Dog

Evidence of collusion?

Recommended Posts

A motion to release the House Intelligence Committee report on FISA abuse to the house membership passed on a straight party line vote.

"A review of a classified document outlining what is described as extensive Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Act abuse was made available to all House members Thursday and the revelations could lead to the removal of senior officials in the FBI and Department of Justice, several sources with knowledge of the document stated. These sources say the report is “explosive,” stating they would not be surprised if it leads to the end of Robert Mueller’s Special Counsel investigation into President Trump and his associates".

https://saraacarter.com/2018/01/18/a-bombshell-house-intelligence-report-exposing-extensive-fisa-abuse-could-lead-to-the-removal-of-senior-government-officials/

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Yes, the suggestion that this could lead to the end of Mueller's investigation is wishful thinking. Still one wonders why the members of the party of transparency would vote to keep this report under wraps.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Are unnamed sources reliable now, Dog?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
10 minutes ago, Bent Sailor said:

Are unnamed sources reliable now, Dog?

"Rep. Steve King, R-Iowa, said he read the memo and implied there was some sort of bias in favor of Trump's 2016 Democratic opponent Hillary Clinton.

I have read the memo," he tweeted. "The sickening reality has set in. I no longer hold out hope there is an innocent explanation for the information the public has seen. I have long said it is worse than Watergate. It was #neverTrump & #alwaysHillary. #releasethememo."

“You think about, ‘Is this happening in America or is this the KGB?’ That's how alarming it is,” Rep. Scott Perry, R-Pa., said, according to Fox News.

Rep. Matt Gaetz, R-Fla., called for the public release of the memo's information "to preserve our democracy."

http://www.washingtonexaminer.com/republicans-rally-for-public-release-of-memo-on-fisa-abuses/article/2646412

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
4 minutes ago, Dog said:

"Rep. Steve King, R-Iowa, said he read the memo and implied there was some sort of bias in favor of Trump's 2016 Democratic opponent Hillary Clinton.

I have read the memo," he tweeted. "The sickening reality has set in. I no longer hold out hope there is an innocent explanation for the information the public has seen. I have long said it is worse than Watergate. It was #neverTrump & #alwaysHillary. #releasethememo."

“You think about, ‘Is this happening in America or is this the KGB?’ That's how alarming it is,” Rep. Scott Perry, R-Pa., said, according to Fox News.

Rep. Matt Gaetz, R-Fla., called for the public release of the memo's information "to preserve our democracy."

http://www.washingtonexaminer.com/republicans-rally-for-public-release-of-memo-on-fisa-abuses/article/2646412

I didn't ask if you could find named Republicans from other sources "implying" all manner of bad acts in the service of Hillary. Your original article didn't quote or reference their comments, so they are irrelevant to my question. Which was, "Are unnamed sources reliable now, Dog?"

Care to answer that question or are you planning to gutlessly dance around it again?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
7 minutes ago, Bent Sailor said:

I didn't ask if you could find named Republicans from other sources "implying" all manner of bad acts in the service of Hillary. Your original article didn't quote or reference their comments, so they are irrelevant to my question. Which was, "Are unnamed sources reliable now, Dog?"

Care to answer that question or are you planning to gutlessly dance around it again?

Not the topic. Start a thread on un-named sources if that's what you want to discuss.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
6 minutes ago, Dog said:

Not the topic. Start a thread on un-named sources if that's what you want to discuss.

Your original post is nothing more than a cherry-picked paragraph from, and a link to, an article that quotes a number of unnamed sources. Whether or not unnamed sources are reliable is one hundred percent pertinent to whether the article in question is credible. 

So, just in case you don't want to look gutless three times in a row, I shall repeat the question "Are unnamed sources reliable now, Dog?"

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
3 minutes ago, hermetic said:

pete king (r ny) is quoted in the original article

He doesn’t care.  He read unnamed sources so he will endless loop that argument while declaring victory in his basement induced fantasy that people give a shit about his point

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
52 minutes ago, hermetic said:

pete king (r ny) is quoted in the original article

No, he is not. He is named as the representative that offered a motion. He is not quoted. Reading comprehension is important ;)

Some members of the House viewed the document in a secure room Thursday.

Rep. Peter King, R-N.Y., offered the motion on Thursday to make the Republican majority-authored report available to the members.

That's it. The only quotes are from unnamed sources. The reference to Mr King is to say what he did, not what he said.

 

45 minutes ago, TMSAIL said:

He doesn’t care.  He read unnamed sources so he will endless loop that argument while declaring victory in his basement induced fantasy that people give a shit about his point

He cares enough to read the article in question. Which, clearly, is more investment in the topic than you've made. :lol: 

Good job on "ignoring" my posts, TMSAIL. Didn't even make it a week this time... before you jumped head-first into a thread, skipped the OP & topic, decided to (once again) make me your first (& only) topic of conversation, and then face-planted because you didn't know what the fuck was going on. Christ, at least Happy Jack tries to put an escape route on his failures - you're just plummeting from 10K feet without a chute & making a mess. Pick up your game, mate, cos your performance is just embarrassing. :rolleyes: 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

hmm, before you guys get too excited, I'd check the cred of the Writer.

