Dog

Evidence of collusion?

Recommended Posts

5 hours ago, TMSAIL said:

Correct me if I'm wrong, but the only reason the Hillary investigation was commented on was to tell the country it was over and no charges were going to be filed.  Just like the Trump investigation no comments until it concludes.  Except for the series of leaks flooding the news this week.  I wonder why that is?  Distracting from all the stories coming out about the actions of some in the FBI to have secret societies to attack a duly elected president?  

OK, you are wrong. They also publicly mentioned the cache of emails found on the laptop of Wiener's wife may require them to re-open the case. 

Share this post


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

I was referring to this assertion by TM -

"Correct me if I'm wrong, but the only reason the Hillary investigation was commented on was to tell the country it was over and no charges were going to be filed."  (emphasis mine)

That is correct.  What part of "we are reopening disputes" the statement that the case was over when it was first brought up by Comey?

It doesn't. The part where Comey mentions that the case will be re-opened is not included in your "only reason" he commented on the subject. So, as directed by you, people are correcting you and telling you that you were wrong. Man up for once, concede you forgot that, and move on.... or continue proving why you've joined Dog in the joke-squad.

Share this post


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

Nope. In fact I'm of the firm opinion that nobody including you knows what you are thinking. You will have to actually think before that can happen. 

"I am rubber, you are glue..."

It was just a couple of days ago someone here was mocking the right-wingers for exactly that kind of "wit". Thanks for proving their point, Jack.

Share this post


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

If "it very well could be true" shouldn't we find out if it's true? 

I don't know. Do you think that the investigation into Trump is a waste of time or is it justified? 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Chief Inspector Nunes gets spanked.

http://thehill.com/homenews/administration/370614-doj-official-tells-nunes-itd-be-reckless-to-release-memo-without

 

Quote

"Though we are currently unaware of any wrongdoing related to the FISA process, we agree than any abuse of this system cannot be tolerated," Boyd said. "Indeed, we do not understand why the committee would possibly seek to disclose this information without first consulting the relevant members of the Intelligence Community."

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

"Comey ‘Friend’ Who Leaked FBI Memos Now Claims To Be His Attorney. Daniel Richman, the law professor who leaked classified FBI records to the media at Comey's request, refused to disclose when exactly he became Comey's attorney"...

...“If it’s true that Professor Richman had four of the seven memos, then in light of the fact that four of the seven memos the Committee reviewed are classified, it would appear that at least one memo the former FBI director gave Professor Richman contained classified information,”...

... “I asked a friend of mine to share the content of the memo with a reporter,” Comey testified last June in response to a question from Sen. Susan Collins (R-Maine). “Didn’t do it myself, for a variety of reasons.”

“But I asked him to, because I thought that might prompt the appointment of a special counsel,” Comey continued. “And so I asked a close friend of mine to do it.”...

..."The news that Richman is now representing Comey raises questions about whether the special counsel may be investigating Comey and Richman for their roles in leaking classified information to the news media in order to get revenge on Trump for firing Comey"...

http://thefederalist.com/2018/01/23/comey-friend-leaked-fbi-memos-now-claims-attorney/

Share this post


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

Nonsense. His objection relates to release of classified info before a review. It is not a judgment on the content of the memo. In fact he indicted that he is relying on  media reports of the memos contents, clearly indicating he has not read it. He stated that the FBI supplied nearly 1000 classified documents to the memo creators and raises the concern that the memo needs to be reviewed for classified content before any consideration is given to wider release. Your slant implies the letter is a commentary of the memo's conclusions and it is nothing of the sort. 

Capture.JPG.b025998efa29a869887e1ee5c9839a5e.JPG

The left is so quick to embrace Snowden and Manning with zero regard to the harm done to our intelligence agencies yet gets all huffy when an AUTHORIZED release might stick their pigs.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

You goofballs really love the smell of your own farts. 

 

Show the evidence blowhards. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

doesn't the doj have an ig that can look into this crap?

if there's a fisa abuse problem/secret society/whateverthefuck problem at the fbi, let the ig make the memo

Share this post


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

doesn't the doj have an ig that can look into this crap?

if there's a fisa abuse problem/secret society/whateverthefuck problem at the fbi, let the ig make the memo

They might, if Nunes would give them the memo. He won’t. 

Share this post


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

Any evidence yet?  

These things take time.  Drip drip drip. 

Share this post


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

Any evidence yet?  

Lots of it...scroll up.

Share this post


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

Lots of it...scroll up.

