Wife of demoted DOJ offical worked for Fusion GPS, firm behind Trump Dossier

[japantiger 3,769]

You seriously could not make this stuff up...

http://www.foxnews.com/politics/2017/12/11/wife-demoted-doj-official-worked-for-firm-behind-anti-trump-dossier.html

EXCLUSIVE: A senior Justice Department official demoted last week for concealing his meetings with the men behind the anti-Trump “dossier” had even closer ties to Fusion GPS, the firm responsible for the incendiary document, than have been disclosed, Fox News has confirmed: The official’s wife worked for Fusion GPS during the 2016 election.

[Proud Tiger 4,261]

1 hour ago, japantiger said:

You seriously could not make this stuff up...

http://www.foxnews.com/politics/2017/12/11/wife-demoted-doj-official-worked-for-firm-behind-anti-trump-dossier.html

EXCLUSIVE: A senior Justice Department official demoted last week for concealing his meetings with the men behind the anti-Trump “dossier” had even closer ties to Fusion GPS, the firm responsible for the incendiary document, than have been disclosed, Fox News has confirmed: The official’s wife worked for Fusion GPS during the 2016 election.

The swamp gets more contaminated by the day.

[japantiger 3,769]

At this point, the whole damn Mueller team has to go.  I'm good with Trump firing him.   The entire premise of this farcical investigation is preposterous.... 

[Proud Tiger 4,261]

57 minutes ago, japantiger said:

At this point, the whole damn Mueller team has to go.  I'm good with Trump firing him.   The entire premise of this farcical investigation is preposterous.... 

I agree. And it looks like poor old John McCain got suckered by the infamous dossier and tried to give it to the FBI.........not knowing they already had it.

http://www.foxnews.com/politics/2017/12/11/inside-trump-dossier-handoff-mccains-go-between-speaks-out.html

[TexasTiger 9,728]

You guys are a propagandists dream.

[homersapien 10,273]

No one can absorb propaganda like a radically partisan conspiracist.

[japantiger 3,769]

2 hours ago, TexasTiger said:

You guys are a propagandists dream.

Please point out the factual errors.   I get it that you don't like it....I mean, it's the only thing you've been able to hold onto for these last 9 months....Russia, Russia, Russia....here's what we know:

• Democrat party paid for the dossier (I think dossier is Russian for "toilet paper"....or something else)
• Dossier delivered to FBI by democrats and later by establishment republican
• Dossier is an acknowledged farce
• Same DOJ investigator made responsible for interviewing Hillary on email scandal and her two lackies and Flynn on Russia.  
• DOJ investigator ardent Democrat and Hillary supporter as evidenced by his attendance at Clinton events, his donations and his text and email chains
• Lackies lie to investigator on email scandal...not prosecuted
• Flynn lies to investigator on who he had spoken to and is prosecuted
• Hillary not even put under oath by investigator and same investigator revises Meuller speech citing Hillary for Gross Negligence....down to "oops, she was a careless abuela"
• No democrat is prosecuted
• Investigator mysteriously re-assigned and demoted 
• Investigator's wife works for company that produced Russian toilet paper...investigator did not disclose
• Investigator was ardent Hillary supporter and produced hundreds of texts showing his contempt for Trump and support for Hillary....investigator did not disclose....
• Special counsel and DOJ refused to cooperate on disclosures of above until threatened with contempt charges by Congress .... hhhmmm....this is all coming out in drips....I would think a prosecutor would be more interested in the appearance of propriety given the magnitude of the stakes of this investigation...this group seems to be more interested in the opposite....
• To be determined....was same investigator and Dossier used as basis to get FISA warrants?  Should be a simple questions to answer...to previous point...why don't they just answer it. 
• why is everyone on the team investigating Trump an ardent Hillary supporter?  Financially and going to Hillary events....I've never heard of a legal process where obvious conflict of interests aren't considered.

Now, I think even a public defender in Poughkeepsie could get a judge to throw out any and everything this investigation has come up with....this smells to high heaven...but hey, "I'm just a guy standing in front of a forum asking for them to listen to me"....

 

[homersapien 10,273]

[Strychnine 1,760]

3 minutes ago, homersapien said:

 

[japantiger 3,769]

36 minutes ago, homersapien said:

I welcome you to point out the factual error

[homersapien 10,273]

15 minutes ago, japantiger said:

I welcome you to point out the factual error

It's not so much factual errors that form the basis of a conspiracy, it's the extrapolation and biased interpretation of incidental or irrelevant facts.

It's commiting oneself to a paranoid conspiracy hypothesis and then bending, misinterpreting, or embellishing any facts - no matter how benign or incidental - to support that hypothesis.  It's classic conspiracy theory.

[AUDub 10,156]

1 minute ago, homersapien said:

It's not so much factual errors that form the basis of a conspiracy, it's the extrapolation and biased interpretation of incidental or irrelevant facts.

It's commiting oneself to a paranoid conspiracy hypothesis and then bending, misinterpreting, or embellishing any facts - no matter how benign or incidental - to support that hypothesis.  It's classic conspiracy theory.

Yeah? Well jet fuel can't melt steel beams!

[homersapien 10,273]

5 minutes ago, Bigbens42 said:

Yeah? Well jet fuel can't melt steel beams!

Point taken. 

But, in my defense,  I never said factual errors don't play any role in conspiracy theories, I said they don't form the basis of most effective conspiracy theories.  

 

[AUDub 10,156]

1 minute ago, homersapien said:

Point taken. 

But, in my defense,  I never said factual errors don't play any role in conspiracy theories, I said they don't form the basis of most effective conspiracy theories.  

 

I was being sarcastic. It's a meme.

[homersapien 10,273]

1 minute ago, Bigbens42 said:

I was being sarcastic. It's a meme.

I know. 

[Strychnine 1,760]

5 minutes ago, Bigbens42 said:

I was being sarcastic. It's a meme.

 

[AUDub 10,156]

4 minutes ago, homersapien said:

I know. 

We need some way to infer tone.

[TexasTiger 9,728]

16 hours ago, japantiger said:

At this point, the whole damn Mueller team has to go.  I'm good with Trump firing him.   The entire premise of this farcical investigation is preposterous.... 

A guy previously said negative things about Trump in texts. He has supporters and defenders who have do that. His Sec of State has done that. So has his NSA. The FBI guy was taken of the case. The evidence will either stand on its own or not. You are awfully afraid of the evidence being made public.

2 hours ago, japantiger said:

Please point out the factual errors.   I get it that you don't like it....I mean, it's the only thing you've been able to hold onto for these last 9 months....Russia, Russia, Russia....here's what we know:

• Democrat party paid for the dossier (I think dossier is Russian for "toilet paper"....or something else)
• Dossier delivered to FBI by democrats and later by establishment republican
• Dossier is an acknowledged farce
• Same DOJ investigator made responsible for interviewing Hillary on email scandal and her two lackies and Flynn on Russia.  
• DOJ investigator ardent Democrat and Hillary supporter as evidenced by his attendance at Clinton events, his donations and his text and email chains
• Lackies lie to investigator on email scandal...not prosecuted
• Flynn lies to investigator on who he had spoken to and is prosecuted
• Hillary not even put under oath by investigator and same investigator revises Meuller speech citing Hillary for Gross Negligence....down to "oops, she was a careless abuela"
• No democrat is prosecuted
• Investigator mysteriously re-assigned and demoted 
• Investigator's wife works for company that produced Russian toilet paper...investigator did not disclose
• Investigator was ardent Hillary supporter and produced hundreds of texts showing his contempt for Trump and support for Hillary....investigator did not disclose....
• Special counsel and DOJ refused to cooperate on disclosures of above until threatened with contempt charges by Congress .... hhhmmm....this is all coming out in drips....I would think a prosecutor would be more interested in the appearance of propriety given the magnitude of the stakes of this investigation...this group seems to be more interested in the opposite....
• To be determined....was same investigator and Dossier used as basis to get FISA warrants?  Should be a simple questions to answer...to previous point...why don't they just answer it. 
• why is everyone on the team investigating Trump an ardent Hillary supporter?  Financially and going to Hillary events....I've never heard of a legal process where obvious conflict of interests aren't considered.

Now, I think even a public defender in Poughkeepsie could get a judge to throw out any and everything this investigation has come up with....this smells to high heaven...but hey, "I'm just a guy standing in front of a forum asking for them to listen to me"....

 

You're also a propagandist. You have so many things wrong, conflated and inflated.

[japantiger 3,769]

1 hour ago, TexasTiger said:

A guy previously said negative things about Trump in texts. He has supporters and defenders who have do that. His Sec of State has done that. So has his NSA. The FBI guy was taken of the case. The evidence will either stand on its own or not. You are awfully afraid of the evidence being made public.

