Jump to content

Steele Dossier not reason for Trump FBI investigation


stanscript

Recommended Posts

Just now, stanscript said:

Yeah, yeah, yeah.  The link wasn't an article, it was an "on the money" skit.  Very funny stuff, if you have an open mind.  Oops, forget who I was talking to.....sorry.

https://www.huffingtonpost.com/entry/bill-maher-donald-trump-russia-joins-the-dots_us_59cf4640e4b05f005d346ae5

The Conservative Tree House has problems with fact based reporting.  Even Shep Smith from FOX has pointed that out (See supposed Puerto Rico Truckers' strike lie from Conservative Tree House.  That you buy such garbarge (sh*t) is hilarious, "lad."

The take-down is done by a number of sources. Even Byron York is in there.

Again, you have no interest.That's fine. The Times counts on you.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

28 minutes ago, concha said:

The take-down is done by a number of sources. Even Byron York is in there.

Again, you have no interest.That's fine. The Times counts on you.

Again, a right wing pundit = fake news

Sorry, coffee boy, you'll have to do a lot better than that.

Can't wait to see Trump's tweets in the AM.  

Bet he is warming up his thumbs as we speak.

Oh wait after 3 straight days of golf (or is it 4?), he probably will sleep like a baby tonight.

Melania is relieved than he won't be grabbing her by the............tonight.

  • Haha 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

3 minutes ago, stanscript said:

Again, a right wing pundit = fake news

Sorry, coffee boy, you'll have to do a lot better than that.

Can't wait to see Trump's tweets in the AM.  

Bet he is warming up his thumbs as we speak.

It'll be interesting to see if you can last 7 more years.

Get some sleep. Being a libtard rage monkey has got to be exhausting.

  • Haha 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 minute ago, concha said:

It'll be interesting to see if you can last 7 more years.

Get some sleep. Being a libtard rage monkey has got to be exhausting.

BTW, have you noticed how much weight Trump has put on lately?  Quite the portly President.  Hard to believe that such a porker could have questioned Hillary's health.  Must be all that riding in golf carts.  Wonder why he doesn't walk the course.  Oh, I forgot, bone spurs.

G'night       COFFEE BOY

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 minute ago, stanscript said:

BTW, have you noticed how much weight Trump has put on lately?  Quite the portly President.  Hard to believe that such a porker could have questioned Hillary's health.  Must be all that riding in golf carts.  Wonder why he doesn't walk the course.  Oh, I forgot, bone spurs.

G'night       COFFEE BOY

Maybe because she was hacking her guts up, passing out and couldn't walk up stairs on her own.

Just throwing it out there.

Rage on.

Your president cares.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 hours ago, stanscript said:

Again, a right wing pundit = fake news

Sorry, coffee boy, you'll have to do a lot better than that.

Can't wait to see Trump's tweets in the AM.  

Bet he is warming up his thumbs as we speak.

Oh wait after 3 straight days of golf (or is it 4?), he probably will sleep like a baby tonight.

Melania is relieved than he won't be grabbing her by the............tonight.

Ah the left. Such class!

Link to comment
Share on other sites

it looks like "loose lips" may have sunk Donny ship....looks like Georgie had a little too much to drink and started talking to the wrong people huh?..LOL...what are Fox news and the right going to do now that they don't have the big bad dossier as complaint # 1 to cry about anymore??....back to the Uranium b.s and Benghazi now?...

...and to make matters worse for the Trumpers is that Georgie may have been wearing a microphone for months as no Trumpers knew what was going on....looks like he's saving his own ass at Donny and Co.'s expense....go get em' George!

Link to comment
Share on other sites

12 hours ago, concha said:

Noted in the link I sent.

Concha,

I read the article and the links. It's not in there.

We live in an age when a lot of noise is being injected into the system.  So much so that it's nearly impossible to separate out the signal from the noise.  Here are some of the reasons why I read your article and have to dismiss it as noise.