 I did. I don’t see any. What post number. 

Share this post


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

 I did. I don’t see any. What post number. 

Start with 132

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
On 1/24/2018 at 4:43 AM, Dog said:

No pleas or indictment but by way of evidence, just off the top of my head, I'm sure I'm missing half...

Lynch's, supposed to be a clandestine meeting, with Bill while her department was investigating Hillary.

Lynch issues an edict that the Hillary investigation was to be referred to as a "matter" not what it was, an investigation.

Comey's exoneration memo written months before the conclusion of the investigation and its subsequent editing by Strzok.

The decision to have the FBI investigator not the DOJ prosecutor decide if charges would be brought against Hillary.

FBI involvement in the dossier commissioned by the DNC and Hillary campaign.

Bruce Ohr's meetings with Fusion GPS (where his wife worked) and his subsequent reassignment.

The all but confirmed use of the dossier (Clinton opposition research)to obtain a FISA warrant for surveillance of Trump campaign members.

The Strzok/ Page texts referencing the "Insurance policy" against a possible Trump win and the "secret society".

Strzok's hiring and subsequent removal from the Mueller investigation.

The disappearance of many of Strzok/Page text messages.

These may not constitute proof to a legal standard but you have to have your head in the sand to claim they don't constitute evidence.

Post 132, just to save everyone the bother.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

No pleas or indictment but by way of evidence, just off the top of my head, I'm sure I'm missing half...  Lets see the other half.  

 

Lynch's, supposed to be a clandestine meeting, with Bill while her department was investigating Hillary.  Of what is this evidence?  

Lynch issues an edict that the Hillary investigation was to be referred to as a "matter" not what it was, an investigation. Of what is this evidence?  

Comey's exoneration memo written months before the conclusion of the investigation and its subsequent editing by Strzok. Lets see a copy of it, and explain how it is supported or unsupported by the evidence in that investigation. 

The decision to have the FBI investigator not the DOJ prosecutor decide if charges would be brought against Hillary. Please supply the evidence of that decision and explain who made it, and how it differs from the decision made in similar cases.  

FBI involvement in the dossier commissioned by the DNC and Hillary campaign. Please substantiate your accusation.

Bruce Ohr's meetings with Fusion GPS (where his wife worked) and his subsequent reassignment. Please substantiate and explain what this is evidence of.

The all but confirmed use of the dossier (Clinton opposition research)to obtain a FISA warrant for surveillance of Trump campaign members. DOJ disputes this.  Prove them wrong. 

The Strzok/ Page texts referencing the "Insurance policy" against a possible Trump win and the "secret society". Please provide the texts from the relevant period, not cherry picked out of context doggy style stuff, all of them. 

Strzok's hiring and subsequent removal from the Mueller investigation. Is evidence of what, other than Mueller removing someone after being informed of anything that could be construed as inappropriate?  

The disappearance of many of Strzok/Page text messages. Were theirs the only text messages that disappeared from that agency in that point of time?  

These may not constitute proof to a legal standard but you have to have your head in the sand to claim they don't constitute evidence. Evidence of what?  

 

You are full of shit, @Dog.  Keep following Nunes down that rabbit hole.  

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
25 minutes ago, Ishmael said:
On 1/24/2018 at 7:43 AM, Dog said:

No pleas or indictment but by way of evidence, just off the top of my head, I'm sure I'm missing half...

Lynch's, supposed to be a clandestine meeting, with Bill while her department was investigating Hillary.

Lynch issues an edict that the Hillary investigation was to be referred to as a "matter" not what it was, an investigation.

Comey's exoneration memo written months before the conclusion of the investigation and its subsequent editing by Strzok.

The decision to have the FBI investigator not the DOJ prosecutor decide if charges would be brought against Hillary.

FBI involvement in the dossier commissioned by the DNC and Hillary campaign.

Bruce Ohr's meetings with Fusion GPS (where his wife worked) and his subsequent reassignment.

The all but confirmed use of the dossier (Clinton opposition research)to obtain a FISA warrant for surveillance of Trump campaign members.

The Strzok/ Page texts referencing the "Insurance policy" against a possible Trump win and the "secret society".

Strzok's hiring and subsequent removal from the Mueller investigation.

The disappearance of many of Strzok/Page text messages.

These may not constitute proof to a legal standard but you have to have your head in the sand to claim they don't constitute evidence.

Post 132, just to save everyone the bother.

