Russia Collusion Scandal (aka A Leftist fantasy)

There's also the pesky little matter of the claim that Steele was "fired" by the FBI when there was no formal arrangement and if you're going to say he got "fired" for disclosing his information to the press, or "leaking" that is just another thing that blows up the conspiracy claim.
 
bravesnumberone said:
There's also the pesky little matter of the claim that Steele was "fired" by the FBI when there was no formal arrangement and if you're going to say he got "fired" for disclosing his information to the press, or "leaking" that is just another thing that blows up the conspiracy claim.
Click to expand...

Also the implication that Steele was working "for the DNC" when he had no knowledge of who FGPS's client was.
 
bravesnumberone said:
Not exactly but there are numerous holes to poke in it as has been pointed out. And it undercuts the far-right narrative of the past few months about this whole thing being based off the dossier. If one bothers to pay attention to timelines, they'll realize it.
Click to expand...

It potentially (italics are the new asterisks) undercuts it.

I think that we've all got to stop speaking in ultimates here. It's counterproductive and just really ****ing annoying.
 
bravesnumberone said:
Yes. Sessions is a Deep Stater for deceiving Trump and for recusing himself from an investigation he was a part of and quite possibly could be a target of.

Yes there was malfeasance from Rosenstein because he's "the Democrat from Baltimore."
Click to expand...

Trump is playing Sessions in 4D chess. Draining him from the swamp by removing him from Senate and then deep state 4d checkmate fire him.
 
If it's sworn testimony and common knowledge then how does this memo represent an earth-shattering refutation of it?
 
Which part are you guys more comfortable with? The fact that Russian agents supplied material to get a FISA warrant or that a yahoo article sourced from Fusion helped support a piece of evidence produced by fusion?
 
thethe said:
Which part are you guys more comfortable with? The fact that Russian agents supplied material to get a FISA warrant or that a yahoo article sourced from Fusion helped support a piece of evidence produced by fusion?
Click to expand...

well now that you put it that way I do feel a sense of alarm...but if you can't point me to the beef how about some stringy horsemeat
 
thethe said:
Which part are you guys more comfortable with? The fact that Russian agents supplied material to get a FISA warrant or that a yahoo article sourced from Fusion helped support a piece of evidence produced by fusion?
Click to expand...

I'm mostly worried about the Germans taking our whole government down any day now
 
nsacpi said:
well now that you put it that way I do feel a sense of alarm...but if you can't point me to the beef how about some stringy horsemeat
Click to expand...

Ok - Just wanted to make sure that we were all ok with using opposition research that was never verified to get a FISA warrant. For the future its nice to know who doesn't care about reasonable cause (even though the burden of proof is less for the FISA courts).

As an aside - Its disheartening that these things have been so easily dismissed. What we are witnessing is the beginning of a tyrannical government and if not for the Trump victory we woul dhave never known it was happening and it only would have gotten worse.
 
thethe said:
Ok - Just wanted to make sure that we were all ok with using opposition research that was never verified to get a FISA warrant. For the future its nice to know who doesn't care about reasonable cause (even though the burden of proof is less for the FISA courts).

As an aside - Its disheartening that these things have been so easily dismissed. What we are witnessing is the beginning of a tyrannical government and if not for the Trump victory we woul dhave never known it was happening and it only would have gotten worse.
Click to expand...

Except much of it was verified and you don't know what was used from it and what other information was. Considering they kept getting renewed and had been investigating Page a long time before Trump was candidate, I think it's safe to say they had more proof. Memo says McCabe said they couldn't get warrant without dossier, but that is now in dispute. Considering the Republicans have lied about everything else, I know who I believe.
 
bravesnumberone said:
Except much of it was verified and you don't know what was used from it and what other information was. Considering they kept getting renewed and had been investigating Page a long time before Trump was candidate, I think it's safe to say they had more proof. Memo says McCabe said they couldn't get warrant without dossier, but that is now in dispute. Considering the Republicans have lied about everything else, I know who I believe.
Click to expand...

That was quoted testimony. If they got that piece wrong then I agree the whole thing is bunk. But, I would like to believe that something that would have this high importance would not have fabricated that.

And 'much' of it was not verified - at the very least not at the time. Don't believe me? Ask Mr. Comey.
 
I think the issue raised about what McCabe is quoted as saying is a legitimate one...but I would like to know more.

Also I think Page appears to be a peripheral figure in the whole Russian interference matter...maybe I'm wrong about this...but it seems to me that nothing in the memo undermines the grounds for Mueller's investigation...i see no beef...i see no stringy horsemeat...at most some very thin gruel

what I do see is a panicky attempt to discredit a legitimate investigation
 
He said the most salacious material had not been verified. Go read the actual testimony.

I would "like" to believe they wouldn't fabricate that either but we are dealing with zealots who value party over country.
 
thethe said:
That was quoted testimony. If they got that piece wrong then I agree the whole thing is bunk. But, I would like to believe that something that would have this high importance would not have fabricated that.

And 'much' of it was not verified - at the very least not at the time. Don't believe me? Ask Mr. Comey.
Click to expand...

How would we know without seeing the testimony, in context?
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top