the dossier / collusion / surveillance stories explained
- Thread starter HanAholeSolo2.0
- Start date
they never thought trump would win
the fire at the clinton compound in NY was prolly cank burning docs
twitter suspends the house intelligence committees account
good effin grief
good effin grief
I laughed at the pisstapes component of it, but dismissed it. Interesting how many elements of that dossier have proven to be true.
Twitter is a public company, right?
I'm guessing f'ing around with something like this could be "looked at" in some capacity.
What key components are you aware of that have been verified to be true? What is false? Just a nutshell and only if you have time. A link would suffice, I’d just like to read so we are on equal footing to discuss.
http://www.foxnews.com/politics/201...rming-memo-on-fisa-abuses-be-made-public.html
I am SHOCKED that there is no mention of this on CNN, ABC, CBS or NBC websites.
Reps need to call their brokers and tell them to dump Twitter, Google, and YouTube stock.
I've thought that since it happened.
Thanks for posting. I’m currently reading the Slate article and I came upon this paragraph:
The author uses the fact that Steele shared the info with the FBI as a pillar to establish credibility. To be fair to the author of the article, I don’t believe the corruption in the upper eschelon of the FBI was known at that time (September 2017). I’ll keep reading, but so far I’m not impressed. And that’s not a jab at you.
"Every single democrat voted against making this public." WTF is in it??
It is also an article from 4 months ago. So...
Yes. That’s what I meant.
The author closes with a sort of maybe its true, maybe it isn’t kind of attitude. His proof lies in leaked reports to the press that have been previously published. That doesn’t amount to proof, in my opinion. The author uses “reportedly” too often for this to be a statement of fact. He’s just launching his opinion and hoping for the best. This article is just too circumstantial to suit me.
Maybe that’s just me.
I'm not defending it and I don't understand why it's so important to debunk. Some of it is implausible, just like the article says. Some of it is plainly accurate, too. Whether the fbi loved it or cussed it is secondary to the basic fact that the author accurately reported some specific facts.
He relies upon leaked press reports as his proof. But then hedges that by saying “reportedly”. It’s just not the smoking gun I was looking for, that’s all.
I am ready for this shit to hit the fan once and for all. And I don’t care who gets burned, so long as they are guilty.
I read it at the time and it in no way "verifies" that anything had been verified. Waste of time. That Slate article was written by John Sipher, a former career CIA guy who is also an Obama/Clinton sycophant (and Clinton donor) and ardent anti-Trumper. Here's a couple of posts from his own website that clearly illustrate his adoration....
https://www.thecipherbrief.com/colu...g-highly-classified-information-is-widespread
https://www.thecipherbrief.com/clinton-security-policy-willing-to-use-the-tools-of-power
And here's an excellent commentary on the article he wrote for Slate...
https://www.emptywheel.net/2017/12/...-makes-clear-it-let-clear-errors-sit-for-two/
That’s quite the rebuttal. Such an intellect. Your parents must be ashamed.
It's time to blow this shit pile up. #RELEASE THE MEMO!!
Not really.
To view it you go into a room.
It’s on a computer, not hard doc.
You are searched and leave your phone.
It’s classified currently.
The “memo” put together may leak.
You mean the contents of the memo, not a copy, then? I’ll buy that.
After the Simpson interview leaks blew up in their face ("So why DIDN'T you guys follow up on the money laundering allegations??") I doubt you'll see the same selective leaks. Don't forget how awful the Nunes stunt was. This will be fun to watch.
Two other problems: The pressure to reveal the source docs will be immense, and the GOP leadership is ass deep in russian money, too.
This is getting really fun. Cue Medic posting more fake news from parody accounts to push the Biff narrative...
Nothing to see here. It's just that cray cray Nunes dude who blew the whistle from the beginning. This is all Russia Russia Russia and their farmed Twitter Bots. The Democrats voted against the full House viewing the memo because FullofSchiff says they have to protect their secrets and methods because Bots and stuff. Because Russia. And Bots. And whatnot.