For Dog and his elk, it's a very short step from "where there's smoke, there is a calculable probability there's a fire" to this kind of claim "we are inventing smoke out of thin air, therefore all Right-Thinking Americans will agree that there is definitely a fire, probably several, to be pointed out on an ongoing basis (retroactively) as convenient for political optics"

To accuse the FBI of libby-rull bias on a massive scale is just mind-bogglingly stupid. I mean, J. Edgar was gay and all but he for damned sure wasn't having any liberal shit at all anywhere in his agency. Also it throws the whole usage of the FBI as a domestic police arm into question, tossing the baby out with the soap there.

-DSK

Share this post


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

For Dog and his elk, it's a very short step from "where there's smoke, there is a calculable probability there's a fire" to this kind of claim "we are inventing smoke out of thin air, therefore all Right-Thinking Americans will agree that there is definitely a fire, probably several, to be pointed out on an ongoing basis (retroactively) as convenient for political optics"

To accuse the FBI of libby-rull bias on a massive scale is just mind-bogglingly stupid. I mean, J. Edgar was gay and all but he for damned sure wasn't having any liberal shit at all anywhere in his agency. Also it throws the whole usage of the FBI as a domestic police arm into question, tossing the baby out with the soap there.

-DSK

"Mind-bogglingly stupid" seems to be the default position for Trump supporters these days.

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

If a football player took a knee to protest the F.B.I. and it's rampant, blatant corruption and liberal bias, would conservatives be ok with it?

Share this post


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

For Dog and his elk, it's a very short step from "where there's smoke, there is a calculable probability there's a fire" to this kind of claim "we are inventing smoke out of thin air, therefore all Right-Thinking Americans will agree that there is definitely a fire, probably several, to be pointed out on an ongoing basis (retroactively) as convenient for political optics"

To accuse the FBI of libby-rull bias on a massive scale is just mind-bogglingly stupid. I mean, J. Edgar was gay and all but he for damned sure wasn't having any liberal shit at all anywhere in his agency. Also it throws the whole usage of the FBI as a domestic police arm into question, tossing the baby out with the soap there.

-DSK

The big issue is that any political bias or hanky panky destroys citizens confidence in institutions.

the present sitaution has a certain stink to it

 

 

Share this post


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

The big issue is that any political bias or hanky panky destroys citizens confidence in institutions.

the present sitaution has a certain stink to it

 

 

Based on what evidence?  That someone is investigating the Pride of New York?  

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
13 minutes ago, slug zitski said:

The big issue is that any political bias or hanky panky destroys citizens confidence in institutions.

the present sitaution has a certain stink to it

yeah, it has a reek of ginned up controversy for the morons.

Share this post


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

The big issue is that any political bias or hanky panky destroys citizens confidence in institutions.

the present sitaution has a certain stink to it

 

What has a certain stink is that Fox News and the hate-spew reich-wingers are determined to attack the FBI to protect their boy Trump. What stinks is Trump asking for the personal loyalty of the FBI director, then firing him, then asking the next FBI director who he voted for. What stinks is the obstruction of justice and the assumption that the mechanism of the Federal Gov't should be used to ensure Republican ascendancy, the way it's been done in all too many states.

There is small amount of evidence (a few FBI agents are apparently Democrats! Heaven forbid!!) and a heck of a lot of blue-sky accusation; and mountains of pre-emptive character assassination.

 

Just now, Mismoyled Jiblet. said:

yeah, it has a reek of ginned up controversy for the morons.

A lot of people are entertained by the red-faced shouting of nonsensical insults. Third-graders like to make poo-poo jokes about teacher. I'm not entirely innocent myself, but generally the various mockery threads over in the sailing section do it for me.

-DSK

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
22 minutes ago, Steam Flyer said:

For Dog and his elk, it's a very short step from "where there's smoke, there is a calculable probability there's a fire" to this kind of claim "we are inventing smoke out of thin air, therefore all Right-Thinking Americans will agree that there is definitely a fire, probably several, to be pointed out on an ongoing basis (retroactively) as convenient for political optics"

To accuse the FBI of libby-rull bias on a massive scale is just mind-bogglingly stupid. I mean, J. Edgar was gay and all but he for damned sure wasn't having any liberal shit at all anywhere in his agency. Also it throws the whole usage of the FBI as a domestic police arm into question, tossing the baby out with the soap there.

-DSK

When this thread reaches 38 pages you might have room to talk.

Share this post


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

When this thread reached 38 pages you might have room to talk.

