Silicon Investor (SI) -- The First Internet Community

STOCKTALK

We've detected that you're using an ad content blocking browser plug-in or feature. Ads provide a critical source of revenue to the continued operation of Silicon Investor. We ask that you disable ad blocking while on Silicon Investor in the best interests of our community. If you are not using an ad blocker but are still receiving this message, make sure your browser's tracking protection is set to the 'standard' level.

Politics : Formerly About Advanced Micro Devices -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?

To: Heywood40 who wrote (1014713)	5/7/2017 8:29:13 AM
From: locogringo	1 Recommendation Recommended By FJB Respond to of 1574683

Conspiring with Russians before the election, then placing foreign agents in his cabinet both meet the constitutional definition of treason. Yes, the evidence is overwhelming......as is your ignorance. No wonder people ignore you.

To: Heywood40 who wrote (1014713)	5/7/2017 9:52:11 AM
From: Thomas A Watson	1 Recommendation Recommended By FJB Respond to of 1574683

What total lying anonymous asshole troll you are... rushlimbaugh.com daily/2017/05/04/after-comeys-absurd-testimony-difi-admis-she-still-has-no-evidence-of-trump-russia-collusion/ WOLF: Do you have evidence that there was in, in fact, collusion between Trump associates and Russia during the campaign? DIFI: Not at this time. maggot slut MISSPRE vs. James Comey: Email Scandal Supercut

To: Heywood40 who wrote (1014713)	5/7/2017 1:27:19 PM
From: i-node	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 1574683

>>Conspiring with Russians Evidence? >>before the election, then placing foreign agents in his cabinet Who? The guy he fired after a couple of weeks upon learning of his delivering a paid speech? >>both meet the constitutional definition of treason. This definition? Treason against the United States, shall consist only in levying War against them, or in adhering to their Enemies, giving them Aid and Comfort. No Person shall be convicted of Treason unless on the Testimony of two Witnesses to the same overt Act, or on Confession in open Court Can you explain how t meets this definition?