Trump, Comey, and Ockham's Razor

>>129514334
Trumps a bullshit artist and all of these rabbits autistic dipshits on here know it but you'll never see them admit it because they'd rather see everything go down in flames just so they can come off as being right. They're the worst people you can imagine but then again, that's %99 of the scum that trolls /Pol

>>129514334
bump

I take the lack of responses as a "no"

File: IMG_5768.gif (2MB, 400x214px) Image search: [Google]

2MB, 400x214px

>>129514334
Almost forgot

>>129514764
>>129514735
>>129514803
Spoke too soon.
I'd agree with you, but I think there are people who legitimately take Trump at his work. What began as a meme morphed into an ideology.

>>129514941
*word

>>129514334
A simple lie is always more believable than the truth.

>>129514941
There are and if you've been lurking /Pol for any amount of time, you'll see that it's the majority of US, Canadian fag, Russian, and South American IP addresses. I'd imagine the same concerted effort by the Trump Trolls ™

File: IMG_5758.png (24KB, 1010x666px) Image search: [Google]

24KB, 1010x666px

>>129514941
It's obvious that he's a huge fucking liar but his supporters are so ridiculously on his cock because they always fall back on the old excuses that Obama is a nigger and that's LITERALLY the main reasoning, oh and the her emails fluff.

>>129515369
Pretty much. Very logical indeed, very "redpilled"

File: comey2.jpg (160KB, 749x1065px) Image search: [Google]

160KB, 749x1065px

Comey needs money. A report is that he was bribed with a $10million "book deal" to cover for Clinton and sabotage president Trump. "Book deal" has become the new term for bribery. Clinton got millions for a "book deal". Obama got $25 million, Michelle got $10 million. Someone in the Deep State has deep pockets flowing corruption bribes through publishers??? Needs to be investigated. Pol-what can you find out about "Book Deals". Who else is getting them? From whom? Follow the money.

>>129519339
>A report is that he was bribed with a $10 million "book deal" to cover for Clinton and sabotage president Trump
[citation needed]

File: comey1.jpg (123KB, 560x1345px) Image search: [Google]

123KB, 560x1345px

Further possible insider truth: Comey was under arrest when he went to the televised committee hearing. He was accompanied by two US Marshalls when they went into the secret meetings after that. Feinstein then came out after the meeting and began saying Lynch should be investigated. Meuller's office drafted Comey's written statement which came out the day before. Andrew McCabe also implicated. If true, this may be what Jeff Sessions is going to report on Tuesday. democrats now are fighting NOT to make his appearance public. That should be a flag that they know it does not look good for them.

File: autism.jpg (58KB, 514x536px) Image search: [Google]

58KB, 514x536px

>>129519339
>>129519864
Ah, okay. So you're saying that Comey, by doing his job as FBI director, opened an investigation on Clinton, concluded she was "extremely careless" but no charges should be pressed, reopened the investigation, did not change his conclusion, and literally one day before election day announced that the FBI was *still* investigating Clinton, despite that the decision had not been changed. Clinton later blamed Comey's cumulative announcements as the reason for her loss of the election.

Tell me - at what point in this timeline was Comey bribed with $10 million to keep quiet about Clinton?

>>129514334
>over
what do you mean? comey went and spoke in support of trump!

>>129514334

If you believe Comey's word over President Trump's, can you verify that your defense passes Ockham's Razor? If it doesn't, chances are it won't convince those who decide Comey's fate.

http://www.zerohedge.com/news/2017-06-11/feinstein-congress-should-investigate-if-lynch-pressured-comey-cover-hillary-clinton

Does OP understand that guilt or innocence is obtained via consideration of the credible evidence beyond a reasonable doubt, and not the non-scientific assertion that the simplest answer is generally best/correct?


in forming your answer consider whether Comey accurately represented the elements of Clinton's multiple federal crimes with pressure from a crooked AG or not

https://www.google.com/amp/amp.nationalreview.com/corner/437479/fbi-rewrites-federal-law-let-hillary-hook


You still dont get it: The Russia thing is over. Smokescreen nonsense. No evidence ever offered that Russia hacked the DNC a a DNC that refused to let the fbi examine the server... only 3 agencies not 17 reported on the purported russian hacking... never examining the DNC server.

of cia, fbi, nsa, nsa is most expert. they reported 'moderate confidence' it was Russia... which essentially means they are not convinced by the evidence presented.

Then there was the Vault 7 dump, Seth Rich, Craig Murray...
you are in over your head here, son.

>>129514334
Comay lied under oath not 2 weeks before.
He said he did not interpret his communication with Trump as an order.
Then he said he did.

It is really simple. Lock them all up. No convincing needed.

>>129520472
Regarding the picture:

"[Comey] was also appointed to the board of directors of the London-based financial institution HSBC Holdings,[66] to improve the company's compliance program after its $1.9 billion settlement with the Justice Department for failing to comply with basic due diligence requirements for money laundering regarding Mexican drug cartels and terrorism financing.[67][68]"

But I guess Wikipedia is part of the deep state too, right?

>Further possible insider truth
Anything is possible with absolutely no evidence.

>>129521249
>comey went and spoke in support of trump!
Did he! Fascinating - please elaborate.

>>129521378
>the non-scientific assertion that the simplest answer is generally best/correct
Well, someone clearly doesn't understand Ockham's Razor.
Your description is a common but complete bastardization of the original rule. Ockham's Razor dictates that the explanation with the least amount of assumptions is usually correct. How many assumptions do you think one must make to favor Trump's word over Comey's?

>consider whether Comey accurately represented the elements of Clinton's multiple federal crimes
I'm not at all convinced that Comey made the right decision with regard to Clinton, but I assume you are implying is that he was bribed to cover Clinton. If that's true, explain the "October Surprise", occurring one day before the election. Oh, and keep Ockham's Razor in mind.

>The Russia thing is over
It's just beginning.
>No evidence ever offered that Russia hacked the DNC
Yet plenty of evidence and confidence from these agencies that the RNC servers were hacked, to the point of "no doubt" that the Russians were involved in hacking the election. Which is kind of the point, right? What would be the goal in hacking the DNC if you have the RNC?

>Vault 7 dump, Seth Rich, Craig Murray...
I'll get back to you when I've done some research on these, but I expect these to be completely unrelated

>>129521390
>He said he did not interpret his communication with Trump as an order.
>Then he said he did.
What he said is that he was not ordered by Trump, meaning there is no legal precedent to claim that Trump gave him a *direct* order to carry something out, but that he did take it as an order. And why shouldn't he? It is not the place of the president to suggest, influence, or direct the director of the FBI how to do his job. The president can fire or hire the FBI director, not tell him how or what to investigate.

File: richard_nixon_ap.jpg (282KB, 750x500px)

282KB, 750x500px

>>129514334
this is gonna go down one of 4 ways it seems to me

1. Comey did not lie, trump lied
>trump resigns Nixon style

2. Comey did not lie, trump lied
>trump gets impeached republicans save him, finishes term as a disgrace and failure

3.Comey did not lie, trump lied
>trump get impeached and btfo of office overwhelming evidence

4. Comey lied, trump did not lie
>Comey goes to jail

i seriously believe that comey is too smart to end up in jail.

trump on the other hand has everything to win by lying and everything to loose if he obstructed justice

the odds are not in trump favor, if you have another scenario pls share

>>129523200


right... ockhams is not scientific, and its also not how we determine guilt... which I guess went over your head in your race to be pedantic... you make a distinction without a real difference actually.

'simplest answer' was a short, rough description not a technical definition.

fewer assumptions = simpler.

I studied phil undergrad as well. but got a law degree too which is the ground we're on.

And I think you're the one multiplying entities needlessly

IAC, you utterly failed to address the other points, and are *presupposing* the BoP lay with us and not you.

At issue is did Hillary violate the statutes?

yrs.

why not indicted?

smells like obstruction by a guy who admitted leaking notes he took while a federal officer.


Even Politico is admitting Comey is in triuble btw


http://investmentwatchblog.com/even-politico-forced-to-admit-that-comey-violated-fbi-policy-and-may-have-broken-federal-laws/
And saying 'plenty of evidence' is not evidence; it is also not true. There has been no proof, certainly, but also nothing riding to the level of credible evidence.

The US government may *have* such evidence, but they have never produced any.


There is plenty of doubt regarding the Russia claims. Were there not - you could do more than assert there's smoking-gun evidence but not reference it.

You surely arent going to embrace an argument from authority here... the CIA saying it is certain is not robust evidence and not itself proof, ESPECIALLY given vault 7 leaks.

