3 minutes ago, SunnyinBangrak said:

Seditious conspiracy is the accusation with written EVIDENCE to back up the claim. Why on earth do you keep banging on about election infrastructure? I note by the deflated tone of your posts recently - and those of other notorious laptop denying conspiracy theorists - that you are merely going through the motions of supporting your team. Devoted grandma defending her delinquent grandkids vibe. Sad really, all those years pumping out mocking disinformation grinding to a predictable end.

 

Legal Definition

 

Seditious conspiracy occurs when two or more persons conspire to use force* to:

 

•  Overthrow, put down, or destroy the U.S. government.

•  Levy war against the United States.

•  Oppose by force the authority of the government.

•  Prevent, hinder, or delay the execution of any U.S. law.

•  Seize, take, or possess U.S. government property by force 

 

 

So what evidence is going to be brought forward that Obama and/or Clinton were going to use force.

 

force*

 

Physical violence or threat thereof: Courts typically interpret “force” to mean actual or threatened physical violence. This includes actions like storming government buildings, attacking law enforcement, or using weapons to obstruct government functions. Like January 6 for example.

•  Not mere speech or protest: The use of “force” must go beyond protected First Amendment activities. Advocacy, dissent, or even harsh criticism of the government is not enough unless it’s tied to a plan involving violence.

13 minutes ago, SunnyinBangrak said:

Seditious conspiracy is the accusation with written EVIDENCE to back up the claim. Why on earth do you keep banging on about election infrastructure? I note by the deflated tone of your posts recently - and those of other notorious laptop denying conspiracy theorists - that you are merely going through the motions of supporting your team. Devoted grandma defending her delinquent grandkids vibe. Sad really, all those years pumping out mocking disinformation grinding to a predictable end.

Because was what Gabbard touted! That Obama knew Russia could not hack the election infrastructure! 

 

There is no evidence of seditious conspiracy, that's just MAGA gaslighting for the gullible! 🤣

 

What is Obama accused of, exactly? You are not even able to phrase it precisely! You just parrot the propaganda you are served every day! Seditious conspiracy! 😆

 

 

24 minutes ago, candide said:

Because was what Gabbard touted! That Obama knew Russia could not hack the election infrastructure! 

 

There is no evidence of seditious conspiracy, that's just MAGA gaslighting for the gullible! 🤣

 

What is Obama accused of, exactly? You are not even able to phrase it precisely! You just parrot the propaganda you are served every day! Seditious conspiracy! 😆

He is not accused of anything, it has been referred for another pointless investigation, not indictment. This is just another distraction from a known Russian asset.

51 minutes ago, Will B Good said:

 

Legal Definition

 

Seditious conspiracy occurs when two or more persons conspire to use force* to:

 

•  Overthrow, put down, or destroy the U.S. government.

•  Levy war against the United States.

•  Oppose by force the authority of the government.

•  Prevent, hinder, or delay the execution of any U.S. law.

•  Seize, take, or possess U.S. government property by force 

 

 

So what evidence is going to be brought forward that Obama and/or Clinton were going to use force.

 

force*

 

Physical violence or threat thereof: Courts typically interpret “force” to mean actual or threatened physical violence. This includes actions like storming government buildings, attacking law enforcement, or using weapons to obstruct government functions. Like January 6 for example.

•  Not mere speech or protest: The use of “force” must go beyond protected First Amendment activities. Advocacy, dissent, or even harsh criticism of the government is not enough unless it’s tied to a plan involving violence.

 

18 U.S. Code § 2384 - Seditious conspiracy

If two or more persons in any State or Territory, or in any place subject to the jurisdiction of the United States, conspire to overthrow, put down, or to destroy by force the Government of the United States, or to levy war against them, or to oppose by force the authority thereof, or by force to prevent, hinder, or delay the execution of any law of the United States, or by force to seize, take, or possess any property of the United States contrary to the authority thereof, they shall each be fined under this title or imprisoned not more than twenty years, or both.

 

-------------------

 

 

https://www.law.cornell.edu/uscode/text/18/part-I/chapter-115

22 hours ago, theblether said:

No one is this stupid. 

 

No one. 

 

He's living proof that you're incorrect.  Or maybe he's a BOT.

