GG Posted January 17, 2019 Share Posted January 17, 2019 (edited) 9 hours ago, Kemp said: Once again, I never said anything even remotely like that, but you already know that. Rhino has been ducking for a while and insulting and it doesn't bother me. I think I know why. At this point, you really think your insults will bother me? All of this garbage could have been avoided with one of you being able to answer a simple and direct question. Instead, Rhino blew a gasket and his followers followed. Let's start again. Name some reliable sources in regards to your point of view. Blustering a non-response or a childish meme has proven to be a waste of everyone's time. If someone can just do that we can have an honest give-and-take. You shouldn't inject your personal problems into a serious discussion. Moving the goalposts yet again, I see. Now the qualifier is reliable sources. What qualifies as reliable sources? The large media outlets that have moved from reporting to editorializing? PS - the linked article is from last year, and the NYT narrative has gone through yet several more twists to arrive to where they are today, while all the small independent sites who've been tracking the story have stayed consistent - that the collusion allegations are a coverup for a major and possibly illegal setup of a Presidential candidate who then became President, and the setup grew in scope and complexity to cover their tracks. Edited January 17, 2019 by GG 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ExiledInIllinois Posted January 17, 2019 Share Posted January 17, 2019 Like duh! Of course Rudy is pre-emptive: https://m.huffpost.com/us/entry/us_5c400adbe4b041e98ffaa092/amp “Quite a performance, right?” Lemon said of Giuliani’s debate with Cuomo. “But make no mistake, there is a method to this madness. The president’s attorney, as he always does, laying out the groundwork there for what is to come. So stay tuned to that.” Just now, GG said: Moving the goalposts yet again, I see. Now the qualifier is reliable sources. What qualifies as reliable sources? The large media outlets that have moved from reporting to editorializing? The only true reliable source to anything will be the final report. Like everybody here knows more? You either accept it or you don't. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
GG Posted January 17, 2019 Share Posted January 17, 2019 2 minutes ago, ExiledInIllinois said: The only true reliable source to anything will be the final report. Like everybody here knows more? You either accept it or you don't. That has been pointed out to Kemp several times, yet he's clamoring for his truth Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Tiberius Posted January 17, 2019 Share Posted January 17, 2019 No collusion! I had nothing to do with Russia It was about adoptions Putin said no, and I see no reason not to believe him Witch hunt! No puppet, no Puppet! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Foxx Posted January 17, 2019 Share Posted January 17, 2019 24 minutes ago, Tiberius said: No collusion! I had nothing to do with Russia It was about adoptions Putin said no, and I see no reason not to believe him Witch hunt! No puppet, no Puppet! and there you have it folks, today's talking points from the DNC troll farm. 2 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Tiberius Posted January 17, 2019 Share Posted January 17, 2019 56 minutes ago, Foxx said: and there you have it folks, today's talking points from the DNC troll farm. Ha ha, quoting Donald Trump is now a talking point of the DNC ? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
B-Man Posted January 17, 2019 Share Posted January 17, 2019 Scandal getting awfully cozy. DOJ official Bruce Ohr shared intel from dossier author in 2016 with prosecutors now on Mueller team by Catherine Herridge, Cyd Upson Original Article LET THE DISCOVERY BEGIN: Judge won’t dismiss libel suit against Fusion GPS over dossier. YEAH. THAT’S NOT HOW ANY OF THIS WORKS: When Did It Become the FBI’s Job to Act as a Check and Balance to the President? 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Tiberius Posted January 17, 2019 Share Posted January 17, 2019 1 minute ago, B-Man said: Scandal getting awfully cozy. DOJ official Bruce Ohr shared intel from dossier author in 2016 with prosecutors now on Mueller team by Catherine Herridge, Cyd Upson Original Article LET THE DISCOVERY BEGIN: Judge won’t dismiss libel suit against Fusion GPS over dossier. YEAH. THAT’S NOT HOW ANY OF THIS WORKS: When Did It Become the FBI’s Job to Act as a Check and Balance to the President? Trump's own pick for AG says the investigation is legit, professional and fair. So stop with the lies already Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Deranged Rhino Posted January 17, 2019 Share Posted January 17, 2019 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Nanker Posted January 17, 2019 Share Posted January 17, 2019 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Deranged Rhino Posted January 17, 2019 Share Posted January 17, 2019 (edited) 10 hours ago, Warcodered said: That's kind of the type of source Steele is isn't he? He's a source of information maybe you can't use it in court as evidence but you can use it to point you in directions to look for evidence. To find him credible is to me to think information he brings you is worth looking into. I'm really not trying to be pedantic but the definition of source is crucial. Let's try it another way... I assume you've seen a (bad or good) cop show over the years, a Law and Order or some other procedural. Imagine a murder investigation. You have the world's best cop leading the investigation (I'll just say it, John McClane). He shows up at the scene, after the murder took place, and the only witness is a shop owner who was across the street when the murder happened. The shop owner tells McClane what he saw... but it turns out that he didn't even see it first hand, a customer saw the murder and then told the shop owner about it who then tells McClane what he heard. McClane is not the source in this scenario. He didn't even question the primary witness. He's merely the cop investigating the crime. When he gets called to