Again... out of your depth here, kid.

zzzzz

>>129521378
>>129525975
>Vault 7
"Cybersecurity writers such as Ben Buchanan and Kevin Poulsen were skeptical of these theories.[55][6] Poulsen wrote, "The leaked catalog isn't organized by country of origin, and the specific malware used by the Russian DNC hackers is nowhere on the list."[6]"
Again, from fucking Wikipedia - I don't even have to try with you guys.

>Seth Rich
No evidence of him communicating with WikiLeaks and the FBI was not investigating his death, only the Metropolitan Police Department. His attackers failed to kill him. Wouldn't these supposedly trained assassins sent by Clinton have done a better job at not risking him surviving? What about the many other robberies reported in the same area he was assaulted?
Also, as expected, irrelevant to the current discussion.

>Craig Murray
His claims are interesting, but still irrelevant to what we are discussing.

Please, if you can point out the relevance of any of these, do so.

>>129525975
>its also not how we determine guilt
Not literally, no - Ockham's Razor is not how we determine guilt. But we do not determine guilt based on assumptions (i.e., nearly everything said in defense of Trump) over evidence. That is clearly what I was getting at, but I guess it went over your head in your race to be pedantic...

>And I think you're the one multiplying entities needlessly
Illuminating flaws in existing entities that have been presented =/= multiplying entities. Try again, kiddo.

>smells like obstruction
What would Comey's motivation be for obstructing justice in this case?

>a guy who admitted leaking notes he took while a federal officer.
Intentionally unclassified notes. The fact that he took them as a federal officer is irrelevant - they were unclassified. They did not detail how the president does his job, only inappropriate behavior exhibited by the president. Additionally, executive privilege has not been invoked. What Comey did is neither wrong, nor illegal.

>The US government may *have* such evidence, but they have never produced any.
That's correct, evidence has not been produced because that evidence is classified. The agencies mentioned all concluded that Russia interfered with the elections. Hard evidence will almost certainly be leaked very soon, but until then, I don't see why so many of these independent government agencies would conclude the same thing. The only counter-argument would introduce baseless assumptions (*ahem*) about how these organizations operate.

>>129524921
5. Comey did not lie, Trump lied
>Trump kills himself on live television for ratings

File: any_time.png (268KB, 361x691px)

268KB, 361x691px

>>129525975
>you utterly failed to address the other points
Try reading the post.

>and are *presupposing* the BoP lay with us and not you.
Christ... alright, I'll spell it out: the burden of proof of Trump's guilt falls upon those who made the claim. Similarly, the burden of proof of ANY claim lies with who made the original claim. If you read the thread, you'll see many instances of claims with no credible evidence at all.

>>129514334
Comedy testimony is 100% predicated on this idea that the memos he wrote himself that have 0 objective validity are true which in its self is predicated on this naive idea that Comey is incapable of lying.

The only verification that what was written in the those memos is actually true is the word, scouts honor, of the man who wrote them.

They should be thrown in the trash and completely disregarded.

>>129529155
this from the guy claiming Occam's Razor as a way to discredit Trump. thanks for doing our job for us, no further need to argue with you

>>129530629
The memos are not proof themselves, but they present a claim to be further investigated. No doubt it makes Trump look bad given that Comey has no history of lying about anything under oath, and it opens doors for further exploration into collusion with Russia.

>>129531011
Oh no, looks like my joke triggered babby. :(

>>129514334
>can you verify that your defense passes Ockham's Razor

Occam's Razor: Muh Russia shilling is a transparent hoax
People deciding Trump's fate: Trump and nobody else

Nice try faggot

File: wkf1488.jpg (50KB, 465x340px) Image search: [Google]

50KB, 465x340px

>>129514334
>If you believe Trump's word over Comey's, can you verify that your defense passes Ockham's Razor?
Hi, if you believe "Anti-Semitism" to be an evil of irrational 'Jew-phobia', can you verify that the millenias long history of the Jews provoking hostile responses and explusions from myriad different ethnic/religious/political/lingusitic groups is the fault of ALL THE MYRIAD GENTILE GROUPS and totally not the fault of the one common factor which is the Jewish people.

I'll wait thx.

File: comey.png (2MB, 566x7779px) Image search: [Google]

2MB, 566x7779px

>comey

>>129531688
Either 'enti-semitism' is the fault of Jewish behaviour - as according to the 'rational' rules of Occam's Razor - or you're a hypocrite OP.

