Deranged Rhino Posted February 20, 2019 Posted February 20, 2019 A THIRD dossier now... So that brings us to three: 1) Steele's dossier (From Fusion GPS) 2) Winer/Kerry's dossier (From Fusion GPS) 3) Nellie Ohr's supplemental dossier (also from Fusion GPS) All three from the same source. All three paid for by the Clinton campaign. All three unverified and third hand hearsay. None of this was presented honestly to the FISC while preparing the applications. *Remember where Nellie Ohr worked... CIA. 3
IDBillzFan Posted February 20, 2019 Posted February 20, 2019 17 minutes ago, Deranged Rhino said: A THIRD dossier now... So that brings us to three: 1) Steele's dossier (From Fusion GPS) 2) Winer/Kerry's dossier (From Fusion GPS) 3) Nellie Ohr's supplemental dossier (also from Fusion GPS) All three from the same source. All three paid for by the Clinton campaign. All three unverified and third hand hearsay. None of this was presented honestly to the FISC while preparing the applications. *Remember where Nellie Ohr worked... CIA. But other than that, Trump TOTALLY colluded with Russia. 1
row_33 Posted February 20, 2019 Posted February 20, 2019 11 minutes ago, LABillzFan said: But other than that, Trump TOTALLY colluded with Russia. and what is the problem with working with Russia these days? it's practically a wary ally
Trump_is_Mentally_fit Posted February 20, 2019 Posted February 20, 2019 1 hour ago, bilzfancy said: 3 years of investigation and nothing found concerning the president, nothing What color is the sky in your world? There is tons of evidence of conspiracy, hush money payments, obstruction of justice, massive corruption and all his lies upon lies.
Deranged Rhino Posted February 20, 2019 Posted February 20, 2019 https://mobile.twitter.com/JohnWHuber/status/1098255859937890306
bilzfancy Posted February 20, 2019 Posted February 20, 2019 10 minutes ago, Tiberius said: What color is the sky in your world? There is tons of evidence of conspiracy, hush money payments, obstruction of justice, massive corruption and all his lies upon lies. If that were all true, he'd be indicted already, but nothing has happened and nothing will 1
row_33 Posted February 20, 2019 Posted February 20, 2019 10 minutes ago, bilzfancy said: If that were all true, he'd be indicted already, but nothing has happened and nothing will why do you bother with Tibs? you can't get these minutes back in your life...
bilzfancy Posted February 20, 2019 Posted February 20, 2019 5 minutes ago, row_33 said: why do you bother with Tibs? you can't get these minutes back in your life... He's entertaining, no one can be that ignorant
DC Tom Posted February 20, 2019 Posted February 20, 2019 9 minutes ago, Deranged Rhino said: Breaking: I hope the Democrats go in to full on "but she won the popular vote" meltdown mode...but I expect weeks of progressive attempts to reinvent the English language to rationalize this report something it isn't, which will be nauseating. 1 1
B-Man Posted February 20, 2019 Posted February 20, 2019 14 minutes ago, DC Tom said: I hope the Democrats go in to full on "but she won the popular vote" meltdown mode...but I expect weeks of progressive attempts to reinvent the English language to rationalize this report something it isn't, which will be nauseating. Might as well rush up on the Media/Dems/Left terms after the report Innocent = Guilty No Collusion = Russian Interference Facebook ads = Voter fraud. .
Trump_is_Mentally_fit Posted February 20, 2019 Posted February 20, 2019 1 hour ago, bilzfancy said: If that were all true, he'd be indicted already, but nothing has happened and nothing will Didn't you listen to the William Barr nomination? Sitting presidents can't be indicted. He is a criminal. 45 minutes ago, Deranged Rhino said: Breaking: Or it may be next year. Let's remember that douche bag Whittaker now works at DOJ. He might be the source
snafu Posted February 20, 2019 Posted February 20, 2019 8 minutes ago, Tiberius said: Or it may be next year. Let's remember that douche bag Whittaker now works at DOJ. He might be the source Whitaker has been working at DOJ since 2017.
Trump_is_Mentally_fit Posted February 20, 2019 Posted February 20, 2019 1 minute ago, snafu said: Whitaker has been working at DOJ since 2017. And? ↔️
snafu Posted February 20, 2019 Posted February 20, 2019 6 minutes ago, Tiberius said: And? ↔️ Nothing, really. You said "now" works at DOJ - like that's a new thing.
B-Man Posted February 20, 2019 Posted February 20, 2019 Quote John CardilloVerified account @johncardillo 1h1 hour ago Liking Bill Barr more and more. First he sidelined Rosenstein, now this. He was read in and brought up to speed over the last two days, and now it's leaking that we can expect a report possibly next week. I'm reading this as he shut #Mueller down. .
Foxx Posted February 20, 2019 Posted February 20, 2019 6 hours ago, Tiberius said: When you are losing, just make crap up. Foxx, Trump is a criminal, how can't you see that? Tibs, i look at facts and what has actually happened. you on the other hand take (and believe) the 'narrative' that is being pushed upon you. current facts are that there was no Russian collusion with Trump and Russia, in fact... there is more evidence of Democratic collusion with Russia and they have not been the intense focus of investigations nor the scourge of the main stream media. does not the fact that 99% of what the media blares out about Trump being #orangemanbad give you any pause at all? what about the facts that are slowly coming out about all these corrupt elite officials being compromised, does that in any way give you pause that the story you've been sold might not be on the level? what do you think about what Hillary said... paraphrased, 'if we lose, we're all gonna swing'? do you not see a parallel to this recent Smollette hoax and the passing of the anti-lynching bill the Senate? i can go on and on with the parallels but if these obvious ones don't resonate with you, i would t be wasting my time, so i will leave it there for now. if you are sincere about an honest discussion of these/this topic(s) we can continue.
Trump_is_Mentally_fit Posted February 20, 2019 Posted February 20, 2019 3 minutes ago, Foxx said: Tibs, i look at facts and what has actually happened. you on the other hand take (and believe) the 'narrative' that is being pushed upon you. current facts are that there was no Russian collusion with Trump and Russia, in fact... there is more evidence of Democratic collusion with Russia and they have not been the intense focus of investigations nor the scourge of the main stream media. does not the fact that 99% of what the media blares out about Trump being #orangemanbad give you any pause at all? what about the facts that are slowly coming out about all these corrupt elite officials being compromised, does that in any way give you pause that the story you've been sold might not be on the level? what do you think about what Hillary said... paraphrased, 'if we lose, we're all gonna swing'? do you not see a parallel to this recent Smollette hoax and the passing of the anti-lynching bill the Senate? i can go on and on with the parallels but if these obvious ones don't resonate with you, i would t be wasting my time, so i will leave it there for now. if you are sincere about an honest discussion of these/this topic(s) we can continue. What about the Trump tower meeting and the total lies Trump made up about it. That was an attempt to work together with Russia over the election. That's just one thing, but how do you explain that away?
Foxx Posted February 20, 2019 Posted February 20, 2019 (edited) 13 minutes ago, Tiberius said: What about the Trump tower meeting and the total lies Trump made up about it. That was an attempt to work together with Russia over the election. That's just one thing, but how do you explain that away? not sure exactly to what you are referring to here, Tibs. there are many..., what do i want to say here... levels/layers that could be the focus of your allegation. as a general statement though, i will say that i don't think obtaining damning information on your election opponent is against the law, which is what i 'think' was the objective of that meeting. let us not forget, there were many supposed Hillary/Obama operatives that were present at that meeting. Edited February 20, 2019 by Foxx
Koko78 Posted February 20, 2019 Posted February 20, 2019 59 minutes ago, Tiberius said: Didn't you listen to the William Barr nomination? Sitting presidents can't be indicted. He is a criminal. By that logic, so are the Founding Fathers. The Federalist Papers support this position. The remedy for a sitting president is to be impeached by the House, removed by the Senate, then prosecuted criminally.
Recommended Posts