Charlie 'Pepe Sylvia' meme = "I'm tapping out of this conversation."
Chump wanting desperately to pretend that networks aren't a part of life.Charlie 'Pepe Sylvia' meme = "I'm tapping out of this conversation."
He wants to put a tin foil hat on ANYTHING that conflicts with his programming.
You guys keep posting that like it means anything.Charlie 'Pepe Sylvia' meme = "I'm tapping out of this conversation."
Explain it to us.
OK, explain the FISA process regarding Carter Page in your own words.
It means there was a real 'conspiracy' to undermine our elections and get Hillary Clinton elected. The image explains itself. Was there something you were specifically disputing about the image before you put your rubber Charlie stamp on it? Also you keep saying 'us'. It's pretty creepy tbh
You make a lot of demands, but you don't really bring anything to the table do you? A true Socialist.
It's illegible.
There is more than one person reading your posts. It's really stupid of you to pretend otherwise.Also you keep saying 'us'. It's pretty creepy tbh
Obama appoints Contreras to FISA court. Contreras issues a warrant to spy on Carter Page. Why is this so difficult for you to understand?
Obama used the IRS to target conservative groups. FACT. Obama used the FBI to abuse FISA warrants. FACT. Obama used the government to go after his political opponents. FACT.
Presidents do not appoint judges to FISC.
There is no evidence Contreras issued any of the warrants. In fact the WSJ reports that four Republican judges issued the warrants.
Yeah, these aren't facts.
Implying John Roberts who saved Obamacare when it was on its last gasp wasn't an Obama guy
Presidents do not appoint judges to FISC.
There is no evidence Contreras issued any of the warrants. In fact the WSJ reports that four Republican judges issued the warrants.
Implying John Roberts who saved Obamacare when it was on its last gasp wasn't an Obama guyBacking down immediately.
W appointed Roberts.
There is no evidence Contreras issued any of the warrants. In fact the WSJ reports that four Republican judges issued the warrants.
Now five Republican judges are in on your conspiracy.
This Roberts character holy
WASHINGTON (Reuters) - Four years ago, John Roberts blew it. In his debut at swearing in the next president, the Supreme Court chief justice stumbled over the oath at Barack Obama’s inauguration ceremony.
That led Obama to mix his words up too () and the historic swearing-in of the first African-American president briefly became an awkward muddle.
To silence doubts that Obama’s presidency might not be legal because he failed to say the oath properly, the two men tried again the next day in the White House and went through the correct, cons utionally mandated avowal, word for word.
Now, Roberts gets his second try - twice: once in a closed ceremony in the White House’s Blue Room on Sunday, and then the public one on Capitol Hill the next day.
The White House and the Supreme Court are leaving nothing to chance this time.
After Obama won re-election on November 6, the two men exchanged a copy of an oath card, containing the precise wording, punctuation, and emphasis of the 35-word recitation, an inauguration official said.
According to nearly a century of tradition, when the cons utionally required date of January 20 falls on a Sunday, the president is formally sworn in on that day then holds a public ceremony the next day where he repeats the oath again.
The formal oath that makes Obama the president is the one taken on Sunday, but Monday’s ceremony -- and Obama’s inaugural speech -- is what will live on in the minds of Americans and TV viewers around the world as the start of his second term.
“Effectively, Sunday is a dress rehearsal for Monday,” the presidential inauguration committee official said. “It is another opportunity for them to go through it by the time Monday rolls around.”
Judging by the first performance, the two men could use the practice.
On January 20, 2009, Roberts, who was reciting the oath from memory rather than using the customary card, uttered the word “faithfully” out of sequence.
The Cons ution requires the president to say, “I do solemnly swear that I will faithfully execute the Office of President of the United States, and will to the best of my ability, preserve, protect and defend the Cons ution of the United States.”
Roberts instead prompted Obama to say “that I will execute the Office of President of the United States faithfully.” It was a tiny mistake, coming as both Roberts and Obama stumbled at the start of the oath, but enough to raise concerns about whether Obama had been properly sworn in.
That's all your panic Google search could bring up?This Roberts character holy
Barely skimmed the surface. What does "us" (That's all your panic Google search could bring up?
Dunno. There is no evidence Contreras issued any of the warrants. In fact the commie rag WSJ reports that four Republican judges issued the warrants. You gonna boycott them?Barely skimmed the surface. What does "us" (
Presidents do not appoint judges to FISC.
There is no evidence Contreras issued any of the warrants. In fact the WSJ reports that four Republican judges issued the warrants.
Yes, Chris. He was appointed to the United States District Court for the District of Columbia by Barack Obama.
He was not appointed to the United States Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Court by Barack Obama.
The United States Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Court is not the United States District Court for the District of Columbia.
Do you understand they are two different courts?
Yes or no.
There are currently 1 users browsing this thread. (0 members and 1 guests)
Posting Permissions
Reply With Quote