the stand to testify, many months later, McClane's still not a source and his credibility is not as important as establishing the credibility of the customer whom told the shop owner what happened in the first place. Because if the customer is a known liar who had a grudge against the victim, his statement and reputation are what matters, not McClane's. See how that works? Steele was McClane in this scenario. He's not a source. He's a collector of information from sources which he then passed on to the FBI. What matters is not Steele's reliability, but the reliability of the witnesses contained in his reporting. Calling Steele the source was done deliberately to confuse this issue because Steele's resume is impressive on the surface: he's a MI6 spy, formerly in Moscow station (before getting burned). But ultimately its irrelevant when attempting to determine the credibility of the witness statements contained in his dossier. But setting that aside, the FBI - as Bruce Ohr testified as well as others - knew Steele had a bias against Trump. A "drive to destroy him" (paraphrased). That shows a possible motivation to present slanted material, especially when said material and the sources therein cannot be verified by any second or third parties. For added reference: Edited January 17, 2019 by Deranged Rhino added a source at the end 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Deranged Rhino Posted January 17, 2019 Share Posted January 17, 2019 (edited) 10 hours ago, Warcodered said: So in this conspiracy against Trump does upper echelon of leadership include Comey because that makes no sense. The primary conspiracy was hatched in the halls of the USIC and in the offices of Brennan, Clapper, and the Oval Office. Comey was involved, but it was Brennan's operation. 10 hours ago, Warcodered said: I don't know if we can really confirm that until we see what Mueller has. There's primary source evidence of this illegal surveillance operation which was released by the FISC in April of 2017. It's found here: https://www.dni.gov/files/documents/icotr/51117/2016_Cert_FISC_Memo_Opin_Order_Apr_2017.pdf This is a very important document which, if you turn to pages 83-84 you'll discover: ***************************************************************** By April 18th, 2016 that audit was complete and the NSA reported its findings to the FISC. The discovery made was startling. 85% of the 702 quarries logged in the NSD/CID between November 2015 and April 2016 were deemed illegal or improper by the FISC. These findings were compiled in the FISC opinion memo which normally remains classified but was released by DNI Coats in April of 2017, the key finding of which stated: “There is no apparent reason to believe the November 2015-April 2016 period coincided with an unusually high rate.” Translation: the illegal spying on American citizens inside the CID and NSD likely had been ongoing since before they were caught red handed by the NSA audit. (my own summation) ******************************************************** This is the origin of the Trump/Russia scandal... it doesn't involve Trump, it involves the FBI and DOJ using private contractors to illegally access 702 data for the purposes of political surveillance on not just politicians, but media members and civilians deemed a threat or a problem to the administration's agendas. Edited January 17, 2019 by Deranged Rhino Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Deranged Rhino Posted January 17, 2019 Share Posted January 17, 2019 Sunlight is starting to reach all corners now of the DOJ. State next. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Deranged Rhino Posted January 17, 2019 Share Posted January 17, 2019 2 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
GG Posted January 17, 2019 Share Posted January 17, 2019 3 minutes ago, Deranged Rhino said: I'm guessing there will be immediate corrections and retractions in the news sources Kemp considers "reliable." 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Deranged Rhino Posted January 17, 2019 Share Posted January 17, 2019 9 hours ago, Warcodered said: To be fair I never know if Rudy knows what day of the week it is let alone what he's talking about. I mean how did that guy get elected mayor he seems like one of the most incompetent lawyers ever. Proving your point Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
GG Posted January 17, 2019 Share Posted January 17, 2019 9 hours ago, Warcodered said: To be fair I never know if Rudy knows what day of the week it is let alone what he's talking about. I mean how did that guy get elected mayor he seems like one of the most incompetent lawyers ever. I'm guessing you didn't live in NYC before, during or after his terms? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
boyst Posted January 17, 2019 Share Posted January 17, 2019 25 minutes ago, Deranged Rhino said: Sunlight is starting to reach all corners now of the DOJ. State next. The results to Max boots twrrt are great 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Tiberius Posted January 17, 2019 Share Posted January 17, 2019 The Post reports: Rudolph W. Giuliani claimed Wednesday night that he “never said there was no collusion” between President Trump’s campaign and Russia leading up to the 2016 presidential election. In a remarkable, at times contentious, interview with CNN’s Chris Cuomo, the president’s lawyer was accused of contradicting his own past statements about collusion as well as what Trump and his supporters have repeatedly asserted. On Twitter, Trump has used the phrase “no collusion” dozens of times, and a number of those instances were direct denials that his campaign was involved with the Russian government. ... As recently as July, Giuliani was asked by Fox News contributor Guy Benson, “Regardless of whether collusion would be a crime, is it still the position of you and your client that there was no collusion with the Russians whatsoever on behalf of the Trump campaign?” “Correct,” Giuliani responded at the time. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Deranged Rhino Posted January 17, 2019 Share Posted January 17, 2019 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts