Platinum Contributing Member Highmark Posted July 12, 2017 Platinum Contributing Member Share Posted July 12, 2017 Poor Snotslinger. 1. What was the deceitful agreement or compact? 2. Releasing truthful information is not an "evil purpose." 3. How are the interests of the parties in the meeting "conflicting" where this resolution benefits them in a specific way. 4. No court or its officers were deceived. What is COLLUSION? A deceitful agreement or compact between two or more persons, for the one party to bring an action against the other for some evil purpose, as to defraud a third party of his right Cowell. A secret arrangement between two or more persons, whose interests are apparently conflicting, to make use of the forms and proceedings of law in order to defraud a third person, or to obtain that which justice would not give them, by deceiving a court or it officers. Baldwin v. New York, 45 Barb. (N. Y.) 359; Belt v. Blackburn, 28 Md. 235; Railroad Co. v. Gay. 8G Tex. 571, 26 S. W. 599, 25 L. R. A. 52; Balch v. Beach, 119 Wis. 77, 95 N. W. 132. In divorce proceedings, collusion is an agreement between husband and wife that one of them shall commit, or appear to have committed, or be represented in court as having committed, acts constituting a cause of divorce, for the purpose of enabling the other to obtain a divorce. Civil Code Cal http://thelawdictionary.org/collusion/Law Dictionary: What is COLLUSION? definition of COLLUSION (Black's Law Dictionary) Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Platinum Contributing Member Highmark Posted July 12, 2017 Author Platinum Contributing Member Share Posted July 12, 2017 Another. Its like slander or libel. It can't occur when the information is true. https://definitions.uslegal.com/c/collusion/ Collusion occurs when two persons or representatives of an entity or organization make an agreement to deceive or mislead another. Such agreements are usually secretive, and involve fraud or gaining an unfair advantage over a third party, competitors, consumers or others with whom they are negotiating. The collusion, therefore, makes the bargaining process inherently unfair. Collusion can involve price or wage fixing, kickbacks, or misrepresenting the independence of the relationship betweeen the colluding parties Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
f7ben Posted July 12, 2017 Share Posted July 12, 2017 Poor stupid Snowslinger Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Mainecat Posted July 12, 2017 Share Posted July 12, 2017 Give it up Highmark Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
f7ben Posted July 12, 2017 Share Posted July 12, 2017 Just now, Mainecat said: Give it up Highmark right ....you are far too dumb to grasp most points he makes....he should just give up Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Platinum Contributing Member Highmark Posted July 12, 2017 Author Platinum Contributing Member Share Posted July 12, 2017 4 minutes ago, Mainecat said: Give it up Highmark Even though it doesn't fit the legal or known definition of collusion if the Trump team accepted any information from Russia or Russian state actors I would pay the bet without question. Nothing was exchanged, no agreement was in place. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Snake Posted July 12, 2017 Share Posted July 12, 2017 1 minute ago, Highmark said: Even though it doesn't fit the legal or known definition of collusion if the Trump team accepted any information from Russia or Russian state actors I would pay the bet without question. Nothing was exchanged, no agreement was in place. Ah... but you forget "The Democrat Thought Police!" Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Snoslinger Posted July 12, 2017 Share Posted July 12, 2017 I should have known the little shitbag weasel would argue "collusion" when it actually happened. lesson learned ya piece of shit. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Snake Posted July 12, 2017 Share Posted July 12, 2017 Just now, Snoslinger said: I should have known the little shitbag weasel would argue "collusion" when it actually happened. lesson learned ya piece of shit. Soon as it happens, he'll prolly pay ya... Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Snoslinger Posted July 12, 2017 Share Posted July 12, 2017 Just now, Snake said: Soon as it happens, he'll prolly pay ya... it already happened, and no he wont. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ICEMAN! Posted July 12, 2017 Share Posted July 12, 2017 FYI The "collusion" laws in an election campaign have to do with campaign finance, not what you're posting Skidmark Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Platinum Contributing Member SnowRider Posted July 12, 2017 Platinum Contributing Member Share Posted July 12, 2017 Don't worry Slinger - Moto never paid me either Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Snoslinger Posted July 12, 2017 Share Posted July 12, 2017 once again, the parameters of the bet were clearly laid out, and even contained "memo" which is exactly wtf this was. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Snake Posted July 12, 2017 Share Posted July 12, 2017 Just now, Snoslinger said: it already happened, and no he wont. Eh, you're wrong bub. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Platinum Contributing Member Highmark Posted July 12, 2017 Author Platinum Contributing Member Share Posted July 12, 2017 On 5/18/2017 at 11:13 AM, Highmark said: Collusion will be clear. Trump side: Release this Russians: Ok. OR Russians: We have this on Hillary. Trump Side: Give it to Wiki. Just now, Snake said: Soon as it happens, he'll prolly pay ya... My statement above was from the bet thread itself. Slinger responded to the thread after that so he had full knowledge of what I was expecting. Again if either of the above or they accepted information from them it would satisfy me losing the bet. None of that occurred. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Platinum Contributing Member Highmark Posted July 12, 2017 Author Platinum Contributing Member Share Posted July 12, 2017 Just now, ICEMAN! said: FYI The "collusion" laws in an election campaign have to do with campaign finance, not what you're posting Skidmark Care to post up some "collusion laws" for elections? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Snoslinger Posted July 12, 2017 Share Posted July 12, 2017 Just now, Highmark said: My statement above was from the bet thread itself. Slinger responded to the thread after that so he had full knowledge of what I was expecting. Again if either of the above or they accepted information from them it would satisfy me losing the bet. None of that occurred. you dumb fuck, case #2 applies, except the wiki part. is that your way out ya little coward? Russians: We have this on Hillary. Trump Side: Give it to Wiki. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Platinum Contributing Member SnowRider Posted July 12, 2017 Platinum Contributing Member Share Posted July 12, 2017 Just now, Snoslinger said: you dumb fuck, case #2 applies, except the wiki part. is that your way out ya little coward? Russians: We have this on Hillary. Trump Side: Give it to Wiki. Honest Assange asked to release Juniors emails Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Platinum Contributing Member Highmark Posted July 12, 2017 Author Platinum Contributing Member Share Posted July 12, 2017 (edited) Just now, Snoslinger said: you dumb fuck, case #2 applies, except the wiki part. is that your way out ya little coward? Russians: We have this on Hillary. Trump Side: Give it to Wiki. They met to talk about it you idiot. NOTHING was exchanged. Even if the Russian's gave information to the Trump team they would have had to use it in some way to define collusion. Edited July 12, 2017 by Highmark Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Zambroski Posted July 12, 2017 Share Posted July 12, 2017 4 minutes ago, SnowRider said: Don't worry Slinger - Moto never paid me either I know the feeling. AMIRITE? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Snoslinger Posted July 12, 2017 Share Posted July 12, 2017 Just now, Highmark said: They met to talk about it you idiot. NOTHING was exchanged. they said they had dirt on Hillary ya fucking idiot. how in the hell do you know nothing was exchanged? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Platinum Contributing Member Highmark Posted July 12, 2017 Author Platinum Contributing Member Share Posted July 12, 2017 Just now, Snoslinger said: they said they had dirt on Hillary ya fucking idiot. how in the hell do you know nothing was exchanged? We don't yet other than both parties have said it. The minute evidence comes out the Trump team received something from them on Hillary I lose the bet. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Snake Posted July 12, 2017 Share Posted July 12, 2017 1 minute ago, Snoslinger said: they said they had dirt on Hillary ya fucking idiot. how in the hell do you know nothing was exchanged? Opposition research, just like Hillary.... right? How do you know something was? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ICEMAN! Posted July 12, 2017 Share Posted July 12, 2017 6 minutes ago, SnowRider said: Honest Assange asked to release Juniors emails Funny how Assange asks first when it's a Republican... Hmmmmm Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Platinum Contributing Member Highmark Posted July 12, 2017 Author Platinum Contributing Member Share Posted July 12, 2017 (edited) Let me ask you this Snot. If an ex Steeler player calls the Patriots and says I have the Steelers playbook I want to give you. Patriots ass coach say great lets meet at this bar. Steerler player shows up and doesn't have the playbook and doesn't have any information to provide but wants to talk about the Patriots helping him with something unrelated. Is that collusion? Until there is some exchange or agreement that would benefit both parties there is no collusion. Edited July 12, 2017 by Highmark Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.
Note: Your post will require moderator approval before it will be visible.