(05-11-2018 02:19 PM)Redwingtom Wrote:  

(05-11-2018 02:12 PM)TechRocks Wrote:  Well, while he's got a proven track record of lying, Andy McCabe said that without the Steele Dossier, there would have been no FISA warrant.

Of course, today we learn that the FISA warrant may have been issued against the FBI's own mole in the Trump campaign, which would mean that NOTHING about Page interested them, they merely needed to open a back door into all of Trump's communications.

I'm sure RWT and others are horrified that this sort of thing could happen in America.

You've said this before and I previously posted that McCabe disputes this.

So, I'll post it again for you.

Quote:The highly controversial memo from Committee Chairman Devin Nunes claimed McCabe testified that "no surveillance warrant would have been sought" for a Trump campaign aide without a disputed opposition-research dossier on Trump and Russia. Not so says McCabe -- the former No. 2 official at the FBI who signed one of the applications to surveil former Trump campaign foreign policy adviser Carter Page.

"We started the investigations without the dossier. We were proceeding with the investigations before we ever received that information," McCabe told CNN as part of a wide-ranging interview. "Was the dossier material important to the package? Of course, it was. As was every fact included in that package. Was it the majority of what was in the package? Absolutely not."

Some Republicans lawmakers have attempted to cast the dossier as an inherently unreliable piece of opposition research because it was funded through the Democratic National Committee and Hillary Clinton campaign, but McCabe says his testimony was "selectively quoted" and "mischaracterized" in order to bolster the claim that the dossier served as the essential linchpin to the surveillance warrant on Page.

McCabe says Republicans 'mischaracterized' his testimony on Trump dossier

But yes, if the FBI did anything illegal, the parties involved need to be brought to justice. I'm not going to hold my breath though.

So after you get your ass in a sling and get fired you change your story. And some fools believe you. By now the perpetrators of this crime have colluded among each other and still can’t get their stories straight.

Quote:"We started the investigations without the dossier. We were proceeding with the investigations before we ever received that information," McCabe told CNN as part of a wide-ranging interview. "Was the dossier material important to the package? Of course, it was. As was every fact included in that package. Was it the majority of what was in the package? Absolutely not."

McCabe's quote is talking about THE INVESTIGATION. I commented on the FISA warrant which is where he said before the committee (and I paraphrase), "without the Steele Dossier, there would have been no FISA warrant".

(05-11-2018 02:30 PM)SoMs Eagle Wrote:  

(05-11-2018 02:19 PM)Redwingtom Wrote:  

(05-11-2018 02:12 PM)TechRocks Wrote:  Well, while he's got a proven track record of lying, Andy McCabe said that without the Steele Dossier, there would have been no FISA warrant.

Of course, today we learn that the FISA warrant may have been issued against the FBI's own mole in the Trump campaign, which would mean that NOTHING about Page interested them, they merely needed to open a back door into all of Trump's communications.

I'm sure RWT and others are horrified that this sort of thing could happen in America.

You've said this before and I previously posted that McCabe disputes this.

So, I'll post it again for you.

Quote:The highly controversial memo from Committee Chairman Devin Nunes claimed McCabe testified that "no surveillance warrant would have been sought" for a Trump campaign aide without a disputed opposition-research dossier on Trump and Russia. Not so says McCabe -- the former No. 2 official at the FBI who signed one of the applications to surveil former Trump campaign foreign policy adviser Carter Page.

"We started the investigations without the dossier. We were proceeding with the investigations before we ever received that information," McCabe told CNN as part of a wide-ranging interview. "Was the dossier material important to the package? Of course, it was. As was every fact included in that package. Was it the majority of what was in the package? Absolutely not."

Some Republicans lawmakers have attempted to cast the dossier as an inherently unreliable piece of opposition research because it was funded through the Democratic National Committee and Hillary Clinton campaign, but McCabe says his testimony was "selectively quoted" and "mischaracterized" in order to bolster the claim that the dossier served as the essential linchpin to the surveillance warrant on Page.

McCabe says Republicans 'mischaracterized' his testimony on Trump dossier

But yes, if the FBI did anything illegal, the parties involved need to be brought to justice. I'm not going to hold my breath though.