  • It starts with the publication itself.  This is an admittedly Breitbart conservative source, so I know going in it's going to be slanted.  Fine,  at least I know what I'm in for.  
  • Then we get to the story itself.  The byline indicates it's written by somebody named "sundance."  Not fine.  Whenever a story is written anonymously, the rule of thumb I use is to read it to understand what people are talking about, but to dismiss the content because nobody stands behind it.  Occasionally, you'll see an anonymously written article from a legitimate news organization  - It still means nobody stands behind it.  I recommend dismissing the content of these too (an exception would be stories written by "the editorial board.")
  • In the very first sentence 'sundance' tells us "The New York Times, via Clinton's favorite voice Maggie Haberman, pushes out an article attempting to cloud..."  This is wrong.  And it it basic.  Maggie Haberman did not write the NY Times piece in question.  You can fact check this for yourself by reading the byline on the NYT story.  Based on this, I know immediately Sundance is at least unreliable and probably worse.
  • The rest of the article is very poorly written and constructed, but it basically claims the NYTimes story is absurd on the face using 3 sets of links/sources.
  1. The first link(s) is a series of stuff written by "Imperator Rex," it is about how we should read Maggie Haberman.  So the anonymous "Imperator Rex" is writing about how we should hate somebody who didn't write the NYT article in question.  This can be dismissed.
  2. The second link(s) is a series of stuff written by "name redacted"  -- The main complaints of which appears to be that Papadopolous's name doesn't appear in the Joint Analysis Report -- Which, by nature of the  JAR document itself, we wouldn't expect it to, and that FISA warrants can't be issued based on the Dossier.  There are multiple problems with this complaint.  First 'name redacted' has no idea on what basis the FISA warrents were issued, and second, Hillary Clinton herself could have walked into the FBI  with evidence and a FISA warrant could be issued as long as it established a criminal or national security predicate for the investigations.  The veracity of the warrant is for the courts to decide, and they will.  It is very likely this will eventually become public in the end, so we will see.
  3. The third link(s) is a series of more stuff by "sundance," it is more about why he doesn't like Maggie Haberman.  Again, Maggie Haberman didn't write the article he's trying to refute.  Sundance is either incompetent, or he's simply trying to whip people into a frenzy, counting on the fact that his readers won't check his work.   It can be dismissed.

There's more, but this post is too long already.  Suffice it to say I have to throw a flag and penalize this 'story' 15 yards for gibberish.  We all need to work harder at learning how to separate signal from the noise.  We are all going to make mistakes, but I believe the future of our republic depends on our efforts to become better, more discerning citizens.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

37 minutes ago, 15yds4gibberish said:

Concha,

I read the article and the links. It's not in there.

We live in an age when a lot of noise is being injected into the system.  So much so that it's nearly impossible to separate out the signal from the noise.  Here are some of the reasons why I read your article and have to dismiss it as noise.

  • It starts with the publication itself.  This is an admittedly Breitbart conservative source, so I know going in it's going to be slanted.  Fine,  at least I know what I'm in for.  
  • Then we get to the story itself.  The byline indicates it's written by somebody named "sundance."  Not fine.  Whenever a story is written anonymously, the rule of thumb I use is to read it to understand what people are talking about, but to dismiss the content because nobody stands behind it.  Occasionally, you'll see an anonymously written article from a legitimate news organization  - It still means nobody stands behind it.  I recommend dismissing the content of these too (an exception would be stories written by "the editorial board.")
  • In the very first sentence 'sundance' tells us "The New York Times, via Clinton's favorite voice Maggie Haberman, pushes out an article attempting to cloud..."  This is wrong.  And it it basic.  Maggie Haberman did not write the NY Times piece in question.  You can fact check this for yourself by reading the byline on the NYT story.  Based on this, I know immediately Sundance is at least unreliable and probably worse.
  • The rest of the article is very poorly written and constructed, but it basically claims the NYTimes story is absurd on the face using 3 sets of links/sources.
  1. The first link(s) is a series of stuff written by "Imperator Rex," it is about how we should read Maggie Haberman.  So the anonymous "Imperator Rex" is writing about how we should hate somebody who didn't write the NYT article in question.  This can be dismissed.
  2. The second link(s) is a series of stuff written by "name redacted"  -- The main complaints of which appears to be that Papadopolous's name doesn't appear in the Joint Analysis Report -- Which, by nature of the  JAR document itself, we wouldn't expect it to, and that FISA warrants can't be issued based on the Dossier.  There are multiple problems with this complaint.  First 'name redacted' has no idea on what basis the FISA warrents were issued, and second, Hillary Clinton herself could have walked into the FBI  with evidence and a FISA warrant could be issued as long as it established a criminal or national security predicate for the investigations.  The veracity of the warrant is for the courts to decide, and they will.  It is very likely this will eventually become public in the end, so we will see.
  3. The third link(s) is a series of more stuff by "sundance," it is more about why he doesn't like Maggie Haberman.  Again, Maggie Haberman didn't write the article he's trying to refute.  Sundance is either incompetent, or he's simply trying to whip people into a frenzy, counting on the fact that his readers won't check his work.   It can be dismissed.