Sara Carter is employed by Circa News that is owned by Sinclair

https://www.thedailybeast.com/why-sean-hannitys-juiciest-blockbusters-come-from-circa-news

****Sinclair promptly remade Circa in its own image, yet has stoutly denied reports in both Politico and The Washington Post that it cut an access-for-favorable-coverage deal with Donald Trump’s presidential campaign. It was recently the target of a John Oliver takedown as a powerful purveyor of right-wing nonsense.

Discarding the original vision and replacing it with what critics claim is a stealthy emphasis on right-leaning, Trump-friendly content, Sinclair launched Circa News last July and, in recent months, has become a favorite of Sean Hannity among other Fox News personalities, along with embattled presidential son Donald Trump Jr. (a serial retweeter of Circa News stories), tendentious White House talking head Sebastian Gorka, and alt-right populist Trumpkin Mike Cernovich.

“I’m a fan. They are doing great work,” Cernovich told The Daily Beast. “I think it’s a cool trend that you have news sites with names like Axios and Circa that almost sound like think tanks. It’s giving a fresh coat of paint to the media… I think Circa’s working the other side of the street [from the mainstream media]. There are two sides to every story, and Circa is telling the other side of the story.”

As for Circa News’ national security reporter, Sara Carter, Cernovich said:  “She’s become a real player, that’s for sure.”

Carter is a frequent guest on Hannity to discuss her “blockbuster” stories alleging various improprieties by former President Obama’s national security adviser Susan Rice and fired FBI director James Comey, and casting doubt on rival media reports of possible Trump campaign collusion with Russia (often alongside pugnacious Trump attorney Jay Sekulow, with whom Carter is said to be close).

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

This means big news is dropping elsewhere.  Soon

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
27 minutes ago, Bent Sailor said:

No, he is not. He is named as the representative that offered a motion. He is not quoted. Reading comprehension is important ;)

Some members of the House viewed the document in a secure room Thursday.

Rep. Peter King, R-N.Y., offered the motion on Thursday to make the Republican majority-authored report available to the members.

That's it. The only quotes are from unnamed sources. The reference to Mr King is to say what he did, not what he said.

 

He cares enough to read the article in question. Which, clearly, is more investment in the topic than you've made. :lol: 

Good job on "ignoring" my posts, TMSAIL. Didn't even make it a week this time... before you jumped head-first into a thread, skipped the OP & topic, decided to (once again) make me your first (& only) topic of conversation, and then face-planted because you didn't know what the fuck was going on. Christ, at least Happy Jack tries to put an escape route on his failures - you're just plummeting from 10K feet without a chute & making a mess. Pick up your game, mate, cos your performance is just embarrassing. :rolleyes: 

I’ll break my SELF imposed rule about not replying directly too you, in order to clear up your confusion.  My ignoring you means  I will no longer engage in your endless twisting word rituals.  That  does not preclude me from reading your posts, scrolling by or commenting about what you wrote to a third party.  That is what happened in this thread when I responded about your latest rant.   You remind me of the character in a Carly Simon Song.   Not every thing is about you.  

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
41 minutes ago, Shortforbob said:

hmm, before you guys get too excited, I'd check the cred of the Writer.

Sara Carter is employed by Circa News that is owned by Sinclair

https://www.thedailybeast.com/why-sean-hannitys-juiciest-blockbusters-come-from-circa-news

****Sinclair promptly remade Circa in its own image, yet has stoutly denied reports in both Politico and The Washington Post that it cut an access-for-favorable-coverage deal with Donald Trump’s presidential campaign. It was recently the target of a John Oliver takedown as a powerful purveyor of right-wing nonsense.

Discarding the original vision and replacing it with what critics claim is a stealthy emphasis on right-leaning, Trump-friendly content, Sinclair launched Circa News last July and, in recent months, has become a favorite of Sean Hannity among other Fox News personalities, along with embattled presidential son Donald Trump Jr. (a serial retweeter of Circa News stories), tendentious White House talking head Sebastian Gorka, and alt-right populist Trumpkin Mike Cernovich.

“I’m a fan. They are doing great work,” Cernovich told The Daily Beast. “I think it’s a cool trend that you have news sites with names like Axios and Circa that almost sound like think tanks. It’s giving a fresh coat of paint to the media… I think Circa’s working the other side of the street [from the mainstream media]. There are two sides to every story, and Circa is telling the other side of the story.”

As for Circa News’ national security reporter, Sara Carter, Cernovich said:  “She’s become a real player, that’s for sure.”