So after you get your ass in a sling and get fired you change your story. And some fools believe you. By now the perpetrators of this crime have colluded among each other and still can’t get their stories straight.

Only a fool would take anything said to them at face value from the likes of Devin Nunes.

(05-11-2018 02:51 PM)TechRocks Wrote:  

Quote:"We started the investigations without the dossier. We were proceeding with the investigations before we ever received that information," McCabe told CNN as part of a wide-ranging interview. "Was the dossier material important to the package? Of course, it was. As was every fact included in that package. Was it the majority of what was in the package? Absolutely not."

McCabe's quote is talking about THE INVESTIGATION. I commented on the FISA warrant which is where he said before the committee (and I paraphrase), "without the Steele Dossier, there would have been no FISA warrant".

Here's your problem Tech, his testimony to the committee was private and has not been made public. Trust Nunes at your own peril.

(05-11-2018 02:53 PM)Redwingtom Wrote:  

(05-11-2018 02:51 PM)TechRocks Wrote:  

Quote:"We started the investigations without the dossier. We were proceeding with the investigations before we ever received that information," McCabe told CNN as part of a wide-ranging interview. "Was the dossier material important to the package? Of course, it was. As was every fact included in that package. Was it the majority of what was in the package? Absolutely not."

McCabe's quote is talking about THE INVESTIGATION. I commented on the FISA warrant which is where he said before the committee (and I paraphrase), "without the Steele Dossier, there would have been no FISA warrant".

Here's your problem Tech, his testimony to the committee was private and has not been made public. Trust Nunes at your own peril.

I don't have a problem.

I read what was drectly quoted from his testimony and cannot figure out how "without the Steele Dossier there would have been no FISA warrant", can be construed to mean anything other than what it says.

Comey has said committee members were confused about what he said in testimony about the FBI's impression of Flynn's comments.....specifically that they didn't believe he lied to them. But when you read his words, there is no doubt what he said.

The FBI seems to be confused a lot these days, and I can understand that. It's hard to keep track of so many lies and bullshyte.

Trey Gowdy has said McCabe said what was quoted. That's good enough for me.

(05-11-2018 03:02 PM)TechRocks Wrote:  

(05-11-2018 02:53 PM)Redwingtom Wrote:  

(05-11-2018 02:51 PM)TechRocks Wrote:  

Quote:"We started the investigations without the dossier. We were proceeding with the investigations before we ever received that information," McCabe told CNN as part of a wide-ranging interview. "Was the dossier material important to the package? Of course, it was. As was every fact included in that package. Was it the majority of what was in the package? Absolutely not."

McCabe's quote is talking about THE INVESTIGATION. I commented on the FISA warrant which is where he said before the committee (and I paraphrase), "without the Steele Dossier, there would have been no FISA warrant".

Here's your problem Tech, his testimony to the committee was private and has not been made public. Trust Nunes at your own peril.

I don't have a problem.

I read what was drectly quoted from his testimony and cannot figure out how "without the Steele Dossier there would have been no FISA warrant", can be construed to mean anything other than what it says.

Comey has said committee members were confused about what he said in testimony about the FBI's impression of Flynn's comments.....specifically that they didn't believe he lied to them. But when you read his words, there is no doubt what he said.

The FBI seems to be confused a lot these days, and I can understand that. It's hard to keep track of so many lies and bullshyte.

Trey Gowdy has said McCabe said what was quoted. That's good enough for me.

NO. YOU. DID. NOT. His testimony was private and has not been made public. What you're putting in quotes is what either Gowdy, Nunes, etc. are saying he said. You're relying on their interpretations of the testimony. And Nunes at least cannot be trusted any more than Schiff can. They're politicians, remember?

And until the judge on the FISA court starts talking, we'll never know if that was the sole reason for the warrant. But when applications normally encompass months of work and scores of pages, I highly doubt it was the sole reason.

(05-11-2018 03:06 PM)Redwingtom Wrote:  

(05-11-2018 03:02 PM)TechRocks Wrote:  

(05-11-2018 02:53 PM)Redwingtom Wrote:  

(05-11-2018 02:51 PM)TechRocks Wrote:  

Quote:"We started the investigations without the dossier. We were proceeding with the investigations before we ever received that information," McCabe told CNN as part of a wide-ranging interview. "Was the dossier material important to the package? Of course, it was. As was every fact included in that package. Was it the majority of what was in the package? Absolutely not."

