(01-18-2019 11:47 AM)Redwingtom Wrote:  I'm continually amazed that the whole FBI being out to get trump for no apparent reason other than they just don't like him (I guess) is totally plausible, but trump colluding with Russia to help win election is a bridge too far.

We have their e-mails and public statements that they were out to get Trump and ignored standard protocols to do it.

There's no evidence Trump colluded with Russia. There is more evidence Hillary colluded with Russia.

(01-18-2019 01:03 PM)WKUYG Wrote:  

(01-18-2019 12:44 PM)Machiavelli Wrote:  

(01-18-2019 12:10 PM)umbluegray Wrote:  

(01-18-2019 11:28 AM)Machiavelli Wrote:  The transcripts haven’t been released, but parts were confirmed for me by congressional sources.

And the sources have motivations.....................

We are just going to have to wait on the report but if Barr is writing it....... Trump may get away with it. Barr has already come out as biased.

The source has motivation.

Does that apply to all sources, even those sources with an opposing perspective?

Yes,

That is why arguing over this is futile. All of these sources have biases. They do. I used to think. Just wait for the Mueller report, but if Barr is writing it. My argument is moot there too.

It's not a good place we are in as a country. I don't trust your sources and you don't trust mine.

Coming from a nut that says you must read twitter to find out what's really going on. Then the nut says, ya'll are just not as smart as me because I gave you links to the twitter source.

Class one fruitcake that now says we must wait "The source has motivation". This nut has fallen out of the tree, onto his head, one too many times

Fallen out of a tree.....

Come to a realization of where we are at.......

It's two sides of the same coin.............

You can't argue on one side that none of the allegations on Trump are proved or sourced and then on the other side be a proponent of articles like this.

At the end you are just going playing the partisan ping pong game.

I've come to the realization I want to be happier. I don't want to be mean spirited. I can't prove a thing and neither can you. I'm just going to sit back and watch the show.

(01-18-2019 01:20 PM)SoMs Eagle Wrote:  

(01-18-2019 11:31 AM)Machiavelli Wrote:  Op-ed writer
She became a senior editorial writer and member of the editorial board of the Wall Street Journal in 2005.[3] In 2007, she began writing the long-running "Potomac Watch" column for the Wall Street Journal.[3] Strassel favorably profiled then-candidate for US vice president Sarah Palin shortly before the 2008 election in an article entitled "'I Haven't Always Just Toed the Line'".[4] The article originally appeared in the Weekend Interview section of The Wall Street Journal on November 1, 2008. In 2012, Strassel wrote an editorial in the WSJ that alleged the Obama campaign was targeting Frank L. VanderSloot, a national finance co-chair for Mitt Romney's 2012 presidential campaign and a top campaign donor.[5] Strassel's editorial was disputed by journalists and liberal commentators.[6][7][8] In May 2013, as part of the IRS targeting controversy, Strassel reported that the IRS (not the Obama campaign) targeted conservatives, including Frank L. VanderSloot.[9]

In November 2017, Strassel's coverage of the Trump–Russia dossier controversy was alleged to have stoked tensions between the Wall Street Journal's reporting staff and editorial Board (of which Strassel is a member); the latter having been widely criticized for taking a partisan, 'pro-Trump' stance.[10] The tensions have reportedly contributed to an exodus of leading journalists from the WSJ.[11] Strassel has referred to the Trump–Russia dossier, a collection of intelligence reports regarding Donald Trump's alleged connections with Putin's regime compiled by ex-MI6 agent Christopher Steele, as "one of the dirtiest political tricks in U.S. history" and characterized specific components of the Dossier as "ludicrous".[12]

In May 2018, Strassel was blamed with inflaming right-wing sources and their conspiracy theories, eventually leading to the unmasking of the identity of Stefan Halper, an American expatriate who alerted the FBI and CIA to possible links between the 2016 Trump Campaign and Russian intelligence services.[13][14] Whilst Strassel has argued that the Trump Campaign was "set up" by American intelligence services,[15] FBI Director, Chris Wray, stated that the exposure of such sources undermines the safety of the American people.[16] Strassel claimed that the FBI revealed Halper's identity to friendly media like the New York Times and Washington Post for their own purposes, and to spin the narrative.[

I will read, and even give a chit, about the crap you post IF you will ‘investigate’ the author of every BS post you make as you have here and in other threads. And post it as here. You can’t help yourself. The author is far and away more respected than 98% of those you quote.

