Comments by "Mark Armage" (@markarmage3776) on "Fmr. Acting Attorney General Sally Yates Opening Statement" video.

  1.  @cathyholden6442  No, that's his job. The decency of foreign policy is not up to you to determine. Because it was Obama's job to tell the Irans that they'll take care of the Israelis and make way for Iran nuclear program. Now, it was a bad policy but it was still a legal policy. So wake up, kid.
    2
  2.    Where's that quote? That is a confession of guilt yet no Democrats dummy ever mentioned that? Where is it? Any documents? Is it inside your head?
    1
  3.    Unmasking is not illegal. It's just an abusurd abuse of power. FISA was used to spy on Carter Page, for the reason that she was affiliated with the Trump Campaign. If she had been a Clinton campaign affiliated then the FISA can't apply to her. So the only reason she was spied on was because she was part of the Trump campaign. So your nonsense of "it wasn't to spy on the Trump campaign, that's pathetic". Because what would you be spying on her for if it isn't for the information ties to the Trump campaign? Would you spy on her because of her personal life? Spy on her son soccer activities? Despite the reason for spying her was because of she used to be a part of the Trump campaign? Nice try, kid. Go back to school, you have been exposed. It's so easy to rip apart. Warranted makes it legal, but illegal reasons to file for a warrant makes it illegal. Clear, dummy?
    1
  4.    You can get a warrant by lying to the court, kid. That is still a crime, because you lied to a court.
    1
  5.    Where's that transcript? Where's the testimony? Inside your head? Seemingly to a direct admission of guilt, you morons can't seem to produce a quote. That is pitiful. Instead of claiming nonsense. Why don't you give out a quote? If he admitted those crime, it would be easy to give out a quote. Or is it that is only your pitiful assumption of what he said, the assumption that has no value because you can't even quote what he said to validate your claim. Wake up, kid.
    1
  6.    No, 270 contacts with Russian people mean he has many Russian acquaintances. An ambassador of the US to Russia has even more. Kid, you can't investigate people for making phone calls. You don't have that authority. You have to have proof of actual misconduct. And you can't prove it. The world is tough on little souls like you, souls that can't handle logic and facts. So I suggest you learn some. A banker, who is a US citizens in Europe would have even more contact of Russian citizens, even Joe Biden son, Hunter Drug Addict Biden. To sit on that board of company, even though it is used to buy Joe Biden office, even Hunter Biden has to have Russian or Ukraine contacts. Wake up, kid.
    1
  7.    First off, agents don't mean secret spy, pal. Agents mean people with associates in Russia, certain foreign affairs officials. And yes, pal, in order to negotiate foreign policy, you need to have foreign contacts. You think US ambassador to the UN doesn't have contacts with foreign government officials? Nice try. If he did something illegal, you have to use that information on the warrant, and of course, even Obama officials admitted that there isn't a probable cause. Like I pointed out, get back to facts and realities, kid. Yeah, he has contacts of Russian government, you know who also has that? Any counselor to foreign companies have foreign contacts, those are foreign companies. So wake up, kid. Every politicians have Russian contacts, they have to negotiate with Russia. He is a general, so even more dealing with Russia considering military operation. You know who also has more contact with Russia? Former Secretary of States and right, Hillary Clinton. Now, we're not investigating those people. Equal under the law, pal, just because you're delusional doesn't mean that's not a thing.
    1
  8.     Unmasking without probable cause. Regarding Michael Flynn, even FBI officials admitted that he is clean. So wake up, dummy. Like I pointed out in your pathetic flaws, the only reason you spy on Page is because he was a part of Trump campaign. Any spying on associates for the reason that they're associates means spying on the thing they're associated with. Government spying on terrorist contacts means spying on the terrorist. So get back to logic, kid. Trump's campaign got contact by the Russian, and the Mueller report proved that there's no collusion. Your assumption of what collusion is is not how the law works, kid. Where's the quote of admission of guilt? Seemingly it is so difficult of you idiots to get quotes admitting the guilt? It's always your assumption of what they meant. That's not how it works. Your example of catching a Predator, in this case, you can't prove and there is no probable reason to believe that it is a conspiracy. Trump campaign got contacted by the Russians, they didn't come to the Russian, and they didn't do anything with the Russian. Pal, that was the same with Edward Snowden, Snowden sharing information to reporters, that is a crime. But reporters receiving information from Snowden, that is not a crime, because the reported didn't collude with Snowden to steal the information. How about studying some real law? Innocent men do fire incompetent people who tried to frame them, like how Yates just admitted that Comey dirty cop did? You do block testimony of rouge agents who has malicious intent of harming you, and you do not comply with trial that denies due process by not allowing you to call your witnesses. In the case Maryland vs King, Sotomayor, Kagan, and Ginsburg all ruled that collection of DNA of a free man for no reason than to hopefully solve a crime is a violation of the 4th amendment, unreasonable searches and seizures. If Trump is charged with a crime, he can be compared to the DNA samples, but comparing random DNA samples for no reason except an allegations, that is called intrusion. And of course, that case with the rape victim, it is not DNA sample of his semen, like how it was Bill Clinton DNA on Monica Lewinsky's dress? It was a DNA sample of something that you don't even know, the victim itself can't describe what the situation was like and what part of Trump's DNA was on her dress. If the DNA is not inside you, under the form of sperm which is the case when comparing real rape victims with reasonably suspected offenders, then the DNA is highly invalid, due to multiple reason why it could be there. And the exposing of Trump DNA can be used against him to frame him in other cases. If you don't have actual cases with proof to request for that DNA samples, you just can't. Because Trump is protected, like you and me, he is protected by the law. So wake up, kid. Your arguments aren't arguments, they're bad lies that can be ripped apart easily.
    1
  9. And of course, that rape allegation waited for 20 years, despite the dress being the proof with the DNA can easily be used to incriminating Trump the day after the raping accidents, that is pathetic. Wake up, kid.
    1