ADVERTISEMENT

Hunter Biden charged.

VanPastorMan said:
So would you compare this with the Steele Dossier? Hillary paid for it so it was untrustworthy. Right?
Click to expand...

If all we had was the dossier, then sure.

But that dossier opened up the door to a lot of other evidence. More than just paid off whistleblowers.

Nice try though
 
IU_Hickory said:
If all we had was the dossier, then sure.

But that dossier opened up the door to a lot of other evidence. More than just paid off whistleblowers.

Nice try though
Click to expand...
Not according to the Durham report. There was no basis for an investigation.

Why don't your trust the DoJ?
 
stollcpa said:
Link with proof whistleblowers were paid off by Trump.
Click to expand...
Simple Google search.
www.rawstory.com

Revealed: Jim Jordan's FBI 'whistleblowers' were paid by Trump ally and spread J6 conspiracy theories

A trio of witnesses being called as "whistleblowers" by the GOP committee investigating the "weaponization" of government were paid off by a Trump ally and spread conspiracy theories, reported The New York Times on Thursday."The first three witnesses to testify privately before the new...
www.rawstory.com www.rawstory.com
 
  • Like
  • Haha
Reactions: Bill4411 and DANC
DANC said:
Not according to the Durham report. There was no basis for an investigation.

Why don't your trust the DoJ?
Click to expand...
You continue to misrepresent the Durham Report. Here's a link to where you can read it yourself if you want. It's 306 pages and I haven't read every page, but I've read several key parts:


The investigation didn't start because of the Steele Dossier as you've said many times. It started when the FBI received information from Australia on July 28, 2016 concerning comments reportedly made in a tavern on May 6, 2016 by George Papadopoulos, an unpaid foreign policy advisor to the Trump campaign. Specifically, that Russia had dirt on HRC in the form of embarrassing emails they had stolen. Of course the FBI soon learned that was true since they shortly thereafter began leaking them to WikiLeaks. The DOJ IG and bipartisan Senate committee found and reported that as well. Durham mentions Papdopoulos 229 times in this report and specifically says on page 8 and 9 that it was the cause for FBI opening the "full" investigation:

The Opening of Crossfire Hurricane As set forth in greater detail in Section IV, the record in this matter reflects that upon receipt of unevaluated intelligence information from Australia, the FBI swiftly opened the Crossfire Hurricane investigation.

On page 8 and elsewhere he makes it clear that all the above was about Papadopoulous running his mouth to a Australian Diplomat over drinks in a tavern. The investigation started with him and spread to Flynn, Page and Manafort initially.

The Steele Dossier was used to support a FISA warrant concerning Carter Page and it shouldn't have been, but that alone does not in any way make the Mueller investigation illegitimate. It wasn't the cause for opening the investigation as you've stated. None of the Mueller findings were based on the Steele Dossier, not even a little bit. Durham himself never says in his report that the Mueller investigation was illegitimate or that its findings were incorrect. What Durham's beef boils down to is that he didn't think the FBI should have opened a "full" investigation when it did, but that it should instead have launched a preliminary investigation instead. He thinks it should have investigated the initial allegations leads and evidences first. That includes the Papadopoulous thing and other evidence like multiple contacts between Russian officials and agents and Trump campaign personnel - Durham himself lays this out in his report). The Republican leadership of the FBI, the DOJ IG and the bipartisan Senate committee all disagree with Durham about whether a full investigation should have been launched rather than a preliminary investigation. Given all that was subsequently found and the convictions that resulted does anyone with two brain cells to rub together really think that starting with a preliminary investigation would have prevented the full investigation?
 
Last edited:
  • Like
Reactions: cosmickid, MrBing, outside shooter and 4 others
ButHerEmails said:
Well, there ya go, the nail in the coffin! Now all we need is the actual phone and cell records to match everything up. It isn’t that hard to do. We got him now!!!

By the way, what kind of phone is that? There’s no time or date or anything at the top of that screenshot. And what’s with the little video camera icon? I’m very interested in this evidence.
Click to expand...
Oh

 
  • Like
Reactions: DANC
Aloha Hoosier said:
On page 8 and elsewhere he makes it clear that all the above was about Papadopoulous running his mouth to a Australian Diplomat over drinks in a tavern
Click to expand...
As acting as a CIA operative, which starts the DC Snake, eating it's own tail, which ended up being that the CIA (as the over lord of all of this) manipulating the masses.......... JUST LIKE THEY are tasked to do... but it wasn't supposed to be US people... only other country's stupid liberals.

But you already know this, you are a republican. Just thought I'd add to your story. Carry on.
 
