
Originally Posted by
Kirkland Laing
So we agree that if Trump can order investigations into people Trump thinks are corrupt then so could Obama when he was president?
I'd ask about if the investigations were properly predicated, but then you'll squeal about it so I'm just going to let it play out. FBI Director Wray addressed the house today and referenced FISA abuse...so we'll see what happens there.

Originally Posted by
Kirkland Laing
The bet wasn't that Mueller couldn't indict Trump for conspiring with Russia. The bet is whether Russia hacked the DNC servers. And you've just confirmed that you lost the bet. If Mueller not having evidence to prove beyond reasonable doubt that what you thought the bet was over -- Trump conspiring with the Russians -- was true means that I lost the bet then Mueller having evidence to prove beyond reasonable doubt that the Russians hacked the DNC servers -- which he does -- means that by your own metric I won the bet. You can now finally pay the money you owe to those two find organisations. $50 each and a further $40 split when Flynn is sentenced soon.
The FBI never had the servers they had what CROWDSTRIKE gave them....not like they'd give a fair shake anyway. But yeah this is why you lost the bet.

Originally Posted by
Kirkland Laing
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.
http://www.saddoboxing.com/boxingfor...87#post1517087
Yeah, I'm well aware and THE guy who ran WikiLeaks at that time said he had 0, nil, nada, nothing, come from Russia or Russian assets. So when he testifies OR the actual server is produced, then and only then will the case be 100% settled. Sorry if you're disappointed by that.
Bookmarks