Discussion in 'Four Corners' started by sensesmaybenumbed, May 20, 2016.
Needs to eat more maccas fries, clearly
If anyone is interested here is the US Budget
Yes, we know everything you can't argue is just a "retard talking point"
Wait, there's a dossier about Obama? Because he was the only sitting president when the Steele dossier was created.
And what did he have to say?
Kinda blows your bullshit talking points out of the water.
Looks like he has mange?
John McClane said it better
Except I can argue it, retard. The Select Committee on Intelligence struck a deal with the Justice Department that allowed only one member of the majority, and one member of the minority to view the documents. Nunes and Gowdy are both on the committee. Nunes sent Gowdy because of his background as a federal prosecutor, and Gowdy took notes which he shared with the rest of the committee. Nunes wrote the memo because he's the chairman. Lindsey Graham also viewed the documents as part of his role on the Senate Judiciary Committee and drew the same conclusions.
The dumbassery in Schiff for Brains' talking point is self-evident, as is your stupidity.
The Grassley Graham referral tears to shreds the key piece of nunes memo apart
a. The FBI did notify the court that the material was politically motivated
b. It also explicitly states that by not stating that the DNC was how the information was sourced, that this is something that is commonly done. Not a deceptive omission.
Basically the Nunes paints the FBI as anti-Trump and the criminal referral refutes that. The Graham Grassley referral steps up stating that it was unwarranted, without stating what exactly information or grounds that the warrant was granted on, was false. Merely saying that if Steele talked to the media, that somehow it invalidates the intel.
But this is the smoking gun people... If you ignore the bits that contradict each other.
Read carefully, dumbass.
Neither the initial application in October 2016, nor any of the renewals disclose or reference the role of the DNC, Clinton campaign, or any party/campaign in funding Steele's efforts
First, the FBI noted to a vaguely limited extent the political origins of the dossier. In footnote 8 the FBI stated that the dossier information was compiled pursuant to the direction of a law firm who had hired an "identified U.S. person" - now known as Glenn Simpson of Fusion GPS - [redacted]. The application failed to disclose that the identities of Mr. Simpson's ultimate clients were the Clinton campaign and the DNC.
Glenn Simpson testified that the law firm he was working for never documented or otherwise informed him regarding who was paying for the work (but he just figured it out himself). He also said that he never spoke to the FBI himself, and that Steele did not know the identity of the "private client" he was working for. In media interviews arranged by Fusion GPS, Steele presents the dossier as being the product of bipartisan efforts from party allies - which, from Simpson's own testimony, is patently false.
Sorry, what? Would you care to reproduce the part of the Grassley-Graham letter that supposedly explicitly states this?
The referral does no such thing. The Grassley-Graham letter describes the lengths the FBI went to in order to protect Steele's credibility in the FISA applications. The Feinstein memo attempts to claim that Steele didn't lie to the FBI. Well if that's true, the FBI obviously just believed Steele didn't talk to Isikoff without ever actually asking him if he did.
It's actually stated pretty clearly - the FISA application contained materially false information.
No, it asserts that if Steele lied to the FBI about his September meeting with Michael Isikoff it damages his credibility.
No, this is just the beginning.
I thought you would have picked up on it by now bile, I stopped reading your posts.
Carry on quoting me though, you won't get a single acknowledgement of your posts content.
I know you read them, Tamps.
I don't expect responses from you because you always run away from your arguments when you know you've lost.
But I will continue to point out what a dumbass you are.
The only thing you succeed in, is carrying on like a petulant child. If you want to convince people how intelligent you are, you need to use the words retard, dumbass and tampon more often. Nothing screams advanced intelligence more than repetitious petty name calling.
That was way too easy.
Indeed, it only took you 30 or 40 posts to get me to respond.
Yeah, fair enough on my wording, mate.
Yes, it was compiled prior to the election and, thus, obviously, the inauguration. But, it continued to be used afterwards so...my wording is kinda right? Or...eventually becomes right?
Obviously, this was not its original intent. The original intent was as a smear document, but as the text messages between Strzok and Page show, it was then turned into an "insurance policy" in the case of Trump's victory, and then enacted in that fashion once this had occurred.
But if you want to go back to the original intent...what crime is falsifying an intelligence document for domestic political reasons? Is that some kind of subversion of democracy? What does that come under, criminally?
Given their verbal jousting I am not sure Trump would support him.
Useless TMZ type shit but I did have a laugh at this...
I'm so happy that a detailed description of Trump's penis will soon be seared into all of our memories
It’s really big
It’s so big you’ll get sick of how big it is
Sometimes I used viagra and I get my partners to pay for it
Separate names with a comma.