>>129531531
>People deciding Trump's fate: Trump and nobody else
Oh, you poor child.

>>129531688
>>129531853
Oh no, looks like the autismos have arrived.
What does this have to do with anything anyone in this thread has discussed?

I'll wait thx.

File: 65687868764966.jpg (22KB, 400x400px) Image search: [Google]

22KB, 400x400px

This thread is Absolutely Subversive.

>>129531817
>searching this collection of ramblings from a madman for a source
>there's one in the last post
>open link
>"This is provided as received. I cannot find any confirming source online. It contains assertions of fact I had not seen in other sources. Take it with as little or as much salt as you deem appropriate."
>"Once again, I warn you that this analysis contains statements I have not verified, and clearly states opinions as well as facts."
How the fuck do you, or the lunatic who posted this expect to be taken seriously?

File: jewsdid911.png (293KB, 613x362px)

293KB, 613x362px

>>129514334
Commey said russian thing is BS, What is your point OP and you gonna show me a 2 second clip of commey talking?

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=zMGZtkMS3sQ

File: 1493752259987.png (2MB, 2465x2465px) Image search: [Google]

2MB, 2465x2465px

>>129533454
Nope, just a lot of speculation. I think he is mad the Comey/Flynn/Russia narrative fell apart.

>>129514735
When Trump becomes a liability /pol/ will drop him. Until then, he's rhetorical genius they way he takes the liberals words, turns them around and shoves them up their ass. Daily reminder: Liberals are assholes and anything that hurts them is a good thing.

>>129533454
>Commey said russian thing is BS
[citation needed]
>you gonna show me a 2 second clip of commey talking?
That's your job now, actually

>>129533700
>rhetorical genius
Let's not get ahead of ourselves here. Feel free to post an example if you have one though
>Daily reminder: Liberals are assholes and anything that hurts them is a good thing
I have no problem with this

File: 1497156591620.jpg (278KB, 700x700px) Image search: [Google]

278KB, 700x700px

>>129533754
>That's your job now, actually
No it's not, Comey admitted that he thought by Trump saying, "I hope you can let Flynn go, he is a good guy", that Trump was ordering him.

>>129534118

He said literally the opposite.

File: 1496604125122.jpg (20KB, 508x587px) Image search: [Google]

20KB, 508x587px

>>129534224
The transcripts have been all over since the hearing, are you a drunk faggot or something? Prove me wrong.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=3aQVqPHcw8I

>>129519339
Could they not have just had actual book deals?

File: tumblr_n41129Vw7t1qzct3eo2_500.jpg (48KB, 500x225px) Image search: [Google]

48KB, 500x225px

>>129521378

>>129523200
STEEPED in fucking irony.

>>129537263
>STEEPED in fucking irony
>doesn't see the irony in posting "yarp" when he actually agrees with what was said
That aside, care to point out the irony in my post?

>>129514334

Can I roleplay in this shitty Share Blue thread too?

>>129537591
>everything I disagree with is Share Blue, shill, or [fill in the blank]
your shitposting only bumps my thread so I get more actually serious replies to engage with

It would seem there's no reason for comey to lie, whereas trump...

>>129514334
Ockham's razor:
>The explanation with the fewest necessary parameters is likely the truth

So, you tell me how it's more likely that the Russians have made Trump president (without any evidence or even a serious explanation of the way the Russians supposedly did this), than it is that half of Americans were sick of Democrat policies and wanted change

>>129515171
If you lurk /pol/ for any length of time you would know how to spell /pol/

Go back to >>>/plebbit/

>>129514334
Actually, yeah.

The most logical conclusion (the one that requires the fewest assumptions) is that Trump has the tapes, and that these prove he is right.

Consider the alternatives:

1. the tapes don't exist: We would have to believe that, after basically being cleared by Comey (Comey did not imply or state or suggests or otherwise even hint at a single impeachable offense, as even Harvard Law professors are now coming out and stating), Trump felt that he needed to claim that what Comey said was a lie for no reason. This requires assuming that Trump's incompetent (which is an assumption already beyond reason for anyone with even a shred of integrity examining the issue), that his lawyers are incompetent and impotent, that all his advisers are, that Trump somehow got to this point with that being true, and requires us to ignore so many things in the list of things he's been right about. Just isn't reasonable.