Carter is a frequent guest on Hannity to discuss her “blockbuster” stories alleging various improprieties by former President Obama’s national security adviser Susan Rice and fired FBI director James Comey, and casting doubt on rival media reports of possible Trump campaign collusion with Russia (often alongside pugnacious Trump attorney Jay Sekulow, with whom Carter is said to be close).

That the Intel committee voted to release the memo to the full house along party lines with the party of transparency opposed, is fact. That named sources say it contents is incriminating is fact but they certainly  may be overstating it. That Republicans are now calling for release of the memo to the general public is fact but doing so will no doubt be opposed by the party of transparency.

It all adds fuel to growing suspicions that there was in fact collusion in play during the election. Collusion between the Clinton campaign and elements within our own government. The Clinton campaign demonstrated it was not above using corrupt practices to dispense with one of their own. Should we believe they were above it wrt Trump?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 minute ago, Dog said:

That the Intel committee voted to release the memo to the full house along party lines with the party of transparency opposed, is fact. That named sources say it contents is incriminating is fact but they certainly  may be overstating it. That Republicans are now calling for release of the memo to the general public is fact but doing so will no doubt be opposed by the party of transparency.

It all adds fuel to growing suspicions that there was in fact collusion in play during the election. Collusion between the Clinton campaign and elements within our own government. The Clinton campaign demonstrated it was not above using corrupt practices to dispense with one of their own. Should we believe they were above it wrt Trump?

give us a reputable source?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, Dog said:

That the Intel committee voted to release the memo to the full house along party lines with the party of transparency opposed, is fact. That named sources say it contents is incriminating is fact but they certainly  may be overstating it. That Republicans are now calling for release of the memo to the general public is fact but doing so will no doubt be opposed by the party of transparency.

It all adds fuel to growing suspicions that there was in fact collusion in play during the election. Collusion between the Clinton campaign and elements within our own government. The Clinton campaign demonstrated it was not above using corrupt practices to dispense with one of their own. Should we believe they were above it wrt Trump?

wait, NOW collusion is bad? This is so confusing.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
11 minutes ago, Raz'r said:

wait, NOW collusion is bad? This is so confusing.

Of course it's bad. Colluding with Russians is bad enough but colluding with our own government!  Looks like we need another special prosecutor.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
4 minutes ago, Dog said:

Of course it's bad. Colluding with Russians is bad enough but colluding with our own government!  Looks like we need another special prosecutor.

Go for it.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Dog's OP said the motion passed. So where is the report?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2 hours ago, Shortforbob said:

give us a reputable source?

Define reputable source?  

Here is a source that contains multiple direct quotes from congressmen and woman that viewed the report

http://ussanews.com/News1/2018/01/19/gop-lawmakers-outraged-fisa-abuse-memo-is-bigger-than-watergate/

“It is so alarming the American people have to see this,” Rep. Jim Jordan (R-OH), a senior member of the Judiciary Committee, said on a Fox News interview.

“You think about, ‘is this happening in America or is this the KGB?’ That’s how alarming it is,” Rep. Scott Perry (R-VA) told Fox.

“It’s troubling. It is shocking,” Rep. Mark Meadows (R-NC) told Fox News. “Part of me wishes that I didn’t read it because I don’t want to believe that those kinds of things could be happening in this country that I call home and love so much.”

“The facts contained in this memo are jaw-dropping and demand full transparency. There is no higher priority than the release of this information to preserve our democracy,” said Rep. Matt Gaetz (R-FL), a member of the Judiciary Committee, which oversees the DOJ and the FBI.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Just now, Remodel said:

Dog's OP said the motion passed. So where is the report?

The motion was to release it out of committee to the rest of the house. We the people are still not allowed to see it.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2 minutes ago, Remodel said:

Dog's OP said the motion passed. So where is the report?

I wasn’t aware you were a congressman. 

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

So, if there is so much outrage over FISA abuses, why did Congress reauthorize it? Or were they just worried that releasing this info early would derail it?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
4 hours ago, TMSAIL said:

Define reputable source?  

Here is a source that contains multiple direct quotes from congressmen and woman that viewed the report

http://ussanews.com/News1/2018/01/19/gop-lawmakers-outraged-fisa-abuse-memo-is-bigger-than-watergate/

“It is so alarming the American people have to see this,” Rep. Jim Jordan (R-OH), a senior member of the Judiciary Committee, said on a Fox News interview.

“You think about, ‘is this happening in America or is this the KGB?’ That’s how alarming it is,” Rep. Scott Perry (R-VA) told Fox.

“It’s troubling. It is shocking,” Rep. Mark Meadows (R-NC) told Fox News. “Part of me wishes that I didn’t read it because I don’t want to believe that those kinds of things could be happening in this country that I call home and love so much.”

“The facts contained in this memo are jaw-dropping and demand full transparency. There is no higher priority than the release of this information to preserve our democracy,” said Rep. Matt Gaetz (R-FL), a member of the Judiciary Committee, which oversees the DOJ and the FBI.