McCabe's quote is talking about THE INVESTIGATION. I commented on the FISA warrant which is where he said before the committee (and I paraphrase), "without the Steele Dossier, there would have been no FISA warrant".

Here's your problem Tech, his testimony to the committee was private and has not been made public. Trust Nunes at your own peril.

I don't have a problem.

I read what was drectly quoted from his testimony and cannot figure out how "without the Steele Dossier there would have been no FISA warrant", can be construed to mean anything other than what it says.

Comey has said committee members were confused about what he said in testimony about the FBI's impression of Flynn's comments.....specifically that they didn't believe he lied to them. But when you read his words, there is no doubt what he said.

The FBI seems to be confused a lot these days, and I can understand that. It's hard to keep track of so many lies and bullshyte.

Trey Gowdy has said McCabe said what was quoted. That's good enough for me.

NO. YOU. DID. NOT. His testimony was private and has not been made public. What you're putting in quotes is what either Gowdy, Nunes, etc. are saying he said. You're relying on their interpretations of the testimony. And Nunes at least cannot be trusted any more than Schiff can. They're politicians, remember?

And until the judge on the FISA court starts talking, we'll never know if that was the sole reason for the warrant. But when applications normally encompass months of work and scores of pages, I highly doubt it was the sole reason.

So what? Do you understand that whether it was a sole reason or a major reason or a minor factor is irrelevant?

(05-11-2018 02:52 PM)Redwingtom Wrote:  

(05-11-2018 02:30 PM)SoMs Eagle Wrote:  

(05-11-2018 02:19 PM)Redwingtom Wrote:  

(05-11-2018 02:12 PM)TechRocks Wrote:  Well, while he's got a proven track record of lying, Andy McCabe said that without the Steele Dossier, there would have been no FISA warrant.

Of course, today we learn that the FISA warrant may have been issued against the FBI's own mole in the Trump campaign, which would mean that NOTHING about Page interested them, they merely needed to open a back door into all of Trump's communications.

I'm sure RWT and others are horrified that this sort of thing could happen in America.

You've said this before and I previously posted that McCabe disputes this.

So, I'll post it again for you.

Quote:The highly controversial memo from Committee Chairman Devin Nunes claimed McCabe testified that "no surveillance warrant would have been sought" for a Trump campaign aide without a disputed opposition-research dossier on Trump and Russia. Not so says McCabe -- the former No. 2 official at the FBI who signed one of the applications to surveil former Trump campaign foreign policy adviser Carter Page.

"We started the investigations without the dossier. We were proceeding with the investigations before we ever received that information," McCabe told CNN as part of a wide-ranging interview. "Was the dossier material important to the package? Of course, it was. As was every fact included in that package. Was it the majority of what was in the package? Absolutely not."

Some Republicans lawmakers have attempted to cast the dossier as an inherently unreliable piece of opposition research because it was funded through the Democratic National Committee and Hillary Clinton campaign, but McCabe says his testimony was "selectively quoted" and "mischaracterized" in order to bolster the claim that the dossier served as the essential linchpin to the surveillance warrant on Page.

McCabe says Republicans 'mischaracterized' his testimony on Trump dossier

But yes, if the FBI did anything illegal, the parties involved need to be brought to justice. I'm not going to hold my breath though.

So after you get your ass in a sling and get fired you change your story. And some fools believe you. By now the perpetrators of this crime have colluded among each other and still can’t get their stories straight.

Only a fool would take anything said to them at face value from the likes of Devin Nunes.

So what lies has he told? What has he been inaccurate about?

(05-11-2018 05:16 PM)SoMs Eagle Wrote:  

(05-11-2018 02:52 PM)Redwingtom Wrote:  

(05-11-2018 02:30 PM)SoMs Eagle Wrote:  

(05-11-2018 02:19 PM)Redwingtom Wrote:  

(05-11-2018 02:12 PM)TechRocks Wrote:  Well, while he's got a proven track record of lying, Andy McCabe said that without the Steele Dossier, there would have been no FISA warrant.

