Logic Posted March 23, 2017 Posted March 23, 2017 Things are about to get reeeeeally interesting over the next few weeks. Shouldn't be too long now.
grinreaper Posted March 23, 2017 Posted March 23, 2017 The deep state received communications that a foreigner had with Trump associates. Normally the domestic party would have their name redacted from any reports that were made and filed by any intelligence officer. They were not redacted. Furthermore, they were shared with other agencies. This was only allowed when Obama (shortly before he left office) changed the rules to allow that sharing.
Deranged Rhino Posted March 23, 2017 Posted March 23, 2017 The deep state received communications that a foreigner had with Trump associates. Normally the domestic party would have their name redacted from any reports that were made and filed by any intelligence officer. They were not redacted. Furthermore, they were shared with other agencies. This was only allowed when Obama (shortly before he left office) changed the rules to allow that sharing. I'm pretty sure what we are seeing is JSOC vs CIA play out with these recent leaks and this tit for tat. People on both sides of that particular battle are pretty vocal about how pissed they are.
meazza Posted March 23, 2017 Posted March 23, 2017 Reset button I'll have more flexibility after the election
B-Man Posted March 23, 2017 Posted March 23, 2017 Always fun watching those (supposed) impartial posters squealing like little schoolgirls in anticipation of those "BIG THINGS COMING".......... Their version of events is big if true, but how likely is it that it’s true? This is the same guy who tweeted yesterday that Russia “hacked our election,” an intentionally misleading Democratic talking point designed to suggest that Russia changed the vote totals on election night. They didn’t, of course, as Barack Obama himself acknowledged. This also isn’t the first time we’ve heard a top Democrat claim evidence of collusion between Trumpers and the Russians — but the last time it happened, Sen. Chris Coons had to backtrack and explain that he had misspoken. There was no conclusive proof, he later admitted. How soon before Schiff has to backtrack too? On top of all that, it’s awfully convenient timing that Schiff, a Democrat, would drop this bombshell damaging Trump so soon after Devin Nunes, his Republican counterpart on the House Intel Committee, dropped a bombshell of his own that supported some of Trump’s claims about surveillance and leaks (well, sort of). That reeks of Schiff wanting to step on the GOP’s “Nunes says Trump team was incidentally surveilled!” headlines with an even sexier headline of his own.
Logic Posted March 23, 2017 Posted March 23, 2017 On top of all that, it’s awfully convenient timing that Schiff, a Democrat, would drop this bombshell damaging Trump so soon after Devin Nunes, his Republican counterpart on the House Intel Committee, dropped a bombshell of his own that supported some of Trump’s claims about surveillance and leaks (well, sort of). That reeks of Schiff wanting to step on the GOP’s “Nunes says Trump team was incidentally surveilled!” headlines with an even sexier headline of his own. If we're talking "convenient" things...it's AWFULLY convenient that so many people connected to Trump and his campaign are, one by one, revealed to have shady ties to Russia. I mean one or two and maybe it's a coincidence...but I'm really wondering at this point what it's gonna take for some here to buy into the fact that maybe, at a certain point, smoke = fire. Sessions, Flynn, Manafort, Page, Tillerson, Kushner, Sater. How many Trump lackies have to have their dirty aired before you consider that maybe it's more than "convenient" that they're connected to Trump, who, as you know, is himself under investigation. And I stand by my statement that it will be an interesting few weeks and some unimaginable stuff is about to come down the pike. I'm not going to run off and hide if I'm wrong. I'll openly admit that I was incorrect. I hope others will do the same if the opposite is proven. We'll all find out soon enough one way or the other.
gatorbait Posted March 23, 2017 Posted March 23, 2017 Damn those two, making it bipartisan is like really, really low.Yawn..... Intelligence committees should never put their country before their party right?
Dorkington Posted March 23, 2017 Posted March 23, 2017 (edited) B-Man, why do you not source the text you post? You constantly copy and paste from articles on the internet without credit. Example: Your last post is pulled from: http://hotair.com/archives/2017/03/22/dem-intel-committee-member-adam-schiff-we-now-have-more-than-circumstantial-evidence-of-collusion-between-russia-and-trump-staffers/ Edited March 23, 2017 by Dorkington
B-Man Posted March 23, 2017 Posted March 23, 2017 B-Man, why do you not source the text you post? You constantly copy and paste from articles on the internet without credit. Example: Your last post is pulled from: http://hotair.com/archives/2017/03/22/dem-intel-committee-member-adam-schiff-we-now-have-more-than-circumstantial-evidence-of-collusion-between-russia-and-trump-staffers/ You are correct sir, I do post the link probably 99% of the time, but I did miss it here after I opened it, thanks for catching it. I just posted in the Global warming thread from a Hot Air article, and here is one from John Hindraker's Powerline. BREAKING NEWS FROM CNN: WE HAVE NO NEWS Democratic Party operatives are desperately trying to keep their Russia narrative alive. Thus, this CNN headline: “US Officials: Info suggests Trump associates may have coordinated with Russians.” Sounds like a blockbuster, right? Only the story contains no actual news. The FBI has information that indicates associates of President Donald Trump communicated with suspected Russian operatives to possibly coordinate the release of information damaging to Hillary Clinton’s campaign, US officials told CNN. The “US officials” are Democrats, likely Obama administration holdovers, embedded in the federal bureaucracy. They are the same leakers we have been hearing from for months now, as they work feverishly to undermine the Trump administration. CNN, their collaborator, is trying to undermine the Trump administration, too. Note that this lead paragraph says nothing at all. What does “to possibly coordinate” mean? It means that there isn’t any evidence. The FBI is now reviewing that information, which includes human intelligence, travel, business and phone records and accounts of in-person meetings, according to those U.S. officials. The information is raising the suspicions of FBI counterintelligence investigators that the coordination may have taken place, though officials cautioned that the information was not conclusive and that the investigation is ongoing. Which is more or less what Comey said on Monday. CNN chooses to say that “the information was not conclusive.” But as far as we know, there is no information at all. This lament is pretty funny: One of the obstacles the sources say the FBI now faces in finding conclusive intelligence is that communications between Trump’s associates and Russians have ceased in recent months given the public focus on Russia’s alleged ties to the Trump campaign. There isn’t any evidence in past communications, and now they aren’t communicating at all, damn them! The Democrats in the bureaucracy and at CNN are grasping at straws.
IDBillzFan Posted March 23, 2017 Posted March 23, 2017 Things are about to get reeeeeally interesting over the next few weeks. Shouldn't be too long now. Tell us. What is it that you expect to happen?
DC Tom Posted March 23, 2017 Posted March 23, 2017 This lament is pretty funny: One of the obstacles the sources say the FBI now faces in finding conclusive intelligence is that communications between Trump’s associates and Russians have ceased in recent months given the public focus on Russia’s alleged ties to the Trump campaign. There isn’t any evidence in past communications, and now they aren’t communicating at all, damn them! The Democrats in the bureaucracy and at CNN are grasping at straws. "The FBI's investigation into collusion is hampered by a lack of evidence of collusion." That is AWESOME.
grinreaper Posted March 23, 2017 Posted March 23, 2017 Yawn..... Intelligence committees should never put their country before their party right? Do you know what "bipartisan means?
gatorbait Posted March 23, 2017 Posted March 23, 2017 (edited) I wish we could put this **** on the back burner until it is decided and over with. Right now there is nothing but pure speculation from both sides, it's getting !@#$ing ridiculous. None of us are reading classified info or have inside sources. We are simply pissing in the wind by claiming they colluded or didn't collude. We don't know **** at this point in time. 7 Miller lites in and I almost threw the remote at Don Lemon's powdered up face for continuously trying to make news out of nothing and hype up dems by using ifs, possiblys and maybes. The left is clowning them self by prematurely freaking out, and the right looks guilty for adamantly denying every claim. Do you know what "bipartisan means?I apologize, I didn't use the word correctly. Touché. I should of said they are both partisan hacks. Edited March 23, 2017 by gatorbait
DC Tom Posted March 23, 2017 Posted March 23, 2017 I wish we could put this **** on the back burner until it is decided and over with. Right now there is nothing but pure speculation from both sides, it's getting !@#$ing ridiculous. None of us are reading classified info or have inside sources. Some of us actually do have some. Not me...but I know who does.
gatorbait Posted March 23, 2017 Posted March 23, 2017 Some of us actually do have some. Not me...but I know who does. Damnit Tom! Now I'm sucked right back into this mess. Tell us more haha
Logic Posted March 23, 2017 Posted March 23, 2017 Tell us. What is it that you expect to happen? I expect proof of collusion between the Trump campaign and Russia in an effort to sway the election. What happens after that? I have no idea. In a just world, impeachment proceedings and indictments. I'm not claiming to have a crystal ball, I'm just telling you what I expect to happen. Today alone, there was Schiff's "more than circumstantial evidence" line and the AP story about Manafort's job as an aid to Putin prior to becoming Trump's campaign manager. I -- and I am in the minority on this message board, I realize -- am inclined to think that there are far too many "coincidences", and far too much smoke, for this to all be just a bunch of meaningless liberal hand wringing. If I'm wrong, I'll admit it without hesitation. As I said: We shall see.
grinreaper Posted March 23, 2017 Posted March 23, 2017 I wish we could put this **** on the back burner until it is decided and over with. Right now there is nothing but pure speculation from both sides, it's getting !@#$ing ridiculous. None of us are reading classified info or have inside sources. We are simply pissing in the wind by claiming they colluded or didn't collude. We don't know **** at this point in time. 7 Miller lites in and I almost threw the remote at Don Lemon's powdered up face for continuously trying to make news out of nothing and hype up dems by using ifs, possiblys and maybes. The left is clowning them self by prematurely freaking out, and the right looks guilty for adamantly denying every claim. I apologize, I didn't use the word correctly. Touché. I should of said they are both partisan hacks. BTW, we don't drink lite beer here---it's considered too pussified. Have a Guinness on me instead.
Recommended Posts