I ask for reputable sources and he gives me "the tea partys front page" 

Does Dog ever read anything but rubbish?

(rhetorical question) 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
5 minutes ago, Shortforbob said:

I ask for reputable sources and he gives me "the tea partys front page" 

Does Dog ever read anything but rubbish?

(rhetorical question) 

No.

(rhetorical answer)

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
4 hours ago, Dog said:

Of course it's bad. Colluding with Russians is bad enough but colluding with our own government!  Looks like we need another special prosecutor.

 I don't believe  Mueller was in on it, but it is an interesting question.  Now, what shall call a special prosecutor of a special prosecutor, the Extra Special? 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
9 hours ago, Dog said:

"Rep. Steve King, R-Iowa, said he read the memo and implied there was some sort of bias in favor of Trump's 2016 Democratic opponent Hillary Clinton.

I have read the memo," he tweeted. "The sickening reality has set in. I no longer hold out hope there is an innocent explanation for the information the public has seen. I have long said it is worse than Watergate. It was #neverTrump & #alwaysHillary. #releasethememo."

“You think about, ‘Is this happening in America or is this the KGB?’ That's how alarming it is,” Rep. Scott Perry, R-Pa., said, according to Fox News.

Rep. Matt Gaetz, R-Fla., called for the public release of the memo's information "to preserve our democracy."

http://www.washingtonexaminer.com/republicans-rally-for-public-release-of-memo-on-fisa-abuses/article/2646412

Those aren't terribly unbiased sources there, quoted from a right wing rag.  You are going to have to do a lot better than that.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

 

4 hours ago, Mismoyled Jiblet. said:

releasethememo is the top trending hashtag of the russian tweet bots.

nope, nothing to see here.

It makes sense for Russia to weaken FISA, doesn't it? FISA is the very tool that allows us to do SIGINT against them, Russia would be overjoyed to see FISA destroyed. A week ago, Trump expressed his pleasure over the bill being reauthorized and Congress did its job, Yet now, there is specific outrage, it's a stunt. 

It's a memo; it isn't a transcript, you're being manipulated. It's a heavily spun opinion piece created by Devin Nunes to discredit FISA and throw shade over his time on the transition."I've got the bombshell exposing the Obama cabal" If you believe that, let's see what Mueller comes up with, that should put to bed all these bullshit claims and if it doesn't we can keep Mueller on board for the next investigation.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, Shortforbob said:

I ask for reputable sources and he gives me "the tea partys front page" 

Does Dog ever read anything but rubbish?

(rhetorical question) 

Speaking of Rubbish.   Not one of those congressman are part of the tea party caucus. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, Ed Lada said:

Those aren't terribly unbiased sources there, quoted from a right wing rag.  You are going to have to do a lot better than that.

Because as usual the left wing rags do not cover anything bad about the left until dragged kickingvand screaming to the story. 

 Jon Edwards love child, Fast and furious, and Reverend Wright come to mind. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
8 hours ago, TMSAIL said:

I’ll break my SELF imposed rule about not replying directly too you, in order to clear up your confusion.  My ignoring you means  I will no longer engage in your endless twisting word rituals.  That  does not preclude me from reading your posts, scrolling by or commenting about what you wrote to a third party.  That is what happened in this thread when I responded about your latest rant.   You remind me of the character in a Carly Simon Song.   Not every thing is about you.  

Who said anything about others imposing a rule on you? I'm just pointing out you said you'd ignore my posts and yet you still cannot refrain from reading them and commenting on me because of them. As your first and second posts in the thread. As Eva Dent.

You will also note hermetic had the balls to man up to the fact there was no "word twisting". Pete King was not quoted. There were only unnamed sources quoted in that article. And you wonder why no-one buys your bullshit when you go into bat for Trump. :rolleyes: 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, TMSAIL said:

Because as usual the left wing rags do not cover anything bad about the left until dragged kickingvand screaming to the story. 

 Jon Edwards love child, Fast and furious, and Reverend Wright come to mind. 

That's all very nice but it isn't what we are talking about.  You Righties are very fond of the deflection.  It's getting tiresome.  Address the issue directly, what others do have no bearing on what is happening here.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, TMSAIL said:

Because as usual the left wing rags do not cover anything bad about the left until dragged kickingvand screaming to the story. 

 Jon Edwards love child, Fast and furious, and Reverend Wright come to mind. 

sigh..there's a difference between journalism with a left bent and Left wing rags/blogs just as there is a difference between journalism with a right wing bent and right wing Rags/Blogs.

Posting the blatantly dishonest sensationalist from either is really not credible.

I'll pull up Random or Gigi for the same stunts.

 

  • Like 1
  • Downvote 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
19 minutes ago, Shortforbob said:

Thanks Sol. Prolly a bit long for Dog to read though.