Of course, today we learn that the FISA warrant may have been issued against the FBI's own mole in the Trump campaign, which would mean that NOTHING about Page interested them, they merely needed to open a back door into all of Trump's communications.

I'm sure RWT and others are horrified that this sort of thing could happen in America.

You've said this before and I previously posted that McCabe disputes this.

So, I'll post it again for you.

Quote:The highly controversial memo from Committee Chairman Devin Nunes claimed McCabe testified that "no surveillance warrant would have been sought" for a Trump campaign aide without a disputed opposition-research dossier on Trump and Russia. Not so says McCabe -- the former No. 2 official at the FBI who signed one of the applications to surveil former Trump campaign foreign policy adviser Carter Page.

"We started the investigations without the dossier. We were proceeding with the investigations before we ever received that information," McCabe told CNN as part of a wide-ranging interview. "Was the dossier material important to the package? Of course, it was. As was every fact included in that package. Was it the majority of what was in the package? Absolutely not."

Some Republicans lawmakers have attempted to cast the dossier as an inherently unreliable piece of opposition research because it was funded through the Democratic National Committee and Hillary Clinton campaign, but McCabe says his testimony was "selectively quoted" and "mischaracterized" in order to bolster the claim that the dossier served as the essential linchpin to the surveillance warrant on Page.

McCabe says Republicans 'mischaracterized' his testimony on Trump dossier

But yes, if the FBI did anything illegal, the parties involved need to be brought to justice. I'm not going to hold my breath though.

So after you get your ass in a sling and get fired you change your story. And some fools believe you. By now the perpetrators of this crime have colluded among each other and still can’t get their stories straight.

Only a fool would take anything said to them at face value from the likes of Devin Nunes.

So what lies has he told? What has he been inaccurate about?

He hasnt, which is why only a fool would plant their head up their ass about anything Nunes says.

mexicans spilling across the border to vote is ok.

foreigners donating to inauguration not ok

bwahahahahaha dimwits

Dont y'all realize that Tom, Mach, CB and a couple others can say what they want and that makes it true....

asked them to show you something backing it up and not a peep out of them. Then a day or week or a hour later, they repeat it again. Ask them to back it up. Not a peep, out of them. The cycle will continue because if they say it enough they believe you will just take their word for it....

eventually

Well Mach will sometimes post a link...just wont have anything to do with what he's talking about

What has Nunes lied about?

(05-11-2018 02:19 PM)Redwingtom Wrote:  

Quote:"We started the investigations without the dossier. We were proceeding with the investigations before we ever received that information," McCabe told CNN as part of a wide-ranging interview. "Was the dossier material important to the package? Of course, it was. As was every fact included in that package. Was it the majority of what was in the package? Absolutely not."

But yes, if the FBI did anything illegal, the parties involved need to be brought to justice. I'm not going to hold my breath though.

Do you understand that if that quote, and Schiff's statement that "most of" the dossier has been verified, are both accurate, then the FISA warrant was obtained illegally?

(05-11-2018 05:28 PM)WKUYG Wrote:  Dont y'all realize that Tom, Mach, CB and a couple others can say what they want and that makes it true....

asked them to show you something backing it up and not a peep out of them. Then a day or week or a hour later, they repeat it again. Ask them to back it up. Not a peep, out of them. The cycle will continue because if they say it enough they believe you will just take their word for it....

eventually

Well Mach will sometimes post a link...just wont have anything to do with what he's talking about

it's why I rarely get involved with those cats when party over country is their primary motive....

as a centrist, I just can't prescribe to all that bs.....I'll never understand how anyone can lean towards today's version of the left and only hope the right will learn from how DJT is teaching them all a lesson by the day.....

even though his label is ®, he's as 3rd party as you'll ever see......

I said it when he announced and laughed at those that called him running as a donk.....I'm still laughing how anyone could've thought that was an option....

and when he toyed with (I) flag, all he was doing was fk'n the RNC.....

ol' boy changed the game.....and it's far from over....it's just now getting juicy.....

