(02-01-2018 09:55 AM)UofMstateU Wrote:  

(02-01-2018 09:37 AM)Redwingtom Wrote:  

(01-31-2018 04:01 PM)gdunn Wrote:  

(01-31-2018 12:36 PM)Redwingtom Wrote:  

(01-31-2018 10:01 AM)gdunn Wrote:  Ah Tom. But your behind now. The memo has been verified with no factual inaccuracies and it's just a memo on classified material not the material itself. Buckle up buttercup.

Don't know what you're reading from me here, but I've already said all of this.

As I've maintained...they're cherry picking stuff from the intelligence, providing it out of context. So the stuff will be a part of the underlying intelligence, thus factual, but it won't be the whole picture.

I've never said anything otherwise.

And any DNC memo would be the same way.

Without the full uncensored underlying intelligence being released, we'll never know exactly what it says.

FBI found no issues. It's gonna embarrass alot of your heros.

Yes, with what they released. However, they also have "grave concerns" which is something they don't throw out lightly. They also point to the omissions in the memo. Which is my whole issue with it. It doesn't provide the whole picture...much as the DNC memo would.
FBI warns it has 'grave concerns' about omissions in Nunes memo

The "ommissions" is a farce. They were pressed to say what was inaccurate in the memo, and they could not come up with anything. The memo is factually correct.

Right...and if I showed you the passage from the Bible of Jesus tossing the temple tables to claim he was a criminal without the passages of the Bible showing he was a caring and loving person, that would be a farce as well.

You can't be this naive as to blindly believe what the GOP is selling you here...can you?

(02-01-2018 09:59 AM)Redwingtom Wrote:  

(02-01-2018 09:48 AM)EverRespect Wrote:  

(02-01-2018 09:37 AM)Redwingtom Wrote:  

(01-31-2018 04:01 PM)gdunn Wrote:  

(01-31-2018 12:36 PM)Redwingtom Wrote:  Don't know what you're reading from me here, but I've already said all of this.

As I've maintained...they're cherry picking stuff from the intelligence, providing it out of context. So the stuff will be a part of the underlying intelligence, thus factual, but it won't be the whole picture.

I've never said anything otherwise.

And any DNC memo would be the same way.

Without the full uncensored underlying intelligence being released, we'll never know exactly what it says.

FBI found no issues. It's gonna embarrass alot of your heros.

Yes, with what they released. However, they also have "grave concerns" which is something they don't throw out lightly. They also point to the omissions in the memo. Which is my whole issue with it. It doesn't provide the whole picture...much as the DNC memo would.
FBI warns it has 'grave concerns' about omissions in Nunes memo

If they stand by the assertion that there are ommissions after today's release, I will join you in calling for all the supporting intelligence to be released as well. All the phone conversations, emails, texts, orders, Presidential Daily Briefings (national security issues redacted)... all of it.

How could they not? You really expect a 4 page memo to be able to capture the entire picture of mountains of intelligence surrounding a complicated issue like the FISA court? FISA court filings themselves are typically 50-60 pages according to experts on the matter.

We dont need 50 pages to tell us whether or not Obamagate exists. If they used any part of that fake dossier to get a fisa warrant, we have full blown ObamaGate on our hands.

I'm not really interested in the FISA court filings or any other legalese. I just want to know who knew what and when about the Trump counterintelligence campaign, who gave the orders, why Trump team members were unmasked, if their names were used in the Presidential Daily Briefings, which can only be seen in the Eisenhower SCIF, and what information got to Hillary Clinton and her campaign.

(02-01-2018 10:18 AM)EverRespect Wrote:  I'm not really interested in the FISA court filings or any other legalese. I just want to know who knew what and when about the Trump counterintelligence campaign, who gave the orders, why Trump team members were unmasked, if their names were used in the Presidential Daily Briefings, which can only be seen in the Eisenhower SCIF, and what information got to Hillary Clinton and her campaign.

So another conspiracy is what you're looking for. Gotcha.

(02-01-2018 10:01 AM)Redwingtom Wrote:  

(02-01-2018 09:55 AM)UofMstateU Wrote:  

(02-01-2018 09:37 AM)Redwingtom Wrote:  

(01-31-2018 04:01 PM)gdunn Wrote:  

(01-31-2018 12:36 PM)Redwingtom Wrote:  Don't know what you're reading from me here, but I've already said all of this.

As I've maintained...they're cherry picking stuff from the intelligence, providing it out of context. So the stuff will be a part of the underlying intelligence, thus factual, but it won't be the whole picture.

I've never said anything otherwise.

And any DNC memo would be the same way.

Without the full uncensored underlying intelligence being released, we'll never know exactly what it says.

FBI found no issues. It's gonna embarrass alot of your heros.

Yes, with what they released. However, they also have "grave concerns" which is something they don't throw out lightly. They also point to the omissions in the memo. Which is my whole issue with it. It doesn't provide the whole picture...much as the DNC memo would.
FBI warns it has 'grave concerns' about omissions in Nunes memo

The "ommissions" is a farce. They were pressed to say what was inaccurate in the memo, and they could not come up with anything. The memo is factually correct.