There's more, but this post is too long already.  Suffice it to say I have to throw a flag and penalize this 'story' 15 yards for gibberish.  We all need to work harder at learning how to separate signal from the noise.  We are all going to make mistakes, but I believe the future of our republic depends on our efforts to become better, more discerning citizens.

My bad. I was looking at another site where the clarification was clearly made. Apologies.

The story's failure to consider timing of things, statements by involved parties, personal connections...

Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 hours ago, DBP66 said:

^^ class?..like you, Tex and Concha show all the time....class?...you have no clue what class is James....you're a Trumper..class and knowledge aren't needed or required...you just need to know Donny is right and the MSM lies...right James?....

Speaking of complete lack of class I bring you georgie boy; the all hate Trump poster of 2017 and his best comeback is she won the popular vote. LOL. 7 more years georgie. You'll never make it.  Watching you implode is sheer delight.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

17 hours ago, stanscript said:

Yeah, yeah, yeah.  The link wasn't an article, it was an "on the money" skit.  Very funny stuff, if you have an open mind.  Oops, forgot who I was talking to.....sorry.

https://www.huffingtonpost.com/entry/bill-maher-donald-trump-russia-joins-the-dots_us_59cf4640e4b05f005d346ae5

The Conservative Tree House has problems with fact based reporting.  Even Shep Smith from FOX has pointed that out (See supposed Puerto Rico Truckers' strike lie from Conservative Tree House.)  That you "buy" such garbage (sh*t) is hilarious, "lad."

Trump is still President. He will be in the morning as well. All your crying will change nothing

Link to comment
Share on other sites

On 12/30/2017 at 4:43 PM, ORabidOne said:

Trump KNEW he was screwed, when for the first time in U.S. history, a Special Counsel was appointed to FIND a crime, rather than to investigate one!

The crime was that the Russians interfered and the Trump people kept lying about their contact with them.  The intelligence agencies of the United States, Britain, Australia and Dutch have evidence of Russian interference and conspiracy.  If Trump and Co. did nothing wrong, there would be nothing to cover up.  There's an awful lot of smoke on Trump and Company.  There is an awful lot of evidence of Russian money laundering, too.  This investigation will have much, much more of a conclusion than the blue dress that Kevin Starr revealed.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

On 12/30/2017 at 6:35 PM, stanscript said:

FOX and Friends

i recall watching this program years ago, it was amazing how little common knowledge these 3 had.

People are hired for these shows because they can speak and read and are camera friendly.

These talking heads don't study history, political science, sociology....they study broadcasting. 

So, frankly, when they utter an opinion, it's often very misinformed and intellectually hollow.

No different than a sportswriter doing a athletic poll. 

But back on subject, this particular show stood out to me worst than any other as a bastion of frat boys/girls playing grown up. 

I assume they are much more knowledge today having been at it for years but still, as they are steeped in conspiracy and real fake news, I doubt they hold any value other than a marketing tool for the GOP and Trump specifically. 

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

41 minutes ago, noonereal said:

i recall watching this program years ago, it was amazing how little common knowledge these 3 had.

People are hired for these shows because they can speak and read and are camera friendly.

These talking heads don't study history, political science, sociology....they study broadcasting. 

So, frankly, when they utter an opinion, it's often very misinformed and intellectually hollow.

No different than a sportswriter doing a athletic poll. 

But back on subject, this particular show stood out to me worst than any other as a bastion of frat boys/girls playing grown up. 

I assume they are much more knowledge today having been at it for years but still, as they are steeped in conspiracy and real fake news, I doubt they hold any value other than a marketing tool for the GOP and Trump specifically. 

 

And then tell me what ABC, CBS, NBC, cnn, mslsd, the NY slimes, etc are other than a left wing communist marketing tool.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, aZjimbo said:

And then tell me what ABC, CBS, NBC, cnn, mslsd, the NY slimes, etc are other than a left wing communist marketing tool.

only fox news was conceived and set up as a propaganda wing of the gop

that makes it very different and an obvious source of right wing bias  

heck, they even promoted the tea baggers, arranged and rallied these extremists

nothing in the main steam is even close if one were to look objectively

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Just now, noonereal said:

only fox news was conceived and set up as a propaganda wing of the gop

that makes it very different and an obvious source of right wing bias  

heck, they even promoted the tea baggers, arranged and rallied these extremists

nothing in the main steam is even close if one were to look objectively

You are 100% full of shit and an extremely good liar. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    • No registered users viewing this page.
×
×
  • Create New...