Deal my friend. We all might learn a thing or two.

(01-18-2019 12:44 PM)Attackcoog Wrote:  

(01-18-2019 11:32 AM)Kaplony Wrote:  

(01-18-2019 11:20 AM)SuperFlyBCat Wrote:  Illegal FISA warrants for spying and an illegal witch hunt.

Fruit of the poisoned tree.

The entire investigation is essentially fruit of the poison tree. It also constitutes the illegal use of US assets to spy (violation of civil rights) on US citizens. Real Banana Republic stuff from the Obama administration.

Which fits right in with the Democratic Party fixing their primary process to give the nomination to the wife of a former president.

(01-18-2019 01:20 PM)SoMs Eagle Wrote:  

(01-18-2019 11:31 AM)Machiavelli Wrote:  Op-ed writer
She became a senior editorial writer and member of the editorial board of the Wall Street Journal in 2005.[3] In 2007, she began writing the long-running "Potomac Watch" column for the Wall Street Journal.[3] Strassel favorably profiled then-candidate for US vice president Sarah Palin shortly before the 2008 election in an article entitled "'I Haven't Always Just Toed the Line'".[4] The article originally appeared in the Weekend Interview section of The Wall Street Journal on November 1, 2008. In 2012, Strassel wrote an editorial in the WSJ that alleged the Obama campaign was targeting Frank L. VanderSloot, a national finance co-chair for Mitt Romney's 2012 presidential campaign and a top campaign donor.[5] Strassel's editorial was disputed by journalists and liberal commentators.[6][7][8] In May 2013, as part of the IRS targeting controversy, Strassel reported that the IRS (not the Obama campaign) targeted conservatives, including Frank L. VanderSloot.[9]

In November 2017, Strassel's coverage of the Trump–Russia dossier controversy was alleged to have stoked tensions between the Wall Street Journal's reporting staff and editorial Board (of which Strassel is a member); the latter having been widely criticized for taking a partisan, 'pro-Trump' stance.[10] The tensions have reportedly contributed to an exodus of leading journalists from the WSJ.[11] Strassel has referred to the Trump–Russia dossier, a collection of intelligence reports regarding Donald Trump's alleged connections with Putin's regime compiled by ex-MI6 agent Christopher Steele, as "one of the dirtiest political tricks in U.S. history" and characterized specific components of the Dossier as "ludicrous".[12]

In May 2018, Strassel was blamed with inflaming right-wing sources and their conspiracy theories, eventually leading to the unmasking of the identity of Stefan Halper, an American expatriate who alerted the FBI and CIA to possible links between the 2016 Trump Campaign and Russian intelligence services.[13][14] Whilst Strassel has argued that the Trump Campaign was "set up" by American intelligence services,[15] FBI Director, Chris Wray, stated that the exposure of such sources undermines the safety of the American people.[16] Strassel claimed that the FBI revealed Halper's identity to friendly media like the New York Times and Washington Post for their own purposes, and to spin the narrative.[

I will read, and even give a chit, about the crap you post IF you will ‘investigate’ the author of every BS post you make as you have here and in other threads. And post it as here. You can’t help yourself. The author is far and away more respected than 98% of those you quote.

Sounds like she is someone with a lot of common sense.

It also constitutes the illegal use of US assets to spy (violation of civil rights) on US citizens.


or the other side of the coin. It was Russia. Always about Russia Full Stop. Individual 1's name just kept popping up.

Boys..... one thing I must chuckle at. Mueller is a life long Republican. You think he just woke up one day and started playing for the other team?

(01-18-2019 12:44 PM)Machiavelli Wrote:  arguing over this is futile. All of these sources have biases. They do. I used to think. Just wait for the Mueller report, but if Barr is writing it. My argument is moot there too.

It's not a good place we are in as a country. I don't trust your sources and you don't trust mine.

Precisely.