2. The tapes exist, but don't prove what Trump says: I really don't see why this even needs to be explained.

3. The tapes exist, but Trump is unaware of what is on them: This is probably the most plausible, though still virtually not a possibility. See, Trump would have a legal authority to view any such tapes, meaning he would be guaranteed to have been able to see them. So we need to believe they are somehow being kept from Trump (which begs the question of why he even knows about them) and that Trump is randomly gambling on them both existing, and confirming what he says or at least not disproving it. That's a wild gamble no matter who you are.

The most plausible scenario, the one with the fewest and most credible assumptions, is that the tapes exist, and they confirm what Trump is saying.

>>129540069
To go along with all three, Trump has explicitly stated he wants to go under oath to testify, meaning that ANYTHING he says would be impeachable if it is a lie. No matter how small or insignificant.

>believe Trump's word over Comey's

Both are retarded and Comey was reading trump wrong, and Trump was talking like a lax business man- causally throwing word out hope to give a his buddy a easy pass but non-binding by putting in some good words.

>>129532582
The point is your using Occam's Razor to try to show Trump is guilty. The idiocy of this method is then turned on you to prove anti-semitism is the fault of the Jews, I.e. Occam's Razor is a pointless philosophical exercise.

>>129541258
Ockham's Razor is not natural law, it's a heuristic, you can't just apply it to anything any everything and expect it to hold true in every case. In the case of claiming anti-semitism is the fault of the Jews, this isn't even a full explanation as there are *no* provided examples, *no* hard, factual evidence, or anything that provides a solid explanation. Any attempt at constructing a solid explanation for this would consist of, you guess it, a multitude of assumptions.
Please, understand exactly what it is you're arguing against before you start arguing and make a fucking fool of yourself.

When did we write new laws. Are we now saying any FBI director or President can have a private meeting with someone..take some notes...and wham bam thank you ma'am election null and void..Lock em up..We got em...Don't need two witnesses or nothing..Dem dare notes fit right into note takers meme and of course the note taker being recently fired from said person gives him that much more credibility...

Shove you're razor up the ass and your bullshit Police State boy..

>>129541936
Yet you can point to no actual hard evidence concerning Trump, yet are still trying to apply this method. You are very bad at this, shill.

>>129541936
Hi Jeremy

>>129540069
Incompetence in one area does not imply incompetence in all areas. Trump is very competent with respect to manipulation, distraction, and lying, which is how he "got to this point", as you say. He is *obviously* incompetent as the leader of the executive branch and has no fucking clue what he's doing with respect to politics. So, is he totally incompetent? Of course not - he's a master con artist. But is he incompetent as president? Yes, and "anyone with even a shred of integrity examining the issue" could see that.
With respect to his lawyers, the lawyer he hired to defend him clearly and objectively fucked up the timeline of Comey's memo leak to the press, so they're at least a little incompetent.
>the one with the fewest and most credible assumptions
I'll give you fewest, but that scenario assumes that what Trump says is credible. Trump is simply not credible, and has no record of credibility; in fact, the complete opposite. What does Comey's record of credibility look like? Hmm.
You are also forgetting that Comey has said he hopes there are tapes. Therefore, the most plausible scenario is that Trump (a proven liar) is bluffing, the tapes don't exist, or, if they did, they would prove what Comey claims to be true.

>>129542301
Are the ellipses for dramatic effect or to distract from your illiteracy/lack of argument?

>>129542470
I've already stated that there's no hard evidence because all of the existing evidence is classified at this time. It's the word of one man against the word of another: a well respected, former head of the FBI with no record of falsehood, and a man who settled a fraud case for a pseudo-university because he would have lost in court.
>le shill meme
Not helping your argument.

>>129541936
Who the fuck is Jeremy?

>>129543533
Again no evidence, you simply start from the assumption that there is evidence that the agencies have. Now Comey is well-respected when people were calling for him to be fired, on both sides, after his actions in the Clinton investigation? It is hilarious how you change the narrative to fit your storyline. And you are obviously a shill.

>>129514334
>If you believe Trump's word over Comey's, can you verify that your defense passes Ockham's Razor?

Trump is always right.