(05-11-2018 05:28 PM)WKUYG Wrote:  Dont y'all realize that Tom, Mach, CB and a couple others can say what they want and that makes it true....

asked them to show you something backing it up and not a peep out of them. Then a day or week or a hour later, they repeat it again. Ask them to back it up. Not a peep, out of them. The cycle will continue because if they say it enough they believe you will just take their word for it....

eventually

Well Mach will sometimes post a link...just wont have anything to do with what he's talking about

Your including me (assuming you're not referring to LazyTom) in this diatribe is completely ridiculous.

(05-11-2018 05:12 PM)Owl 69/70/75 Wrote:  

(05-11-2018 03:06 PM)Redwingtom Wrote:  

(05-11-2018 03:02 PM)TechRocks Wrote:  

(05-11-2018 02:53 PM)Redwingtom Wrote:  

(05-11-2018 02:51 PM)TechRocks Wrote:  McCabe's quote is talking about THE INVESTIGATION. I commented on the FISA warrant which is where he said before the committee (and I paraphrase), "without the Steele Dossier, there would have been no FISA warrant".

Here's your problem Tech, his testimony to the committee was private and has not been made public. Trust Nunes at your own peril.

I don't have a problem.

I read what was drectly quoted from his testimony and cannot figure out how "without the Steele Dossier there would have been no FISA warrant", can be construed to mean anything other than what it says.

Comey has said committee members were confused about what he said in testimony about the FBI's impression of Flynn's comments.....specifically that they didn't believe he lied to them. But when you read his words, there is no doubt what he said.

The FBI seems to be confused a lot these days, and I can understand that. It's hard to keep track of so many lies and bullshyte.

Trey Gowdy has said McCabe said what was quoted. That's good enough for me.

NO. YOU. DID. NOT. His testimony was private and has not been made public. What you're putting in quotes is what either Gowdy, Nunes, etc. are saying he said. You're relying on their interpretations of the testimony. And Nunes at least cannot be trusted any more than Schiff can. They're politicians, remember?

And until the judge on the FISA court starts talking, we'll never know if that was the sole reason for the warrant. But when applications normally encompass months of work and scores of pages, I highly doubt it was the sole reason.

So what? Do you understand that whether it was a sole reason or a major reason or a minor factor is irrelevant?

I don't personally believe it was the sole reason OR the major reason.

(05-14-2018 09:56 AM)Redwingtom Wrote:  

(05-11-2018 05:12 PM)Owl 69/70/75 Wrote:  

(05-11-2018 03:06 PM)Redwingtom Wrote:  

(05-11-2018 03:02 PM)TechRocks Wrote:  

(05-11-2018 02:53 PM)Redwingtom Wrote:  Here's your problem Tech, his testimony to the committee was private and has not been made public. Trust Nunes at your own peril.

I don't have a problem.

I read what was drectly quoted from his testimony and cannot figure out how "without the Steele Dossier there would have been no FISA warrant", can be construed to mean anything other than what it says.

Comey has said committee members were confused about what he said in testimony about the FBI's impression of Flynn's comments.....specifically that they didn't believe he lied to them. But when you read his words, there is no doubt what he said.

The FBI seems to be confused a lot these days, and I can understand that. It's hard to keep track of so many lies and bullshyte.

Trey Gowdy has said McCabe said what was quoted. That's good enough for me.

NO. YOU. DID. NOT. His testimony was private and has not been made public. What you're putting in quotes is what either Gowdy, Nunes, etc. are saying he said. You're relying on their interpretations of the testimony. And Nunes at least cannot be trusted any more than Schiff can. They're politicians, remember?

And until the judge on the FISA court starts talking, we'll never know if that was the sole reason for the warrant. But when applications normally encompass months of work and scores of pages, I highly doubt it was the sole reason.

So what? Do you understand that whether it was a sole reason or a major reason or a minor factor is irrelevant?

I don't personally believe it was the sole reason OR the major reason.

So what has Nunes lied about?

(05-14-2018 10:05 AM)SoMs Eagle Wrote:  

(05-14-2018 09:56 AM)Redwingtom Wrote:  

(05-11-2018 05:12 PM)Owl 69/70/75 Wrote:  

(05-11-2018 03:06 PM)Redwingtom Wrote:  

(05-11-2018 03:02 PM)TechRocks Wrote:  I don't have a problem.