You're also a propagandist. You have so many things wrong, conflated and inflated.

Never claimed not to be a propagandist... but then, I'm not a prosecutor or investigator on the biggest investigation in 40 years either....so I don't have to have the appearance of propriety.    Anyone involved in our legal system should have enough common sense not to behave in the same prejudicial manner as either Strzok or Weisman; nor should they withhold evidence from Congress.  They are either incredibly stupid (too stupid to be involved in such a matter) or so brazen they think they can get away with it (more likely given how their boss has protected them).  Also, why didn't Mueller and the DOJ release this info prior to being threatened with contempt?  That is a rhetorical question...you know the answer...you just don't like the answer.  And, in case you and Homey want to go down the tinfoil hat clueless routine again...I guess the DOJ IG must wear the same tinfoil hat....

 

"The January 2017 statement issued by the Department of Justice Office of the Inspector General (OIG) announcing its review of allegations regarding various actions of the Department of Justice and the Federal Bureau of Investigation in advance of the 2016 election stated that the OIG review would, among other things, consider whether certain underlying investigative decisions were based on improper considerations and that we also would include issues that might arise during the course of the review. The OIG has been reviewing allegations involving communications between certain individuals, and will report its findings regarding those allegations promptly upon completion of the review of them."

drip....drip.....drip.....

 

 

 

[TexasTiger 9,728]

39 minutes ago, japantiger said:

Never claimed not to be a propagandist... but then, I'm not a prosecutor or investigator on the biggest investigation in 40 years either....so I don't have to have the appearance of propriety.    Anyone involved in our legal system should have enough common sense not to behave in the same prejudicial manner as either Strzok or Weisman; nor should they withhold evidence from Congress.  They are either incredibly stupid (too stupid to be involved in such a matter) or so brazen they think they can get away with it (more likely given how their boss has protected them).  Also, why didn't Mueller and the DOJ release this info prior to being threatened with contempt?  That is a rhetorical question...you know the answer...you just don't like the answer.  And, in case you and Homey want to go down the tinfoil hat clueless routine again...I guess the DOJ IG must wear the same tinfoil hat....

 

"The January 2017 statement issued by the Department of Justice Office of the Inspector General (OIG) announcing its review of allegations regarding various actions of the Department of Justice and the Federal Bureau of Investigation in advance of the 2016 election stated that the OIG review would, among other things, consider whether certain underlying investigative decisions were based on improper considerations and that we also would include issues that might arise during the course of the review. The OIG has been reviewing allegations involving communications between certain individuals, and will report its findings regarding those allegations promptly upon completion of the review of them."

drip....drip.....drip.....

 

 

 

Your mind was made up before Mueller's work ever began. You're way too biased to be a credible arbiter of bias. A critical mass of folks like you are essential to an autocratic tyrant's success.

[japantiger 3,769]

44 minutes ago, TexasTiger said:

Your mind was made up before Mueller's work ever began. You're way too biased to be a credible arbiter of bias. A critical mass of folks like you are essential to an autocratic tyrant's success.

Oh wow....an autocrat...a tyrant...Just go ahead and call me Hitler....so original....but I guess at this point you're conceding I have my facts right since you've made no effort to refute them....just tried to deflect....appreciate it Tex...drip....drip....drip...what fact on these guys is going to come out next?  My bet, FISA warrants and the dossier....

[TexasTiger 9,728]

1 hour ago, japantiger said:

Oh wow....an autocrat...a tyrant...Just go ahead and call me Hitler....so original....but I guess at this point you're conceding I have my facts right since you've made no effort to refute them....just tried to deflect....appreciate it Tex...drip....drip....drip...what fact on these guys is going to come out next?  My bet, FISA warrants and the dossier....

You're "facts" are weak. Like your reasoning ability. 

[homersapien 10,273]

21 hours ago, Bigbens42 said:

We need some way to infer tone.

Actually, I know you well enough to detect sarcasm. 

[homersapien 10,273]

20 hours ago, TexasTiger said:

A guy previously said negative things about Trump in texts. He has supporters and defenders who have do that. His Sec of State has done that. So has his NSA. The FBI guy was taken of the case. The evidence will either stand on its own or not. You are awfully afraid of the evidence being made public.

You're also a propagandist. You have so many things wrong, conflated and inflated.

This ^

[japantiger 3,769]

22 hours ago, TexasTiger said:

You're "facts" are weak. Like your reasoning ability. 

But I guess they're not so weak you can actually refute them....