(01-18-2019 01:02 PM)Attackcoog Wrote:  

(01-18-2019 12:51 PM)UofMstateU Wrote:  

(01-18-2019 12:44 PM)Machiavelli Wrote:  

(01-18-2019 12:10 PM)umbluegray Wrote:  

(01-18-2019 11:28 AM)Machiavelli Wrote:  The transcripts haven’t been released, but parts were confirmed for me by congressional sources.

And the sources have motivations.....................

We are just going to have to wait on the report but if Barr is writing it....... Trump may get away with it. Barr has already come out as biased.

The source has motivation.

Does that apply to all sources, even those sources with an opposing perspective?

Yes,

That is why arguing over this is futile. All of these sources have biases. They do. I used to think. Just wait for the Mueller report, but if Barr is writing it. My argument is moot there too.

It's not a good place we are in as a country. I don't trust your sources and you don't trust mine.

You do realize that the actual SOURCE of some of this information is the sworn testimony of the Obama FBI and DOJ officials, right?

All based on the fake dossier that was paid for by Hillary and the DNC....which the FBI and DOJ represented as verified legit evidence before a FISA court. The bombshell question that nobody has asked---Was any information from the illegal spying on the Trump campaign passed on to the DNC or Hillary campaign? My guess is "yes". Odd that nobody has asked or looked into this question.

I believe I remember Clinton calling Trump a “puppet of Putin” more than once in the debates. The great setup. She knew she was in danger of losing.

(01-18-2019 01:35 PM)Native Georgian Wrote:  

(01-18-2019 12:44 PM)Machiavelli Wrote:  arguing over this is futile. All of these sources have biases. They do. I used to think. Just wait for the Mueller report, but if Barr is writing it. My argument is moot there too.

It's not a good place we are in as a country. I don't trust your sources and you don't trust mine.

Precisely.

Mach doesn't trust anything that doesn't fit his point of view. Its the standard leftist meme. The WSJ is the only objective American source out there. Its pro business, but has few biases other than that.

Anything else you have to read very closely. Its amazing how often I read leftist media when the headlines say one thing and the details in the article say something else. Mach doesn't read past the headlines.

(01-18-2019 01:33 PM)Machiavelli Wrote:  It also constitutes the illegal use of US assets to spy (violation of civil rights) on US citizens.


or the other side of the coin. It was Russia. Always about Russia Full Stop. Individual 1's name just kept popping up.

Boys..... one thing I must chuckle at. Mueller is a life long Republican. You think he just woke up one day and started playing for the other team?

McCain was a lifelong republican.
Romney is a lifelong republican.
You see, republicans don’t walk in lockstep. It is refreshing really. The dems on the other hand.......

(01-18-2019 01:45 PM)bullet Wrote:  

(01-18-2019 01:35 PM)Native Georgian Wrote:  

(01-18-2019 12:44 PM)Machiavelli Wrote:  arguing over this is futile. All of these sources have biases. They do. I used to think. Just wait for the Mueller report, but if Barr is writing it. My argument is moot there too.

It's not a good place we are in as a country. I don't trust your sources and you don't trust mine.

Precisely.

Mach doesn't trust anything that doesn't fit his point of view. Its the standard leftist meme. The WSJ is the only objective American source out there. Its pro business, but has few biases other than that.

Anything else you have to read very closely. Its amazing how often I read leftist media when the headlines say one thing and the details in the article say something else. Mach doesn't read past the headlines.

there has never been any time since the invention of the printing press where editorialized rhetoric is the dominating daily source of disinformation....it disgusts me from value to ethics how this group currently operates....they've become nothing more than a snake oil salesman in the 21st century.....today's version is the Hearst principle x20....

if I had to define a number, I put it at >80% what most people 'SEE' at distorted levels designed to herd sheeple....

that's the shite that disgusts me more so than those that refuse to sift through to the point where 'reason' falls behind that which is disseminated and acknowledged as 'fact'.....

the imbalance within the msm are now operating at extremely dangerous levels....

(01-18-2019 01:45 PM)bullet Wrote:  

(01-18-2019 01:35 PM)Native Georgian Wrote:  

(01-18-2019 12:44 PM)Machiavelli Wrote:  arguing over this is futile. All of these sources have biases. They do. I used to think. Just wait for the Mueller report, but if Barr is writing it. My argument is moot there too.