 

30 minutes ago, Miloki said:

 

18 U.S. Code § 2384 - Seditious conspiracy

If two or more persons in any State or Territory, or in any place subject to the jurisdiction of the United States, conspire to overthrow, put down, or to destroy by force the Government of the United States, or to levy war against them, or to oppose by force the authority thereof, or by force to prevent, hinder, or delay the execution of any law of the United States, or by force to seize, take, or possess any property of the United States contrary to the authority thereof, they shall each be fined under this title or imprisoned not more than twenty years, or both.

 

-------------------

 

 

https://www.law.cornell.edu/uscode/text/18/part-I/chapter-115

 

 

Every actionable clause in the statute still hinges on “by force”......which i fail to see how the DOJ will show that.

 

•  Overthrowing or destroying the government

•  Opposing its authority

•  Hindering law enforcement

•  Seizing federal property

23 hours ago, theblether said:

 

And now known to be fake. 

So you claimed that the GOP-led Senate Committee report (signed by Rubio), showing the extent of Russian interference, was fake (along with a few personal insults). 

 

What exactly has been proven not to be true in the GOP-led Senate Committee report? 😆

 

Report of the Select Committee on Intelligence United States Senate on Russian Active Measures Campaigns and Interference in the 2016 U.S. Election

https://www.intelligence.senate.gov/2020/08/18/publications-report-select-committee-intelligence-united-states-senate-russian-active-measures/

 

 

Do you guys not think it's interesting that Dutch intelligence intercepted Russian communications proving it was fake and when it was delivered to the USA, it was buried? 

"What's The Blether on about now, he's lost the plot." 

 

5,4,3,2,1......

Here's a summary of the Durham Annex intelligence chain and why the FBI did not investigate the Clinton campaign-Russia smear allegation:

---

🧾 Durham Annex: What Happened and What the FBI Did (or Didn't Do)

---

🔁 1. Initial Intelligence Gathering

• Source: Dutch intelligence intercepts Russian communications
• Content: Alleged emails between Clinton campaign aides discussing a plan to link Donald Trump to Russian election interference
• Claim: The aim was to distract from the Clinton email scandal and manipulate the election narrative

---

📬 2. Intelligence Shared with the U.S.

• Agencies involved: Dutch intelligence ➝ CIA
• CIA found the intercepts plausibly authentic, though some content may have been Russian disinformation
• CIA passed this intel to senior U.S. officials in August 2016

---

🧠 3. High-Level Briefing

• Briefed by CIA Director John Brennan
• Recipients:
  • President Barack Obama
  • Vice President Joe Biden
  • FBI Director James Comey
  • DNI James Clapper
• Clinton campaign plan discussed in person

---

❌ 4. FBI Response: Inaction

• No investigation opened
• No assessment or verification attempted
• No documentation or follow-up
• The FBI did nothing with the Clinton campaign intelligence
• This is despite simultaneously acting aggressively on the unverified Steele Dossier (against Trump)

---

❓ 5. Why Didn’t the FBI Investigate?

Reason	Explanation
Suspected disinformation	The intercepts were possibly Russian-planted — so FBI dismissed them
Political caution	Having just investigated Clinton’s emails, the FBI may have feared backlash or “interfering”
No process initiated	Durham found no internal FBI logs or actions taken
Institutional bias	The Trump-Russia narrative fit their suspicions; this did not
No explanation given	Durham report says officials could not explain why they ignored it

---

🧨 6. Durham's Final Judgment

• The intelligence was credible enough to merit investigation
• The FBI's failure to even assess it represents a double standard
• No conclusive proof the Clinton plan existed — but the FBI refused to find out

---

🧭 Key Takeaway:

The FBI ignored a potential political influence operation because it came from the “wrong side.”
Intelligence pointing toward Clinton was quietly dropped, while similar-quality intel against Trump led to full-blown investigations.

---

 

For clarity - information gathered and post written by chatgpt. Verified by two other AI. 

55 minutes ago, candide said:

So you claimed that the GOP-led Senate Committee report (signed by Rubio), showing the extent of Russian interference, was fake (along with a few personal insults). 

 

What exactly has been proven not to be true in the GOP-led Senate Committee report? 😆

 

Report of the Select Committee on Intelligence United States Senate on Russian Active Measures Campaigns and Interference in the 2016 U.S. Election

https://www.intelligence.senate.gov/2020/08/18/publications-report-select-committee-intelligence-united-states-senate-russian-active-measures/

 

 

 

If the committee was fed fake info ( it was ) then the conclusion will be fake. 

 

Simple! 

 

By the way, I have never personally insulted you as I dont personally know you. 

 

To me, you are merely digital litter. 

1 hour ago, Will B Good said:

 

 

Every actionable clause in the statute still hinges on “by force”......which i fail to see how the DOJ will show that.

 

•  Overthrowing or destroying the government

•  Opposing its authority

•  Hindering law enforcement

•  Seizing federal property

We'll have to see more details on what exactly happened but 'force' is a very interesting word legally.  It does not exclusively encompass violence, but also power, pressure, compulsion/coercion; real and implied.

Instigating a campaign to undermine the Trump admin through bogus claims would not be 'by force', although government officials and especially the CIA doing it likely broke other laws.

But the systematic use of illegal wiretaps, foreign intelligence, attempted setups/entrapment by intelligence or law enforcement, etc, specifically targeted at Trump officials or campaign staff with no probable cause or with maliciously fabricated probable cause, and with the expressed intention of going after Trump and/or crippling his administration;  that's 'by force' potentially.

Not sure there is a case, but there could be. 

 

21 minutes ago, theblether said:

 

If the committee was fed fake info ( it was ) then the conclusion will be fake. 

 

Simple! 

 

By the way, I have never personally insulted you as I dont personally know you. 

 

To me, you are merely digital litter. 

Lame deflection blah blah again (talking about litter!  ).

 

So what is fake (and why) exactly in the Senate report about Russian interference (considering that, like other assessments, it did not claim that Russia hacked the electoral infrastructure)? For example (just a few):

- the Social Media campaign by Russian bots and agents;

- the Russian hack of Podesta's email;

- the Russian hack of DNC server;

- Russia bought RNC electoral information from Manafort.

 

You are claiming it's all fake, then it should be easy for you to prove it. Please tell us! 

 

Or could it be that you are just baselessly lying?

1 hour ago, candide said:

 

Lame deflection blah blah again (talking about litter!  ).

 

So what is fake (and why) exactly in the Senate report about Russian interference (considering that, like other assessments, it did not claim that Russia hacked the electoral infrastructure)? For example (just a few):

- the Social Media campaign by Russian bots and agents;

- the Russian hack of Podesta's email;

- the Russian hack of DNC server;

- Russia bought RNC electoral information from Manafort.

 

You are claiming it's all fake, then it should be easy for you to prove it. Please tell us! 

 

Or could it be that you are just baselessly lying?

 

Okay. Let's use your logic. A GOP led Senate Committee said there was Russian collusion. 

 

Take a victory lap. 

 

Biden's DoJ delivered a special investigators report to the Senate saying Russian Collusion was a hoax. 

 

The Mueller report found no evidence of collusion. It was published. 

 

The Durham report said it was a hoax. It was classified. 

 

I'll take a victory lap. 

2 minutes ago, theblether said:

 

Okay. Let's use your logic. A GOP led Senate Committee said there was Russian collusion. 

 

Take a victory lap. 

 

Biden's DoJ delivered a special investigators report to the Senate saying Russian Collusion was a hoax. 

 

The Mueller report found no evidence of collusion. It was published. 

 

The Durham report said it was a hoax. It was classified. 

 

I'll take a victory lap. 

You're making up the use of the word hoax in those reports.

That word is simply a maga talking point.

 

18 minutes ago, theblether said:

 

Okay. Let's use your logic. A GOP led Senate Committee said there was Russian collusion. 

 

Take a victory lap. 

 

Biden's DoJ delivered a special investigators report to the Senate saying Russian Collusion was a hoax. 

 

The Mueller report found no evidence of collusion. It was published. 

 

The Durham report said it was a hoax. It was classified. 

 

I'll take a victory lap. 