  • Like
Reactions: DANC
Aloha Hoosier said:
You continue to misrepresent the Durham Report. Here's a link to where you can read it yourself if you want. It's 306 pages and I haven't read every page, but I've read several key parts:


The investigation didn't start because of the Steele Dossier as you've said many times. It started when the FBI received information from Australia on July 28, 2016 concerning comments reportedly made in a tavern on May 6, 2016 by George Papadopoulos, an unpaid foreign policy advisor to the Trump campaign. Specifically, that Russia had dirt on HRC in the form of embarrassing emails they had stolen. Of course the FBI soon learned that was true since they shortly thereafter began leaking them to WikiLeaks. The DOJ IG and bipartisan Senate committee found and reported that as well. Durham mentions Papdopoulos 229 times in this report and specifically says on page 8 and 9 that it was the cause for FBI opening the "full" investigation:

The Opening of Crossfire Hurricane As set forth in greater detail in Section IV, the record in this matter reflects that upon receipt of unevaluated intelligence information from Australia, the FBI swiftly opened the Crossfire Hurricane investigation.

On page 8 and elsewhere he makes it clear that all the above was about Papadopoulous running his mouth to a Australian Diplomat over drinks in a tavern. The investigation started with him and spread to Flynn, Page and Manafort initially.

The Steele Dossier was used to support a FISA warrant concerning Carter Page and it shouldn't have been, but that alone does not in any way make the Mueller investigation illegitimate. It wasn't the cause for opening the investigation as you've stated. None of the Mueller findings were based on the Steele Dossier, not even a little bit. Durham himself never says in his report that the Mueller investigation was illegitimate or that its findings were incorrect. What Durham's beef boils down to is that he didn't think the FBI should have opened a "full" investigation when it did, but that it should instead have launched a preliminary investigation instead. He thinks it should have investigated the initial allegations leads and evidences first. That includes the Papadopoulous thing and other evidence like multiple contacts between Russian officials and agents and Trump campaign personnel - Durham himself lays this out in his report). The Republican leadership of the FBI, the DOJ IG and the bipartisan Senate committee all disagree with Durham about whether a full investigation should have been launched rather than a preliminary investigation. Given all that was subsequently found and the convictions that resulted does anyone with two brain cells to rub together really think that starting with a preliminary investigation would have prevented the full investigation?
Click to expand...

You've previously and correctly identified him as a bad faith poster. He proves it every day. In the "Trump Indicted" thread he claimed today that the FBI has never been to Biden's and Pence's residences in connection with documents. That's patently false.

He doesn't give a shit about facts, just themes and narratives. He'll fabricate facts to fit his bizarre and baseless narratives.

It's pointless to engage in a lengthy exchange with this troubled individual. Best to just call out his lies and bullshit and move on.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Aloha Hoosier
IU_Hickory said:
Simple Google search.
www.rawstory.com

Revealed: Jim Jordan's FBI 'whistleblowers' were paid by Trump ally and spread J6 conspiracy theories

A trio of witnesses being called as "whistleblowers" by the GOP committee investigating the "weaponization" of government were paid off by a Trump ally and spread conspiracy theories, reported The New York Times on Thursday."The first three witnesses to testify privately before the new...
www.rawstory.com www.rawstory.com
Click to expand...
Your own link proves you're lying. Trump didn't pay them and the reason they got money was because they lost their jobs because they came forward.

Congrats on proving what a liar you are.
 
  • Like
Reactions: stollcpa
Aloha Hoosier said:
You continue to misrepresent the Durham Report. Here's a link to where you can read it yourself if you want. It's 306 pages and I haven't read every page, but I've read several key parts:


The investigation didn't start because of the Steele Dossier as you've said many times. It started when the FBI received information from Australia on July 28, 2016 concerning comments reportedly made in a tavern on May 6, 2016 by George Papadopoulos, an unpaid foreign policy advisor to the Trump campaign. Specifically, that Russia had dirt on HRC in the form of embarrassing emails they had stolen. Of course the FBI soon learned that was true since they shortly thereafter began leaking them to WikiLeaks. The DOJ IG and bipartisan Senate committee found and reported that as well. Durham mentions Papdopoulos 229 times in this report and specifically says on page 8 and 9 that it was the cause for FBI opening the "full" investigation:

The Opening of Crossfire Hurricane As set forth in greater detail in Section IV, the record in this matter reflects that upon receipt of unevaluated intelligence information from Australia, the FBI swiftly opened the Crossfire Hurricane investigation.

On page 8 and elsewhere he makes it clear that all the above was about Papadopoulous running his mouth to a Australian Diplomat over drinks in a tavern. The investigation started with him and spread to Flynn, Page and Manafort initially.

