and you're wrong and the Mueller report proves all the emails were hacked by Russia. And I'll pay the money directly to you. You can make a million dollars by betting a hundred if you really believe the Seth Rich thing.

I'll take gold thank you.

[Kirkland Laing]

Here's the bet we made:

If you bet at least $100 I'll give you 10000 to 1 odds that I'm right and you're wrong and the Mueller report proves all the emails were hacked by Russia. And I'll pay the money directly to you. You can make a million dollars by betting a hundred if you really believe the Seth Rich thing.

I'll take gold thank you.

There we go Lyle. Chapter and verse. The Russians hacked all the Hillary/Democratic party stuff and laundered it via Wikileaks and various other outlets. $50x2 with verifiable receipts please.


And how about this with Carter Page?

Email from Konstantin Kilimnik to Paul Manafort in December 2016, more than 2 months after Page "left" the campaign: "Carter Page is in Moscow today , sending messages he is authorized to talk to Russia on behalf of DT on a range of issues of mutual interest, including Ukraine."

https://twitter.com/NatashaBertrand/...16681231949824


On Nov 9, 2016, someone wrote to the head of Russia's sovereign wealth fund Kirill Dmitriev that "Putin has won." We don't know who wrote that because it's redacted.

https://twitter.com/NatashaBertrand/...19349316849665

and fourteen ongoing investigations following evidence uncovered by the Mueller investigation:

The Special Counsel's Office made 14 referrals of evidence of potential criminal activity to outside offices. Only two are publicly known at this point.

https://twitter.com/BySteveReilly/st...17924822159360

[Kirkland Laing]

Oh so the bet WAS different than the bet about Democrats being indicted

That's the bet you made.

So now it's ONE of the bets I've made. Just to clarify

Yes the other one is $20 on who is more broadly correct on how the Trump-Russia thing shakes out.

Kirk I’m surprised you don’t even acknowledge there may be something at least a little fishy with the launching of this investigation. So straight up you you in complete denial that there may be something a little curious with the beginning of this investigation and now that he has been cleared. I know you are still hanging on the obstruction thing and even saying still there is plenty of evidence of collusion but you don’t at lest think even in the biased mind of yours something odd happened to set it in motion. Don’t answer with a question as you like to as I’m honestly curiously

We already know what set it in motion. One of Trump's campaign aides drunkenly blurted out to some diplomats in a London bar that the Trump campaign knew that a whole bunch of Clinton/Democratic party emails had been stolen and were going to be released later in the campaign. Once these emails started being released and the diplomats realised the guy had been telling the truth they passed the information on. Also five (5) foreign intelligence agencies passed on reports to the FBI that Trump people were meeting with Russian government actors in Europe.

[Kirkland Laing]

Oh so the bet WAS different than the bet about Democrats being indicted

That's the bet you made.

So now it's ONE of the bets I've made. Just to clarify

Yes the other one is $20 on who is more broadly correct on how the Trump-Russia thing shakes out.

Kirkland, you sound like a man who needs a holiday. Fancy a week in Thailand with me?

I've got all my holidays planned out this year already. Off on the 24th for the next on. I'm over in Japan later in the year but it's my mate's private island. No riff raff allowed. Could possibly stop off somewhere over there if you're interested. Second half of August/first half of September. It's going to involve heroic quantities of substances though and a parade of dirty women because that's how I roll. Aren't you married?

[El Kabong]

Here's the bet we made:

If you bet at least $100 I'll give you 10000 to 1 odds that I'm right and you're wrong and the Mueller report proves all the emails were hacked by Russia. And I'll pay the money directly to you. You can make a million dollars by betting a hundred if you really believe the Seth Rich thing.

I'll take gold thank you.

There we go Lyle. Chapter and verse. The Russians hacked all the Hillary/Democratic party stuff and laundered it via Wikileaks and various other outlets. $50x2 with verifiable receipts please.

And how about this with Carter Page?

Email from Konstantin Kilimnik to Paul Manafort in December 2016, more than 2 months after Page "left" the campaign: "Carter Page is in Moscow today , sending messages he is authorized to talk to Russia on behalf of DT on a range of issues of mutual interest, including Ukraine."

https://twitter.com/NatashaBertrand/...16681231949824


On Nov 9, 2016, someone wrote to the head of Russia's sovereign wealth fund Kirill Dmitriev that "Putin has won." We don't know who wrote that because it's redacted.

https://twitter.com/NatashaBertrand/...19349316849665

and fourteen ongoing investigations following evidence uncovered by the Mueller investigation:

The Special Counsel's Office made 14 referrals of evidence of potential criminal activity to outside offices. Only two are publicly known at this point.

https://twitter.com/BySteveReilly/st...17924822159360

A#1 You know who said Guccifer2.0 got info from Russians? CrowdStrike the very same outfit which prevented the FBI from ever seeing the servers. So "beyond a reasonable doubt" also Julian Assange has maintained that he didn't get the information via Russians and "Has proof to back that up" so I'm sorry Kirkland, but you're reading what you WANT and not the TRUTH

The Russians COULD very well have hacked the DNC servers but that doesn't mean that WikiLeaks got their info from Russia/Russians in fact since Assange says he didn't and can prove it I'm apt to believe him (especially when Hillary has him murdered or attempts to). I'm certain China and probably others hacked the DNC servers as well....I by no means think it's 100% Russia and that was the bet YOU made, you said "Russia hacked all the emails" and that's not the case it's certainly not veritably the case.


Hmmm Carter Page .....you mean....this guy?
https://thehill.com/opinion/white-ho...ssian-spy-ever

....Odd guy to be a "Russian spy" what with his history of nabbing Russian spies....but then again that's written by Sharyl Attkisson...who would know absolutely nothing about how the intelligence community was used by Obama et al?


Go make my money princess