So Nunes writes a "memorandum" with many allegations, all of which are backed up by classified information nobody can see?

We know Nunes is totally impartial, so this memo should be hot stuff.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
13 hours ago, hermetic said:

manafort still laundered money

flynn and papadopolous still lied to the fbi

And Lefties  still lied about collusion

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
7 minutes ago, Ishmael said:

So Nunes writes a "memorandum" with many allegations, all of which are backed up by classified information nobody can see?

We know Nunes is totally impartial, so this memo should be hot stuff.

Nunes is smarter than Simple Jack, and far more subtle.  

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
4 minutes ago, Hillary said:

The election loss taught me a lot. 

Jack, No one learns a thing on a cruise.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 minute ago, badlatitude said:

Jack, No one learns a thing on a cruise.

Stay away from old people and sushi. That's the basics right there, I think.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
5 hours ago, Mark K said:

 I don't believe  Mueller was in on it, but it is an interesting question.  Now, what shall call a special prosecutor of a special prosecutor, the Extra Special? 

I don't believe Mueller was in on it either. You misunderstand, we need a special prosecutor not to investigate Mueller, he can continue his investigation. We need a second special prosecutor to investigate possible collusion between the Clinton campaign and operatives within the Obama administration. and while there at it look at pay for play too. Lots of smoke.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2 hours ago, Shortforbob said:

Thanks Sol. Prolly a bit long for Dog to read though.

OFGS...Do you Australians suffer from an inferiority complex?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

 

21 minutes ago, Dog said:

I don't believe Mueller was in on it either. You misunderstand, we need a special prosecutor not to investigate Mueller, he can continue his investigation. We need a second special prosecutor to investigate possible collusion between the Clinton campaign and operatives within the Obama administration. and while there at it look at pay for play too. Lots of smoke.

The only smoke is what Devin Nunes created typing his memo. I thought Uranium One was the new hype, but since it's January we need a new one?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
3 hours ago, Ed Lada said:

That's all very nice but it isn't what we are talking about.  You Righties are very fond of the deflection.  It's getting tiresome.  Address the issue directly, what others do have no bearing on what is happening here.

But, but, but... That would mean acknowledging Bent Sailor has a point... fuck no. Better to run like a coward than do that!

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
10 hours ago, badlatitude said:

So, if there is so much outrage over FISA abuses, why did Congress reauthorize it? Or were they just worried that releasing this info early would derail it?

The re-authorization included a bunch of amendments, written by Nunes, that supposedly prevent this sort of abuse from ever happening again.

(Some RW bloggers are trying to deduce the Obama misdeeds contained in the memo, by looking closely at Nunes' amendments.)

 

2 hours ago, Sol Rosenberg said:

Nunes is smarter than Simple Jack, and far more subtle.  

You can say that again.  This dude is slick... probably nearly as smart as Jack thinks he is.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 minute ago, frenchie said:

The re-authorization included a bunch of amendments, written by Nunes, that supposedly prevent this sort of abuse from ever happening again.

Some RW bloggers are trying to deduce what's in the memo, what Obama misdeeds it might contain... by looking closely at Nunes' amendments. 

You can say that again.  This dude is slick... he's as smart as Jack thinks he is.

Just means he's going to hit the wall harder.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
16 hours ago, Dog said:

Yes, the suggestion that this could lead to the end of Mueller's investigation is wishful thinking. Still one wonders why the members of the party of transparency would vote to keep this report under wraps.

Why would anyone object to an investigation if they had nothing to hide?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2 minutes ago, random said:

Why would anyone object to an investigation if they had nothing to hide?

For the same reason, a party would vote 100% en masse without even seeing what everyone was talking about?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Are they going to release Trump's tax returns in a gesture of good faith?

 

 

 

{Hysterical laughter}

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
7 hours ago, badlatitude said:

 

The only smoke is what Devin Nunes created typing his memo. I thought Uranium One was the new hype, but since it's January we need a new one?

Oh...there's plenty smoke going all the way back to Bill and Loretta's tarmac meeting while Loretta's department was investigating Bill's wife. Then to the bizarre flipping of the script in which the investigator, not the prosecutor, decides against filing charges against Hillary. To the drafting of the exoneration months prior to the conclusion of the investigation and its subsequent watering down by the now removed from the Mueller investigation and reassigned to HR Mr. Strzok of "insurance policy" fame. To the nepotistic relationship between the now demoted Mr. Ohr of the FBI and Fusion GPS where his wife worked. To all but confirmed fact that the FBI used Clinton campaign "opposition research" purchased from the Russians to obtain a warrant to spy on the Trump campaign. Smoke abounds.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
20 minutes ago, Dog said:

Oh...there's plenty smoke going all the way back to Bill and Loretta's tarmac meeting while Loretta's department was investigating Bill's wife. Then to the the bizarre flipping of the script in which the investigator, not the prosecutor, decides against filing charges against Hillary. To the drafting of the exoneration months prior to the conclusion of the investigation and its subsequent watering down by the now removed from the Mueller investigation and reassigned to HR Mr. Strzok of "insurance policy" fame. To the nepotistic relationship between the now demoted Mr. Ohr of the FBI and Fusion GPS where his wife worked. To all but confirmed fact that the FBI used Clinton campaign "opposition research" purchased from the Russians to obtain a warrant to spy on the Trump campaign. Smoke abounds.

You're letting your imagination get in the way of the fact that the purported document is about FISA(Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Act) abuses.The FISA court is one of the toughest places to get a Judge to OK a warrant, have you considered that there may be some factual basis to those proceedings?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
7 minutes ago, badlatitude said:

You're letting your imagination get in the way of the fact that the purported document is about FISA(Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Act) abuses.The FISA court is one of the toughest places to get a Judge to OK a warrant, have you considered that there may be some factual basis to those proceedings?

FISA Court Has Rejected .03 Percent Of All Government Surveillance Requests

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
19 minutes ago, badlatitude said:

The FISA court is one of the toughest places to get a Judge to OK a warrant

Well,

7 minutes ago, badlatitude said:

It's a secret court, just how reliable is that information?

It's hard to say, isn't it. I prefer not to give govt the benefit of the doubt in such situations. I know I'm in a small minority on that one and the majority will rule if they feel they must. That's why I said

On 1/17/2018 at 6:52 PM, Uncooperative Tom said:

8 R's joined a regrettably-insufficient number of D's in trying to block it, but the simple fact is most of our Duopoly trusts Trump and anyone who may replace him with these powers.

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
17 hours ago, Dog said:

I don't believe Mueller was in on it either. You misunderstand, we need a special prosecutor not to investigate Mueller, he can continue his investigation. We need a second special prosecutor to investigate possible collusion between the Clinton campaign and operatives within the Obama administration. and while there at it look at pay for play too. Lots of smoke.

O for heaven's sake. We know both Obama and Clinton are DemocRATs. No need for a special prosecutor. Any idiot can ask "Are you now or have you ever been a DemocRAT?" 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
5 hours ago, Mark K said:

O for heaven's sake. We know both Obama and Clinton are DemocRATs. No need for a special prosecutor. Any idiot can ask "Are you now or have you ever been a DemocRAT?" 

Oh....such poor little victims.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
5 minutes ago, Dog said:

Oh....such poor little victims.

The irony in your post is fucking astounding. Well done, Dog,I didn't think anyone could beat Hillary Jack at that. 

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

The Aussies just referred a fraud complaint to the FBI against my po Billy J. 

 

Aussie Complaint Tells FBI That Bill Clinton Misled Government Down Under

The former president signed a 'memorandum of understanding' on behalf of a foundation he could not legally represent

by Mark Tapscott | Updated 19 Jan 2018 at 12:18 PM

Former President Bill Clinton apparently misled Aussie officials in 2006 when he signed a $25 million memorandum of understanding (MOU) between the Clinton Foundation and the Australian Government’s Department of Foreign Affairs (DFAT) in 2006, according to a complaint filed Thursday with the FBI.

The MOU committed the funds collected from Australian taxpayers to the American charity for medical projects it agreed to conduct inChina, Papua New Guinea, and Vietnam. The foundation also agreed to match the $25 million from its own funds under its Clinton HIV/Aids Initiative (CHAI).

 

The problem, according to Michael Smith, an investigative reporter and retired Australian police detective, is that Clinton was not at the time a director of the foundation that was created in 1997 to build and operate his presidential library in Little Rock, Arkansas.

Clinton was also barred from legally representing the foundation for five years after his losing his law license in 2001 in connection with his false testimony to the U.S. government during the Monica Lewinsky scandal, which led to his impeachment by the House of Representatives in 1998.

In a Jan. 18, 2018, letter and complaint to FBI Director Christopher Wray, Smith said, “William J CLINTON signed the document over the words ‘For the William J Clinton Foundation HIV/Aids Initiative.’ In a statement (emailed to me) DFAT advised that Clinton executed the agreement as the ‘Founder’ of the Clinton Foundation.”

But Smith told Wray in the complaint, “Clinton was never the ‘founder’ of the Clinton Foundation, which was incorporated in 1997, nor of the Clinton HIV/Aids Initiative Inc. For at least five years from 2001, Clinton was prohibited from holding a number of legal and/or trustee positions on account of his disbarment following dishonesty convictions in U.S. courts. Clinton held no role and had no fiduciary responsibility for the Clinton Foundation or CHAI until 2013.”

During the formal ceremony announcing the MOU, Smith said “Clinton spoke as the decision-maker wholly responsible for the performance of the Clinton Foundation. He held no such role, and while he may have been confident in his ability to influence the board of the Clinton Foundation — his statements about control and establishment of the Clinton Foundation were false, misleading and had the effect of engendering unwarranted confidence in what turned out to be a false narrative concerning the foundation’s ability to deliver on its agreements.”