Hint- how many hours of anti-Mueller "speculative reporting" does Fox News broadcast every day?

-DSK

Share this post


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

When this thread reached 38 pages you might have room to talk.

That the so called President picked felons for his National Security Adviser and Campaign chair is worth 178 pages or more

Share this post


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

Hint- how many hours of anti-Mueller "speculative reporting" does Fox News broadcast every day?

-DSK

Is it speculation that Comey wrote Hillary's exoneration memo months before the conclusion of the investigation and long before the principle players had been interviewed?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
19 hours ago, Bent Sailor said:

OK, you are wrong. They also publicly mentioned the cache of emails found on the laptop of Wiener's wife may require them to re-open the case. 

In all seriousness - why do you think that Dir Comey said what he did each time? 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

"The big issue is that any political bias or hanky panky destroys citizens confidence in institutions."

As do attacks by elected officials for allegations, substantiated or not,  for political gain.

Share this post


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

Is it speculation that Comey wrote Hillary's exoneration memo months before the conclusion of the investigation and long before the principle players had been interviewed?

I don't know, I've seen it shouted a lot by the same people who spent years hollering about  Obama being a Kenyan Marxist. Is there actual evidence?

-DSK

Share this post


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

I don't know, I've seen it shouted a lot by the same people who spent years hollering about  Obama being a Kenyan Marxist. Is there actual evidence?

-DSK

Yes there are drafts of the memo...Is it speculation that Bill and Loretta conducted a tarmac meeting while her department was investigating Bill's wife?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
9 minutes ago, learningJ24 said:

"The big issue is that any political bias or hanky panky destroys citizens confidence in institutions."

As do attacks by elected officials for allegations, substantiated or not,  for political gain.

Quite correct - it seems that we've tossed the decorum that was once expected of our elected officials out w/the 20 yr old stack of National Geographic magazines. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
3 minutes ago, Dog said:
8 minutes ago, Steam Flyer said:

I don't know, I've seen it shouted a lot by the same people who spent years hollering about  Obama being a Kenyan Marxist. Is there actual evidence?

-DSK

Yes there are drafts of the memo...Is it speculation that Bill and Loretta conducted a tarmac meeting while her department was investigating Bill's wife?

About what I expected..... all the same old voices shouting the same old message. Since you beee-leeeeve that Obama WAS a Kenyan Marxist, then that's PROOF for you.

If the wheels of justice sink to such a low standard, this country will not survive. Is that what you want?

 

5 minutes ago, A guy in the Chesapeake said:
15 minutes ago, learningJ24 said:

"The big issue is that any political bias or hanky panky destroys citizens confidence in institutions."

As do attacks by elected officials for allegations, substantiated or not,  for political gain.

Quite correct - it seems that we've tossed the decorum that was once expected of our elected officials out w/the 20 yr old stack of National Geographic magazines. 

Hey! I kept all those Nat G mags!!!! They'll be collectors items some day!

-DSK

Share this post


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

About what I expected..... all the same old voices shouting the same old message. Since you beee-leeeeve that Obama WAS a Kenyan Marxist, then that's PROOF for you.

If the wheels of justice sink to such a low standard, this country will not survive. Is that what you want?

 

Did Comey confirm that he leaked what we now know to be classified information to the NYT for the purpose of encouraging the a appointment of a special counsel to investigate Trump?

BTW...I never believed Obama was Kenyan

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

<hijack> My uncles were in an issue of the NatGeo mags - somewhere back around 1971, IIRC - they did an article on the Chesapeake Bay Skipjacks.  I have a copy of that issue put away, but, have the rest on DVD. 
</hijack>

Share this post


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

When this thread reaches 38 pages you might have room to talk.

And when this "investigation produces any evidence, let alone two guilty pleas and two indictments, so will you.  

Until then, the rest of us can happily smear your bullshit right in your face.  Open wide like you would for your Messiah!  

Share this post


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

And when this "investigation produces any evidence, let alone two guilty pleas and two indictments, so will you.  

Until then, the rest of us can happily smear your bullshit right in your face.  Open wide like you would for your Messiah!  

Scroll up.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
36 minutes ago, A guy in the Chesapeake said:

In all seriousness - why do you think that Dir Comey said what he did each time? 

I think Comey felt it best served his agency and his role to do so.

I think the Republicans have been very good at playing people to do so in such a way their opponents look like shit. In this manner they have been far 

Share this post


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

Scroll up.

I responded to your doggy styling already.  I will waste no more time on it.  