Right...and if I showed you the passage from the Bible of Jesus tossing the temple tables to claim he was a criminal without the passages of the Bible showing he was a caring and loving person, that would be a farce as well.

What does Jesus purging the corrupt people from his own house have to do with Obama spying on the opposition party? You democrats should have taken a lesson from Jesus and purged your own house before you allowed Obama and Clinton to corrupt it.

But dont worry, the purge is now underway. We'll do it for you.

(02-01-2018 10:24 AM)UofMstateU Wrote:  

(02-01-2018 10:01 AM)Redwingtom Wrote:  

(02-01-2018 09:55 AM)UofMstateU Wrote:  

(02-01-2018 09:37 AM)Redwingtom Wrote:  

(01-31-2018 04:01 PM)gdunn Wrote:  FBI found no issues. It's gonna embarrass alot of your heros.

Yes, with what they released. However, they also have "grave concerns" which is something they don't throw out lightly. They also point to the omissions in the memo. Which is my whole issue with it. It doesn't provide the whole picture...much as the DNC memo would.
FBI warns it has 'grave concerns' about omissions in Nunes memo

The "ommissions" is a farce. They were pressed to say what was inaccurate in the memo, and they could not come up with anything. The memo is factually correct.

Right...and if I showed you the passage from the Bible of Jesus tossing the temple tables to claim he was a criminal without the passages of the Bible showing he was a caring and loving person, that would be a farce as well.

What does Jesus purging the corrupt people from his own house have to do with Obama spying on the opposition party? You democrats should have taken a lesson from Jesus and purged your own house before you allowed Obama and Clinton to corrupt it.

But dont worry, the purge is now underway. We'll do it for you.

The only people falling are Republicans. lol

(02-01-2018 10:01 AM)UofMstateU Wrote:  

(02-01-2018 09:59 AM)Redwingtom Wrote:  

(02-01-2018 09:48 AM)EverRespect Wrote:  

(02-01-2018 09:37 AM)Redwingtom Wrote:  

(01-31-2018 04:01 PM)gdunn Wrote:  FBI found no issues. It's gonna embarrass alot of your heros.

Yes, with what they released. However, they also have "grave concerns" which is something they don't throw out lightly. They also point to the omissions in the memo. Which is my whole issue with it. It doesn't provide the whole picture...much as the DNC memo would.
FBI warns it has 'grave concerns' about omissions in Nunes memo

If they stand by the assertion that there are ommissions after today's release, I will join you in calling for all the supporting intelligence to be released as well. All the phone conversations, emails, texts, orders, Presidential Daily Briefings (national security issues redacted)... all of it.

How could they not? You really expect a 4 page memo to be able to capture the entire picture of mountains of intelligence surrounding a complicated issue like the FISA court? FISA court filings themselves are typically 50-60 pages according to experts on the matter.

We dont need 50 pages to tell us whether or not Obamagate exists. If they used any part of that fake dossier to get a fisa warrant, we have full blown ObamaGate on our hands.

And it’s apparently not 50 pages, but THOUSANDS. That’s why things called “summary memos” exist.

They release all of this and who’s going to read all that? Right. No one, Tom included.

(02-01-2018 11:24 AM)JMUDunk Wrote:  

(02-01-2018 10:01 AM)UofMstateU Wrote:  

(02-01-2018 09:59 AM)Redwingtom Wrote:  

(02-01-2018 09:48 AM)EverRespect Wrote:  

(02-01-2018 09:37 AM)Redwingtom Wrote:  Yes, with what they released. However, they also have "grave concerns" which is something they don't throw out lightly. They also point to the omissions in the memo. Which is my whole issue with it. It doesn't provide the whole picture...much as the DNC memo would.
FBI warns it has 'grave concerns' about omissions in Nunes memo

If they stand by the assertion that there are ommissions after today's release, I will join you in calling for all the supporting intelligence to be released as well. All the phone conversations, emails, texts, orders, Presidential Daily Briefings (national security issues redacted)... all of it.

How could they not? You really expect a 4 page memo to be able to capture the entire picture of mountains of intelligence surrounding a complicated issue like the FISA court? FISA court filings themselves are typically 50-60 pages according to experts on the matter.

We dont need 50 pages to tell us whether or not Obamagate exists. If they used any part of that fake dossier to get a fisa warrant, we have full blown ObamaGate on our hands.

And it’s apparently not 50 pages, but THOUSANDS. That’s why things called “summary memos” exist.

They release all of this and who’s going to read all that? Right. No one, Tom included.

No, but people who are able to decipher all its meaning can and should. And I'm not opposed to any type of summary memo on it put forth by the IC. I do have a problem though with a political one put forth by a political party.

You have to know that it can in no way be objective regardless of party. Pretending otherwise is just foolish.

(02-01-2018 12:25 PM)Redwingtom Wrote:  

(02-01-2018 11:24 AM)JMUDunk Wrote:  

(02-01-2018 10:01 AM)UofMstateU Wrote:  

(02-01-2018 09:59 AM)Redwingtom Wrote:  

(02-01-2018 09:48 AM)EverRespect Wrote:  If they stand by the assertion that there are ommissions after today's release, I will join you in calling for all the supporting intelligence to be released as well. All the phone conversations, emails, texts, orders, Presidential Daily Briefings (national security issues redacted)... all of it.

How could they not? You really expect a 4 page memo to be able to capture the entire picture of mountains of intelligence surrounding a complicated issue like the FISA court? FISA court filings themselves are typically 50-60 pages according to experts on the matter.

We dont need 50 pages to tell us whether or not Obamagate exists. If they used any part of that fake dossier to get a fisa warrant, we have full blown ObamaGate on our hands.

And it’s apparently not 50 pages, but THOUSANDS. That’s why things called “summary memos” exist.

They release all of this and who’s going to read all that? Right. No one, Tom included.

No, but people who are able to decipher all its meaning can and should. And I'm not opposed to any type of summary memo on it put forth by the IC. I do have a problem though with a political one put forth by a political party.

You have to know that it can in no way be objective regardless of party. Pretending otherwise is just foolish.

Thats the whole point of the memo. It exposes the fact that all our "reports" coming from ALL our intelligence agencies ARE POLITICALLY slanted and have been for some time.

(02-01-2018 12:46 PM)Attackcoog Wrote:  

(02-01-2018 12:25 PM)Redwingtom Wrote:  

(02-01-2018 11:24 AM)JMUDunk Wrote:  

(02-01-2018 10:01 AM)UofMstateU Wrote:  

(02-01-2018 09:59 AM)Redwingtom Wrote:  How could they not? You really expect a 4 page memo to be able to capture the entire picture of mountains of intelligence surrounding a complicated issue like the FISA court? FISA court filings themselves are typically 50-60 pages according to experts on the matter.

We dont need 50 pages to tell us whether or not Obamagate exists. If they used any part of that fake dossier to get a fisa warrant, we have full blown ObamaGate on our hands.

And it’s apparently not 50 pages, but THOUSANDS. That’s why things called “summary memos” exist.

They release all of this and who’s going to read all that? Right. No one, Tom included.

No, but people who are able to decipher all its meaning can and should. And I'm not opposed to any type of summary memo on it put forth by the IC. I do have a problem though with a political one put forth by a political party.

You have to know that it can in no way be objective regardless of party. Pretending otherwise is just foolish.

Thats the whole point of the memo. It exposes the fact that all our "reports" coming from ALL our intelligence agencies have been POLITICALLY slanted for some time.

Utterly ridiculous.

And even it is was true, you're a fool if you trust the GOP and the GOP alone as an unbiased arbiter of the truth here.

I love the libbies who act high and mighty telling everyone not to believe their party, but as soon as a Democrat comes along and raises their shirt, they'd suckle the teeth given and listen and go along with whatever is told to them.

(02-01-2018 12:50 PM)gdunn Wrote:  I love the libbies who act high and mighty telling everyone not to believe their party, but as soon as a Democrat comes along and raises their shirt, they'd suckle the teeth given and listen and go along with whatever is told to them.

Don't lump me in with any such fantasy. I have no love for the democratic party.

(02-01-2018 12:48 PM)Redwingtom Wrote:  

(02-01-2018 12:46 PM)Attackcoog Wrote:  

(02-01-2018 12:25 PM)Redwingtom Wrote:  

(02-01-2018 11:24 AM)JMUDunk Wrote:  

(02-01-2018 10:01 AM)UofMstateU Wrote:  We dont need 50 pages to tell us whether or not Obamagate exists. If they used any part of that fake dossier to get a fisa warrant, we have full blown ObamaGate on our hands.

And it’s apparently not 50 pages, but THOUSANDS. That’s why things called “summary memos” exist.

They release all of this and who’s going to read all that? Right. No one, Tom included.

No, but people who are able to decipher all its meaning can and should. And I'm not opposed to any type of summary memo on it put forth by the IC. I do have a problem though with a political one put forth by a political party.

You have to know that it can in no way be objective regardless of party. Pretending otherwise is just foolish.

Thats the whole point of the memo. It exposes the fact that all our "reports" coming from ALL our intelligence agencies have been POLITICALLY slanted for some time.

Utterly ridiculous.

And even it is was true, you're a fool if you trust the GOP and the GOP alone as an unbiased arbiter of the truth here.

I dont. I use my head. What I know is if you have 17 highly advanced US intelligence agencies, a hostile administration, and a FISA court warrant allowing electronic surveillance---along with 7 months to find collusion---then you will find it if its there. Now we have added another year to that 7 month long Obama investigation. Another year to comb over the data and accumulate new data---still nothing.

This was--and is political.

(02-01-2018 12:51 PM)Redwingtom Wrote:  

(02-01-2018 12:50 PM)gdunn Wrote:  I love the libbies who act high and mighty telling everyone not to believe their party, but as soon as a Democrat comes along and raises their shirt, they'd suckle the teeth given and listen and go along with whatever is told to them.

Don't lump me in with any such fantasy. I have no love for the democratic party.