It's not a good place we are in as a country. I don't trust your sources and you don't trust mine.

Precisely.

Mach doesn't trust anything that doesn't fit his point of view. Its the standard leftist meme. The WSJ is the only objective American source out there. Its pro business, but has few biases other than that.

Anything else you have to read very closely. Its amazing how often I read leftist media when the headlines say one thing and the details in the article say something else. Mach doesn't read past the headlines.

They do this because most people, especially those 30 and under only see the headline. I would bet my home that if a poll was taken on the story: "Cohen Rigged Polls" 70% of those democrats 30 or under would say it had something to do with the election and Russia

(01-18-2019 12:44 PM)Machiavelli Wrote:  

(01-18-2019 12:10 PM)umbluegray Wrote:  

(01-18-2019 11:28 AM)Machiavelli Wrote:  The transcripts haven’t been released, but parts were confirmed for me by congressional sources.

And the sources have motivations.....................

We are just going to have to wait on the report but if Barr is writing it....... Trump may get away with it. Barr has already come out as biased.

The source has motivation.

Does that apply to all sources, even those sources with an opposing perspective?

Yes,

That is why arguing over this is futile. All of these sources have biases. They do. I used to think. Just wait for the Mueller report, but if Barr is writing it. My argument is moot there too.

It's not a good place we are in as a country. I don't trust your sources and you don't trust mine.

I completely agree with you.

And I think the distrust between "us and our opinions" isn't due to falling on different sides of the political spectrum.

I think we're seeing the effect of a society abandoning object truth and objective morality.

I don't trust "your sources" because I don't trust the ideology of the person who's the source.

Frankly, I don't necessarily trust the ideology of the person who's my source, either.

There may be those people out there who are dedicated to finding and sharing the absolute truth -- I truly hope there are -- but there are soooo many that fabricate which essentially taints ALL sources as being untrustworthy.

For example, banks didn't used to fingerprint everyone cashing a check. But because there are too many people who try to cash fraudulent checks the bank has to assume everyone is potentially a criminal. I'm not. I would never pass bad checks. However, everyone is under suspicion because too many of our fellow citizens disregard those laws.

Similarly, too many of our fellow citizens disregard the idea of objective truth and objective morality.


We're seeing what we've been warned about: that is, the collapse of our civilization.

The Eight Stages of the Rise and Fall of Civilizations

1. From bondage to spiritual growth
2. From spiritual growth to great courage
3. From courage to liberty
4. From liberty to abundance
5. From abundance to complacency
6. From complacency to apathy
7. From apathy to dependence
8. From dependence back to bondage
   

(01-18-2019 01:33 PM)Machiavelli Wrote:  It also constitutes the illegal use of US assets to spy (violation of civil rights) on US citizens.


or the other side of the coin. It was Russia. Always about Russia Full Stop. Individual 1's name just kept popping up.

Boys..... one thing I must chuckle at. Mueller is a life long Republican. You think he just woke up one day and started playing for the other team?

The "other team" is The Establishment. That team knows no party.

(01-18-2019 02:38 PM)umbluegray Wrote:  

(01-18-2019 12:44 PM)Machiavelli Wrote:  

(01-18-2019 12:10 PM)umbluegray Wrote:  

(01-18-2019 11:28 AM)Machiavelli Wrote:  The transcripts haven’t been released, but parts were confirmed for me by congressional sources.

And the sources have motivations.....................

We are just going to have to wait on the report but if Barr is writing it....... Trump may get away with it. Barr has already come out as biased.

The source has motivation.

Does that apply to all sources, even those sources with an opposing perspective?

Yes,

That is why arguing over this is futile. All of these sources have biases. They do. I used to think. Just wait for the Mueller report, but if Barr is writing it. My argument is moot there too.

It's not a good place we are in as a country. I don't trust your sources and you don't trust mine.

I completely agree with you.

And I think the distrust between "us and our opinions" isn't due to falling on different sides of the political spectrum.

I think we're seeing the effect of a society abandoning object truth and objective morality.

I don't trust "your sources" because I don't trust the ideology of the person who's the source.

Frankly, I don't necessarily trust the ideology of the person who's my source, either.

There may be those people out there who are dedicated to finding and sharing the absolute truth -- I truly hope there are -- but there are soooo many that fabricate which essentially taints ALL sources as being untrustworthy.

For example, banks didn't used to fingerprint everyone cashing a check. But because there are too many people who try to cash fraudulent checks the bank has to assume everyone is potentially a criminal. I'm not. I would never pass bad checks. However, everyone is under suspicion because too many of our fellow citizens disregard those laws.

Similarly, too many of our fellow citizens disregard the idea of objective truth and objective morality.


We're seeing what we've been warned about: that is, the collapse of our civilization.

The Eight Stages of the Rise and Fall of Civilizations

1. From bondage to spiritual growth
2. From spiritual growth to great courage
3. From courage to liberty
4. From liberty to abundance
5. From abundance to complacency
6. From complacency to apathy
7. From apathy to dependence
8. From dependence back to bondage
   

(01-18-2019 02:40 PM)umbluegray Wrote:  

(01-18-2019 01:33 PM)Machiavelli Wrote:  It also constitutes the illegal use of US assets to spy (violation of civil rights) on US citizens.


or the other side of the coin. It was Russia. Always about Russia Full Stop. Individual 1's name just kept popping up.

Boys..... one thing I must chuckle at. Mueller is a life long Republican. You think he just woke up one day and started playing for the other team?

The "other team" is The Establishment. That team knows no party.

XACLY!

if Barr chooses to dig into the FISA debacle, I'm betting the CYA movement will hit the NOS button due to sheer fear....

(01-18-2019 02:33 PM)WKUYG Wrote:  

(01-18-2019 01:45 PM)bullet Wrote:  

(01-18-2019 01:35 PM)Native Georgian Wrote:  

(01-18-2019 12:44 PM)Machiavelli Wrote:  arguing over this is futile. All of these sources have biases. They do. I used to think. Just wait for the Mueller report, but if Barr is writing it. My argument is moot there too.

It's not a good place we are in as a country. I don't trust your sources and you don't trust mine.

Precisely.

Mach doesn't trust anything that doesn't fit his point of view. Its the standard leftist meme. The WSJ is the only objective American source out there. Its pro business, but has few biases other than that.

Anything else you have to read very closely. Its amazing how often I read leftist media when the headlines say one thing and the details in the article say something else. Mach doesn't read past the headlines.

They do this because most people, especially those 30 and under only see the headline. I would bet my home that if a poll was taken on the story: "Cohen Rigged Polls" 70% of those democrats 30 or under would say it had something to do with the election and Russia

There was a study out a year or two ago. The overwhelming majority of readers never get past the first paragraph. NY Times practice is to put one thing in the headline and the first paragraph and then about 2/3 of the way through the article you see that the headline and first paragraph were very misleading.

(01-18-2019 01:33 PM)Machiavelli Wrote:  It also constitutes the illegal use of US assets to spy (violation of civil rights) on US citizens.


or the other side of the coin. It was Russia. Always about Russia Full Stop. Individual 1's name just kept popping up.

Boys..... one thing I must chuckle at. Mueller is a life long Republican. You think he just woke up one day and started playing for the other team?

Nope. I think his boss was a Democrat and it was EXTREMELY likely his next boss would be a Democrat as well. Now...he has done wrong by playing along with Obama's ruse, as did many of the people he has named to his staff, and his only hope to survive is to keep the president (and his administration) on defense until a Democrat is in the White House. His problem is there is about to be a new AG that's going to be MUCH more objective and much more hands on in his management of the Justice Department than his predecessor. Muellers free reign is over. Thats not good news for the Mueller and the gang that spied on an opposing campaign using what they knew was fake evidence from the DNC.

(01-18-2019 02:40 PM)umbluegray Wrote:  

(01-18-2019 01:33 PM)Machiavelli Wrote:  It also constitutes the illegal use of US assets to spy (violation of civil rights) on US citizens.


or the other side of the coin. It was Russia. Always about Russia Full Stop. Individual 1's name just kept popping up.

Boys..... one thing I must chuckle at. Mueller is a life long Republican. You think he just woke up one day and started playing for the other team?

The "other team" is The Establishment. That team knows no party.

The tears of trump supporters taste so good.