You're making up stuff up again, as usual! 🤣🤣🤣

 

The Senate report did not claim there was collusion. Nor did I. It has proven that there was a multifaceted Russian interference, as did the Mueller report two years before that.

 

Rubio's own statement: "Russia took advantage of members of the Transition Team’s relative inexperience in government, opposition to Obama Administration policies, and Trump’s desire to deepen ties with Russia to pursue unofficial channels through which Russia could conduct diplomacy."

 

You claimed the GOP-led Senate report was fake. So what was fake in this report and what is the evidence it was fake? Still crickets......, as expected! 🙂

 

Other quote from Rubio:

“Over the last three years, the Senate Intelligence Committee conducted a bipartisan and thorough investigation into Russian efforts to influence the 2016 election and undermine our democracy. We interviewed over 200 witnesses and reviewed over one million pages of documents. No probe into this matter has been more exhaustive."

 

https://www.intelligence.senate.gov/2020/08/18/press-rubio-statement-senate-intel-release-volume-5-bipartisan-russia-report/

5 hours ago, Jingthing said:

Wake up maga people

They did, as the useless and totally confused & misguided democrats slept like a thumb sucking biden after the stunning performance /beatdown Trump inflicted on him in the June CNN debate, and guess what: they won the 2024 election in case you were wondering. How's that for waking up. What happened to Kamala, she fall asleep suffering fatigue from cackling and lying too much? 

2 hours ago, theblether said:

Here's a summary of the Durham Annex intelligence chain and why the FBI did not investigate the Clinton campaign-Russia smear allegation:

---

🧾 Durham Annex: What Happened and What the FBI Did (or Didn't Do)

---

🔁 1. Initial Intelligence Gathering

• Source: Dutch intelligence intercepts Russian communications
• Content: Alleged emails between Clinton campaign aides discussing a plan to link Donald Trump to Russian election interference
• Claim: The aim was to distract from the Clinton email scandal and manipulate the election narrative

---

📬 2. Intelligence Shared with the U.S.

• Agencies involved: Dutch intelligence ➝ CIA
• CIA found the intercepts plausibly authentic, though some content may have been Russian disinformation
• CIA passed this intel to senior U.S. officials in August 2016

---

🧠 3. High-Level Briefing

• Briefed by CIA Director John Brennan
• Recipients:
  • President Barack Obama
  • Vice President Joe Biden
  • FBI Director James Comey
  • DNI James Clapper
• Clinton campaign plan discussed in person

---

❌ 4. FBI Response: Inaction

• No investigation opened
• No assessment or verification attempted
• No documentation or follow-up
• The FBI did nothing with the Clinton campaign intelligence
• This is despite simultaneously acting aggressively on the unverified Steele Dossier (against Trump)

---

❓ 5. Why Didn’t the FBI Investigate?

Reason	Explanation
Suspected disinformation	The intercepts were possibly Russian-planted — so FBI dismissed them
Political caution	Having just investigated Clinton’s emails, the FBI may have feared backlash or “interfering”
No process initiated	Durham found no internal FBI logs or actions taken
Institutional bias	The Trump-Russia narrative fit their suspicions; this did not
No explanation given	Durham report says officials could not explain why they ignored it

---

🧨 6. Durham's Final Judgment

• The intelligence was credible enough to merit investigation
• The FBI's failure to even assess it represents a double standard
• No conclusive proof the Clinton plan existed — but the FBI refused to find out

---

🧭 Key Takeaway:

The FBI ignored a potential political influence operation because it came from the “wrong side.”
Intelligence pointing toward Clinton was quietly dropped, while similar-quality intel against Trump led to full-blown investigations.

---

 

For clarity - information gathered and post written by chatgpt. Verified by two other AI. 

Clarity? You've got to be joking!🤣 Unless you post exactly what you (?) asked the AI your post is useless.

2 hours ago, BLMFem said:

Clarity? You've got to be joking!🤣 Unless you post exactly what you (?) asked the AI your post is useless.

 

You go ask AI yourself. 

 

"What did the Durham Annex say?" 

22 minutes ago, theblether said:

 

You go ask AI yourself. 

 

"What did the Durham Annex say?" 

I did, and what came out was totally different to the lying drivel you falsely posted. Don't you feel like such a total moron when you have to resort to such tactics?

Don't worry, it was a rhetorical question. No one believes for a moment that you're man/woman enough to admit you "got creative" with the reply from the AI.

 

 

One can expect prosecution of the Obama treason/sedition actors to commense sooner than later. Remember, "no one is above the law" 

 

 

32 minutes ago, BLMFem said:

I did, and what came out was totally different to the lying drivel you falsely posted. Don't you feel like such a total moron when you have to resort to such tactics?

Don't worry, it was a rhetorical question. No one believes for a moment that you're man/woman enough to admit you "got creative" with the reply from the AI.

 

 

 

We used to have good trolls here 

On 7/24/2025 at 7:49 AM, gargamon said:

Sorry, the supreme court has made presidents and ex-presidents immune from prosecution. One would think Trump and his minions would remember that, as it was Trump that had real cases against him cancelled.

 

No show trials, panty raids, and mugshots?

Turley shines with his break down  called ,The Reveal:

"How the Dems pulled off the Greatest Political Trick in History"

The illusion would of never succeeded without the help of the members of the audience,the reporters in the media.

Dems,Intel,Media and foreign surrogates' all acting in unison to promulgate a manufactured

conspiracy started by Hillary with the help of the FBI & CIA.

 

"Leonard Bernardo, who was the regional director for Eurasia at the Open Society Foundations, explained that “during the first stage of the campaign, due to lack of direct evidence, it was decided to disseminate the necessary information through the FBI-affiliated…from where the information would then be disseminated through leading U.S. publications.”

 

 https://jonathanturley.org/2025/08/01/the-reveal-the-public-is-finally-learning-how-democrats-pulled-off-the-greatest-political-trick-in-history/

 

https://www.foxnews.com/opinion/jonathan-turley-dems-pulled-greatest-political-con-job-ever-americans-its-finally-unraveling

16 hours ago, theblether said:

 

We used to have good trolls here 

Yeah, and now we have you, Care to share why your posted "AI reply" was so different to the one I posted?

16 hours ago, theblether said:

 

We used to have good trolls here 

The troll quality level has significantly decreased on this forum, indeed! In particular, board members making fake claims they are unable to support. That's really bad trolling! 

 

BTW, you claimed the 2020 GOP-led Senate Intelligence report was fake (you know, the one Rubio signed), then you claimed it included something it didn't.

 

So what's fake in the 2020 GOP-led Senate Committee report, and based on which evidence, precisely? 

 

Report of the Select Committee on Intelligence United States Senate on Russian Active Measures Campaigns and Interference in the 2016 U.S. Election

https://www.intelligence.senate.gov/2020/08/18/publications-report-select-committee-intelligence-united-states-senate-russian-active-measures/

20 minutes ago, BLMFem said:

Yeah, and now we have you, Care to share why your posted "AI reply" was so different to the one I posted?

 

  Yes, if ignorance is bliss then he's the happiest guy on AN.

 

  Plus, that orange ring around his mouth is distracting, isn't it?

2 minutes ago, candide said:

The troll quality level has significantly decreased on this forum, indeed! In particular, board members making fake claims they are unable to support. That's really bad trolling! 

 

BTW, you claimed the 2020 GOP-led Senate Intelligence report was fake (you know, the one Rubio signed), then you claimed it included something it didn't.

 

So what's fake in the 2020 GOP-led Senate Committee report, and based on which evidence, precisely? 

 

Report of the Select Committee on Intelligence United States Senate on Russian Active Measures Campaigns and Interference in the 2016 U.S. Election

https://www.intelligence.senate.gov/2020/08/18/publications-report-select-committee-intelligence-united-states-senate-russian-active-measures/

 

 

I think it might transpire that that was a fake Rubio or the real Rubio was forced to sign it under duress......either way we can totally disregard a detail bipartisan report of this nature.

50 minutes ago, Will B Good said:

 

 

I think it might transpire that that was a fake Rubio or the real Rubio was forced to sign it under duress......either way we can totally disregard a detail bipartisan report of this nature.

It must be because of Soros! 🤣

Just now, candide said:

It must be because of Soros! 🤣

 

 

.....nope.....my money is on Biden.