(04-06-2017 01:11 PM)gdunn Wrote:  

(04-06-2017 12:53 PM)Redwingtom Wrote:  

(04-06-2017 12:40 PM)200yrs2late Wrote:  

(04-06-2017 11:04 AM)Redwingtom Wrote:  

(04-06-2017 10:54 AM)200yrs2late Wrote:  Why lay his cards on the table? The left, including most mainstream media, are tripping all over themselves trying to contain this.

Or, as one of my favorite sayings goes, "Only pull out enough to win"

Tripping you say...is that what you call Nunes going back and forth to the White House...tripping?

No [sic] see if you actually followed any news you would know that was Nunes going to the source of the logs.

I'm well aware. But why did he not take Schiff or the whole committee with him and why did they try to do it in secrecy and then to act initially like the WH was not the source of the leaked classified information?

And how did the NSC come about obtaining this information?

If I'm researching a problem I do it alone first then inform others. I don't take 15 people with me so there's chaos and confusion. I go, do my research, and then tell others of my findings. Them show them to see if they agree.

But you're not a bi-partisan house intelligence committee supposedly conducting an independent investigation. By proceeding the way Nunes did it made him look guilty of something when he likely wasn't. He just got played by people smarter than him. #puppet

(04-06-2017 01:12 PM)Redwingtom Wrote:  

(04-06-2017 01:11 PM)gdunn Wrote:  

(04-06-2017 12:53 PM)Redwingtom Wrote:  

(04-06-2017 12:40 PM)200yrs2late Wrote:  

(04-06-2017 11:04 AM)Redwingtom Wrote:  Tripping you say...is that what you call Nunes going back and forth to the White House...tripping?

No [sic] see if you actually followed any news you would know that was Nunes going to the source of the logs.

I'm well aware. But why did he not take Schiff or the whole committee with him and why did they try to do it in secrecy and then to act initially like the WH was not the source of the leaked classified information?

And how did the NSC come about obtaining this information?

If I'm researching a problem I do it alone first then inform others. I don't take 15 people with me so there's chaos and confusion. I go, do my research, and then tell others of my findings. Them show them to see if they agree.

But you're not a bi-partisan house intelligence committee supposedly conducting an independent investigation. By proceeding the way Nunes did it made him look guilty of something when he likely wasn't. He just got played by people smarter than him. #puppet

So riddle me this, where does it state he can't research something on his own?

(04-06-2017 01:20 PM)gdunn Wrote:  

(04-06-2017 01:12 PM)Redwingtom Wrote:  

(04-06-2017 01:11 PM)gdunn Wrote:  

(04-06-2017 12:53 PM)Redwingtom Wrote:  

(04-06-2017 12:40 PM)200yrs2late Wrote:  No [sic] see if you actually followed any news you would know that was Nunes going to the source of the logs.

I'm well aware. But why did he not take Schiff or the whole committee with him and why did they try to do it in secrecy and then to act initially like the WH was not the source of the leaked classified information?

And how did the NSC come about obtaining this information?

If I'm researching a problem I do it alone first then inform others. I don't take 15 people with me so there's chaos and confusion. I go, do my research, and then tell others of my findings. Them show them to see if they agree.

But you're not a bi-partisan house intelligence committee supposedly conducting an independent investigation. By proceeding the way Nunes did it made him look guilty of something when he likely wasn't. He just got played by people smarter than him. #puppet

So riddle me this, where does it state he can't research something on his own?

Never said he can't. But again, the issue is that it looks bad when he does stuff on his own instead of in full view of the whole committee.

So basically he looked bad investigating something without people trying to hinder him. What a jerk.

(04-06-2017 10:12 AM)Redwingtom Wrote:  Stay on topic please. Again...

Why doesn't he go public with his evidence and totally remove the Russia cloud that's currently plaguing his administration bigly?

For the same reason Nunes is gone. I think the idea is step out of the way and let the investigation play out. They know for a fact the evidence is there and they know where at least some of it is. Also, the revelation that much of the material is personal in nature likely means there may be resistance to intimate personal details unnecessarly being made public.

(04-07-2017 08:52 AM)Attackcoog Wrote:  

(04-06-2017 10:12 AM)Redwingtom Wrote:  Stay on topic please. Again...

Why doesn't he go public with his evidence and totally remove the Russia cloud that's currently plaguing his administration bigly?

For the same reason Nunes is gone. I think the idea is step out of the way and let the investigation play out. They know for a fact the evidence is there and they know where at least some of it is. Also, the revelation that much of the material is personal in nature likely means there may be resistance to intimate personal details unnecessarly being made public.

Again, they can redact any unnecessary personal information and still make their case.

(04-07-2017 09:45 AM)Redwingtom Wrote:  

(04-07-2017 08:52 AM)Attackcoog Wrote:  

(04-06-2017 10:12 AM)Redwingtom Wrote:  Stay on topic please. Again...

Why doesn't he go public with his evidence and totally remove the Russia cloud that's currently plaguing his administration bigly?

For the same reason Nunes is gone. I think the idea is step out of the way and let the investigation play out. They know for a fact the evidence is there and they know where at least some of it is. Also, the revelation that much of the material is personal in nature likely means there may be resistance to intimate personal details unnecessarly being made public.

Again, they can redact any unnecessary personal information and still make their case.

That's what I think will happen eventually. It's not going to just go away. There's no hurry. Your assuming that winning the next press conference is better. its not. In fact, it's politically much better for the Republicans to draw it out so its in the news for the next 4 years.

My issue is that if he has the evidence, he needs to present it now and stop wasting everyone's time on investigations that should be directed elsewhere.

He keeps telling us this is all a hoax...well we're spending millions and millions investigating it. If it's a hoax, prove it and stop those worthless investigations and investigate the real problem: Obama.

Can there really be any doubt that Trump just made all this up our of whole cloth? Really?

(04-07-2017 10:07 AM)Redwingtom Wrote:  My issue is that if he has the evidence, he needs to present it now and stop wasting everyone's time on investigations that should be directed elsewhere.

He keeps telling us this is all a hoax...well we're spending millions and millions investigating it. If it's a hoax, prove it and stop those worthless investigations and investigate the real problem: Obama.

Can there really be any doubt that Trump just made all this up our of whole cloth? Really?

now you want this to all go away, dont you? sorry, we warned you not to go down the Putin rabbithole.

(04-07-2017 10:21 AM)UofMstateU Wrote:  

(04-07-2017 10:07 AM)Redwingtom Wrote:  My issue is that if he has the evidence, he needs to present it now and stop wasting everyone's time on investigations that should be directed elsewhere.

He keeps telling us this is all a hoax...well we're spending millions and millions investigating it. If it's a hoax, prove it and stop those worthless investigations and investigate the real problem: Obama.

Can there really be any doubt that Trump just made all this up our of whole cloth? Really?

now you want this to all go away, dont you? sorry, we warned you not to go down the Putin rabbithole.

Dude, your reading comprehension sucks. I guess maybe you should stick to your worthless trolls instead?

KNOW YOUR ROLE

(04-07-2017 10:07 AM)Redwingtom Wrote:  My issue is that if he has the evidence, he needs to present it now and stop wasting everyone's time on investigations that should be directed elsewhere.

Same standard for the Trump/Russia allegations?

Good luck with that....the sound of one hand clapping out the beat of a Pantera song.

(04-07-2017 04:18 PM)Owl 69/70/75 Wrote:  

(04-07-2017 10:07 AM)Redwingtom Wrote:  My issue is that if he has the evidence, he needs to present it now and stop wasting everyone's time on investigations that should be directed elsewhere.

Same standard for the Trump/Russia allegations?

Read my whole post and my others. I've never said otherwise.

Again, I have no doubt Russia interfered in our election. What I/we don't know is whether any Trump folks were complicit.

(04-07-2017 10:07 AM)Redwingtom Wrote:  My issue is that if he has the evidence, he needs to present it now and stop wasting everyone's time on investigations that should be directed elsewhere.

He keeps telling us this is all a hoax...well we're spending millions and millions investigating it. If it's a hoax, prove it and stop those worthless investigations and investigate the real problem: Obama.

Can there really be any doubt that Trump just made all this up our of whole cloth? Really?

Well, apparently the statute of limitations with respect to investigations with no evidence is up to about 10 months and climbing. Settle in and get comfortable. Obamagate is just getting started.

(04-07-2017 04:58 PM)Redwingtom Wrote:  

(04-07-2017 04:18 PM)Owl 69/70/75 Wrote:  

(04-07-2017 10:07 AM)Redwingtom Wrote:  My issue is that if he has the evidence, he needs to present it now and stop wasting everyone's time on investigations that should be directed elsewhere.

Same standard for the Trump/Russia allegations?

Read my whole post and my others. I've never said otherwise.
Again, I have no doubt Russia interfered in our election. What I/we don't know is whether any Trump folks were complicit.

I have no doubt the Russia attempted to interfere in our elections--all of them, ever. As we would do in theirs. They'd be fools not to. As would we.

Whether they actually succeeded in any meaningful way is more doubtful. Whether any Trump folks were involved in any material way, shape, or form, is even more doubtful.

(04-06-2017 09:35 AM)Redwingtom Wrote:  Trump says Rice committed a crime.
Trump says Obama "tapped" Trump tower.
Trump has the ability as president to declassify anything he sees fit.

Why doesn't he go public with his evidence and totally remove the Russia cloud that's currently plaguing his administration bigly?

Seems odd doesn't it?

Why didn't Obama go forward with whatever evidence he had. I read the public reports, they were basically lifted of an IT security providers sales pamphlet.