5
BrakeRemovalMechanic 5 points ago +5 / -0

You aren't wrong, bbut I'm also severely swollen from all the IV stuff that they pumped into me. First wrist band literally broke itself off. I was severely dehydrated and hadn't eaten or drank for days when I was brought in.

Thank you for the advice though.

6
BrakeRemovalMechanic 6 points ago +6 / -0

Nah. If he was dead his crazy sister would have started a nuclear war already.

2
BrakeRemovalMechanic 2 points ago +2 / -0

Assuming these are the documents Ty got, here are the highlights.

On page 64, a November 11, 2017 memo from FBI’s Boston Field Office is almost completely redacted, but the last sentence reads as follows: “Given _________, it is conceivable that an individual or group would want to pay for his death.”

A witness interview form begins on page 65, and it appears to be the interview of former Asst. U.S. Attorney Deborah Sines, the prosecutor assigned to the Seth Rich murder case.

Page 66 of that interview reads as follows: ““After the homicide, ____ took Rich’s personal laptop to his house in ____. ____ was not aware of if _____ deleted or changed anything on Rich’s laptop.” I suspect this is referring to Aaron Rich, brother of Seth, and it begs a question: why would a private citizen be allowed to carry away evidence relevant to a murder investigation? Why was this not immediately given to the police rather than taken to somebody’s house? And the government is not aware of whether this private citizen deleted anything from the laptop? That seems like an important thing to figure out.

Lower on page 66, we find the following: “___ AUSA ___ are aware that the FBI is in possession of RICH’s work laptop. ___ AUSA ____ requested a forensic image of the laptop for the homicide investigation.” So now we know that the FBI had two of Seth Rich’s laptops: his work laptop and his personal laptop. And remember that the FBI long insisted that it was not investigating anything related to Seth Rich. Obviously the FBI was investigating something about Rich, so what was it? If not his murder, then the leak of DNC emails to Wikileaks?

On page 50, a May 30, 2018 letter from Democratic law firm Perkins Coie notes that the Democratic National Committee and Hillary for America were “voluntarily” providing certain electronic evidence to the office of Special Counsel Robert Mueller. Why wasn’t that information subpoenaed, i.e., to insure that all relevant information was produced?

https://lawflog.com/?p=2481

12
BrakeRemovalMechanic 12 points ago +12 / -0

"I think they know they need a fresh start if Trump runs again," said Bob Vander Plaats, CEO of Iowa-based social conservative group, The Family Leader. "Is that a Nikki Haley, is that a Tim Scott, is that a Gov. Kim Reynolds? Or is that a Kristi Noem? You could see all of those making a big play for VP." (hilarious)

I didn't think there would be a way that I wouldn't vote for Trump but if he picks Haley, I think that's it. These idiots are really out of touch.

7
BrakeRemovalMechanic 7 points ago +7 / -0

I live in NY. They shutdown all the mass testing sites. How can you know if the vaccine "works" if they magically stop testing everyone as soon as it is rolled out. The answer is that it has been bullshit from the beginning.

5
BrakeRemovalMechanic 5 points ago +5 / -0

Funny, but John the Baptist would probably slap him across the head. That would be funnier.

by Tucso
3
BrakeRemovalMechanic 3 points ago +3 / -0

Anti Trump IMO. The plan was always to protect deep state assets.

by Tucso
5
BrakeRemovalMechanic 5 points ago +5 / -0

Q was a psyop to control outrage. Every betrayal by a Trump appointee was part of some magical plan.

4
BrakeRemovalMechanic 4 points ago +4 / -0

Just some shitposting. It's important to have fun once in a while.

5
BrakeRemovalMechanic 5 points ago +5 / -0

Which was it? Was it the obvious fork, the knife with the backwards handle, or the random green thing?

12
BrakeRemovalMechanic 12 points ago +12 / -0

That's only partially true. It's a cross carrier filter on dot win domains. T-mobile to t-mobile it does not not block. It's possibly related to spam. I talked with someone about it and they had no idea how to address it other than submitting a complaint. They did admit that it was incorrect and should not be active.

view more: Next ›