The Steele Dossier was used to support a FISA warrant concerning Carter Page and it shouldn't have been, but that alone does not in any way make the Mueller investigation illegitimate. It wasn't the cause for opening the investigation as you've stated. None of the Mueller findings were based on the Steele Dossier, not even a little bit. Durham himself never says in his report that the Mueller investigation was illegitimate or that its findings were incorrect. What Durham's beef boils down to is that he didn't think the FBI should have opened a "full" investigation when it did, but that it should instead have launched a preliminary investigation instead. He thinks it should have investigated the initial allegations leads and evidences first. That includes the Papadopoulous thing and other evidence like multiple contacts between Russian officials and agents and Trump campaign personnel - Durham himself lays this out in his report). The Republican leadership of the FBI, the DOJ IG and the bipartisan Senate committee all disagree with Durham about whether a full investigation should have been launched rather than a preliminary investigation. Given all that was subsequently found and the convictions that resulted does anyone with two brain cells to rub together really think that starting with a preliminary investigation would have prevented the full investigation?
Click to expand...
The Steele Dossier was used to get FISA warrants. Spin it however you want.

The Durham report says there is no foundation - not just an illegitimate Steele Dossier - to have an full investigation on 'Russian Collusion'.

The FBI continued the investigation, even though they knew there was no basis for an investigation.

They knew Hillary paid for the Steele Dossier and still used it.

You can spin it any way you want, but those are facts.

I realize you want to defend anyone who is out to get Trump, but the investigation was bogus and Durham exposed the FBI for their bias. And I guess you forgot about Peter Strzok's text to Lisa Page about having a plan to keep Trump from being President.

Anyone with half a brain could see the conspiracty to get Trump. "in plain sight" as Pencil Neck would say.
 
  • Like
  • Haha
Reactions: dbmhoosier, Indianaftw, Joe_Hoopsier and 1 other person
DANC said:
The Steele Dossier was used to get FISA warrants. Spin it however you want.

The Durham report says there is no foundation - not just an illegitimate Steele Dossier - to have an full investigation on 'Russian Collusion'.

The FBI continued the investigation, even though they knew there was no basis for an investigation.

They knew Hillary paid for the Steele Dossier and still used it.

You can spin it any way you want, but those are facts.

I realize you want to defend anyone who is out to get Trump, but the investigation was bogus and Durham exposed the FBI for their bias. And I guess you forgot about Peter Strzok's text to Lisa Page about having a plan to keep Trump from being President.

Anyone with half a brain could see the conspiracty to get Trump. "in plain sight" as Pencil Neck would say.
Click to expand...
Durham was exposed for his bias. Yet he fully admitted there was Russian collusion but that it was merely inadvisable.

It is amazing how many facts you get wrong or purposely omit
 
  • Haha
Reactions: ulrey
IU_Hickory said:
Durham was exposed for his bias. Yet he fully admitted there was Russian collusion but that it was merely inadvisable.

It is amazing how many facts you get wrong or purposely omit
Click to expand...
Yeah, like Trump paid off the whistleblowers...... if you had any sense, you'd slink away, but you're too stupid to realize your idiocy.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Indianaftw and stollcpa
UncleMark said:
Trump didn't write them a personal check so he had nothing to do with it.
Click to expand...
But you don't think Joe profited off Hunter's business dealings because the money didn't go directly into Joe's account. Just his entire family's.

I don't think you want to go there.
 
DANC said:
Doesn't the link say?
Click to expand...

You're making me look aren't you.

Of course....Kash f#$king Patel again.

Yeah this is totally not a farce and should be taken with the utmost seriousness.

Here's a tip, when going after political opponents it works better if you can get someone that's a political peer or a direct associate instead of constantly holding up well know sycophants.

That just gets you ridiculed.
 
Last edited:
  • Like
Reactions: MrBing, Bowlmania and IU_Hickory
Joe_Hoopsier said:
As acting as a CIA operative, which starts the DC Snake, eating it's own tail, which ended up being that the CIA (as the over lord of all of this) manipulating the masses.......... JUST LIKE THEY are tasked to do... but it wasn't supposed to be US people... only other country's stupid liberals.

But you already know this, you are a republican. Just thought I'd add to your story. Carry on.
Click to expand...
I have no idea what any of that meant.
 
AG Garland "Criticizing The DOJ For Bias Is An ‘Attack’ On Democracy"

And now the stage is set for the gestapo to start rounding up grandmothers.
 
  • Like
Reactions: DANC
You must log in or register to reply here.

Similar threads

U

Hunter Biden on trial

Replies
225
Views
3K
The Water Cooler
Aloha Hoosier
Aloha Hoosier
M

Oh Shocker Radical Left Winger BIden Gearing Up for 2025 bringing racism to everyone's door

Replies
333
Views
5K
The Water Cooler
jet812
J
stollcpa

Damages

Replies
14
Views
321
The Water Cooler
BradStevens
BradStevens
D

"I don't remember"

Replies
57
Views
1K
The Water Cooler
UncleMark
U
B

The latest in Trump's unending blizzard of dangerous lies

Replies
65
Views
2K
The Water Cooler
DDE-6-20-23
DDE-6-20-23
ADVERTISEMENT

Latest posts

ADVERTISEMENT
Top Bottom
Back