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Uh oh.  Sorry about those "missing" text messages.  It seems they've been found.  Now we just need them to be released so that we can see the context for ourselves, without Chief Inspector Nunes' interpretation. 

http://thehill.com/homenews/administration/370711-justice-department-recovers-missing-fbi-agents-text-messages

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

It was never really a "secret" society.  If you look at the bottom of your Soros Protesting Pay stub, there's an Email address

and website you can go to to download your packet and take a virtual oath.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

http://thehill.com/homenews/senate/370707-ron-johnson-its-a-real-possibility-that-ex-fbi-agents-secret-society-text-was

And the Senator who spoke about Chief Inspector Nunes' "Secret Society" admits that it's probably a joke.  

 

Hey, @Dog just farted, everybody come get a whiff.  Chief Inspector Nunes has been feeding him eggs. WHEW!  

Share this post


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

If a football player took a knee to protest the F.B.I. and it's rampant, blatant corruption and liberal bias, would conservatives be ok with it?

Depends on if he's White, and the types of tattoos.  A rebel flag on the bicep?  Yeah, they would...  A black kid with a list of the Bill of Rights on his back? Not so much.

Share this post


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

http://thehill.com/homenews/senate/370707-ron-johnson-its-a-real-possibility-that-ex-fbi-agents-secret-society-text-was

And the Senator who spoke about Chief Inspector Nunes' "Secret Society" admits that it's probably a joke.  

 

Hey, @Dog just farted, everybody come get a whiff.  Chief Inspector Nunes has been feeding him eggs. WHEW!  

Is that evidence you're citing?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

"In a letter sent to congressional committees, Justice Department Inspector General Michael Horowitz said his office “succeeded in using forensic tools to recover text messages from FBI devices, including text messages between Mr. Strzok and Ms. Page that were sent or received between December 14, 2016 and May 17, 2017.”

http://www.foxnews.com/politics/2018/01/25/missing-text-messages-between-two-fbi-employees-have-been-located-according-to-department-justice-official.html

Share this post


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

Post 132, just to save everyone the bother.

Such a wonderful melange of fact and fiction.  Thank goodness the courts have a higher standard for evidence than a fevered imagination.

Share this post


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

Is that evidence you're citing?

Someone retracting or otherwise walking back their bullshit would naturally be a foreign concept to you.  

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Dum da dum dum

Mueller Almost Done With Obstruction Part of Trump Probe, Sources Say

Source: Bloomberg News




By Chris Strohm and Shannon Pettypiece 
January 25, 2018, 4:00 AM EST Updated on January 25, 2018, 11:27 AM EST 

Special Counsel Robert Mueller is moving at a far faster pace than previously known and appears to be wrapping up at least one key part of his investigation -- whether President Donald Trump obstructed justice, according to current and former U.S. officials. 

Mueller has quietly moved closer to those around Trump by interviewing Director of National Intelligence Dan Coats, National Security Agency Director Michael Rogers, Attorney General Jeff Sessions and former FBI Director James Comey in recent weeks, officials said. His team has also interviewed CIA Director Mike Pompeo, NBC News reported. 

Those high-level officials all have some degree of knowledge about events surrounding Trump’s decisions to fire Comey and Michael Flynn, his first national security adviser. 

“Clearly the names that are coming out now indicate that we’re into the obstruction of justice side of it,” said Stanley Twardy, a former U.S. attorney for Connecticut who’s now a white-collar criminal defense lawyer at the law firm Day Pitney LLP. “He’s now getting people who are closest to the president, closest to the issues.”
 

Share this post


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

Someone retracting or otherwise walking back their bullshit would naturally be a foreign concept to you.  

Is it evidence?

Share this post


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

Is it evidence?

Not for you.  I'm betting that you ignore it and double down on the Doggy.  

Share this post


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

Not for you.  I'm betting that you ignore it and double down on the Doggy.  

You're wrong, I'll put in in the pot as evidence but does it qualify under your standards as evidence?

 

Share this post


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

You're wrong, I'll put in in the pot as evidence but does it qualify under your standards as evidence?

 

Unless he is sworn in, it is as evidentiary as one of your posts.  

Share this post


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

Unless he is sworn in, it is as evidentiary as one of your posts.  

I'm guessing that's a no since you dismiss my posts as not evidence.

Share this post


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

You're wrong, I'll put in in the pot as evidence but does it qualify under your standards as evidence?

 

Is that in addition to the chicken in the pot?