 

https://www.lifezette.com/polizette/aussie-complaint-tells-fbi-clinton-misled-government-down-under/

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, Hillary said:

The Aussies just referred a fraud complaint to the FBI against my po Billy J. 

 

Aussie Complaint Tells FBI That Bill Clinton Misled Government Down Under

The former president signed a 'memorandum of understanding' on behalf of a foundation he could not legally represent

by Mark Tapscott | Updated 19 Jan 2018 at 12:18 PM

Former President Bill Clinton apparently misled Aussie officials in 2006 when he signed a $25 million memorandum of understanding (MOU) between the Clinton Foundation and the Australian Government’s Department of Foreign Affairs (DFAT) in 2006, according to a complaint filed Thursday with the FBI.

The MOU committed the funds collected from Australian taxpayers to the American charity for medical projects it agreed to conduct inChina, Papua New Guinea, and Vietnam. The foundation also agreed to match the $25 million from its own funds under its Clinton HIV/Aids Initiative (CHAI).

 

The problem, according to Michael Smith, an investigative reporter and retired Australian police detective, is that Clinton was not at the time a director of the foundation that was created in 1997 to build and operate his presidential library in Little Rock, Arkansas.

Clinton was also barred from legally representing the foundation for five years after his losing his law license in 2001 in connection with his false testimony to the U.S. government during the Monica Lewinsky scandal, which led to his impeachment by the House of Representatives in 1998.

In a Jan. 18, 2018, letter and complaint to FBI Director Christopher Wray, Smith said, “William J CLINTON signed the document over the words ‘For the William J Clinton Foundation HIV/Aids Initiative.’ In a statement (emailed to me) DFAT advised that Clinton executed the agreement as the ‘Founder’ of the Clinton Foundation.”

But Smith told Wray in the complaint, “Clinton was never the ‘founder’ of the Clinton Foundation, which was incorporated in 1997, nor of the Clinton HIV/Aids Initiative Inc. For at least five years from 2001, Clinton was prohibited from holding a number of legal and/or trustee positions on account of his disbarment following dishonesty convictions in U.S. courts. Clinton held no role and had no fiduciary responsibility for the Clinton Foundation or CHAI until 2013.”

During the formal ceremony announcing the MOU, Smith said “Clinton spoke as the decision-maker wholly responsible for the performance of the Clinton Foundation. He held no such role, and while he may have been confident in his ability to influence the board of the Clinton Foundation — his statements about control and establishment of the Clinton Foundation were false, misleading and had the effect of engendering unwarranted confidence in what turned out to be a false narrative concerning the foundation’s ability to deliver on its agreements.”

 

https://www.lifezette.com/polizette/aussie-complaint-tells-fbi-clinton-misled-government-down-under/

Yeah, let's see how far that will go.  You are pitiful Jack.  Benghazi!!!!!!!!!!!!!

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, Ed Lada said:

Yeah, let's see how far that will go.  You are pitiful Jack.  Benghazi!!!!!!!!!!!!!

It's in all the right-wing rags, it must be true.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

An complaint by an Aussie reporters to the FBI and a voucher for Starbucks will get you a shit coffee. 

Not even a good deflection Jack. You are clearly desperate if this is all you got. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
5 hours ago, Hillary said:

The Aussies just referred a fraud complaint to the FBI against my po Billy J. 

 

 

That's awesome Jack.  You are quoting from ...

Some Fake News Publishers Just Happen to Be Donald Trump’s Cronies

The extraordinary phenomenon of fake news spread by Facebook and other social media during the 2016 presidential election has been largely portrayed as a lucky break for Donald Trump.

By that reckoning, entrepreneurial Macedonian teenagers, opportunists in Tbilisi and California millennials have exploited social media algorithms in order to make money — only incidentally leading to the viral proliferation of mostly anti-Clinton and anti-Obama hoaxes and conspiracy theories that thrilled many Trump supporters. The Washington Post published a shoddy report on Thursday alleging that Russian state-sponsored propagandists were seeking to promote Trump through fabricated stories for their own reasons, independent of the candidate himself.

But a closer look reveals that some of the biggest fake news providers were run by experienced political operators well within the orbit of Donald Trump’s political advisers and consultants.

Laura Ingraham, a close Trump ally currently under consideration to be Trump’s White House press secretary, owns an online publisher called Ingraham Media Group that runs a number of sites, including LifeZette, a news site that frequently posts articles of dubious veracity. One video produced by LifeZette this summer, ominously titled “Clinton Body Count,” promoted a conspiracy theory that the Clinton family had some role in the plane crash death of John F. Kennedy, Jr., as well as the deaths of various friends and Democrats.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

"...plans to begin the process to release..."

All we need to do is set up a sub-committee to consider the option of making a recommendation to plan to process our intent to register our consideration of releasing the memo. :rolleyes: 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
9 minutes ago, Bent Sailor said:

"...plans to begin the process to release..."

All we need to do is set up a sub-committee to consider the option of making a recommendation to plan to process our intent to register our consideration of releasing the memo. :rolleyes: 

Get ready to be prepared.....

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
5 hours ago, Bus Driver said:
5 hours ago, Bent Sailor said:

"...plans to begin the process to release..."

All we need to do is set up a sub-committee to consider the option of making a recommendation to plan to process our intent to register our consideration of releasing the memo. :rolleyes: 

Get ready to be prepared.....

Even if they do manage to get prepared to consider releasing the memo, they are screwed because all the people who know how the photocopier works are at home.

I have a feeling this memo is going to make the NYT's annual Top Fiction list.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
16 hours ago, Dog said:

Oh....such poor little victims.

 T'was your idea that a sitting POTUS colluding with someone's political campaign was a crime. I suppose we must view DemocRATs as a foreign nation though. They are un-American, at the very least! Or is it that Obama is black? Or perhaps his being a Muslim? There is no end to the task of MAGA.  

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
15 hours ago, Mark K said:

 T'was your idea that a sitting POTUS colluding with someone's political campaign was a crime. I suppose we must view DemocRATs as a foreign nation though. They are un-American, at the very least! Or is it that Obama is black? Or perhaps his being a Muslim? There is no end to the task of MAGA.  

I never said or even implied that Obama was implicated in any collusion. You've been reduced to playing the race card against figments of your own imagination.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

"The revelation was included in 384 pages of text messages exchanged between FBI officials Peter Strzok and Lisa Page, and it significantly diminishes the credibility of Lynch's earlier commitment to accept Comey's recommendation — a commitment she made under the pretense that the two were not coordinating with each other.

And it gets worse. Comey and Lynch reportedly knew that Clinton would never face charges even before the FBI conducted its three-hour interview with Clinton, which was supposedly meant to gather more information into her mishandling of classified information.

On July 1, 2016, as the Lynch announcement became public, Page texted Strzok:

Page: And yeah, it’s a real profile in couragw [sic], since she knows no charges will be brought."

http://thehill.com/opinion/campaign/370019-was-lynch-coordinating-with-comey-in-the-clinton-investigation

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Investigators investigating is bad, sometimes.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
3 hours ago, Dog said:

"The revelation was included in 384 pages of text messages exchanged between FBI officials Peter Strzok and Lisa Page, and it significantly diminishes the credibility of Lynch's earlier commitment to accept Comey's recommendation — a commitment she made under the pretense that the two were not coordinating with each other.

And it gets worse. Comey and Lynch reportedly knew that Clinton would never face charges even before the FBI conducted its three-hour interview with Clinton, which was supposedly meant to gather more information into her mishandling of classified information.

On July 1, 2016, as the Lynch announcement became public, Page texted Strzok:

Page: And yeah, it’s a real profile in couragw [sic], since she knows no charges will be brought."

http://thehill.com/opinion/campaign/370019-was-lynch-coordinating-with-comey-in-the-clinton-investigation

2

Unfortunately, all of these paranoid rantings from the right eventually turn up nothing before crumbling into dust. I wonder how history will view these last twenty-five years of witch hunts? 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
11 minutes ago, badlatitude said:

Poster girl of Republican crazeee

26814712_1576867362348661_12208943562521

Did Gene Simmons join Bruce Jenner on the gender swap list?  

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
4 minutes ago, Sol Rosenberg said:

Did Gene Simmons join Bruce Jenner on the gender swap list?  

Imagine walking in the woods and running into that.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2 minutes ago, badlatitude said:

Imagine walking in the woods and running into that.

The first thought I had when I saw that picture was literally:

"Hello, I'd like to sell you some 'KISS' merchandise."  That f-ing guy is shameless.  

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
4 minutes ago, Sol Rosenberg said:

The first thought I had when I saw that picture was literally:

"Hello, I'd like to sell you some 'KISS' merchandise."  That f-ing guy is shameless.  

So is Jeanine Pirro, she best get out of the woods before the Secret Service takes a shot at her for being a rabid dog.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 minute ago, badlatitude said:

So is Jeanine Pirro, she best get out of the woods before the Secret Service takes a shot at her for being a rabid dog.

Meh.  She's just selling a product to morons, just like Simmons....

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2 hours ago, badlatitude said:

Unfortunately, all of these paranoid rantings from the right eventually turn up nothing before crumbling into dust. I wonder how history will view these last twenty-five years of witch hunts? 

Meanwhile the drip drip drip thread is on page 34.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
6 minutes ago, Dog said:

Meanwhile the drip drip drip thread is on page 34.

Speaking of drip, drip, drip, did you ever clear up that little problem you had?  You know ignoring it can lead to your brain being severely infected.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites