Reply With Quote
Republican didn't first fund the dossier.
So you have nothing to back up your claims? Okay then.
Republican didn't first fund the dossier.
TSA likes to amuse himself.
Looks like Steele was a whisteblower,
informing the FBI of Trash/Trash mafiya business with Pootin,
so naturally the corrupt, lawless Repugs (eg, Grassley, Nunes, "Trash is a kook" L. Graham), try to obstruct justice,
by referring Steele for a criminal investigation.
Repugs and Repug/Trash supporters are corrupt.
Will the mythical, apocryphal? rule of law win, or will corrupt oligarchy- 'd Repugs win?
lol trump upset about Feinstein
Trill Clinton
"Somebody do something!"
this rant means something new is about to come up
https://www.vox.com/2018/1/10/168736...weet-feinsteinThe key takeaway is that the FBI was already investigating potential links between Donald Trump’s campaign and the Russian government before they got the Steele dossier. The hearing lasted for hours, and the transcript is extremely long and fairly tedious. But Simpson does clearly state that when Steele spoke to the FBI about his findings, the bureau “believed Chris’s information might be credible because they had other intelligence that indicated the same thing, and one of those pieces of intelligence was a human source from inside the Trump organization.”
https://www.vox.com/2018/1/10/168736...weet-FeinsteinThe key takeaway is that the FBI was already investigating potential links between Donald Trump’s campaign and the Russian government before they got the Steele dossier. The hearing lasted for hours, and the transcript is extremely long and fairly tedious. But Simpson does clearly state that when Steele spoke to the FBI about his findings, the bureau “believed Chris’s information might be credible because they had other intelligence that indicated the same thing, and one of those pieces of intelligence was a human source from inside the Trump organization.”
Interesting that your post doesn't acknowledge that he answered no, and that was readily ascertainable in your excerpt.
Conservatives have recently been pushing a theory that the basis for the FBI investigation was an opposition research do ent compiled at the behest of Clinton’s campaign. Simpson’s testimony seems to confirm the Times account and thereby debunk a conservative counternarrative that places the dossier itself at the center of the story.
TSA and Darrin have been trying their damndest to bury the lede here. Thanks for reminding everyone.
Sorry but he did not answer no and left it open.
https://pbs.twimg.com/media/DTHkzSPXUAAKrCq.jpg
Pavlov 2017 dossier good
Pavlov 2018 dossier bad
“Papadopoulos was the start of the investigation”
We’ll see
TSA still trying to bite dem ankles.
The dossier itself is just a thing.
2017 Times pushes dossier as central piece of story
2018 Times laughs at dossier as central piece of story
Papadopoulos was the start of the investigation, but FISA warrant is on Page.
TSA 2017 Pizzagate!
TSA 2018 Corrupt FISC judge!
It doesn't matter what started the investigation...it's all just a distraction attempt to deflect from the revelations coming out from the top of the DOJ and FBI.
Is he actually saying that?
2017: Dossier pee pee good
2018: Dossier got even better
Keep your eyes out for Dana Boente and John Carlin when the OIG investigation results start being revealed.
What are you saying will happen with them?
There are currently 3 users browsing this thread. (0 members and 3 guests)
Posting Permissions