Share this post


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

I'm guessing that's a no since you dismiss my posts as not evidence.

Is English not your first language?  I do not dismiss your posts as non-evidentiary.  I dismiss your posts as non-factual, non-sensical, non-believable, non-valuable...but otherwise entertaining.  

Share this post


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

Ouuuuuch! 

Step on your dick again? Poor baby.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
7 hours ago, SailBlueH2O said:

Trio.jpg

.......are they really holding hands........?

  • Downvote 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

No quite as bad as

main-qimg-219de59d94b845272e03ff4d7016ec

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
6 hours ago, Sol Rosenberg said:
6 hours ago, Dog said:

I'm guessing that's a no since you dismiss my posts as not evidence.

Is English not your first language?  I do not dismiss your posts as non-evidentiary.  I dismiss your posts as non-factual, non-sensical, non-believable, non-valuable...but otherwise entertaining.  

The problem is, Dog is taking this WAY-Y seriously. He hasn't said anything funny in weeks.

-DSK

Share this post


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

I'm guessing that's a no since you dismiss my posts as not evidence.

None of your posts are evidence of anything except bullshit.  Been that way for years.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
9 hours ago, A guy in the Chesapeake said:

In all seriousness - why do you think that Dir Comey said what he did each time? 

Honestly I think he did so because he was stuck between a rock and a hard place. On the one hand, the Republicans would have found out he was looking at the laptop, leaked that info, and ruined his career. On the other hand, he could break with standard policy and comment on a possible nothing-burger that ends up destroying an ongoing election campaign. 

I'm not criticising Comey for his decision, simply correcting TMSAIL as he asked to be if he was wrong. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
On 1/24/2018 at 8:00 AM, Dog said:

Evidence of corruption within the FBI and DOJ focused on protecting Hillary and defeating Trump possibly coordinated with the Clinton campaign.

If the FBI is so pro Hilliary why did they keep quiet about the American general, working for Russia, that helped Trump win but reopened the Clinton campaign just before the election?   It may be some idiot in the FBI ignored the Hatch act.    That doesn’t mean Russia can do whatever they want.  It doesn’t mean anybody that helps Trump is a hero and anybody who thwarts him is a Clinton tainted traitor.  

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
23 minutes ago, Lark said:

If the FBI is so pro Hilliary why did they keep quiet about the American general, working for Russia, that helped Trump win but reopened the Clinton campaign just before the election?   It may be some idiot in the FBI ignored the Hatch act.    That doesn’t mean Russia can do whatever they want.  It doesn’t mean anybody that helps Trump is a hero and anybody who thwarts him is a Clinton tainted traitor.  

Fear of exposure,.... oh wow, look what happened....

Share this post


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

If the FBI is so pro Hilliary why did they keep quiet about the American general, working for Russia, that helped Trump win but reopened the Clinton campaign just before the election?   It may be some idiot in the FBI ignored the Hatch act.    That doesn’t mean Russia can do whatever they want.  It doesn’t mean anybody that helps Trump is a hero and anybody who thwarts him is a Clinton tainted traitor.  

People within the FBI, not the FBI. Recently released Stzrok/Page texts also point to a motive other than the purely political, self preservation.  They believed that Hillary would be the next president and the manner with which they conducted the investigation into her mishandling of classified information would be remembered by president Hillary who is not known for her empathy. Hence Page cautions Stzrok against an aggressive questioning of Hillary.

These are not stupid people who believed that Hillary would soon be their boss.

Share this post


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

People within the FBI, not the FBI. Recently released Stzrok/Page texts also point to a motive other than the purely political, self preservation.  They believed that Hillary would be the next president and the manner with which they conducted the investigation into her mishandling of classified information would be remembered by president Hillary who is not known for her empathy. Hence Page cautions Stzrok against an aggressive questioning of Hillary.

These are not stupid people who believed that Hillary would soon be their boss.

Let’s see the released texts. 

Share this post


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

Let’s see the released texts. 

And the Nunes memo and the Democrat's rebuttal memo.

"She might be our next president. The last thing you need us going in there loaded for bear," Page, an FBI attorney, said in a discussion on February 25, 2016, about personnel involved in the investigation. "You think she's going to remember or care that it was more doj than fbi?"

"Agreed," replied Strzok",

http://edition.cnn.com/2018/01/25/politics/fbi-texts/index.html

Share this post


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

And the Nunes memo and the Democrat's rebuttal memo.

"She might be our next president. The last thing you need us going in there loaded for bear," Page, an FBI attorney, said in a discussion on February 25, 2016, about personnel involved in the investigation. "You think she's going to remember or care that it was more doj than fbi?"

"Agreed," replied Strzok",

http://edition.cnn.com/2018/01/25/politics/fbi-texts/index.html

So you are basing that on texts that Sen. Grassley cherry picked and released.  Get back to us when the lot of them are released, so that we can see what they were actually talking about.  We've seen the game that is being played with that, by the way Chief Inspector Nunes and company handled the secret society stuff.  Nobody with so much as a single firing synapse is going to fall for that again.  

Share this post


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

So you are basing that on texts that Sen. Grassley cherry picked and released.  Get back to us when the lot of them are released, so that we can see what they were actually talking about.  We've seen the game that is being played with that, by the way Chief Inspector Nunes and company handled the secret society stuff.  Nobody with so much as a single firing synapse is going to fall for that again.  

I based it on the content of the texts which indicate ulterior motivations were in play. Ulterior motivations which dovetail nicely with the writing of the exoneration memo prior to the conclusion of the investigation matter. It's looking more and more like a whitewash job.

Share this post


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

I based it on the content of the texts which indicate ulterior motivations were in play. Ulterior motivations which dovetail nicely with the writing of the exoneration memo prior to the conclusion of the investigation matter. It's looking more and more like a whitewash job.

Oh it definitely could be.  All we need to see are the texts, instead of your comments about other people's comments, based on comments from people who have seen the texts and released one or two, to remove the context...kinda like Chief Inspector Nunes played you with the secret society stuff.  Let us know when we can see the context.  

Share this post


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

Oh it definitely could be.  All we need to see are the texts, instead of your comments about other people's comments, based on comments from people who have seen the texts and released one or two, to remove the context...kinda like Chief Inspector Nunes played you with the secret society stuff.  Let us know when we can see the context.  

If it definitely could be a whitewash sounds like a special prosecutor is in order. Given Mueller's broad mandate seems to me he could do it under his current authority.

Share this post


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

If it definitely could be a whitewash sounds like a special prosecutor is in order. Given Mueller's broad mandate seems to me he could do it under his current authority.

That’s an interesting topic too. Thought provoking!

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Good read....

"Meantime, the Department of Justice has officially warned the House Intelligence Committee not to release its memo. It's like the possible defendant in a criminal trial threatening prosecutors for having the audacity to reveal alleged evidence to the judge and jury.

This is the first time I can recall open government groups and many reporters joining in the argument to keep the information secret. They are strangely uncurious about alleged improprieties with implications of the worst kind: Stasi-like tactics used against Americans". 

http://thehill.com/opinion/white-house/370717-as-walls-close-in-on-fbi-the-bureau-lashes-out-at-its-antagonists

Share this post


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

And the Nunes memo and the Democrat's rebuttal memo.

"She might be our next president. The last thing you need us going in there loaded for bear," Page, an FBI attorney, said in a discussion on February 25, 2016, about personnel involved in the investigation. "You think she's going to remember or care that it was more doj than fbi?"

"Agreed," replied Strzok",

http://edition.cnn.com/2018/01/25/politics/fbi-texts/index.html

The next question is suspicion vs thoroughness,   There may have been a strong desire not to piss Clinton off on another Republican witch hunt,   It would have been just as delicate as the current investigation of “You’re Fired” and Putin, yet not necessarily based on evidencethat time.   The investigation to me smelled of fear of the House in the first place.    Hauling Comey there to testify on why he hadn’t arrested Clinton for using email. And forcing him to promise updates, was rather irregular and may have been the reason he violated decades old protocol not to taint an election with public announcements.    Since the investigations have yet to lead anywhere, the whole thing smells of political BS.   

I’m also biased by the banana republic platform of the Republicans to lock up their political rivals.    What better way to run unopposed in 2020 than terror of jail for anybody that tries and loses.   House threats to investigate President Obama in retaliation for having been a Democratic President are equally Anti democracy.

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
30 minutes ago, Lark said:

The next question is suspicion vs thoroughness,   There may have been a strong desire not to piss Clinton off on another Republican witch hunt,   It would have been just as delicate as the current investigation of “You’re Fired” and Putin, yet not necessarily based on evidencethat time.   The investigation to me smelled of fear of the House in the first place.    Hauling Comey there to testify on why he hadn’t arrested Clinton for using email. And forcing him to promise updates, was rather irregular and may have been the reason he violated decades old protocol not to taint an election with public announcements.    Since the investigations have yet to lead anywhere, the whole thing smells of political BS.   

I’m also biased by the banana republic platform of the Republicans to lock up their political rivals.    What better way to run unopposed in 2020 than terror of jail for anybody that tries and loses.   House threats to investigate President Obama in retaliation for having been a Democratic President are equally Anti democracy.

 

Hyperbole right?... You don't really believe Republicans have a platform to lock up their political rivals or that the house threatened to investigate Obama for being a Democrat.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
On 1/19/2018 at 11:31 AM, TMSAIL said:

I wasn’t aware you were a congressman. 

 

Oh come on. If it were that damming, Nunes would have leaked it by now.

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

 

http://abc30.com/politics/rep-devin-nunes-opens-investigation-into-uranium-deal-under-obama/2562803/.  From the same representative that ran straight to Trump to help protect him from the consequences of his deals with Russia.   

A Republican pardoned Republican Nixon from the consequences of his anti democratic actions.    It was controversial but correct. Endless investigations of the most crooked President to date had Republican blessing (how things change) but would have been a pointless squabble for years.   Better to move forward as a country.    Yet modern Republicans protect the new most corrupt President by attacking all political rivals, a warning of the consequences of not being Republican in Republican country,  

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Get ready to watch the Clown Car do an abrupt U-Turn now that the texts show Stzrok and Page considered a special prosecutor to look into Madame She Devil's email use.  

http://thehill.com/homenews/administration/370838-fbi-officials-considered-naming-special-prosecutor-for-clinton-emails

 

Whoops, gotta run, there's a Secret Society meeting in ten minutes.  Wait.  um...no there isn't.  Maybe.  

Share this post


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

Get ready to watch the Clown Car do an abrupt U-Turn now that the texts show Stzrok and Page considered a special prosecutor to look into Madame She Devil's email use.  

http://thehill.com/homenews/administration/370838-fbi-officials-considered-naming-special-prosecutor-for-clinton-emails

 

Whoops, gotta run, there's a Secret Society meeting in ten minutes.  Wait.  um...no there isn't.  Maybe.  

Come on thats just flimsy...FBI agreed the crime was serious enough to call for a SP but the "Secret Society" shot it down and saved her even as they hatched plots to bring down trump. Trump the genius won and has now exposed the "Secret Society". 

You already know whats coming.

Take texts of any political active/involved citizens during the period, the potential for spin would be unlimited. Even Youtube comments had assassination plots, some quite detailed, for both candidates.

Just need someone in government venting frustration and joking with close friends and theres the proof of the "deep state".

Share this post


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

The next question is suspicion vs thoroughness,   There may have been a strong desire not to piss Clinton off on another Republican witch hunt,   It would have been just as delicate as the current investigation of “You’re Fired” and Putin, yet not necessarily based on evidencethat time.   The investigation to me smelled of fear of the House in the first place.    Hauling Comey there to testify on why he hadn’t arrested Clinton for using email. And forcing him to promise updates, was rather irregular and may have been the reason he violated decades old protocol not to taint an election with public announcements.    Since the investigations have yet to lead anywhere, the whole thing smells of political BS.   

I’m also biased by the banana republic platform of the Republicans to lock up their political rivals.    What better way to run unopposed in 2020 than terror of jail for anybody that tries and loses.   House threats to investigate President Obama in retaliation for having been a Democratic President are equally Anti democracy.

 

Hyperbole right?... You don't really believe Republicans have a platform to lock up their political rivals or that the house threatened to investigate Obama for being a Democrat.

Benghazi !!!! LOCK HER UP !! LOCK HER UP !!

The FBI has a secret society devoted to bringing down Trump, they must be investigated and arrested.

The state of North Carolina, with a strong Republican majority in it's House, has been ordered TWICE to redraw blatantly partisan districts. They ignored the first order and asked the US Supreme Court to put off having to actually redraw the districts. "Now is not a good time."

Trump's "voter fraud" panel?

Oh no, there is zero evidence that Republicans want to luck up political members and diminish democracy in the US.

-DSK

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
14 hours ago, Sol Rosenberg said:

Oh it definitely could be.  All we need to see are the texts, instead of your comments about other people's comments, based on comments from people who have seen the texts and released one or two, to remove the context...kinda like Chief Inspector Nunes played you with the secret society stuff.  Let us know when we can see the context.  

Inspector Nunes? 

  

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites