japantiger 4,051 Posted December 13, 2017 Author Share Posted December 13, 2017 6 hours ago, homersapien said: This ^ Oh homey....the only evidence being withheld at this point is was the Dossier passed to Strzok by his wife and used as evidence for the FISA court....if that is the case, I think we'll all know everything we need to know. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
homersapien 11,362 Posted December 14, 2017 Share Posted December 14, 2017 57 minutes ago, japantiger said: Oh homey....the only evidence being withheld at this point is was the Dossier passed to Strzok by his wife and used as evidence for the FISA court....if that is the case, I think we'll all know everything we need to know. Sorry but I didn't realize that Mueller had released his report. Can you provide me a link? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
TexasTiger 12,829 Posted December 14, 2017 Share Posted December 14, 2017 2 hours ago, japantiger said: But I guess they're not so weak you can actually refute them.... Too weak to bother. There's nothing really there. A guy texts stuff no worse than cabinet secretaries say about their boss and he gets replaced. You're terrified of a Republican special counsel with impeccable credentials because your cult leader is dirty. Get used to it, snowflake. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
japantiger 4,051 Posted December 14, 2017 Author Share Posted December 14, 2017 11 hours ago, TexasTiger said: Too weak to bother. There's nothing really there. A guy texts stuff no worse than cabinet secretaries say about their boss and he gets replaced. You're terrified of a Republican special counsel with impeccable credentials because your cult leader is dirty. Get used to it, snowflake. Wow, once again overpowered by your witty repartee and biting logic.... snowflake....boy, you've cowed me now.... Just wondering, does it take you and Homey to come up with these? You seem to post in tandem...wait, I can see it Tex: "Ok, Ok, I got it, Homey, you throw out a distraction that completely ignores the discussion" Homey: trying to withhold hysterical laughter "and then you call him snowflake...that will fix him!" Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
TexasTiger 12,829 Posted December 14, 2017 Share Posted December 14, 2017 2 minutes ago, japantiger said: Wow, once again overpowered by your witty repartee and biting logic.... snowflake....boy, you've cowed me now.... Just wondering, does it take you and Homey to come up with these? You seem to post in tandem...wait, I can see it Tex: "Ok, Ok, I got it, Homey, you throw out a distraction that completely ignores the discussion" Homey: trying to withhold hysterical laughter "and then you call him snowflake...that will fix him!" The guy was removed last SUMMER! Those screaming about this are all about distractions. They are either dupes, corrupt or both. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
japantiger 4,051 Posted December 14, 2017 Author Share Posted December 14, 2017 So proud Tex...that is how this is done...an actual challenge to a point.... good boy....good boy (well, it works for my dog anyway)..... He was "reassigned"....the lead investigator in the highest profile case in 50 years was taken off his case. His actions were not disclosed by either the special counsel or his boss. In fact, they were deliberately and willfully not disclosed even after repeated requests from Congress. This wasn't disclosed until they were threatened with contempt charges. I wonder why that is the case from people that are supposed to be so impartial and esteemed. Had I been leading the investigation and found this, I would have not just reassigned the guy....I would have fired him. He had obviously lied and hidden a lot of info. You don't screw around with ethics breaches...especially something of this magnitude. In fact, when I am confronted with key leaders and an ethics investigation, I disclose it in my MRL. I wonder why the key law enforcement officers of the land and lawyers would operate under a different standard of disclosure? I actually track stats on this kind of thing....and I give that to the Audit Committee every quarter. In fact, if I didn't disclose an ethics breach like this, these same lawyers would prosecute me....but, hey, different set of rules for the haves and have-nots I guess. I guess they could just be incompetent....isn't that the typical democrat defense? I read about it in the news.....dog ate my homework...... Also, politically, if you go tell everyone immediately that you found someone being impartial and got rid of them...getting rid of someone with obvious bias ..... that bolsters your case as being an impartial arbiter doesn't it? .... "Oh my, look how fair these guys are being"...again, why didn't these esteemed legal minds get that point? hhhhmmmm....I guess they're just really busy and didn't have time to consider how any of this might be perceived....I mean, they're new to Washington, right? oh, they're not? Well, yeah, I guess they just got too busy not responding to Congressional requests for disclosure...I mean, not disclosing can be so time consuming... The details of the content of his comm's still have not been investigated. There were no hearings to understand the implications of what a key investigator in two major political investigations being outspokenly biased might mean to evidence presented to date (fruit of the poison tree comes to mind). And, when given a chance to clear up the most prescient and potentially troublesome point in all this with a simple yes or no, the guy in charge of the special counsel declined comment in front of Congress yesterday. Now, why would that be....it's a simple yes or know.... the dossier is public....nothing classified...was it an input or not? Say no...conspiracy theory dies on the vine....simple... We both know this smells like a diaper full of shawarma... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