File: starter_pack.jpg (17KB, 650x366px) Image search: [Google]

17KB, 650x366px

>>129544008
There is a reason for there being no evidence - it's classified. There is no reason to believe that the existence of this evidence is simply *made up* by government organizations. That's a pretty big fucking bluff, especially when the special council will (and to an extent already has) followed up on the claims of there being evidence.
>Now Comey is well-respected when people were calling for him to be fired
Comey has long been respected by his peers, the fact that you're just now hearing it doesn't falsify that. With respect to Clinton, I point again to his "October Surprise". He clearly spent a lot of time reviewing all of the information, which sounds like a honest man doing the job he was hired to do. Again, maybe he fucked up on that. But he wasn't paid off by Clinton, because he effectively inadvertently sabotaged her campaign, and he's *still* respected within the intelligence community.
>And you are obviously a shill
>muh shill memes
>muh ad hominems
Wrong, and not an argument. Please apply direct pressure to both temples.

>>129543533
>he is obviously incompetent as a leader

The momement your post lost any validity. This is again, only something a fool or a liar would ever post.

Also, despite what Rachel Maddow told you you retarded Shareblue cuck, the lawyer got the timeline correct. The memo was leaked before the tweet. That's known fact. It was cited and referenced in the loyalty article published in the NYT before the tweet. Try again.

>>129514334
Simplest explanation? Muh Russia was made up by Pedesta and Hillary (facts) and then shilled by the media.

That's it, and it matches all the facts.

>>129545778
>not posting the full quote
What I said is the following:
>He is *obviously* incompetent as the leader of the executive branch
>leader of the executive branch
That's the full quote. He's bad at being president. He has absolutely no sense of diplomacy, composure, or decision making. He has accomplished virtually nothing in office other than throw a travel ban that was promptly shut down, and attempt to build his fucking wall, which is also being blocked.
Now that I've provided some evidence as to how he *isn't* an effective president, it's your turn, kiddo! Step up to the plate and let's see what you've got!

>the lawyer got the timeline correct. The memo was leaked before the tweet. That's known fact.
You are such a stupid fucking faggot.
Here is the NYT loyalty article:
https://www.nytimes.com/2017/05/11/us/politics/trump-comey-firing.html
Show me, and everyone, where the memo was cited and referenced.

I'll wait.

>>129514334
oh god, this faggot thinks occams razor is some hard and fast rule

what a moran faggot

Comey basically exposed himself as a partisan hack last week, by confirming that he downplayed the Clinton investigation(s) at the behest of the AG Lynch (which amazingly Dianne Feinstein has decided she wants to investigate). Then there's the matter of his leaking confidential documents (which should have stayed at the FBI), his refusal to make it public that Trump was not under investigation (again, probably for political reasons), and a whole slew of other stuff. Before he was fired, both sides were calling for his removal, and yet he claims Trump is a liar for saying people didn't have any confidence in him. He's entirely discredited at this point, and may very well end up in prison when the dust settles.

>>129547563
see
>>129541936

>>129551678
yeah, least assumptions is MORE LIKELY to be correct

no guarantees though, no proofs

just a MORELIKELY guess

godammit

>>129514334

What crime is Trump accused of? I can't see anything that would stand against him in a court of law.

>>129551802
...we're not at odds here, my autistic friend. Have some tea and calm down.

File: 1497067428175.png (115KB, 500x698px)

115KB, 500x698px

Comey says under oath "hes not aware of anyone influencing investigations".
>Says trump implied he wanted him to not investigate flynn (which is it comey)
>Says obama attorney general influenced him about clintons investigation.
He just contradicts himself, and he admitted clinton broke the law, and anyone else would be punished but she wont be......
How can you say he has morals?

>>129551989
*sips tea*

I can still be upset, even if not with you, my wise friend

>>129514334

You libs are too stupid to realize that you LOST!!!! I'm no longer going to waste my time of these gay libtard threads. Go back to R.eddit, you low life fucks.

>>129552703
Not a lib or libtard, but nice projection. Please don't waste your time, you'd lose if you even attempted to argue with me.

File: 1495862963806.gif (2MB, 320x193px) Image search: [Google]

2MB, 320x193px

>>129514334
I see the shills are back. Time to meme Seth Rich and Loretta Lynch.

>>129553117
Shills post once and leave bitch, quit memeing as a defense mechanism for being wrong

Before this thread 404s, I want to thank everyone for participating and getting completely BTFO'd. Enjoy your "winning" (slow and painful destruction of the republic) with Trump while it lasts.