I read what was drectly quoted from his testimony and cannot figure out how "without the Steele Dossier there would have been no FISA warrant", can be construed to mean anything other than what it says.

Comey has said committee members were confused about what he said in testimony about the FBI's impression of Flynn's comments.....specifically that they didn't believe he lied to them. But when you read his words, there is no doubt what he said.

The FBI seems to be confused a lot these days, and I can understand that. It's hard to keep track of so many lies and bullshyte.

Trey Gowdy has said McCabe said what was quoted. That's good enough for me.

NO. YOU. DID. NOT. His testimony was private and has not been made public. What you're putting in quotes is what either Gowdy, Nunes, etc. are saying he said. You're relying on their interpretations of the testimony. And Nunes at least cannot be trusted any more than Schiff can. They're politicians, remember?

And until the judge on the FISA court starts talking, we'll never know if that was the sole reason for the warrant. But when applications normally encompass months of work and scores of pages, I highly doubt it was the sole reason.

So what? Do you understand that whether it was a sole reason or a major reason or a minor factor is irrelevant?

I don't personally believe it was the sole reason OR the major reason.

So what has Nunes lied about?

Start with his midnight run to the WH.

(05-14-2018 09:56 AM)Redwingtom Wrote:  

(05-11-2018 05:12 PM)Owl 69/70/75 Wrote:  

(05-11-2018 03:06 PM)Redwingtom Wrote:  

(05-11-2018 03:02 PM)TechRocks Wrote:  

(05-11-2018 02:53 PM)Redwingtom Wrote:  Here's your problem Tech, his testimony to the committee was private and has not been made public. Trust Nunes at your own peril.

I don't have a problem.
I read what was drectly quoted from his testimony and cannot figure out how "without the Steele Dossier there would have been no FISA warrant", can be construed to mean anything other than what it says.
Comey has said committee members were confused about what he said in testimony about the FBI's impression of Flynn's comments.....specifically that they didn't believe he lied to them. But when you read his words, there is no doubt what he said.
The FBI seems to be confused a lot these days, and I can understand that. It's hard to keep track of so many lies and bullshyte.
Trey Gowdy has said McCabe said what was quoted. That's good enough for me.

NO. YOU. DID. NOT. His testimony was private and has not been made public. What you're putting in quotes is what either Gowdy, Nunes, etc. are saying he said. You're relying on their interpretations of the testimony. And Nunes at least cannot be trusted any more than Schiff can. They're politicians, remember?
And until the judge on the FISA court starts talking, we'll never know if that was the sole reason for the warrant. But when applications normally encompass months of work and scores of pages, I highly doubt it was the sole reason.

So what? Do you understand that whether it was a sole reason or a major reason or a minor factor is irrelevant?

I don't personally believe it was the sole reason OR the major reason.

So what if it wasn't? The FISA warrant was still improperly issued.

It's an ex parte proceeding. The purported object is neither present nor represented. That means every single iota of evidence presented has to be squeaky clean. There can be zero factual issues in dispute. Otherwise the judge cannot issue the warrant. But the judge has no resources with which to assess the truth or falsity of any evidence presented. So it has to be perfect, every part of it.

There are four possibilities:

1) Every single assertion in the dossier, or at least any portion presented to the FISA court, was absolutely verified, down to the very last comma, before it was introduced, or
2) No part of the dossier was introduced in any way, shape, or form before the FISA court, or
3) No FISA warrant was issued by the court, or
4) Such warrant was issued improperly.

Which is it?

(05-14-2018 09:54 AM)Redwingtom Wrote:  

(05-11-2018 05:28 PM)WKUYG Wrote:  Dont y'all realize that Tom, Mach, CB and a couple others can say what they want and that makes it true....

asked them to show you something backing it up and not a peep out of them. Then a day or week or a hour later, they repeat it again. Ask them to back it up. Not a peep, out of them. The cycle will continue because if they say it enough they believe you will just take their word for it....

eventually

Well Mach will sometimes post a link...just wont have anything to do with what he's talking about

Your including me (assuming you're not referring to LazyTom) in this diatribe is completely ridiculous.

RWT is correct. I've seen him post links numerous times. Not once have I asked him to provide back up has he said I'm doing it for you do your own homework. He's usually pretty responsive.