TexasTiger 12,829 Posted December 14, 2017 Share Posted December 14, 2017 54 minutes ago, japantiger said: So proud Tex...that is how this is done...an actual challenge to a point.... good boy....good boy (well, it works for my dog anyway)..... He was "reassigned"....the lead investigator in the highest profile case in 50 years was taken off his case. His actions were not disclosed by either the special counsel or his boss. In fact, they were deliberately and willfully not disclosed even after repeated requests from Congress. This wasn't disclosed until they were threatened with contempt charges. I wonder why that is the case from people that are supposed to be so impartial and esteemed. Had I been leading the investigation and found this, I would have not just reassigned the guy....I would have fired him. He had obviously lied and hidden a lot of info. You don't screw around with ethics breaches...especially something of this magnitude. In fact, when I am confronted with key leaders and an ethics investigation, I disclose it in my MRL. I wonder why the key law enforcement officers of the land and lawyers would operate under a different standard of disclosure? I actually track stats on this kind of thing....and I give that to the Audit Committee every quarter. In fact, if I didn't disclose an ethics breach like this, these same lawyers would prosecute me....but, hey, different set of rules for the haves and have-nots I guess. I guess they could just be incompetent....isn't that the typical democrat defense? I read about it in the news.....dog ate my homework...... Also, politically, if you go tell everyone immediately that you found someone being impartial and got rid of them...getting rid of someone with obvious bias ..... that bolsters your case as being an impartial arbiter doesn't it? .... "Oh my, look how fair these guys are being"...again, why didn't these esteemed legal minds get that point? hhhhmmmm....I guess they're just really busy and didn't have time to consider how any of this might be perceived....I mean, they're new to Washington, right? oh, they're not? Well, yeah, I guess they just got too busy not responding to Congressional requests for disclosure...I mean, not disclosing can be so time consuming... The details of the content of his comm's still have not been investigated. There were no hearings to understand the implications of what a key investigator in two major political investigations being outspokenly biased might mean to evidence presented to date (fruit of the poison tree comes to mind). And, when given a chance to clear up the most prescient and potentially troublesome point in all this with a simple yes or no, the guy in charge of the special counsel declined comment in front of Congress yesterday. Now, why would that be....it's a simple yes or know.... the dossier is public....nothing classified...was it an input or not? Say no...conspiracy theory dies on the vine....simple... We both know this smells like a diaper full of shawarma... Most of Trump's cabinet and staff think he's an idiot. Doesn't necessarily mean they can't do their jobs. Richard W. Painter @RWPUSA The President on Twitter implies that one senator is a whore and calls another "Pocahontas". A-OK with Congress. Two FBI and DOJ employees sent personal texts criticizing Trump as a candidate. Congress wants a special prosecutor. I say fire Congress! 8:43 AM · Dec 14, 2017 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
TexasTiger 12,829 Posted December 14, 2017 Share Posted December 14, 2017 Laura Rozen @lrozen suspect if there was a review of Congressional R emails and texts, there would be no shortage of descriptions of Trump as an idiot 10:39 AM · Dec 14, 2017 11 Retweets 27 Likes Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
japantiger 4,051 Posted December 14, 2017 Author Share Posted December 14, 2017 24 minutes ago, TexasTiger said: Most of Trump's cabinet and staff think he's an idiot. Doesn't necessarily mean they can't do their jobs. Richard W. Painter @RWPUSA The President on Twitter implies that one senator is a whore and calls another "Pocahontas". A-OK with Congress. Two FBI and DOJ employees sent personal texts criticizing Trump as a candidate. Congress wants a special prosecutor. I say fire Congress! 8:43 AM · Dec 14, 2017 Funny, but that has nothing to do with the lead prosecutor in the investigation being demoted for obvious bias and lying about it....or whether the FBI paid for the dossier and used it as the basis for a FISA warrant....Nice try though.... And, Trump didn't call what's her name a whore.... Pocahontas called her a whore. Trump stated a fact...just like he described Bill and Hillary and countless other political money whores (Schumer, etc) that knocked at his door prior to him being "candidate" Trump. And you guys know exactly what he meant...you're just so desperate to create an issue you're trying to exaggerate his comments....and the sad thing is you have a base of people that buy this s***....like you apparently. And you're seriously trying to defend Pocahontas? Really? That is truly pathetic....she's a loser that couldn't get a real job and had to fake her credentials.... let me help....real Native American below Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
TexasTiger 12,829 Posted December 14, 2017 Share Posted December 14, 2017 1 hour ago, japantiger said: Funny, but that has nothing to do with the lead prosecutor in the investigation being demoted for obvious bias and lying about it....or whether the FBI paid for the dossier and used it as the basis for a FISA warrant....Nice try though.... And, Trump didn't call what's her name a whore.... Pocahontas called her a whore. Trump stated a fact...just like he described Bill and Hillary and countless other political money whores (Schumer, etc) that knocked at his door prior to him being "candidate" Trump. And you guys know exactly what he meant...you're just so desperate to create an issue you're trying to exaggerate his comments....and the sad thing is you have a base of people that buy this s***....like you apparently. And you're seriously trying to defend Pocahontas? Really? That is truly pathetic....she's a loser that couldn't get a real job and had to fake her credentials.... let me help....real Native American below Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Proud Tiger 4,261 Posted December 14, 2017 Share Posted December 14, 2017 3 hours ago, japantiger said: Funny, but that has nothing to do with the lead prosecutor in the investigation being demoted for obvious bias and lying about it....or whether the FBI paid for the dossier and used it as the basis for a FISA warrant....Nice try though.... And, Trump didn't call what's her name a whore.... Pocahontas called her a whore. Trump stated a fact...just like he described Bill and Hillary and countless other political money whores (Schumer, etc) that knocked at his door prior to him being "candidate" Trump. And you guys know exactly what he meant...you're just so desperate to create an issue you're trying to exaggerate his comments....and the sad thing is you have a base of people that buy this s***....like you apparently. And you're seriously trying to defend Pocahontas? Really? That is truly pathetic....she's a loser that couldn't get a real job and had to fake her credentials.... let me help....real Native American below ^^^^^^Like. I would just hit the "like" button but I don't have that privilege. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.